HRC: The Russians Did It – Amanda S. Green


HRC: The Russians Did It – Amanda S. Green

As we near the end of HRC’s book, we finally get to see what she thinks about the Russians and the 2016 election. I could sum it all up with “Bad Putin, Worse Trump” but that wouldn’t make for a very interesting post. Besides, there is sooo much more there. Starting with the fact that, within four paragraphs, she blames our lack of faith in institutions like the media and academia, the Mercer family, the Koch brothers, Trump and Vladimir Putin for her loss. Again, what happens is everyone else’s fault but her own.

In 2016 our democracy was assaulted by a foreign adversary determined to mislead our people, enflame our divisions, and throw an election to its preferred candidate. (pg 326)

Standing on its own, that statement could be seen as a condemnation for what the Democratic National Committee did with regard to the Bernie Sanders campaign. Except HRC means the Russians, in particular Putin. Funny how she could sit there and dictate this with a straight face, knowing how her own campaign and the DNC leadership had done all it could to steal the nomination from Sanders and his supporters. But, as we’ve discussed before, the rules don’t apply to HRC. She is above it all, in her own mind at least.

Many Americans had lost faith in the institutions that previous generations relied on for objective information, including government, academia, and the press, leaving them vulnerable to a sophisticated misinformation campaign. (pg 326)

Gee, Hils, why have we lost faith in those so-called institutions? Could it be because they are no longer objective? It’s difficult to trust a press that is more interested in making the news instead of reporting it, a press that has shown its bias over and over again. Don’t believe me? Look at the recent headlines concerning our First Lady. As for trusting the government, you mean the government like the Obama Administration that is now under attack for the way it turned a blind eye to sexual misconduct on the Hill? Of course, you yourself are guilty of that, aren’t you, Hils? And as for academia, sorry, but I don’t want to trust the socialist leaning higher learning institutions to tell me how to help preserve the country I love so much. Nope, that’s not going to happen.

It is in this turmoil of mistrust that Putin, according to HRC, began his assault on our country, one aimed at making sure she didn’t become our next president. Why would he not want her sitting in the Oval Office, you ask. She’s happy to answer. “Our relationship has been sour for a long time. Putin doesn’t respect women and despises anyone who stands up to him, so I’m a double problem.” (pg 327) Not that she can point to anything other than criticizing some of his policies. But that, in her mind, is standing up to him.

Of course, this is also the woman who has delusions about her place in government after the 2008 election. If you ever had any doubt about it, this comment should erase it. “When President Obama and I came into office in 2009.” Think about that for a moment. On the surface, the statement seems innocent enough but then look deeper. The statement implies she was elected to office along with Obama, if not as co-president then as vice president. She wasn’t. She didn’t hold elected office and she didn’t come “into office” in that manner. She was appointed and had to be confirmed. That’s a bit different from having a mandate from the electorate. But she doesn’t see the difference, and that should worry all of us.

As does her belief that, had she remained Secretary of State, things wouldn’t have gotten worse where Putin’s concerned. In fact, she claims they went from “bad to worse” (pg 330) We’re not just talking about US relations with Russia but things inside of Russia itself. She spends several pages discussing how bad Putin is and how she could see it all. Funny, I don’t remember her spending too much time talking about what she would have done during those years. She didn’t come out and offer to help the Obama Administration deal with someone she saw as a serious world threat. No, she kept quiet and Putin only became the Devil on Earth when she needed another person to blame for her loss.

Of course, bad as Putin is, Trump is worse. Never, ever forget that or she will remind you. In fact, she writes about his “budding bromance” with Putin (pg 333). “He doesn’t just like Putin – he seems to want to be like Putin, a white authoritarian leader who could put down dissenters, repress minorities, disenfranchise voters, weaken the press and amass untold billions for himself. He dreams of Moscow on the Potomac.”

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry as I read that. She managed to get race into her attack on the President. She, who spent so much time attacking the white working class voters, basically saying they weren’t good enough to vote for her. A tactic that could also be seen as repressing a part of the electorate. And let’s not forget about her attacks on women who didn’t vote for her – repression and disenfranchising voters. She’s spent the entire book talking about how evil the media was to her and how there should be rules in place to prevent such bias in reporting. Couldn’t that be seen as weakening the press? And can anyone say “Clinton Foundation”? As for Moscow on the Hudson, hasn’t the DNC been trying to instill socialism in our land for generations?

Trump has a long-standing worldview that aligns well with Putin’s agenda. He is suspicious of American allies, doesn’t think values should play a role in foreign policy, and doesn’t seem to believe the United States should continue carrying the mantle of global leadership. . . urging America to stop defending allies who should be taking care of themselves. Trump said the world was taking advantage of the United States and laughing at us. (pp334-335)

Considering how Obama treated our allies, our real allies, and did so while Clinton was SecState, I find it ironic that she can write the above. Which allies are she talking about? The ones who share our ideals of freedom and trade? No. Absolutely not. She is more worried about those who stand with hands out, more than happy to take our money while plotting our downfall. I’ve no doubt she was one of those who decried Ambassador Haley’s speech to the United Nations, that bastion of money grabbers and anti-American sentiment. Well, to hell with them. We can’t afford to continue supporting those nations that want nothing more than to see the United States fail. I wonder, has HRC ever heard the adage, “Charity begins at home”? Perhaps it is time to turn our sights to fixing the problems here before we worry about what’s happening elsewhere.

Ah, but the blame game doesn’t end with Putin. HRC throws in WikiLeaks as well.

On July 22, WikiLeaks published about twenty thousand stolen DNC emails. It highlighted a handful of messages that included offensive comments about Bernie Sanders. (pg 339) Not once does she apologize for those offensive comments. Nor does she admit the cards had been stacked against Bernie by the DNC and members of her own campaign. Oh no, instead she complains because the leaks set off his supporters who were still upset he hadn’t won the nomination and claims the leak was to drive a wedge in the party, insuring Trump’s win.

“In my view, Assange is a hypocrite who deserves to be held accountable for his actions.” (pg 343) Am I the only one to see the irony in this statement? She wants Assange held accountable for the hacking of the DNC servers and the leaking of documents but she continues to do a song and dance to obscure her own role in the deaths of our people in Benghazi. She decries any attempt to hold her husband – or herself – responsible for Slick Willie’s sexual antics, behavior that from anyone else she would call sexual assault. She who erased how many emails off her server instead of letting someone else determine if they might have been germane to the investigation of her actions as SecState. But she wants Assange held responsible for his actions. Why? Because they weren’t what she approved of. That’s why. Go against the queen and face beheading, figuratively if not literally.

I felt physically ill to read the following: As Secretary of State, I was responsible for the safety of our officers around the world, and I knew that releasing those confidential reports put not only them in danger but also their foreign contacts. . . .(pg 344)

How dare she? How dare she! The only safety she is or has been concerned with is her own. She’s proven that time and again over the years.

HRC spends more than 40 pages laying out her case that she lost because of the Russians, because we were too foolish as voters not to see what really mattered. But she has a solution. First, we have to end “the war on truth”. Pardon me while I laugh hysterically for a moment. The thought of her recognizing the truth and not her own perverted version of it is more than a bit comic.

First, we need to get to the bottom of what really happened in 2016. (pg 370). That’s easy, Hils. You lost. You can’t admit it or accept it but you LOST and you still aren’t president. Ironic, isn’t it, that the media she’s been blaming for being so mean to her is who she wants to keep digging to make sure the “truth” comes out.

Second, we need to get serious about cyber warfare. Government and the private sector need to work together more closely to improve our defenses. (pg 370) That is one thing I can agree with her on. But I have one question for her. Why wasn’t she screaming from the highest rafters about this when she was SecState? Why didn’t she raise this concern after leaving office and before becoming a candidate? Why now? Oh, I know, because she lost and she has to find a reason why that doesn’t involve her own failings.

Third, we need to get tough with Putin. . .The Obama administration proved with crippling sanctions against Iran that this kind of pressure can force our adversaries to change course. (pg 371) That’s right, Obama’s administration was sooooo successful in dealing with our enemies. And she wants us to put what sort of sanctions on Russia? We’re to do this by strengthening NATO and helping our allies reduce their energy dependence on Russia. But she doesn’t say how – or how we’re supposed to pay for it because you know she wants the US to foot the bill.

Fourth, we need to beat back the assault on truth and reason here at home and rebuild trust in our institutions. . . Companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Google have already begun taking steps – adjusting algorithms, deactivating bot networks and partnering with fact-checkers – but they must do more. . . The mainstream media also has a responsibility to do more to debunk the lies infecting our public life and more directly hoe the liars accountable. (pg 372)

Let’s see. How have Facebook, Twitter and Google been doing? They’ve silenced conservative voices. I guess that’s a check in HRC’s column. They have no problem showing ISIS and similar groups torturing and beheading their victims but heaven help anyone posting against those groups. Another check as far as HRC is concerned. MSM – well, you know my feelings about the mainstream media and it bias. HRC doesn’t want the bias gone. She wants it strengthened and guaranteed to back her even stronger than it has before.

But that’s okay. They are “our institutions” and we, as voters, should trust them. Riiiight.

Except it is so wrong.

HRC lives in her own world, that much is clear. It’s a world I’m glad I don’t live in. It is a world where she continues to angle for power. She is not going to go gently into the night. This book, as well as her public appearances since the election, prove it. She can’t forgive the American electorate for not putting her into power. It’s our fault we denied her dream and she’s going to make us pay for it – one way or the other.

(You can find the other installments in this series at the following links: What Happened or How I Suffered for this Blog and had to ShareGrit and GratitudeHRC Gets Caught TryingA New Deal, A Square Deal or How She Wanted to be the Next RooseveltIt’s All His FaultTurning Mourning into a Movement, HRC: Idealism and Realism, HRC: Making History and HRC: Those Damn Emails.)

[I know this is hard to watch, imagine what it must be like to read the book.  If you want to help finance Amanda’s liquor bill, use this address  Send the woman a drink-SAH]

288 thoughts on “HRC: The Russians Did It – Amanda S. Green

  1. > end “the war on truth”

    Somehow, I got the impression I’d read something very like this post before. [dark things scuttle about my brain]

    “George Orwell to the service desk. Mr. George Orwell…”

    1. Oh, yes, because after all another explanation for

      Gee, Hils, why have we lost faith in those so-called institutions? Could it be because they are no longer objective?

      is that they were never objective — Holodomor, anyone? — but they used to be able to cover up their lack better.

      1. I think they were objective, for low values of objective, when each town had more than one paper, one for Democrats and one for Republicans, and could keep each other in check.

        Also for those complaining about information bubbles caused by the interwebs, see above multiple papers catering to a specific group…

        1. Absolutely. Dallas used to have the Morning News and the Times Herald. We took both papers because of the different slants they gave on the same items. Also, the Times Herald covered more of the suburbs and that helped. Unfortunately, the Times Herald is no more. That leaves us with only the DMN and the FW Star-Telegram, and the two share so many stories there is little difference between them except for the size of the pages.

          1. Used to be the ownership of newspapers was local. Now the ownership is usually just another faceless bottom-line oriented corporation, controlling costs and buying their news from AP. The staffers are looking to move up the chain and are more interested in impressing future employers than serving the interests of their readership.

            And those anticipated future employers all lean in one direction.

          2. The DMN and the FWST used to be different papers, based on the slant given any particular story. (We took the FWST because we lived in Tarrant County, but Dad worked in Dallas County and he sometimes brought home the DMN.) I think it was about 25 years ago that they began to muddle.

            1. I remember the days when they were different. In fact, we took both papers because we lived in Tarrant County, Dad worked in both Dallas and Tarrant and Mom worked in Dallas. But the ST was rarely read, other than the local news pages. We went to DMN for state, federal and world news. Mom still reads the DMN but I couldn’t tell you the last time I read it cover to cover.

              1. heh, for me it came down to preferring the FWST over DMN because the comics were better.
                Other than that, I never bought either, except when I was job hunting in mid 2004, and the Strib had better selections (and ultimately led me to a job)

        2. Also, when not everything was politicized, you could trust those sorts of stories. Another thing the left has soiled.

      2. True, but back then they actually would identify at least some of their lack of objectivity as “opinion” and “editorial”. Now, nope. It’s “fact” and “reality”. Except we all know better.

        1. I am tempted to say most anyone could write better.

          The Daughter, when she was very young, wrote in scribble pictures.  She carefully kept them in order and always told the same story based upon any given set of them.  They were all set in the Dr. Who universe.  They not only made better sense, they were more realistic representations of the universe. 

    2. LOL. Except Orwell wrote better and you could believe his alternate universe. I dare anyone to really look hard at HRC’s world and believe it exists.

  2. Okay, Trump’s foreign devil family ties are legitimately concerning. Mr. Knavs (?) was a communist party official of the USSR. But expressing such concerns about Democratic candidates would be ascribed to racism.

    Didn’t Putin get ticked off at Hillary for meddling in some Russian election he cared about?

    And to have tipped the election, Putin’s organization would needed to read the American people, and target effective persuasion where it actually change things. If Putin’s organization understood that much better than Hillary’s, she is flipping incompetent. And given the Jesus arm wrestling the Devil ad, one can have legitimate doubts about whether the Russians could produce persuasive enough ads to change the mind of anyone on the fence.

    It’s much more likely that the center of gravity was how many Americans hate and fear Hillary Clinton. The Democrats would have needed to be vilifying the Republican candidate back in 1990 to match that, and any Republican hated to that degree would have needed powerful backing from the Republican Party to stay out of jail, or at least to stay viable in public life. If she had instead thrown her whole organization’s support behind Sanders, they might have beaten Trump. If she had known where she needed to produce extra fake ballots, she would have won.

    But she didn’t know, because she didn’t care, and because she didn’t realize how the Democratic Party’s actions impacted the measures they used to ‘see’ the American people.

    She’s been spending the reputation of a number of institutions to cover her tab, and is totally surprised when the change in reputation alters other behavior.

    1. Like most gov’t types (and most people), she only does a static analysis. Second order effects are completely foreign to her.

    2. On a whim I put “Philip Agee Clintons” into a search engine and found numerous mutual friends, such as

      IPS [Institute for Policy Studies] leader Morton Halperin, a supporter of the notorious KGB agent and CIA turncoat Philip Agee, is now a leading official in the State Department. Anthony Lake, Clinton’s one-time National Security Advisor, was once an IPS instructor.

      indicating the long-standing antipathy between the Clintons and our Communist adversaries.

      I shan’t bother reprising the career of former CIA agent Agee and the cause of his retirement to Havana — it is there for the Wikipeding.

  3. Many Americans had lost faith in the institutions that previous generations relied on for objective information, including government, academia, and the press, leaving them vulnerable to a sophisticated misinformation campaign. 

    Having some knowledge of the history of the press I am not so sure one could correctly state that the general populace has really has placed any great faith in the press as a whole.  Much can also be said about the longstanding public love/hate relationship towards the government.  Academia hasn’t fared much better.

    This woman lives in a small part of the world, an echo chamber made up of government, academia and the press, and she make the mistake of thinking that most everyone thinks as she does.  Besides, a vulnerability of much of the populace to a sophisticated misinformation campaign lead by these same organizations was just what she had been expecting to bring her into office. 

    1. In addition, Amanda says:

      “Gee, Hils, why have we lost faith in those so-called institutions? Could it be because they are no longer objective?”

      Fact not in evidence, Amanda. Many of us may have believed that these institutions were once objective, but that hasn’t been true since at least the early to mid 1960s and more likely was never true. We all know about Walter Duranty…

      1. Americans have never embraced the press entirely. There may have been a period during WWII and its immediate aftermath where the nation generally trusted the press, but even then it was not all of the press.

        1. The press has never been trust worthy. See the Jefferson/Hamilton feud in the newspapers of the day.

          The best example of how the new works is the 1940 movie His Girl Friday.

          Here is a example of how important stories are covered.

          “No, no, never mind the Chinese earthquake for heaven’s sake…Look, I don’t care if there’s a million dead…No, no, junk the Polish Corridor…Take all those Miss America pictures off Page Six…Take Hitler and stick him on the funny page…No, no, leave the rooster story alone – that’s human interest.”

        2. The Progressive Left, having labored mightily to take over various institutions, and to bolster the public reputations of this same institutions, is shocked and dismayed that the stupid proles are catching on to their perfidy.

          Aww. Let me put of a record of the world’s smallest violin playing ‘My Nose Bleeds For You’.

          1. Honestly, I was discussing this with Charlie Martin on Christmas day: WHY is it that everything they take over objectively falls apart and collapses. You’d thing just on laws of averages and some people being good managers SOME institutions would improve, right?

            1. The dose makes the poison, and/but some thing are just that toxic. They seem to have found the system that is equivalent to the more potent organophosphates.

              And then there is also the thing like in economics where “bad money chases out good money” so above a (disturbingly small?) critical mass/density, things just can’t help but fail as Competency Flight takes place.

                1. Used to work with HF; it has my serious respect. Still, Polonium comes to mind, with an LD50 of 1 microgram or so…

            2. Honestly, I think that, to a degree and for a time, some tinstitutions did improve. The Press got better as the last influence of the Progressive Left counteracted the ‘receiving radio venus on his bridgework’ influence of Hearst (I’ve read excerpts from late period Hearst papers, and they get downright bizarre). Film got better in some ways as it escaped the Studio system. The thing is, sincemthe political Left does not accept negative feedback that runs counter to its theories, they always go too far.

              1. This. The problem with progs, in general (besides the whole Not Understanding Human Nature thing), is that seemingly good small-scale ideas just must be taken to their extreme. So, little things that might be good and valuable if kept small get taken to a national, gov’t level, encoded into law, and inflicted on the masses – without any thought given to how scaling and shifting the power to the gov’t affects the outcome. Because… Prog Good Idea!

            3. They think like cooks convinced that everything is improved by adding more salt.

              Because the one thing these Proglodytes never consider is that the customer might be right, they will not only not lay off the added salt, they will take customer complaints about the soup’s saltiness as evidence the customer knows nothing about soup.

              1. To some degree, I think it’s because at this late date if they stopped to consider the children of their actions, they might mentally destroy themselves. They CAN’T have been wrong all these decades, because if they were wrong, then they are partially responsible for all the death, destruction, and misery that has followed in the wake of Socialism. And they aren’t up to carrying that weight…except for a few brave souls like David Horowitz.

            4. You’d thing just on laws of averages and some people being good managers SOME institutions would improve, right?

              I’m of the cynical opinion/observation of ‘no, it wouldn’t, not unless you had successive good management and rules in place to ensure that it would improve, along with a company / institution that was careful in it’s workplace policies and environment to ensure that it’s purpose is actually fulfilled and held as the priority objective over personal bullshit – and even that isn’t a guarantee of ongoing improvement.’

              A single good manager can have their improvements swiftly undone by an ambitious small wo/man wanting to make their mark and stand out so they can get a better job elsewhere; a good workplace can be destroyed by a HR that isn’t that interested in the company’s / institutions’ improvements but instead employing their friends; workplace environments can be poisoned by a toxic meddler interested only in their personal standing and position, and erosion of the company/institution’s purpose to something else, like social justice over merit.

              They’re strangling vines, climbing on things that other people built or grew, and kill them.

              1. Hiring people is a hassle. The trend now is to oursource HR. Which lets those companies dictate who their customers get to choose from…

            5. I’m a member of a couple of organizations. These are local chapters of national organizations. The local organizations at least still do good work, even if they do have a certain amount of problems. This despite the number of liberal Democrats who have at times held leadership positions.

              Why are these organizations still functional? (Or at least somewhat.) Because the left didn’t actually take over. (Okay, one of the national organizations has some issues. One side of that organization I don’t touch. And the other half’s issues could simply be a weakness of the sort of person the organization is for.) I haven’t been run off not being enthusiastically left.

              Organizations are hard enough to keep running if you grab everyone who shows an interest. If you are trying only to grab folks with the secret decoder ring, you are repelling others. Which sooner or later includes the folks you need to keep things going over the long term. (Which doesn’t mean that you should instead gut the organization in a futile bid to attract those who don’t care about the core mission.)

            6. In answer to Sarah’s question “Why is it that everything they take over objectively falls apart and collapses…(?)”, I have a take on that which goes to two inextricably entwined characteristics of the left:

              Firstly, they never intend to do anything other than further their own interests and ideologies in the first place. They go after taking over things like SWFA not because they are interested in the stated goals and purpose of the institution, but because they want to use it. Because of that, the organization inevitably becomes merely another appendage to that which the Communists called the Party. It’s like cordyceps taking over an ant–They can’t not pith the organization and turn it into an auxiliary of the Party. Asking them not to would be like asking cordyceps to please not kill the host. It is their nature, written into their ideological DNA.

              Second, think about the sorts of people attracted to those left-wing ideologies in the first place. Yes, there are all sorts of personality types attracted to it all, but the one thing you generally don’t find much of is the quality that the Meyers-Briggs tests are talking about when they discuss “conservers”–Men and women who hear the tale of Chesterton’s Wall and automatically think “Yeah, that is a truth, an eternal verity, if I ever heard one…”.

              No conservers? The organizations they take over get flown into the dirt. That’s just a fact of life–The revolutionary is rarely a builder or a maintainer.

            7. I have a growing suspicion that the basic principles that underlie their thinking is antithetical to good business practices.

      2. A Vietnam era song of Leftwing devotion to the authority of the Mainstream Media:

        Civil rights leaders are a pain in the neck
        Can’t hold a candle to Chang Kai Shek
        How do I know? I read it in the Daily News
        Ban the bombers are afraid of a fight
        Peace hurts business and that ain’t right
        How do I know? I read it in the Daily News
        Daily News, daily blues
        Pick up a copy any time you choose
        Seven little pennies in the newsboy’s hand
        And you ride right along to never, never land

        1. Again Tom Paxton:

          I believe, I do, I believe its true.
          I believe exactly what they tell me to.
          I believe, I do.  I believe its true.
          I’m a simple guy, I believe.

      3. Totally agree, especially with the 1960s timeline. I’ll add that it also started really changing with such shows like 60 Minutes when people started realizing that not everything those shows broadcast was even-handedly reported. I remember a story Rather did on the hospital where my mother worked. It was one of the most yellow journalistic hit pieces I’ve ever seen. CBS didn’t expect the hospital to come right back at them, not only with a denial but with enough facts and figures to prove the false reporting. It really opened my young eyes about what was going on in the world of the media.

        1. We also believed that If They Said it on 60 Minutes It Must Be True…until they did a story on a topic we actually knew something about.
          Never watched the show again, forever.

    2. …leaving them vulnerable to a sophisticated misinformation campaign

      Fortunately, the Democrats lost in spite of it.

    1. Next to the last — well, not so much chapter as blog post. There are still several chapters but there is so much fucking repetition in this book that it is getting hard not to glaze over page after page after page. Of course, that might also be the fact that the woman couldn’t write her way out of a paper bag if her life depended on it. I’ve seen bad editing before and bad writing before but this book reads like it was written by several different people and not edited at all. I am really looking forward to starting a new book soon.

      1. Which makes me wonder if HRC had a ghostwriter or two start out on the first version, and then she came in and added her bits and bobs, and then the book was just de-typoed and sent to press.

  4. Does any one remember “The 1980s have called. They want their foreign policy back”?

    And I’m still convinced that the Russian stuff keeps coming up is because they promised (or at least seemed to) the election to Hillary, and didn’t deliver.

    1. Putin apparently held enough of a grudge against Hillary for, as SecState, advocacy regarding a Russian election, that she would have to be stupid to think he would do her a favor.

    2. I remember this as well:

      Over charge?  Hum? Yeah.

      A little voice in the back of my head asks, “Was that really a mistake?”

      And, if it was, what does that indicate about the State Department?

    3. Putin wouldn’t have been reckless enough to do that. I’m pretty confident that his plan during the election was just to sow as much chaos and confusion as possible. He knows that undermining the credibility of a government will make it more difficult for that government to act in a strong and forthright manner.

      And, thanks to the Dems and their howls about collusion, his plan worked.

      1. If Hillary (see: Johnny Chung & Charles Trie) Clinton and the Dems were truly concerned about foreign meddling in our elections, their patriotic duty would be to remain quiet about the damage done in 2016 and work with Republicans to shore up weaknesses in our open electoral process, not scream those vulnerabilities to the world.

        Spy Wars: The Mueller Mess Is Just the Outcome Russia Wanted
        By Michael Ledeen
        I believe the Russians are involved in American politics. It’s an old story: There used to be organizations known as “Communist front groups” that were founded, funded, and otherwise supported by the Kremlin, the most important of which was ANSWER. Such organizations undoubtedly still exist, and their mission is still the same: destroy American democracy.

        They are part of the global war against the United States. They hate and fear democracy and freedom, which — as the demise of the Soviet Empire abundantly demonstrates — are the greatest threat to their own legitimacy and hence their continued tyranny. Hatred and fear of the United States is what binds together such diverse regimes as those in Moscow, Tehran, Beijing, Pyongyang, and Caracas.

        So I am not surprised when our counter-intel guys find evidence of Russian meddling. But if we had an intelligence community worthy of the name, we’d probably know a lot more. And not just about Russians, either.

        Given the deep corruption of the American political system, there must be considerable activity by Chinese and Iranian agents as well. And, apparently, Pakistanis, as it seems from the remarkable story of aides to former Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Wasserman Schultz:

        [END EXCERPT]

    4. Who? The Russians, or the mainstream media? If you’re saying the MSM, oh, they absolutely did, and didn’t even realize how much power they had lost. They still haven’t, really.

      1. I gather Dan Rather still believes he was unfairly maligned.

        Many more people consider him to have been unfairly aligned.

        1. I have to say, I never like Rather much, and greeted the news that he had been caught faking a story to attack a Republican with a complete lack of surprise.

        2. Of course he does. He’ll even tell you so. He forgot what the word integrity meant long ago and I doubt he ever thought it applied to him.

  5. Of course, bad as Putin is, Trump is worse. Never, ever forget that or she will remind you.

    That Trump is the worst she has and will continue to remind you time and again whatever you do.   

    It is quite apparent that in her mind whatever is wrong with the world is either exemplified by Trump or is the fault of Trump.  The world hates up because Trump.  We hate ourselves because Trump.  Never mind the problems began long before Trump was born. 

    1. Well, it used to be all Bush’s fault, except Bush seems to be supporting the Democrats now…

      The Uniparty is not a myth.

      1. W Bush didn’t cast a vote for president in the last election. So while I’m not happy he didn’t support Trump, I’ll at least give him credit for not casting a vote for Clinton (unlike his father).

  6. On a related note:

    16 hours ago

    Trump ‘beheaded’ by Griffin: meh
    Trump ‘executed’ by rapper: meh
    Trump ‘assassinated’ as Caesar: meh
    Suggestion Hillary take up knitting: OUTRAGE!”

      1. Better she should take the largest knitting needles she can find, jam them violently up her own vagina, and spin on them, the silly bitch.

        Jesus Christ on a flaming pogo stick, but I am tired of this sniveling twunt!

        “Most gracious (would be) Queen,
        we thee implore
        to go away
        and sin no more.
        Or if the effort be too great,
        to go away
        at any rate.”

        Why do I have a mental image of Bill, sitting in a quiet corner where he can’t be overheard by Her Shrillness, giggling?

      2. Bill only needs a quiet corner if he’s in the same building as Hillary. I doubt that happens at all these days.

        1. As far as I’ve seen, that’s only happened when absolutely necessary for political campaigns since Bill pried off all the W keys and left the WH in 2000.

          1. That was vandalism of public property. MY property.

            The perpetrators should have been made to pay for that.

            1. Yes, ideally they should. But Bush had other things on his mind when he came into office, and then shortly after something vastly more important – or at least urgent – than hanging ex-President Bubba and his charming wife Bruno by the heels.

              Also, Bush is a decent fellow, and probably thought that it would be petty. Now, if Trump had found that kind of mess left behind by Obumbles, there would have been fireworks.

              1. Further, the costs of such prosecutions would have been “”excessive” and the Dems would have gone all High Dudgeon about frittering away precious DOJ resources persecuting WH interns for a “harmless prank” rather than delving into the devious machinations that had deprived many Florida senile senior citizens of their right to cast their votes for Al Gore in the recent election.

            2. Yes. One of the prime examples of Bush (and all the rest of the establishment) not fighting back. And that brought us Trump.

      3. I kind of doubt Hillary has ever seen a realistic vagina, including her alleged own. On the other hand, we could speculate on who has the biggest Richard, her or Billy Boy.

        1. I seem to recall that Hillary was widely speculated to have personally investigated numerous such openings, with a distinct preference for those over the alternative.

          I refuse to pursue this as it engenders mental images none of us want to share.

  7. Not sure how well the theory of “Leading from behind” (Libya Fiasco) squares with someone who alleges that she ” believes the United States should continue carrying the mantle of global leadership. . .”
    Maybe it’s just me.

    1. mantle of global leadership

      Well that has a different meaning for intelligent people than for people like Hillary.

      To intelligent people it means “The US is the Boss and everybody should fall in line with what the Boss wants”.

      To people like Hillary it means “The US should follow the instructions of the world leaders especially when it comes to the US using its military”.

      Apparently, Hillary didn’t know what the world leaders would think about the US military rescuing the US ambassador. 😈

      1. If one were to be thinking “How do I frighten, say, the mad mullahs of Persia, or regional dudes with over-decorated uniforms, into doing what I want?” one might ponder the reports that many of them were packing getaway bags during the US invasion, convinced that after taking Baghdad the US Army would hang a right and drive to Tehran.

        Also ponder the impact of Saddam being dug out of his hideyhole on Khadaffi: “Oh, look, I just found these WMD programs! I give them to you! For free!”

        And then HRC led the effort to throw away yet another Bush admin win by turning Libya into the slavers haven it is today, which had the added bonus of convincing Little Kim that, even if he were to make a deal with the US, a few years later we’d likley depose him anyway, so his only hope for longevity in power was to build Nuke ICBMs to hold the US mainland at threat.

        Thanks, Hill.

        1. Nod, although a lot of that can be laid onto Obama as well as the Eurotrash.

          The Eurotrash had made it clear that any Dictators that wanted to retire in peace would face “trials” for “crimes” they committed while in office. So why wouldn’t a Dictator “fight to the end”?

          Obama made it clear that Khadaffi would face “war crime trials” for his actions while fighting to remain in power (even before the Eurotrash wanted US help in kicking him out).

          On the other hand, Little Kim like his daddy & granddaddy doesn’t need any excuses to “fight unto the end” as he likely believes that nobody could kick him out anymore than anybody was able to kick out his daddy & granddaddy. IE As long as China says nothing against him, it doesn’t matter what Americans say.

          1. If memory serves, the Eurotrash started the whole thing because of the Lefty hate on for Pinochet.
            As an aside, had he embraced Communism, he’d had been loved and praised by the Left.
            Anyway, they wanted to full on Hague his bottom, and viola, we lost the cheap option for removing dictators.

            1. Worse, Pinochet lost an honest election.

              Therefore no dictator should hold elections that he might lose. 😈

            2. Consideration of long-term consequences is not a Progressive strength, which makes laughable the idea that only they are sufficiently enlightened and selfless to make decisions about allocation of resources.

          1. I think Bush decided, wisely or not, that two countries was enough for the military to deal with at one time. Also, Iraq still has something resembling an infrastructure (say ‘thank you Shah’, you ungrateful Iraqi bastards) and maybe he was hoping that a nice messy object lesson right next door would convince them to play nice.

            Oh well.

            1. At the time, I was working a contract for the USAF, and the general consensus was that he wanted to, but by the time we took Iraq the Disloyal Opposition had sabotaged that plan.

              1. I think it would have been easier had Erdogan not blocked the (Seventh Cavalry?) entering through Turkey.

                Even so, and I fully acknowledge the mischief caused by the Disloyal Opposition, we ought have taken some reprisals for the Iranians supplying IEDs and other weapons as well as their support for Shiite Militia attacks on US forces and their weaponization of Mookie (Muqtada al-Sadr.)

              2. I’ve always said he did it wrong. He should have started in Iraq, and gone through Iran into Afghanistan. And not stopped at the border to Pakistan.

            2. Oh, I understand that – I understood this even after the whole thing. Frankly, from reports I hear from people who were actively there, the West had a very, very good chance for Iraq to have become the resistance to all the Islamic shitfuckery that infested the place, had it been properly rebuilt, like Japan. The people there were very amenable to that cultural conversion at the time.

              My hubby told me stories of Aussie soldiers angry that they were being pulled out mid-rebuild, because they’d built good rapport with the locals who sincerely wanted to have them there and were really working it out. “We had a chance to really make a change there, and the effin’ pollies lost their balls and brains” or something to that effect, and the worst part, apparently, was that the everyday citizenry there didn’t blame the soldiers – American or Aussie – for leaving; ‘after all, you do what your leaders have you do’ and thanked them. No, it was the hint of resigned despair that was in the air afterward, because the lack of established stability meant they were vulnerable to outside influences.

              1. I thought so also, Shadow – that there was a chance for Iraq to become a functional place, if we had only stuck it out, the way we stuck it out in South Korea. Kept a couple of bases in out-of-the-way neighborhoods, kept a watchful eye as the secular (read non-Islamic-fanatics) rebuilt and cultivated the opportunities and advantages they had.
                Can you imagine what a tourist industry they might have had? Turn those ghastly Saddam-era places into luxury hotels, and give tours of all the sites of ancient Mesopotamia?
                But President Odumbo-ass had to pull the plug on all that. I still can’t decide if it was malice or incompetence on his part, or malicious incompetence. All that blood we spilled to make a renewed and first-world Iraq happen … and he threw it all away.
                If I sound PO’ed about this, my daughter (the two-hitch Marine) is even more intemperate.

                1. Count as a factor our lack of willingness to be hard-assed once there. Frankly, we should have picked our strong-man, installed him in power and kept him aware of the length of his leash. Allowing Iran to supply funds, advice and weapons to such puppets as Moqtada al Sadr and the remnant militias was mush-minded in a nation with no experience of democratic governance.

                  You start by building the little platoons, by establishing self-governance on the local level before you put it into effect at the top. When we were attempting to rebuild Iraq’s military one question I could never get answered was “How long does it take to develop an effective NCO core to the service?” But that is the basis for a military, just as municipal and provincial governments are the start of national self-government.

          2. The perfect exit strategy for Iran and Afghanistan would have been for both armies to meet in Tehran.

  8. “In my view, Assange is a hypocrite who deserves to be held accountable for his actions.” (pg 343) Am I the only one to see the irony in this statement? 

    Along with everything you have carefully detailed she claims that Assange contributed to her own loss in the Presidential elections by upset the Bernie voters when he released the pertinent DNC e-mails regarding the DNC’s own actions to engineer Bernie’s loss in the primaries.  

    She has no sense of irony.  

    Nor shame.

    If she did by this point they would weigh so heavily upon her no one could carry it.

    1. When reading between the lines, what you come to realize is that Hillary is basically upset because voters know what she was doing behind the scenes.

      1. This this this – pretty much my-coverup-is-worse-than-my-crime theory: “What I did to fix the D primaries wasn’t the problem – that it came out was the problem.”

      2. It’s amazing how many Democrats think, “The Russians told you too much of the truth about us! We should have been able to keep you in the dark!” is a rallying cry.

    2. It has become abundantly clear — not that I ever had any doubt about it — that she doesn’t believe the rules apply to her. She is above all the rest of us lowly serfs. How dare we not bow down to her will and proclaim her our God Empress for Life?

  9. HRC: Second, we need to get serious about cyber warfare.

    From the woman who did not follow her own State Department guidelines for electronic communications?

    1. Since she had her server wiped, like with a cloth, or at least had had the maid do it, I think her thoughts on cyber security might be lacking.

      Also what was this in reference to?
      “As Secretary of State, I was responsible for the safety of our officers around the world, and I knew that releasing those confidential reports put not only them in danger but also their foreign contacts.”

      I’m sure it wasn’t referencing her emails the Russians stole.

      1. Well, in fairness, we’ve yet to see any proof that a foreign power hacked her server. There’s reason to believe it took place, but there’s been no proof so far. All of the Hillary e-mails released through WikiLeaks and the like came from hacking the recipients of those e-mails, such as Podesta.

        1. And you won’t unless the Russians fall apart again and the FSB archives get opened, or maybe the Chinese Party falls and someone opens up their archives.

          Any competent cyber actor would leave absolutely no traces on such a poorly protected server.

          1. There’s convincing eforensic evidence that support the local download of the leaked emails to a flash thumb drive instead of a remote download via network. Not conclusive, but it certainly points more towards an internal leaker inside the DNC instead of Russkiya hackers.

            1. Wasn’t there a family of dubious background handling IT services for Debbie Washedup-Schultz in the House and at the DNC?

              1. A group of Pakistanis who have since fled the country. They apparently got a *very* lucrative and sweet deal for the work that they were doing – to the point where some outside individuals who do similar work have raised questions about what they were being paid.

                And DWS was apparently quite desperate to get at least one laptop out of police hands after it was seized as evidence of the hacking crimes.

              2. I think I saw some allegation that the pattern of spending could be a sign of money laundering, and speculation it was for an Islamic terrorist organization.

                1. Just because they ran a Used Car operation that had no cars on the lot here in America? That’s on account of they sold those cars (at HUGE mark-up) back home in the M.E. It is a type of trade — moving things from where there’s a surplus to where they’re scarce) that has proven very successful for many Middle Eastern based organizations, such as Hezbollah, who have found an exploding market fr such vehicles.

            2. IIRC, WikiLeaks claimed that they got the e-mails from the Dem guy who was gunned down on his own front porch last summer. But a headline that I spotted just yesterday stated that a Russian who is in custody is claiming that he’s the one who hacked the DNC.

              1. The two claims are not mutually exclusive. Apparently everybody and his brother could have hacked the DNC, whose idea of cyber-security apparently consisted of leaving the key under the doormat.

        2. Quite possible that several foreign powers hacked her server, and discovered that she was doing enough damage to the U.S. that they wouldn’t have been able to effectively contribute anything.

        1. Which to this day makes me see red and my blood boil. Vengeance does not soothe the soul, nor brings life back to our honored dead. ‘Tis not enough, but a tithe- to see her plans and dreams brought low and for naught. Hardly even worthy of praise, being only what a rational and sane people would do.

          But one might imagine Christopher Stevens looking down from his reward and saying, “well done.” Many a man holds hope for a brighter future, knowing that that… unfortunate person is not persident, nor ever shall she be.

          1. Not to dishonor the dead, but manning an embassy in a third world country during a Democrat administration is a proven health hazard, not tomsay threat to life.

            The world really, seriously, needs a few embassy seiges ended by first world countries telling the host country “You have eight hours to get that under control, or we send in the troops and shoot anyone who annoys us.” and meaning it. Maybe a couple of dropped djams, too. Some nice, messy, object lessons are badly needed.

            1. You’ll note the KGB ensured nobody pulls this crap on the Russians. Nearly thirty years after the KGB became defunct, their rep still helps Russia.

            2. Measured responses.

              One. “Your people are acting a bit unruly around our embassy. Perhaps you would like to look into that.” Wake up the closest military assets. Appraise of situation.

              Two. “It seems there are folks throwing flammables now. It would be wise to get this situation under control. Soon.” Launch. Regardless of host country’s response, if there is no *visible* response at the embassy at this point, assets should already be in play.

              Three. “Last warning. Fix this sh*t or we will.” Final approach. Notify host country (if haven’t already) that we are/will be in their area… and will take appropriate action.

              Four. “Our people have been attacked/injured/killed. This is our party now. Stay out of the way.” This should only have happened if assets were too far away/attack happened and overwhelmed embassy security. Rescue our people, end the threat, send the host country the bill. Kick *ss, don’t p*ss on ’em.

      2. When called out in the hearings in the statement that lead up to the infamous line, ‘What difference does it make at this point in time?” did anyone notice that HRC tried to put forward a false choice?  She starts referring to the fact that we had four dead Americans — as if the death of four Americans meant something so great that it in some way it rendered any attempt to find out just what lead up to their deaths wrong.  She goes on to dismissively suggest two false scenarios, a protest or ‘some guys who went out for a walk one night and decided to kill some Americans.’  She has yet to publicly face the fact that it was a deliberate planned attack targeting Americans.

        1. I am once again reminded that Hillary had long since answered the question implicit in the title of her book.

          “What Happened”
          ‘What difference does it make at this point in time?”

        2. Oh, I saw it and I’m furious she hasn’t been charged with at least obstruction. She continues to do her song and dance around what happened. Worse, she will wave those four dead as a rallying flag against the Republicans — and she does in her book. Why? Because we dare still question her about her emails and her actions leading up to and following the attack that cost Ambassador Stevens and the others their lives.

  10. Hillary, Dear,

    You really need to wake up. You didn’t lose because of Russia. You didn’t lose because of some diabolical conspiracy. You didn’t lose because of some failing on the part of the American Public.

    You lost because, having hijacked the nomination process, you ran a campaign that could have been bettered by a badly carved potato. You ran a leisurely campaign among your nearest and dearest, and the Democrat voters slept in on election day.

    Face it, darling, you are something worse than criminal, careless, stupid, and hypocritical. You’re tiresome.

    Go. Away.

    1. Badly Carved Potato 2020: Better than Pat Buckman, and even Pat Buckman would be better than Hillary!

    1. If Russia had intended to damage the United States, they would have been throwing their support to Hillary.

  11. Amanda deserves more adult beverages for reading this than I can afford. Think of Steve Green’s monthly allocaion.

    1. I’ll admit, as I wrote this post, it was difficult not to go in and crack open the bottle my son gave me for Christmas. I refused, however, because I wouldn’t waste the really good whiskey on the likes of HRC.

  12. I’m old enough to remember when the Republicans were the ones who were supposed to be afraid of Russians hiding under every bed.

    1. No, no, no, that memory of “The 1980s are calling, and they want their foreign policy back” is a false memory: The D team has always maintained that the Russians are America’s greatest geopolitical threat!

          1. why are you calling them by the euphemism”bear” then? Call it the “brown” makes it seem like it’s something scary.

  13. In 2016 our democracy was assaulted by a foreign adversary determined to mislead our people, enflame our divisions, and throw an election to its preferred candidate. (pg 326) Compare and contrast, from the Washington Times, story dated July 12th, 2016:

    The State Department paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayers grants to an Israeli group that used the money to build a campaign to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in last year’s Israeli parliamentary elections, a congressional investigation concluded Tuesday.

    We don’t hear Benjamin Netanyahu whinging on and on and on about foreign interference and undermining the sole democracy in the middle east, by an ally at that, do we?

    1. He knew there wasn’t any point at the time (the Obama administration was also trying to shove an anti-Israel resolution through the UN before the end of the year). And now that Trump’s in the White House, there’s no point in bringing up the issue. Trump’s not going to try and do that to Netanyahu.

      1. Also another giggle, because if it’s not Trump’s fault, or the Russians, it’s Mossad / the Jewish Conspiracy of Zion (and if this is a parody account, it’s still rather spot on the usual ‘NOOOOOOOOO’)

        1. I always wonder if they have a cork-board somewhere with news clippings of all the really wild things attributed to them that they DIDN’T do. 🙂

          1. I bet they do. And laugh about it.

            “Oi, Benny, it looks like we’re responsible for the X-Files again. And smart cars, somehow. And Taiwan’s secession from mainland China.”
            “Oh good. I was getting bored of being accused of spying for the Russians this week. ”
            “For a Mossad plant, Putin’s doing a bad job of advancing Zionist Protocols.”
            “I wonder when we’ll be blamed for the Shah again…”


        2. I’ve seen more than one good one from them. Remember when we “opened the gates of hell” by moving our embassy to Israel’s capital (shock, horror!)? TheMossad tweeted something (which I can’t find at the momnt) about all the *other* times the sulferous kiddie-gate was opened… And it was pretty much a day ending in -y, with certain idiots throwing stabbing tantrums, or bombing tantrums, and blaming it all on those darn sneaky Joos, i.e. their “Senpai, pay attention to meeeee~!” act to get deluded folks with more money than sense to give them money.

          Someone over there has their wits about them. The mockery is spot on. Couldn’t happen to more deserving a group.

            1. *chuckle* I know. My usual starts before the sun rises and ends after dark, too. And my little horde is going to be so lonely without me at work… Ah, who am I kidding, I’ve got the day off, and they’ve got a list. They’re good kids. They’ll be fine.

              Now if I could manage to sleep *in* for once, without being deathly ill first…

    2. LOL. I thought of that, of the Central American elections and Central Asia elections we “invested” in. Then there’s the Middle East. I have no doubt if the intelligence community opened up, we’d see other governments have long tried to influence elections here as well. This isn’t new. It’s just the first time it became a media event here.

    3. To be fair, that extremely heavy-handed attempt was run by people so incompetent and out of touch with the voters that on balance it probably helped Netanyahu more than it hurt him. I personally know several people who held their nose and voted for him BECAUSE of it, not despite.

  14. The Obama administration proved with crippling sanctions against Iran that this kind of pressure can force our adversaries to change course. (pg 371) 

    Well, long enough to convince the mark and complete the con, anyway – see CBS News story dated August 24th, 2016:

    The Obama administration said Wednesday it paid $1.3 billion in interest to Iran in January to resolve a decades-old dispute over an undelivered military sale, two days after allowing $400 million in cash to fly to Tehran.

      1. The single most aggravating US action or policy to The Shirtless Tsar is our support and expansion of US fracking-based oil production.

        WIthout that stream of oil income that he was using to rebuild the Russian military while propping up the economy owned by his ex-KGB organized crime oligarch buddies, Russia is screwed, and Vlad knows it.

        1. Sorry, didn’t complete the thought:

          And which candidate campaigned on shutting down US fracking?

          If Vlad were a rational actor, HRC would clearly have been his preferred counterpart – and as a plus he could then use the stuff he downloaded from her mailserver.

          1. Fracking? Heck, which candidate had denounced George W Bush for wanting to open ANWAR’s oil reserves, sneering that the Alaskan oil wouldn’t be available for almost ten years until 2010?

            Which candidate refused to authorize the Canadian oil pipeline route, creating a secure, uninterruptible oil supply for the USA?

            These are people who won’t fix the roof when it isn’t raining and blame others for the leaks when the rain does come.

            1. For years after the real estate bubble burst, I had Lefties angrily damanding to know why Congress didn’t hold hearings on who was to blame. And I’d tell them “Because they’re deathly afraid that somebody will tell them in public.”

          2. The Dems simultaneously ran against fracking and for fracking. They told their supporters that they wanted to shut it down, while simultaneously taking credit its expansion under Obama’s watch with the public at large.

          3. and who is backing some of the anti-fracking ‘grassroots’ organizations? and who backed the anti-fracking movie? (I know it wasn’t Russia, but anyway…)

            1. The Greens (aka Watermelons) have been a front group for Russian interests almost from the beginning, if not directly subsidized then as useful idiots into whose cap the Russians drop the occasional penny.

              As for Russian meddling in our politics … that has been ongoing since at least the 1930s (see: Alger Hiss) and if Hillary only just now discovered this she has voided any claim of being qualified for the presidency.

            2. Matt Damon was in one anti-fracking “documentary”. IIRC, it was later revealed that the documentary had been financed at least in part by money from the Middle East.

              1. yes, thats what i was referring to. it was paid for by the Saudis and the Russians are backing the ‘grassroots’ orgs

    1. Wasn’t Hillary Sec. State when our government turned a blind eye to Iran’s ayatollahs crushed the Green Revolution?

  15. [While this is not entirely factual, it is not nearly as fictional as I would like.]

    “You’re… a…”

    “…minotaur, yes. And I would like a drink, please.”

    “And this is a smokehouse… brisket, etc.”

    “I know. Now, about that drink?”

    “Sure you shouldn’t be somewhere else? Alright, what do you want to drink?”

    “It’s called a Brave Bull. Two parts tequila, one part Kahlúa.”

    “Apt. Uh…. what are you reading, if I may ask.”

    * Shows bartender the phone, open to this post. *

    “All is explained.”

        1. Trainwreck appeal?
          I tend to read up some on industrial accidents and the like (Chernobyl, Bhopal, lesser and lesser known things as well). Part is fascination with process of how things happened.. and how they could have been avoided. Part is, I dunno, that it’s real and not invented horror (a genre I that holds little to no attraction for me).

          1. Click to access bxpl.pdf

            This is a full accident report, with pictures, of a completely avoidable boiler explosion. Amazingly, no casualties. Trainwreck appeal for sure.

            I’ve looked at a number of boiler explosions in the last few years, and they pretty much have the the following in common: 1. Boiler operations was part of the operator’s job, not the boiler operators’s job. 2. Boiler operators wren’t present 24/7 while boiler was in operation. 3. Operators were either not licensed, not unionized, or both.

            There is no uniform boiler operator requirement anywhere. The boiler’s I’m operating now have one operator 24/7. If they were boilers operated by the State of NY, the State would required two operators present 24/7 because 100 PSI. If they were operated privately in NY outside Rochester, Buffalo, or NYC, someone could come in and check on them once daily M-F and take readings, and security could walk through a few times a night and on weekends and call someone if there’s an alarm. BTW, things can go to hell really fast if something goes wrong.

            “Experienced” doesn’t mean “Knowledgeable”. Last time we hired one experienced interviewee failed on the first question: If you’re passing in front of the boiler and you observe no water in the sightglass, what do you do? He answered “Add water.”

            1. OK, I’m not a licensed boiler operator, but I’ve run state-owned steam engines a few times. We/I were pretty careful to keep water in the good zone, but I’ll admit to ignorance about the answer. Collier State Park near Klamath Falls has 3 working engines; two tractors rated at 10 and 75-ish HP, and a portable engine at 25HP. I’ve run the two smaller ones fur a full day, and helped do the annual tests* on all 3 a couple of times, so I’m barely experienced. I think I last did it in 2011..

              (*) Usually a static hydraulic test, then after dumping water to the full mark, a fireup to verify the automatic pressure relief works correctly. Some years, the inspector would measure sheet thicknesses.

              Assumptions: the boiler is hot, and the sightglass was working earlier in the day. Further assuming the day’s operators aren’t idiots.

              I’ve been thinking about this a few minutes, and the best I can come up with is the following: First, trip the emergency pressure relief valve. Second, look at the pressure gauge. If it’s critically high, clear the area and run like hell. If it’s below the trip pressure, I’d kill the fire. Probably grab a dry extinguisher. These are all wood fired, and beyond draft induction, there’s not much in the way of draft control. (Maybe on the tiny Westinghouse. Don’t recall anything in the 25HP portable.) All the time, telling people to get the hell out of the area.

              Once my heart rate returned to quasi-normal, I’d try to find out What Happened

              So, never mind hiring, am I still alive?

              1. Secondary assumption: the sightglass isolation and drain valves haven’t been fiddled with. I’d start checking that after dumping the steam pressure…

              2. If water is out of sight low, there’s no way to tell where it is. If you add water to a dry hot boiler that has continued firing despite all the low water shutdowns, it’s going to flash into steam faster than the relief valves can handle it. Followed by something coming apart violently as it overpressurizes.

                1. Forgot- first step in low water out of sight- shut it down, completely. Cut off fuel. Solid fuel cut off air as well as fuel feed.

                  1. Thanks. I knew they “why”, but wasn’t clear on the “how to recover”. In the 2001 in Medina, Ohio. The owner/operator/idiot had the tractor on the road outside the venue, and had ti under power to get inside. He hit a slope and the thing exploded. (search “ohio steam tractor explosion”).

                    The forensics showed that a) he had insufficient water, b) the crown sheet was very thin; IIRC, it had been eroded to 1/16″. and c) water splashed onto the superheated crown sheet. 5 killed, 48 injured, and lots-o-lawsuits. The owner seems to have been an ass; he had been stopped by a trooper because he tore up over a mile of road in operation. Somehow the trooper survived.

                    Local machines are inspected yearly. I know of 4, all supervised by an ME who rebuilt them, boiler tubes and all. With cedar and pine solid fuel, someone is always by the firebox and the gauges.

        2. So we’ll recognize her ilk faster the next time they show up. Like reading the history of the origins of the USSR, so the next Stalin and Lenin won’t get as much of a start.

        3. Humans are the animal that poses the most danger to both adults and children. Thus understanding human behavior is vital to any real practice of safety. Understanding phenomena involving Hillary is part of a complete understanding of human behavior.

            1. Hillary is idolized by a lot of probable human beings. The mechanisms behind that related to human behavior.

              1. Is she, indeed, so idolized? If she was capable of energizing her own side, wouldn’t she have won? Oh, there are a lot of (what can I call them? Whores give value for money) like Rosie O’Doughnut who will simulate orgasm over her, but I think the election shows that given a choice between voting for Shrillary and another hour’s sleep, the Democrat electorate slept in.

                1. There seems to be a certain number of women who have no pride in their own lives after having invested them according to feminist dictates, and have their ego in publicly visible proxies.

                2. I do wonder how much of the public praise of Hillary is actual adoration, and how much is just virtue signaling for Big Sister, if you know what’s good for you comrade.
                  I suspect that we’ll see the knives come out for the Clintons in the next few years.

  16. Reading these posts, I’ve come to the conclusion that Amanda has somehow gotten a hold of a copy of Hillary Clinton’s memoirs from an alternate dimension. At least, that’s the only way that I can imagine that anyone could possibly write these words and expect anyone to take them seriously.

    “Putin … despises anyone who stands up to him, so I’m a double problem.”

    See, in my universe, the main interaction between Hillary and Russia was her blaming all the issues between the two countries on that horrible Bushitler administration and handing out a “reset” button. (Okay, a stolen button from the hotel hot tub that was supposed say be “reset” in Russian but actually said “overcharged,” but it’s the thought that counts).

    “When President Obama and I came into office in 2009.”

    Yeah, Amanda covered this one pretty thoroughly, but again, not the way it happened in my universe.

    “He seems to want to be like Putin, a white authoritarian leader who could put down dissenters … weaken the press and amass untold billions for himself.”

    Hmm. Again, in my universe, it was Hillary vowing to change the first amendment so that the government could prohibit people from showing a movie critical of her (for anyone who’s forgotten, that’s what Citizens United was about). Also, in my universe, there’s a contradiction between wanting a free press and wanting Google, Twitter, and Facebook to carefully monitor anything allowed to be posted.

    1. Also, in my universe, there’s a contradiction between wanting a free press and wanting Google, Twitter, and Facebook to carefully monitor anything allowed to be posted.


      I can hear their reply, and I don’t like it:

      blockquote>But we aren’t talking about shutting down the press, these people are not the responsible press. They are divisive people, purveyors of faux news, trying to incite hate and undercut progress with their lies. These terrible people are hurting a innocent individuals who need the guidance and protection of their government to keep them safe.

      Towards this end we are recommending a state and federal licensure for the press going forward.

      Who knows, we might even get a national government sponsored news source named Truth. G-d forbid.

      1. Bangs head repeatedly against WP …

        There was absolutely no HTML coding included after the word press in the first line of that paragraph, yet it posted in that way.

        And I can swear that I not only had the initial carat before the first ‘blockquote’, but that I did close the block quote after the words ‘press going forward.’

        Word Press delenda est!

    2. Whew, I thought I was the only one thinking that. But it’s scarier to think this is actually what HRC believes the world is like. Thank goodness, it’s her own delusion and not reality.

      1. It isn’t that this is what HRC believes the world is like; it is that this is what HRS believes her supporters will believe the world is like.

        This book is less an expression of delusion and more an expression of contempt.

  17. Oh, and on a serious note:

    “In my view, Assange is a hypocrite who deserves to be held accountable for his actions.”

    I agree with her on this. Assange is a scumbag, a Russian tool, and an enemy of the United States.That he helped “our side” by releasing the DNC emails doesn’t change that. The charge of “hypocrisy” is rather painful, however, given that she thinks Assange needs to be “held accountable” not for releasing information about classified US military operations and the names of intelligence contacts in the War on Terror but for releasing non-classified information harmful to HER. I’d tell Hillary what do with her “view” here, but I’m a guest here and I don’t want to leave a mess in Sarah’s comment section.

    1. What Shrillary deserves is to be consigned to obscurity. Ignored by the Democrat establishment she let down so comprehensively in 2016, gradually consigned to the lesser talk shows, and finally no longer invited at all. She would hate that even more than being roasted alive on the Washington Mall.

      Won’t happen, more’s the pity.

    2. While I have no wish to defend the guy, I am confused about Hillary’s denunciation of Julian Assange as hypocrite, as I am not clear about what she thinks he is being hypocritical.

      A dangerous provocateur, yes, a person who exposes that which is best kept secret, yes. But it isn’t as if he ever took an oath to defend and preserve our Constitution, and the real condemnation ought be reserved for those who have sworn such oaths and violated them by releasing classified documents to his organization.

    3. I’m not all that displeased with Assange. Regardless of his level of toolship to the Russians, he did a better job than our own MSM. For that matter, the Russians themselves did a better job than our own MSM on reporting about Hillary. While the enemy of our enemy is not necessarily our friend, they can still be of guarded use to us.

      1. He’s needed killing on general principles for years. That all of a sudden his leaks hurt the Democrats instead of just getting a bunch of our sources killed does not change that. As a practical matter, I sincerely doubt he changed many votes.

        1. It is possible he changed a number of votes from “A pox on both their houses” to “I reckon it’s worth the trip to the polls to cast a vote for the lesser evil.”

          1. Point.

            IIRC, it is thought that the votes that swung the vote were in many cases poor whites who had voted for Obama. I’m pretty sure that the folks who sought out, read and considered the emails in their vote did not have a huge overlap with that demographic.

            I think it may be like supposing that Trump must have won only because Kratman was giving away free copies of A State of Disorder. The people who would see an accurate depiction of Hillary in Willie are by and large the same people who could have guessed what the emails revealed, and may well have convinced themselves to vote for Trump anyway in absence of the emails.

            1. In the case of poor whites, Hillary obviously did not like them, the bunch of racist deplorables. Trump, on the other hand, was able to connect with them in an honest way.

        2. I doubt any of WikiLeaks leaks have gotten any of our sources killed. Why? Because if he could find the information, our enemies probably did already. Now add to the leaks by politicians in Washington who aren’t making those leaking decisions for the betterment of this country either, just what furthers their political careers. So the only ones truly in the dark are the voting public; the ones who really should know what’s going on.

          And before you go into COMSEC, OPSEC, etc. I played that game for 22 years already. There’s a time and a place for it; but it should be declassified and released at the earliest possible moment; and we both know that isn’t happening.

          1. Maybe if Islamic terrorist intelligence is using wikileaks to launder information they already had access to, to hide that it was them who received it, and have plausible deniability when they killed our sources.

        1. Any negative coverage of Hillary was a mere shadow of a vestigial nod towards a Potemkin show of a whisper of pretense of objectivity, and that was still too much for the woman who would be empress.

  18. a white authoritarian leader who could put down dissenters … weaken the press and amass untold billions

    Project much, HRC?

  19. “Fourth, we need to beat back the assault on truth and reason here at home and rebuild trust in our institutions.”

    Odd, seeing a truthful quote by Hillary. Only she wouldn’t recognize that it’s herself and the Progressive controlled MSM that are the assaulters of truth and reason.

    1. Those “institutions” were an artefact of poor communications. When something was far away, the newspapers, radio, and TV were your only windows into the wider world. And those windows became information gates, with partisan gatekeepers using them more for control than information.

      The gatekeepers are still hanging on to their jobs, but information flows around them now.

  20. I know why she wrote this book. It’s all about setting up an insanity defense when she’s arrested.

  21. Excerpts submitted for review

    Presiding: A Memoir
    by Hillary Clinton
    copyright 2031, Revolution Press
    Inter-dimensional/Trans-Temporal edition published by Evil League of Evil Press
    Wendell, Managing Editor
    Faceless Minion #6969, Transcription Supervisor

    Chapter 1

    It began the evening of the election.
    Actually, it began well before that, with Donald Trump’s refusal to promise he would honor the results of the election. As I said at the time, this fundamentally undermined our democracy.
    It came as no real surprise, then, that the process of casting doubts on my victory began immediately.
    When the election was called for me shortly after 10 PM in New York, I had my staff contact the Trump team to give them time for his concession. He was put on, and the phone was handed to me. His voice carried the frustration and anger he had displayed throughout the long campaign, but he eventually managed to admit I had won (through gritted teeth, I’m sure).
    Then he took the stage at the Hilton ballroom. Bill, John Podesta and I were on the way to the Javitz Center, the rest of the staff following behind. The drive took more than enough time for a simple concession speech, but when we arrived in the backstage area, he was still talking.
    I felt that I should wait a bit longer to let him finish, but John said that I needed to show strength from the beginning, so we told the press I would be going on. They immediately cut away to my victory speech.
    Of course, afterwards, Trump and his surrogates claimed this was some sort of attempt by me to offer one last undercut to my opponent, calling it “petty and vindictive”, but really, does a concession speech need to be that long?
    And then came the moment so many Americans were waiting for, when I came out….

    Of course I understand that the final tallies across the states had to be finished and tabulated, but it truly should have been no more than a footnote. But Donald Trump couldn’t simply let it go.
    “I won the popular vote!” he whined. Again and again, for weeks (and months!) on end.
    Khzir Khan, when speaking at the Democratic National Convention, offered to give a copy of the constitution to him. Perhaps he should have taken the offer. That way, maybe he’d understand about the Electoral College system in use in our great country. My clear victory of 279 votes to his 259 can only be described as a mandate, showing the will of a majority of the peoples of the states, something obviously much more important than a large surplus of votes in places like Texas and Florida.
    Can you imagine if the sequence were reversed? Do you honestly think I, a lawyer with a perfectly clear understanding of the process, would harp about few million votes in certain areas, rather than a consensus among a greater variety of citizens?

    …recounts requested by Gary Johnson (who denies any backing by the Trump campaign) for Ohio and Michigan. Endless conspiracy theories about Detroit vote total irregularities. All of these elements trying to undermine my presidency in the months before the inauguration even took place.
    And then well into the first year of my administration, over and over, supported by his friends in the press.
    To quote Donald himself: Sad!

    Chapter 3

    The economy.
    Over and over I was forced to hear these words. My first year produced solid 1.5 to 2.0 percent growth each quarter and yet the obstructionists in congress kept repeating the lie that the economy was stagnant, while ignoring a simple truth.
    Uncontrolled growth is bad. Whether for a population or an economy, it is simply unacceptable. The closest analogy is cancer. When a cell culture separates itself from an organ and becomes nothing but itself, it can kill the organ or indeed the entire organism. The same holds for a national economy. The foolish insistence from those who near-worship capitalism that it could be otherwise is a danger that modern societies are finally defeating.
    While I understand that some segments of the American workforce can feel the pinch as we move into a more nuanced and morally balanced economy, the six to eight percent unemployment rate is a truly fair and reasonable measure of a just and focused guided economy.
    And the many alt-right and radical conservatives who criticized my policies ignore the simple fact that Donald Trump, with no knowledge of the proper connection between government and business would most likely have enacted measures that would lead to truly disastrous numbers, most likely wiping out any growth from the Obama administration.
    And of course, we would have then been forced to listen to Trump and his allies blame Obama for his problems. Just for sparing the public that, you’d think they would show me some gratitude.

    Chapter 5
    ….and yet people continue to blame me for everything that happened on the Korean Peninsula.
    The Kim administration’s drive for nuclear weapons began long before my election and there was no rational way to stop it.
    While everyone keeps howling about the loss of life near Seoul, they completely avoid two truly important points: the bomb did not actually reach the capitol of South Korea and my decision to remove American troops from the region saved thousands of American lives.
    And yet there are those who would have you believe that I “abandoned” an ally and gave the North Koreans confidence to start their strikes.
    And as I said at the start of this chapter, the Chinese and Russian efforts to stabilize the area in the wake of the strike have introduced levels of peace not seen in half a century.

    Chapter 14
    …my second election showed that the American people were behind me. I achieved a clear majority of the popular vote this time, in addition to my 273 votes in the Electoral College. What more could someone want?

    Chapter 17
    My efforts to equalize the financial status of ALL Americans had met with some success, but were repeatedly undercut by efforts of Republicans and their obstructionist methods.
    My answer to this was, of course, the signature achievement of my second term: the Combined Omnibus Measures to Mitigate Inequities of the Economy (COMMIE). This broad, far-reaching effort to truly enact fair pay and incomes…
    …need to enact further restrictions against so-called “parody” or “satire” exceptions to hate speech laws. Their constant mockery of me and my legislative actions undercut not just a person, but the entire Presidency itself).

    Chapter 19
    The “money flight” opposition to COMMIE had simply become too great and thus necessitated laws to restrict the emigration of needed workers and capital. This was clearly addressed by my friends in the Senate and House when they passed the Working Against Loss of Labor Act.
    Our Canadian neighbors offered nothing but support, as did the majority of my fellow citizens. They wanted the WALL. They understood the WALL. And with a huge increase of border agents/RCMP, Canada pretty much paid for the WALL.
    With all that, I never understood the vehemence I experienced over the issue…

    Chapter 22
    While I have nothing but the greatest respect for Vice President Kaine, it had become clear over the last eight years that he would simply not be up to the task of running the country. As election season approached, staff members and advisors gathered to help address the issue. And I couldn’t be happier that they found an answer.
    The twenty-fifth amendment clearly states that a president may serve ten years. While my opponents kept screaming this specifically refers to individual who finish out another’s term due to succession, the DOJ and Supreme Court upheld that the Continued Opportunities for Uninterrupted Prosperity (COUP) measure was allowed.
    Frankly, I would have welcomed the opportunity to retire and relax, but my country needed me and I felt I had no choice…
    …the support of community organizations with long and varied histories such as Bringing Lives to Maturity (BLM) and Beginning Again to Move Nationally (BAMN) was instrumental…
    Chapter 23

    The gun violence plague that cast too many American lives had to end. The reasonable restrictions we had placed on gun ownership had failed, largely due to undermining efforts by the right.
    My hard working staff’s solution was brilliant and fair. The Greater ReAlignment of Basic Benevolence (GRABB) efforts would show the world that America was ready to join the sensible nations of the world on this fundemental issue of human rights…

    Chapter 31

    The basic Internal Service Ideally Moving Onward (ISIMO) had helped stabilize government positions by removing the need for Congressional approval for many positions. This success led us to move on to the General ISIMO, allowing me to finish up the rest of the four year term I had begun.
    Again, my enemies would do nothing but mock this decision, never offering up any positive solutions for leadership beyond vague, repeated appeals to the Constitution, ignoring the evolving nature of the document they professed to care so much about…

    And lest you think I’ve exaggerated the trouble I face over the issue, I would remind you that I needed to bring many members of congress (and their families) from both sides of the aisle into federal protection until the vote was completed.

    Chapter 34

    …with the breakdown of many municipalities, I was heartened to hear of the Honorable Caliphate of Michigan. Building on the recent traditions of Qur’anic and Sharia law being allowed in the United States, these noble people banded together and formed a widespread community offering protection and support for all.
    Of course, the extremist Republicans and their racist, Islamophobic allies denounced it as soon as it was organized. With cries of “unconstitutional” and “oppression” on their lips, they proceeded to lie about an innocent group of dedicated, caring Americans who were only trying to help their fellow man. They even trotted out supposed “escapees” to tell false or misleading stories full of nothing but the typical xenophobic slurs we’ve come to expect.
    Rest assured, if there were any evidence or credible reports of rape or murder at the hands of the leadership of the MHCoM, I would have never provided them with support…

    Chapter 41
    …the decision to suspend the elections of 2028 was the hardest choice I’ve ever made in my adult life. As I’ve said elsewhere in this work, the troubles wracking our nation were simply too great to leave to unfettered choice.
    And indeed, using General ISIMO and the COUP, I instituted a brilliant, streamlined process for leadership across our nation. I would appoint the Governors (a tradition held by many a leader throughout history) and they would, in turn appoint Senators and Representatives, thus preserving Congress as we’ve known it for more than two hundred and fifty years.
    And allowing the confidence vote the next year showed that it was the right decision. After a safely run vote where nearly fifty million citizens cast their ballots without interference from trouble-makers, I had a clearly displayed support in all fifty states. Not even the Republicans much vaunted Reagan victory of 1984 can claim that!

    Vindictive, hateful people would simply not give up. The announcement that they would hold a full slate of state and Federal representation elections for the midterm was a clear threat against the country that I loved and all I had done for it.
    By declaring the BLM and BAMN supporters as national auxiliaries, I had hopes that this insurrection could be quelled in an orderly, proper fashion, but I had no way of knowing so many violent lunatics would have betrayed our nation during the GRABB program and kept illegal firearms.

    …the loss of the Guard and regular military units can be placed solely at the feet of the traitorous, malevolent criminal who leaked the Project Fire Break memo.
    To any and all who read this, I can only repeat the two points that everyone seems to have missed:
    First, the idea never really got past early theory stages.
    Second, only a limited number of the lowest yield tactical devices were called for, to be used in remote, low population areas so as to minimize the casualties this warning would require.
    Sadly, at the time, no was willing to listen.

    After the last of my reserve protectorate forces had been pushed out, the peaceful, caring Caliphate was destroyed, its citizens forced to live under the rule of what amounted to warlords, whatever title of “Mayor” or “Sheriff” they bestowed upon themselves.

    And so I found myself with only the most limited die-hard supporters. But with their strength, I stood up against my enemies and made them understand two very important things.

    1: Everything I did, I did to make America, and indeed the world, a better place.
    2: Hillary Clinton doesn’t run from a fight.

    About the author:

    Open Term President Hillary Clinton lives with her family in Havana, Cuba, where she leads the American Government-in-Exile. She is currently working with the United Nations and other international partners to end the brutal and illegitimate regime of the self-styled “Restored Constitutional Republic of the United States”.

    [Writer’s note: Any similarity between The Honorable Caliphate of Michigan and events taking place in Detroit from John Ringo’s “The Last Centurion” is purely coincidental. No, wait, not coincidental. What’s that other word? Plagiarized. Yeah, that’s it, completely plagiarized.]

    1. I am reminded of the disclaimer at the beginning of one of the Three Stooges movies. It was something like this:

      This is a work of fiction. Any resemblance of characters in this film to real persons is a dirty shame.

    2. “My answer to this was, of course, the signature achievement of my second term: the Combined Omnibus Measures to Mitigate Inequities of the Economy (COMMIE).”

      (squints) I see what you did there.

  22. No offense, Amanda, and I thank you for taking one for the team, but I think I’m done with the HRC book reviews. The problem is the book, not your reviews. I’ve managed to get through the Communist Manifesto and graffiti on bathroom walls, but I have to draw the line with What Happened. OTOH, I can’t bring myself to read Mein Kampf, either. I don’t think the question is whether there was a ghost writer, but whether she wrote it without medication.

    1. The first half is primarily an extended whinge about the history and internal politics of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was pretty much a “who cares?” to everyone even when Hess transcribed it. I got distracted by something about the time I got to where he could spot Jews walking down the street (even without Roddy Piper magic sunglasses!) and never managed to finish it, though.

      Most of the Reich functionaries admitted openly that they had never actually read the book. In a way it was sort of comforting, knowing that the Nazis would draw the line *somewhere*…

      “There’s no pedant like a German pedant”, and at least the first half of the book is so boring it’s probably a crime all on its own.

      1. I wonder if the ghost writer has been fitted with a lovely canvas jacket with long sleeves which tie in the back.

        1. They’re too busy aping apoplexy over her ordering the King’s White House’s Forester to bring her the heart of the Jackson Magnolia. I s’pose we ought be grateful there is some remnant of Jackson they are willing to preserve.)

    2. I’ve read the Communist Manifest — in Russian no less — and Mein Kampf and other books most folks would run from. Hell, I’ve even read the John Birch Society’s Blue Book. But nothing has been the train wreck or the nightmare that this book has been. I doubt I will ever do another review as in-depth as this has been. All I can say is this woman scares the shit out of me. Not only when I think about how close she came to becoming president but when I look at everything she is willing to do to get what she wants.

      This is one of those books I would tell everyone to read – if for only the purpose of using it to help recognize others like HRC, those who are more subtle and who can learn from her mistakes.

      1. those who are more subtle and who can learn from her mistakes
        Which evidently excludes the feminist left. But “more subtle” is otherwise a very low bar……


    Media now: “How come nobody trusts us anymore?”


    1. Their problem is that, in choosing what is newsworthy …

      … they chose poorly.

      HT: Power Line Tweet of the Day

        1. A popular wifi SSID has long been “FBI Surveillance Van” or something similar. Now some people are using “Trump 2020 MAGA.”

      1. You know, I apparently missed the “Whitetruckgate” scandal, so I’ve got to ask: is there any particular reason that journalists needed to watch every moment of Trump’s golf game? Had they been asked to serve as referees or something? Was there a particularly critical meeting of heads-of-state going on on the course? Or were these simply a bunch of alleged reporters who couldn’t come up with anything better to do with their time?

        1. Well, it started with this creepy stalker video one of them shot (very much a perv shot). While normal people were responding “OMG, that is so creepy”, CNN doubled down and went back for more. And there was the truck.

          So, it must be all about them, naturally. It *has* to be a conspiracy to Stop The News or something.

          (Of course, they care about Trump’s golf game – after all the crap people gave 0bama over his golfing, they’re going to use that as the new “see, this guy isn’t really one of the people” hammer.)

      2. I’m surprised they haven’t had a full on breaking news update about Melinda’s shoes again.

  24. From the book, albeit indirectly: “the war on truth”

    That’s easy to end, Hils. Just tell your buddies in the mainstream press to stop publishing anything other than weather reports. 😛

  25. I woke up this morning and wondered if I was the one in hell… and that my late hubby got out early. *sigh I think D’s would even make demons want to leave hell.

  26. Of course, this is also the woman who has delusions about her place in government after the 2008 election. If you ever had any doubt about it, this comment should erase it. “When President Obama and I came into office in 2009.” […] The statement implies she was elected to office along with Obama, if not as co-president then as vice president.

    Not necessarily. It also can imply that this simply went the way it was agreed upon and arranged.
    The papers were prepared by the upper managers¹ beforehand, and once the board USA Inc. signed them² , the time has come for the new CEO and vice moved from one building to another. As simple as this.
    ⁽¹⁾ aka “permanent government”.
    ⁽²⁾ no surprise here, they always did – until recently they suspected that this time instead of a golden parachute they may be rewarded with concrete shoes, and voted the “wrong” CEO to prevent this.

  27. the DNC leadership had done all it could to steal the nomination from Sanders and his supporters
    Yes, but not the way the Dem rank-and-file think of it. The parties can pick their candidates any way they want. A lot of the Dems seemed to think they were guaranteed some democracy in that choosing. Nope. It’s my party and they can cry if they want to. (Well, not my party….)

    Nope, that’s not going to happen.
    Now, see? That’s what makes you so deplorable.
    (I love Sarah’s bit a while back about Americans not listening.)

    1. As soon as they created the whole superdelegate system i knew that the dem candidate was going to forevermore be whomever the Inner Party chose.

  28. The Obama administration proved with crippling sanctions against Iran…
    Taking credit for something they actually undid is the definition of chutzpa!

Comments are closed.