Democratic Senator Kicked Out of Office by Republican Hijinx: Report

Investigative reporter Greg Palast has uncovered evidence of a vast scheme to disenfranchise voters in the election of last November.  One result was the defeat of a sitting U.S. Senator.  (Palast does not say which one.  I will try to find out.)

This blog was founded last fall as the stakes in the Senate race were being ratcheted up by low-ball politics and a media distracted by a non-existent Ebola pandemic.  I am grateful for the work of Greg Palast as he begins to show just how rotten that election process was, especially in the South.


For more and a link to the Palast story, please click here:
Democratic Senator Kicked Out of Office by Republican Hijinx

Logan Act Reference Called Political Bait

I haven't seen a single Constitutional Law professor say this is a real thing, for good reason. I used to teach Constitutional Law. Nobody's going to charge anybody with this. It's not treason either under any reasonable definition. I'd call it a stupid counter-productive political stunt. That's what Hillary called it.   

--  Monica Bauer 
Playwright and Political Science Professor; Writing Fellow at Quinnipiac University

Brad Friedman Reports on Hillary Clinton E-mail "Scandal"

Unheard program for reference:
Brad Friedman Covers Hillary Clinton's Supposed E-mail "Scandal"


I have not yet had the opportunity to listen to this program and thus have no comment on it.  I thought you would be interested.  

Hillary Clinton E-Mail "Scandal" Blowing Over

The Hillary Clinton e-mail "scandal" appears to be essentially blowing over at this moment.  Evidently, she possibly did not break any laws after all.  At least the facts don't necessarily point in that direction.  It will take time to sort the matter out.

That leaves the question of whether she was trying to cover up anything.  According to Maureen Dowd of New York Times fame, both Clintons are secretive to a fault.  Oh, I suppose so.  Most modern Presidents have been secretive, including Barack Obama.

But there was something seedy about the criticisms of Mrs. Clinton in this matter, as if one were looking to find a scandal, any scandal, in order to ruin her.

This, of course, doesn't give Hillary Clinton a clean bill of health.  But let us hope this 2016 campaign can be first, honest and genuine, and second, substantive.  Dwelling on what kind of e-mail Hillary Clinton used, especially if her e-mails become available, doesn't seem to pass muster.  

Citizens Group Issues Useful Statement on Clinton E-Mails

The citizens' watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington issued a statement a few days ago about the Hillary Clinton e-mail situation.  This statement seems to win the prize for pertinence as well as brevity.  Here is the statement:


Statement from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, March 3, 2015 -- 

“Today’s New York Times report shines a light on a systemic problem throughout the federal government. Agencies simply do not know how to handle emails from a record keeping perspective. That is why President Obama issued an executive order mandating that all agencies have electronic record keeping systems in place by 2016. But that will take new technology, which means money, which is why the President gave agencies several years to comply.
"Secretary Clinton is not the first agency head to go without an official email account. FOIA requests CREW sent during the Bush Administration revealed that then-Attorney General Michael Mukasey and Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff did not have official email accounts, and we understand the practice was even more widespread and continues to the present.
"This issue is not unique to any official or agency. It is an ongoing issue that President Obama’s order is designed to address.”

*******

It certainly seems there is a strong element of making a mountain out of a molehill here.   

Hillary Clinton Announcement Reportedly Set

Two Internet sources are reporting Hillary Clinton has decided to announce her candidacy for the Democratic nomination in April.  This would be a month sooner in the process than Barack Obama in 2007.

Donors have reportedly begun to grow restive amid allegations of corporate and foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation.  Such allegations could complicate Mrs. Clinton's campaign.

So, here we go again.  The stage is being set for a redux of 2000 in which a Clinton administration member fell victim to charges of being soft on corporatism.  Of course, we shall have to see how the campaign develops.  And the economy itself will likely overshadow everything else.  But if the economy sinks in 2016, Mrs. Clinton will likely receive blame, tied as she was to the Obama administration.

A challenge, whether formal or informal, from the left is a very real possibility, especially in the nomination process.  But with the Green Party also active again, third-party influence next year could once again be a factor.  What a tragedy it would be if a Democrat insufficiently loyal to traditional Democratic ideals (compromised by a sweet-heart relationship to Wall Street), would fail to surmount difficulties, allowing the Presidency to fall to -- whom -- Bush-Bush?   Please spare me.  Spare us.

First Lady Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton Announcement Reportedly Set

Could Jill Stein Be the Ralph Nader of 2016?

In 2000, you may recall, Ralph Nader served the role of spoiler, allowing one G. W. Bush (Bush the Lesser) to enter the White House.  Nader had some very legitimate criticism of the two-party system and how they had congealed around the profit system, shutting out too many people.

And certainly the Supreme Court, with the approval of the punditry, including  William Safire,  William F. Buckley, Jr., and experts who should have known better such as Brent Scowcroft -- did their part to put W. in the White House.

But without Nader -- who declared that even if he were a spoiler the Republicans wouldn't be so bad -- Al Gore would have won Florida clearly, and would have gone into the White House.

So why is Jill Stein running ( officially, exploring)?  Is she running because she thinks she has a chance of winning, or because running for President is the only way she can get her voice heard? What Dr. Stein has to say is important, and she certainly should be heard.  But after reading her announcement and listening to her question and answer period over the radio, I do not feel Jill Stein, is ready to be President.  Has she a developed foreign policy?  For that matter, has she a developed domestic policy, including a fiscal and monetary policy, and an employment policy?  Just how are we going to employ all these people?

Our situation now is like the house that is slowly sinking.  We know it is sinking;  we can clearly see it.  No one knows why the building is sinking, but one room is already in danger of being lost.  The people in the house know something must be done.  Meanwhile there is an election for the committee which runs this co-operative housing unit.  Now, the house is rapidly sinking.  But the election won't be held until November of 2016.  And besides, the committee is dominated by corrupt individuals who have basically bribed their way into power.  What should the people in the house do?  Should they start fighting amongst themselves over who should lead the committee?  Or should they immediately hire an expert who has the knowledge and resources to study the matter and come up with a solution?

The answer seems obvious.  Yes, our Presidential election next year is going to be important.  But what do we do now? 

The answer lies in the direction hinted at above.  We should seek out people who have the knowledge necessary to right our wobbly ship of state.  Should people do exist;  some are found right in this blog.

I urge you dear reader, to look around, read, and think it over.  We cannot afford to make the same mistake some made in 2000.

Dr. Jill Stein

Jill Stein Announces Exploratory Committee

Dr. Jill Stein has announced the formation of an exploratory committee regarding seeking the Presidency under the Green Party banner in 2016.

You may also follow the link below for a video of the press conference.


http://www.c-span.org/video/?324227-1/announcement-2012-green-party-presidential-candidate-jill-stein&live

With All Due (Very Large) Respect

Please read this e-mail from Sen. Elizabeth Warren, then see my comments below. From Sen. Elizabeth Warren: George — If you thought the amount of money spent in the 2014 elections was obscene, fasten your seatbelts because we’re in for a rough ride: Last week, the oil billionaire Koch Brothers pledged to spend $889 million for Republicans in the 2016 elections. Forget for just a moment all the schools we could build, or the crumbling roads and bridges we could start to repair, or the medical research on Alzheimer’s or autism that we could invest in with that ginormous amount of money. The deep-down point is that if we thought the playing field was tilted against us last year, it’s only going to be worse in the next election.  So here we are. We can whimper, we can whine, or we can fight back. Me?  I’m fighting back—and I’m getting started right now. I want to show the Koch Brothers that we’re ready to fight. So I’m asking you to sign my petition now to commit to restoring the Democratic Majority.  The Koch Brothers aren’t the only ones we have to worry about. Last week, Republican political operatives linked to Mitch McConnell and Karl Rove launched a new SuperPAC with one goal (and I quote): “To protect and expand the Republican Senate Majority when Harry Reid, Elizabeth Warren and their army of left-wing activists try to take it back in 2016.” The Republicans are right: That’s exactly what we’re going to do. We’ll never be able to outspend the Koch Brothers or Karl Rove on the airwaves, but we can build a grassroots team that’s ready to fight for what we believe in. We can fight, and we can win. We didn’t build this country so that it would work only for the millionaires and billionaires and giant corporations. We will not abandon this country to a bunch of Republicans who say, “I’ve got mine, the rest of you are on your own.” We’re a country that believes we make the investments together so the next kid can get ahead, and the kid after that. And we’re going to take on Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers so that every kid gets a fighting chance. Please help us get started. Names—thousands of names and millions of names—matter. Sign my petition to show Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers that you’re committed to taking back the Senate in 2016 and standing up to the powerful interests trying to buy our elections. We need you to be a part of this. Thank you, Elizabeth Warren ******************************** With all due respect (and mine is very large), this won't work.  In a moment, I will try to suggest what I think can work in 2016.  What Sen. Warren asks for here is certainly good, and even necessary. But make no mistake:  What Fascists like the Kochs are doing, when added together, represents a fundamental shift in politics as we know it in America.  True, we did in fact see huge monies flowing into campaign coffers from oligarchs in 2014.  And true enough, this was seen in 2010 and before. But what we have here is in a new category.  Already, the Kochs' apparent antipathy to Rand Paul is making that tea party favorite seem a less likely candidate.* And just what do the Brothers Koch mean by the new political infrastructure  they have promised?   Are we going to have undercover corporate/political operatives showing up in our towns and precincts advocating stealth laws and ordinances making it yet harder to participate in democracy?  (Think Florida's draconian control laws affecting voter registration groups, for example.) Whatever else we do, let us not be naive.  And, please, oh God, please, let us not be complacent.  The good news is, there are things which can be done.  I have only begun to work on a program in my mind. For now, I suggest consulting sister blogs The Musical Patriot, and Patriot in Exigency.  And, be sure that what I advocate will be legal.  For the time being remember: education is still legal! *I'll get my source up here soon.

Democratic Campaign Status

So far, America has been spared any announcement by a candidate for President.  I'm sure there are some declarations out there, but so far we have not had to deal with the fall-out from some tired politician announcing to run.

In normal times such things are interesting to me.  After the debacle of last year's election, after the debacles of 2000 and 2004, I'm less excited.  Primaries of the capitalist parties are of interest to me insofar as they promote or delay the nomination of candidates favorable to large corporations.

But what if, just what if Hillary Clinton were to run on her version of Bill Clinton's campaign slogan, "People Before Profits"?  That would be something.  Who is interested in organizing around this cause?  -- that being to help persuade Ms. Clinton this is the way to go.  Then, if not Hillary, who?  Who will will run under the People's banner in 2016?

More importantly, before we get to 2016, who will support free, fair, and genuine elections in the U.S.?

Once again, it appears the U.S. may have to turn to friends across the sea for help in making this happen.

It's food for thought.