The article is long – over 14,000 words – but if you want to get a view of what really happened with the alleged collusion between the Trump campaign. Trust us that it is not what you have seen and heard from the main stream media.
[….]
In the wake of the DNC hack, leading figures in the press and senior officials in the Obama administration faced a choice. They could depict Carter Page as he really was: an unknown man of modest accomplishments who played no role of note in the Trump organization. Or they could conspire with Fusion GPS to promote the fiction that he was a sly operative in a sinister network. In a fateful choice, they opted for dishonesty and deception over truth.
Once the enablers of Hillary Clinton compromised their own integrity, they internalized her program of denial and projection. Their own egos are now invested in perpetuating it. To avoid owning up to their shortcomings, they insist, in ever-shriller tones, on the personal integrity of the super spy and the credibility of his reports. The mere acknowledgement of a simple truth — that the “dossier” is junk — would constitute an admission either of deep professional malfeasance or of gob-smacking gullibility.
Choose your poison: You duped people and thereby abetted a gross abuse of power; or you were yourself badly duped. That is the dilemma that the lofty-minded now face. The choice is excruciating. It requires abandoning satisfying self-images and embracing painful self-truths — while also handing a well-deserved victory to a hated political enemy. As a consequence, the Steele dossier has proved to be as consequential as it is asinine.
The Greatest Denier
Of course, no one is in deeper denial than Hillary Clinton herself. After she had conceded to Trump on the night of the election, Obama called her. Taking the phone, she said, “Mr. President, I’m sorry.” (more…)
Part III of the undercover investigation dives further into the back room dealings of Democratic politics. It exposes prohibited communications between Hillary Clinton’s campaign, the DNC and the non-profit organization Americans United for Change. And, it’s all disguised as a duck.
Several Project Veritas Action undercover journalists catch Democracy Partners founder directly implicating Hillary Clinton in FEC violations.
“In the end, it was the candidate, Hillary Clinton, the future president of the United States, who wanted ducks on the ground,” says Creamer in one of several exchanges. “So, by God, we would get ducks on the ground.”
It is made clear that high-level DNC operative Creamer realized that this direct coordination between Democracy Partners and the campaign would be damning when he said: “Don’t repeat that to anybody.” (more…)
Oct 4, 2016
Posted by AAfterwit on Oct 4, 2016 | Comments Off on Driving Miss Machado.
Hillary is using Alicia Machado to spotlight Trump’s war on women, but what about Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Monica Lewinsky, and many others who Hillary tried to destroy.
The Hillary / Trump / Alicia Machado dust up is one of the reasons we think this is a presidential election of not who one wants to see in the White House, or even who is slightly less likable than the other.
No, this is an election of “who is more despicable.”
In 1995 Alicia Machado won the Miss. Venezuela beauty contest. She later won the Miss Universe crown in 1996.
After winning the Miss Universe pageant, Machodo gained weight. A lot of weight. For a person whose primary job is to keep trim, look good, and smile for cameras, the weight gain was seen as a problem by the contest organizers as well as the press.
Trump, who at that time owned the Miss Universe pageant, was less than sensitive to the weight gain of Machado. On the one hand, he was encouraging her to get into the gym, hiring trainers and dietitians. On the other hand, in public he called her “Miss Piggy” and made off statements such as:
She was the worst we ever had. The worst. The absolute worst. She was impossible. She was the winner, and she gained a massive amount of weight, and it was a real problem.
Oy vey.
During last weeks debate, Clinton raised the Marchado incident as an example of Trump’s “war on women.”
That “war on women” is quite an interesting charge being made by Clinton as she has gone after Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Monica Lewinsky, all of whom had some sort of sexual encounter with her husband. (more…)
Aug 22, 2016
Posted by AAfterwit on Aug 22, 2016 | Comments Off on FOH – Friends Of Hillary.
In this video, a PVA journalist encounters a Hillary Clinton Alternate Delegate who discusses how the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton hide the fact that they want to ban all guns.
May 27, 2016
Posted by AAfterwit on May 27, 2016 | Comments Off on Couric, Clinton, and Reid.
In case you missed it, Katie Couric, head of Yahoo’s News Division, was the executive producer of an alleged “documentary” on guns in the US. The film was produced and directed by anti gun activist Stephanie Soechtig
At a point in the film, Couric asks a group of people from the Virginia Citizens Defense League:
“If there are no background checks for gun purchasers, how do you prevent felons or terrorists from purchasing a gun?”
There is an 8 second gap between the question and the answer. The film seems to show that the people are confused or don’t know how to respond.
Here’s the relevant portion of the video:
The problem is that the people did respond immediately. The Virginia Citizens Defense League made an audio recording of the interview:
The footage used in the documentary was actually footage shot before the interview took place and inserted into the film and changed the whole tenor and meaning of what happened. Instead of the portrayal of being confused and not knowing how to answer, the members of the discussion group were well prepared and ready with an multiple answers.
Caught in a lie and deception, one would think Soechtig would apologize.
It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.
