RICK PERRY CALLS OUT KHAN FOR CHEAP SHOT AT TRUMP

I never thought I would ever agree with someone like Rick Perry but, to my surprise, he made a comment about the Khan attack on Trump that I completely agree with.



Not only should Khan be ashamed of himself for using his son's death as political fodder, but the DNC should be scolded for manipulating the Khans to do it. Playing the "fallen hero" card is dirty politics.



Rick Perry to Khizr Khan: ‘Shame on You’

WHY NOT HAVE REAL - INSTEAD OF RIGGED DEBATES?

Just as with the primaries being rigged the Establishment and Main Stream Media are now rigging the Presidential debates.



Instead of giving the stage to the "four" candidates running for POTUS the powers to be want to keep it just "two" which happen to be the candidates selected (at least partially) by the Establishment; Hillary and the Wild Card (Trump) they are still plotting to bring down.



So, what about the other 2 candidates; Stein (Green) and Johnson (Libertarian)?



Why keep them off the stage and national limelight?



Simply put; fear. The Establishment is afraid that a narrative they can't control could upset the apple cart if Main Street Americans (voter) were better informed and made aware that they do have choices besides the lesser of "two evils."



Commission on Presidential Debates announces polls to be used for securing spot - POLITICO

POLLS DECIDE WHAT CANDIDATES ARE WORTHY; DEMOCRATIC?

Why is it not better to allow anyone who is legally registered to run for the office of POTUS to participate in the presidential debates?



Commission on Presidential Debates announces polls to be used for securing spot - POLITICO

Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight.

                         



This person has a real problem with just being truthful. It’s arrogant at best and pathological at worse. It’s not that she lies more than other politicians but what she lies about.

Hardly an incident goes by where she is asked to respond to fairly straightforward questions that she goes into this double-talk mode and evades responding truthfully; she “short circuited” or she answered “truthfully” to one out of many questioners as if that negates all the times she didn’t. Even though it’s obvious she lied and the obvious reasons why she lied she just can’t bring herself to admitting it; “I made a mistake” is as close as she comes.

It could just be arrogance but it is still insulting and demeaning to others because what she’s saying is; believe me! Don’t believe what you know to be true (reality) by the facts that support it. They are just plain “wrong.” I’m right and that’s the way is. So deal with it!

If it’s worse yet, and pathological in nature, then there’s a real problem with how this person would act and behave in situations where they felt threatened because there a real risk they would encapsulate themselves in their own version of reality; very dangerous when someone is in a powerful position.

CLINTON'S FAVORITE CHARITY IS THEMSELVES

It's a win-win for the Clinton's. Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution to a charity owned by you.



96 Percent Of Hillary's Charitable Donations Went To Clinton Foundation | 


Hillary Clinton and her husband Bill deducted $1,042,000 in charitable contributions last year — $1 million of which went to their own family non-profit, the Clinton Family Foundation.

The documents show that the power couple earned $10,745,378 last year, mostly on income earned from giving public speeches.

IS CLINTON FOUNDATION A PIGGY BANK FOR BILL AND HILLARY?

POLITICAL FAVORS FOR MONEY? It's called "pay for play" and Hillary is a notorious player.

Hillary Clinton publicly defended an embattled banker during an official visit to Bangladesh while Clinton Foundation officials tried to steer money from an Abu Dhabi oil company into the banker’s coffers.

A Daily Caller News Foundation investigation traced the convoluted payment by TAQA — formally known as the the Abu Dhabi National Energy Company — to Muhammad Yunus’ Grameen Bank. Yunus is a long-time friend and Clinton Foundation donor.

The oil company deal eventually put as much as $500,000 into President Bill Clinton’s pockets via a speaking fee he got in Scotland.

The complicated set of international transactions is contained in a cryptic May 7, 2012, email chain between Cheryl Mills, then Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff, and Amitabh Desai, the Clinton Foundation’s foreign policy director. The email chain was obtained by Citizens United, the conservative activist group that is the lead plaintiff in multiple federal Freedom of Information Act court cases. 

Hillary Aide Mills OK'd Deal That Put $500K In Bill's Pocket | The Daily Caller

Who in the Hell is Voting for This Woman?’

                                 





James Woods Torches Hillary’s Damning Poll Numbers: ‘Who in the Hell is Voting for This Woman?’

HILLARY APOLOGIZES FOR MISTAKE BUT NOT FOR LYING

Hillary learned this from the best. This is a classic Bill Clinton, "it all depends what the definition of the word is- is."



If it were anyone else all of this nonsense would easily be resolved by either admitting they lied or taking the "fifth."



But that would be too simple for Hillary so for over a year now the public has to be subjected to an ongoing flow of crazy making double talk; "I made a mistake", "I short circuited" (whatever that means), and now Tim Kaine explains the lying as "talking past each other" Uh?



You are asked a straightforward and specific question. You answer with a lie. That's talking past each other. Uhm?


After playing a montage of Hillary Clinton and FBI Director James Comey that for all intents and purposes indicated that Clinton lied to the American public, host of NBC’s “Meet the Press” Chuck Todd said, “[Clinton] seems to be conflating what she said to the FBI and what she said to the American public. Can you conclude here whether or not Secretary Clinton lied to the American public about sending and receiving classified email?” (RELATED: CNN’s Tapper Calls Out Clinton For Email Lies: You’re Not Entitled ‘To Your Own Facts’ [VIDEO])

“Chuck, let me just say this, I’m going to jump right to the punch line,” Kaine claimed. “I heard Hillary Clinton say over and over again when I’ve been sitting next to her and when I’ve watch her on TV that with respect to the emails, I made a mistake and I’ve learned something and I wouldn’t do it again and I’ve heard her apologize.” (RELATED: Hillary Clinton: I ‘Short-Circuited’ With My Email Answers [VIDEO])

“I did hear that back and forth and I think Chris Wallace and Hillary were sort of talking past each other last week. She was saying what Director Comey acknowledged to be true, that when she spoke to the FBI, when she was talking to the FBI thought her answers in that setting were truthful.”(RELATED: Hillary, Chris Wallace Spar Over Her Classified Emails [VIDEO])

Kaine Unable To Answer For Hillary's Email Lies [VIDEO] | 

WHY IS HILLARY BEATING TRUMP ON WALL STREET?

It looks like the Wall Street money is almost all on Hillary and one has to wonder what is she promising them in return? Speeches?



As for Trump? No one is buying possibly because he can't be bought.



Who should you vote for?



Using history (2008 crash) as a guide voters may want to take a close look at why and where all that Wall Street money is going to Hillary.  The rest is easy to figure out.


A July 29 Wall Street Journal article crediting our data is headlined, “Hedge-Fund Money: $48.5 Million for Hillary Clinton, $19,000 for Donald Trump.” The startling disparity in numbers led other media outlets to cite the piece — as did Trump himself. The article was shared on Facebook over 27,000 times and generated more than 500 comments.

Only problem is, those numbers aren’t correct. Trump had taken in just $2,054 in hedge fund contributions as of June 30. Clinton, along with her supporting super PACs, has received $25.6 million from the hedge fund industry, just a bit more than half the WSJ’s figure.

While the article says the money came from “employees or owners” of hedge funds (later amended to include private equity), nearly all of it came from just four people. Four big donors associated with hedge funds gave $24.6 million of the total — most of which was given to the pro-Clinton super PAC Priorities USA Action, which she does not control (at least not directly).

Clinton’s campaign itself, not counting super PACs, has so far received just $557,619 from individuals who work at hedge funds.

Further down, the WSJ article says that the $48.5 million figure is the sum of contributions to Clinton from seven unspecified “financial firms” that are either hedge funds or “similar private investment funds.” We emailed the reporters on the story to find out which firms they counted.



Setting it straight: Hedge funds to Clinton plus super PACs, $25.6 million; to Trump, $2,000 | OpenSecrets Blog

HILLARY 'SHORT CIRCUITS' LIES ABOUT LYING

On Friday, Hillary Clinton took questions from the press for the first time in 260 days. A number of her answers revealed why she doesn’t hold press conferences more: Her answers to both difficult and easy questions were often evasive, excessively legalistic, and frustrating to watch.

Clinton spoke at a joint convention being held by the National Association of Black Journalists and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists. Her previous press conference was December of last year and she has faced heavy criticism from both the media and the Trump campaign for not being more accessible.

In Friday’s press questioning, the trouble began when she was asked her first question about her private email server and recent statements about that server which independent fact checkers have labeled as categorically untrue. Clinton’s responses here—and her previous responses to questions about the truthfulness of past statements—are so overly legalistic and convoluted that they are difficult to even explain. But here’s a shot.

Last month, Fox News’ Chris Wallace asserted to Clinton that FBI Director James Comey said her public statements about which documents on her private email server were classified and which were not were untrue. In actuality, Comey declined to address the truthfulness or lack of truthfulness of those statements in Congressional testimony on the matter. 

But in announcing his investigation into her server—which cleared Clinton of any wrongdoing—Comey implied that she had either misled the American public about her poor handling of material she should have known was classified information, or been incompetent in doing so. “Even if information is not marked ‘classified’ in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it,” he said. Clinton had previously claimed: “I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time. I had not sent classified material nor received anything marked classified.”

In response to Wallace’s question claiming that Comey had said she was not telling the truth, Clinton said this: “Director Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails.”

This is the claim that fact checkers have destroyed. Clinton’s defenders might claim that she was talking about two separate things in two separate clauses in this sentence: That Comey said her answers to the FBI were truthful and separately that her answers to the FBI were consistent with her public statements. This would have made the statement incredibly misleading, though, given that she was asked directly about what Comey's views. 

Also making that answer seem disingenuous at best, and a lie at worst, is that she repeated a similar version of it in an interview earlier this week, telling a local CBS affiliate: “It was all personal stuff [that was deleted on the email server], and we’ve said that consistently. And as the FBI said, everything that I’ve said publicly has been consistent and truthful with what I’ve told them.” It’s really hard to argue that this is two separate points, with the “and as the FBI said” part referring to the earlier point, but I guess a really eager Clinton apologist could make that claim.

All of this leads us to the press conference, where Clinton was asked this:

Are you mischaracterizing Director Comey's testimony and is this not undercutting your efforts to rebuild trust with the American people?

Clinton’s answer, which you can watch here, is an awkward journey of disassembling and lawyerly quibbling:

SEE VIDEO; Hillary gave a rare press conference. It was terrible.

THERE'S A NEW GRASS ROOTS ACTIVIST IN TOWN

 The Republican nominee’s new fund-raising numbers suggest he has tapped into the passion of his core supporters and may now have the resources to compete with Hillary Clinton.

Donald J. Trump all but erased his enormous fund-raising disadvantage against Hillary Clinton in the span of just two months, according to figures released by his campaign on Wednesday, converting the passion of his core followers into a flood of small donations on a scale rarely seen in national politics.

Mr. Trump and the Republican National Committee raised $64 million through a joint digital and mail effort in July, according to his campaign, the bulk of it from small donations. All told, Mr. Trump and his party brought in $82 million last month, only slightly behind Mrs. Clinton’s $90 million, and ended with $74 million on hand, suggesting he might now have the resources to compete with Mrs. Clinton in the closing stretch of the campaign.

“She’s been doing this for 20 years,” said Steven Mnuchin, a New York investor who is Mr. Trump’s finance chairman. “We’ve been doing it for two months.” More than two-thirds of the $64 million had come online, Mr. Mnuchin said.

The new figures indicate a major shift in Mr. Trump’s campaign, which until recent months was largely funded by hat and T-shirt sales and by Mr. Trump’s wallet. And they suggest that Mr. Trump has the potential to be the first Republican nominee whose campaign could be financed chiefly by grass-roots supporters pitching in $10 or $25 apiece, echoing the success of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont during the Democratic primary.


Fueled by Small Donations, Donald Trump Makes Up Major Financial Ground - The New York Times

Clinton Cash - Official Movie Premiere

MAIN STREET UNDER ATTACK BY MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES

These super rich, super spoiled Millionaires, Billionaires and the legions of minions that pander to them are mad as hell and are not about to let the American people take back America.

Bernie Sanders came after them but they were just too big to take down and inthe end brought him to "heel" as Hillary would say.

But there is still one guy they have not been able to buy who is out of their control and they are going berserk looking for ways to end him and the real possibility that Main Street American voters could turn the tables against them and dismantle the cozy plutocracy they have created
for themselves.

So far nothing has worked and it's not because of a lack of trying; using the mainstream media to bombard the 24/7 news cycle with everything they can conjure up, no matter how petty or silly.

The U.S. can’t let Trump win: His victory would embolden the most hateful Americans who fostered his rise 

 It’s worth asking again: Is Donald Trump trying to tank his campaign?

America is no longer a country “by the people, for the people,” but a plutocracy. The new doc ‘Meet the Donors’ exposes our broken political system and the uber-rich pulling the strings.

There’s the belief that somehow the whole system in Washington is not on the level—that it’s tilted against the ordinary citizen. And the reason people have that view is because they’re right: it is tilted against the ordinary citizen and it does favor the rich.”

That is Tom Downey, a former U.S. Congressman from New York turned founder of the high-powered lobbying firm Downey McGrath Group, Inc., and one of many talking heads in Meet the Donors, a damning new documentary that just made its premiere on HBO.

The film comes courtesy of Alexandra Pelosi, the daughter of House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. There is a brief showdown between Pelosi Jr. and a right-wing lobbyist who took out vicious attack ads against her mother that showed the former House Speaker as a city-destroying Godzilla-like monster. Despite the family ties, this remains a fairly nonpartisan examination of the corrupting influence of money in politics, and how the American political system is no longer a democracy but rather a plutocracy. The American public’s mounting frustration with this corrupt system has, in part, led to the rise of populist candidates like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.

Late last year, The New York Times published a terrifying study  on how just 158 wealthy families have provided nearly 50 percent of the funds raised for presidential candidates with their eye on the White House. They were mostly white, rich, older, and male, and hailed from the finance and energy sectors.

“Just 158 families, along with companies they own or control, contributed $176 million in the first phase of the campaign, a New York Times investigation found. Not since before Watergate have so few people and businesses provided so much early money in a campaign, most of it through channels legalized by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision five years ago.”

The Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision changed the playing field, allowing both nonprofit and for-profit corporations to be treated as people, thereby prohibiting the government from regulating their political expenditures (coincidentally, this whole hullabaloo was over the right-wing nonprofit Citizens United’s desire to air a propaganda film, Hillary: The Movie, just prior to the 2008 general election). This led to the creation of super PACs, or political action committees—vessels that individuals, corporations, and other organizations can pour large sums of money into in order to influence elections, typically via attack ads. Conservative strategist Karl Rove notoriously oversaw super PACs that spent over $300 million on Republican candidates during the 2012 election year.

Meet the Billionaires Manipulating the U.S. Presidential Election

BREAKING NEWS! TRUMP BREAKS WIND!

Has the media gone berserk?

This is an example of the sh-t load of crazy-making rhetoric the media floods the 24/7 news cycle with.

It's gotten so bad that Trump can't even fart without someone sounding a "breaking news" alert.



In the last two weeks, Donald Trump has slandered the family of a dead soldier, committed treason by inviting Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s email account, admitted he lied about receiving a letter from the NFL, saw an Air Force mother get booed at one of his rallies, claimed Russia wouldn’t invade Ukraine even though they already have, refused to endorse House Speaker Paul Ryan’s candidacy, falsely accused a fire marshal of limiting his crowd for political reasons, tossed a baby out of a rally, and called Hillary Clinton “the devil.”

It’s worth asking again: Is Donald Trump trying to tank his campaign? - Salon.com

DNC A DAY LATE AND A DOLLAR SHORT

These heads should have been rolling before the Hillary balloon drop.



But then, this is not about cleaning house, but more about taking the focus off the conspirators  who, after successfully rigging the primaries, have accomplished their mission and are now liabilities.  



The CEO of the Democratic National Committee and two other high-level staffers left the organization on Tuesday in the wake of the committee's hacked email controversy.


Amy Dacey is the highest-ranking official at the DNC to step aside due to the matter, a senior Democratic official said. 



The DNC also announced the departure of CFO Brad Marshall and and Communications Director Luis Miranda in a press release Tuesday afternoon. 


Dacey is well-respected by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC circle, a source familiar with the resignation said. But the committee is looking to clean house in the wake of leaked emails that appeared to show the committee favoring Clinton over Bernie Sanders during the primary.
Dacey's resignation was first reported by Politico.


Interim Chairwoman Donna Brazile, who stepped in after the resignation of former Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, also announced some additions to her team, saying former Howard Dean aide Tom McMahon would lead a transition team focused on November's election. The chief of staff that joined the DNC in June, Brandon Davis, will retain his post and oversee general election efforts, Brazile announced. 



Also joining as an interim senior adviser is Doug Thornell. 


Wasserman Schultz resigned after the party's convention last week as a result of the revelations, and Brazile has stepped in as interim chair through the election. 


The changes at the DNC come as the Clinton campaign is moving to take greater control of party headquarters in Washington and in states across the country. 


Democrats are also trying to get ahead of the disclosure of more emails and internal documents from hacked computer systems, fearful of more embarrassing revelations.


The press release made no mention of the controversy, focusing instead on gearing up for the November election.




DNC CEO resigns in wake of email controversy

TRUMPHOBES GONE WILD!

There is a raging epidemic of "Trumphobia" gripping the Establishment and the Main Stream media hacks that run interference for them.

This crazy obsession with bringing Trump down is raging on both sides of the aisle; though not so much with the Main Street voters.

Even the president is climbing  on the phobia train which is surprising given that he was once in Trump's shoes and should know what it feels like when your being ganged up on.

The Establishment is trying it's damnedest to bring the angry voters to "heel" as Hillary would put it. It's still difficult for these corrupted pandering politicians to get their heads around the notion that the electorate is completely fed up with them. 

The people are "anti-Establishment" and they are looking for an "outsider" for leadership; in this case it's Trump.

The following piece is an example of the barrage of vitriol being spewed at Trump and the people who support (voted) him.

The message is that a vote for Trump is a vote for hate and fear mongering while the reality is that a vote for Trump is a vote for reform of a corrupt plutocratic political system that has proven to be the real threat against democracy and the American people.

The headlines read:

A victory for Trump would legitimize the dangerous, inchoate anger of unhinged Americans

Donald Trump is an existential threat to American democracy, and therefore he can’t simply lose the election. He has to be electorally humiliated. Crushed. Embarrassed. The candidate who pledged “so much winning” has to be personally mortified by an unequivocal loss — an electoral massacre so severe that it leaves little room for screeching about rigged elections, and, more importantly, the loss has to be so overwhelming that it discourages any similar would-be populist tyrants from emerging in the future. Trump and anyone similar needs to be politically put-down in a way that permanently ends whatever derangement led us to this point.

Sadly, however, the latest polls continue to indicate that the popular vote will come down to a five-point contest.

Monday’s CBS News poll, taken following the conventions, puts the race at 47-41 (including leaners) in Hillary’s favor. PPP’s latest numbers also reflect a five-point race, even after all the hoopla surrounding the Democratic Convention; even after Hillary’s historic nomination and President Obama’s moving remarks; even after Michelle Obama’s barnburner address and especially the salient remarks by Gold Star parents Khizr and Ghazala Khan. It’s still just a five or six point race, even after the deeply contrasting conventions, and even after news about Trump’s nefarious connections to Putin; even after Trump trolled the Khans on Twitter (as predicted by Hillary in her acceptance speech), and even after his utterly disastrous Palin-style interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos on Sunday.

Five points separate Hillary and national oblivion. As Bernie Sanders said on “Real Time with Bill Maher” on Friday, Trump is easily the most treacherous presidential nominee in modern history, and yet there’s really not much of a difference in the polls between his numbers and the numbers of previous GOP nominees, McCain and Romney.

It seems as though nothing will change the hearts and minds of Trump’s rage-filled minion. And I suppose that’s acceptable as long as enough sensible, rational Republicans choose to forego this election, either voting for Gary Johnson or Hillary Clinton, or by simply sitting it out. It can’t be underscored enough how this election has to result in a party realignment, with moderate, reasonable Republicans voting with center-left and, yes, progressive Democrats to defeat this cancerous GOP nominee.

The U.S. can’t let Trump win: His victory would embolden the most hateful Americans who fostered his rise - Salon.com

HILLARY SAYS BOTH OBAMA AND TRUMP NOT FIT TO BE PRESIDENT

President Obama has a short memory loss.  As he comes out in support of Hillary claiming that Trump is not fit to be president he seems to have forgotten that he was once in those very same shoes.







                            

THE REASON AMERICANS DON'T TRUST HILLARY

Hillary just can't help herself when confronted with reality that doesn't fit her version of it.


Hillary Clinton on Sunday insisted that FBI Director James Comey said that her answers to the American public regarding her handling of emails containing classified information were truthful, but this was disputed by host Chris Wallace.

“The emails… I want to ask you about just one aspect of them, and that’s what you told the American people,” Wallace said to the Democratic nominee on “Fox News Sunday.”

Fox then played three separate clips in which Clinton said she did not send or receive any classified material via email.

“After a long investigation, FBI Director James Comey said none of those things that you told the American public were true,” Wallace said to the former secretary of state.

“Chris, that’s not what I heard Director Comey say, and I thank you for giving me the opportunity to, in my view, clarify,” Clinton responded. “Director Comey said that my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails.”

“I was communicating with over 300 people in my emailing. They certainly did not believe and had no reason to believe that what they were sending was classified,” she added. “Now in retrospect, different agencies come in and say, well, it should have been, but that’s not what was happening in real time.

“But in a congressionally hearing on July 7th, Director Comey directly contradicted what you had told the public,” Wallace said.

Fox then aired footage of the congressional hearing when Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy questioned Comey. “There was classified material emailed,” Comey said. 

(RELATED: Comey Confirms Hillary Clinton Lied To The Public About Her Emails [VIDEO])

READ MORE; Hillary Lied About Her Emails on National TV 

 And Now WaPo Slaps It With Damning ‘Four Pinocchios’