Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton

Jesse Ventura Says He May Run for President If Clinton Is Nominated Over Sanders

Former independent Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura, who says he is leaning towards supporting U.S. Senator from Vermont Bernie Sanders for president in 2016, indicated that he is considering getting into the presidential race if Sanders fails to win the Democratic primary.

In a Monday interview with The Daily Beast, Ventura said that he will likely launch a run for president by June if former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton defeats Sanders.

They’re setting the groundwork for me because if Bernie loses, by the time we get to June, how sick are the people going to be of all these people,” he said.

[RELATED: Jesse Ventura: Trump’s Border Wall Plan Would Make U.S. “Look Like a Prison”]

Ventura has claimed in the past that he might seek the Libertarian Party’s nomination for president and said that he considers former Republican New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party’s best-known currently-announced candidate, a personal friend. The Libertarian Party’s nominating convention is set to take place in May of this year.

Last year, Gary Johnson said in an interview with The Daily Caller that he would welcome a head-to-head matchup against Ventura for the Libertarian Party’s nomination “because that potentially could be a televised-kind-of-a-debate situation.

In a Monday interview with The Associated Press, Ventura described the conditions under which he would be most likely to run for president, “If it’s Hillary Clinton and Marco Rubio, the chances are better. I don’t want the revolution to die if Bernie gets beat.

Incidentally, while Ventura has stopped short of fully endorsing any particular candidate during the primary season, he says he is somewhat torn between Trump and Sanders when trying to identify a favorite.

[RELATED: Exclusive: Jesse Ventura Says American Sniper “Falls Short in Honor Department”]

People give them no PAC money, no special interest money. To me, that’s the most important thing,” said Ventura.

See, I’m an independent and I despise the two parties. I love what Trump’s doing to the Republicans. He’s got them in complete disarray. In fact, it looks like the WWE when you watch their debates,” the former pro wrestler added.

However, Ventura said that he leans more towards Sanders than Trump due to the Senator from Vermont’s positions on campaign finance reform, foreign policy, and ending the War on Drugs. Ventura said that he has concerns with the hawkish tone Trump uses when describing his approach for dealing with ISIS.

For more 2016 election coverage, click here.

Follow Barry Donegan on Facebook and Twitter.

Green Party’s Stein Predicts DNC Will Sabotage Sanders, Try to Reabsorb Supporters

Physician Jill Stein, who is seeking the Green Party’s nomination for president in 2016, has called Bernie Sanders’ 2016 Democratic presidential campaign “wonderful” and stated that the Green Party “will not attack that campaign.

However, she told RT on Saturday, “But unfortunately he is in a party that has a track record for basically sabotaging its rebels. It has done a good job of doing that in the past from Dennis Kucinich to Jesse Jackson to Howard Dean, whether they use a PR campaign like the ‘Dean’s scream’ to bring down the Dean candidacy. Also Jesse Jackson was sabotaged by a PR by the DNC. The Democratic Party has its ways of reigning people in if they try to rebel. The bottom line is that we are in political system in the U.S., which is funded by predatory banks and fossil fueled giants and war profiteers. So, we really need to reject that system, we say to reject the lesser evil so we can stand up and really fight for the greater good.

[RELATED: DONEGAN: If GOP Debate Stage Can Fit 11, Let Third Parties In General Election Debates]

In a Monday interview on New England Public Radio, Stein said, “What’s been happening in the Democratic Party is you’ll have a good candidate who will run, but then the candidate gets reabsorbed and the campaign becomes reabsorbed back into the Democratic Party. So it’s kind of a fake left while the party becomes more corporatist, more militarist, and continues to march to the right.

She called the grassroots movement that Sanders has tapped into a “rebellion” that “can’t simply be passed on to Hillary Clinton.

[RELATED: Sanders Criticizes Two-Party System for Blocking Competition from Third Parties]

Speaking on the current leaders in the Democratic and Republican presidential contests, Stein said that Trump and Clinton have “an awful lot in common” and are “representatives of oligarchy.

She pointed to their advocacy of a muscular foreign policy as a specific example of a commonality between the candidates.

We can’t afford to keep doing what’s not working. In my view, we need transformational change under a political party that is of, by, and for the people that’s not controlled by the big money,” said Stein.

In the below-embedded CBS 46 Reality Check video, Ben Swann points out how DNC technicalities enabled Clinton to obtain the same number of New Hampshire delegates as Sanders in spite of the Senator from Vermont’s overwhelming victory in the primary election.

Reality Check: After Being Trounced By Sanders in NH, Clinton…

Hillary Clinton was trounced in the New Hampshire Primary and yet thanks to the way the DNC rules work, she actually won the most delegates. Is the primary system a huge scam?

Posted by Ben Swann on Thursday, February 11, 2016

For more 2016 election coverage, click here.

Follow Barry Donegan on Facebook and Twitter.

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard Quits DNC to Endorse Bernie Sanders

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) announced Sunday that she is stepping down from her position as a vice chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee and endorsing presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.

Gabbard appeared on NBC’s Meet The Press Sunday morning, where host Chuck Todd noted that she “has been at odds with her boss, DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, for months over the Democratic presidential debate schedule.”

Gabbard replied and said she is resigning from the DNC altogether in order to endorse Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) over Hillary Clinton. She listed her experience as an Iraq War veteran as one of the main reasons, and said she has seen firsthand “the true cost of war.”

[pull_quote_center]Well first of all, I am resigning from the DNC so that I can support Bernie Sanders for president, and I’d like to tell you why. As a veteran and as a soldier I’ve seen firsthand the true cost of war. I served in a medical unit during my first deployment where every single day I saw firsthand the very high human cost of that war. I see it in my friends who now a decade after we’ve come home are still struggling to get out of a black hole.[/pull_quote_center]

[RELATED: Reps Gabbard, Scott Introduce Bill to End U.S. Effort to ‘Overthrow Syrian Government of Assad’]

Gabbard said she wants to support a president who “exercises good judgment,” and who “looks beyond the consequences” in order to end the chaos in the Middle East.

[pull_quote_center]I think it’s most important for us as we look at our choices as to who our next commander-in-chief will be is to recognize the necessity to have a commander-in-chief who has foresight, who exercises good judgment, who looks beyond the consequences. Who looks at the consequences of the actions they are willing to take before they take those actions so that we don’t continue to find ourselves in these failures that have resulted in chaos in the Middle East and so much loss of life.[/pull_quote_center]

[RELATED: Sanders Condemns Overthrow of Saddam Hussein, Supports Overthrow of Assad]

Sanders condemned the U.S. overthrowing Saddam Hussein and creating a political vacuum that led to the rise of “groups like ISIS” during a presidential Democratic debate in January. He also said that while our first priority is destroying ISIS, our second priority “must be getting rid of Assad.”

Todd said that Gabbard has said that the next president needs to have a “military mindset,” and he questioned whether she thinks Sanders has that mindset.

Gabbard said she believes Sanders, who has been critical of the Iraq War, does have a “military mindset” in the sense that he would “go through an analysis process” when choosing to use or not to use “military power.”

[pull_quote_center]That military mindset says you have foresight. You look at what are the results? What are the consequences of these actions? How will other actors in the area react to those actions? What will we then do? And you look and continue down the line so you know exactly what you’re potentially getting yourself into before you make that decision that ends up costing us lives and treasure.[/pull_quote_center]

Gabbard has also been critical of the debate schedule set up by the DNC, and in October she claimed she was disinvited from a Democratic presidential debate for openly criticizing the limited schedule during an appearance on MSNBC.

[RELATED: Reality Check: Are Democratic Debates ‘Rigged’ for Hillary Clinton?]

“More and more people on the ground from states across the country are calling for more debates, are wanting to have this transparency and this greater engagement in our democratic process,” Gabbard said during the interview. “We’ve gotta have more opportunity for people to present their vision for our country, their plans and to be held accountable for the positions that they’re taking and the path they’d like to take our country on.”

On Monday, Gabbard appeared on MSNBC’s Morning Joe and said that her resignation “had nothing to do with the DNC or DNC politics.”

“This had everything to do with my decision that I could no longer stand on the sidelines as elections are taking place to determine who our potential next commander in chief could be,” Gabbard said.

She added, “There’s a very clear contrast and clear difference when it comes to our two Democratic candidates and who will exercise good judgment, who will stop us from continuing these interventionist regime change wars that we’ve seen in Iraq and Libya and now in Syria that have cost our country so much in terms of American lives, trillions and trillions of dollars, what to speak of the hundreds of thousands of lives in the Middle East that have been lost to this and the impact on our economy here at home. Bernie Sanders is that candidate who will not take us, service members and our country, into these interventionist wars.”

In a January Reality Check following the Jan. 17 Democratic presidential debate, Ben Swann discussed comments made by both Sanders and Clinton regarding America’s Middle East policy, noting that it was “surprising” that Sanders expressed support for removing Bashar al-Assad.

Reality Check: Sanders and Clinton Would Make Same Mistake On …

Sen. Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton debated Sunday about policy for moving forward in the middle east. But did BOTH candidates advocate a policy that is really just a step backward into the same policies of Presidents Bush and Obama?Learn more here: http://bit.ly/sanders-clinton-middle-east

Posted by Ben Swann on Tuesday, January 19, 2016

For more election coverage, click here.

Follow Rachel Blevins on Facebook and Twitter.

Video: Bill Clinton Confronted at Campaign Rally Over Benghazi

During a campaign rally for presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in South Carolina on Friday, former President Bill Clinton engaged in a heated argument with a man, claiming to be a Marine, who confronted Clinton over the 2012 Benghazi attacks which occurred while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.

A video shows a man, identifying himself as a Marine, asking Clinton at first to address the VA. “I’m anxious to get to the VA, you covering that, I’m not sure so hopefully you can get to it.”

“I am,” Clinton interjected.

The man went on, “We have loved ones that we want to hear about and we care about, and I’ve met with many of these Gold Star parents and families so I’ve seen them-“

“What do you think should be done with the VA?” Clinton interrupted.

The man then suddenly shifted the topic to Benghazi: “The thing is, we had four lives in Benghazi killed and your wife tried to cover it up,” he said, which drew a negative response from the crowd.

The man continued to speak for several more seconds before Clinton asked to respond. “Can I answer? Are you going to let me answer?” Clinton asked. “This is America, I get to answer. I heard your speech. They heard your speech. You listen to me now,” Clinton said.

The man continued to speak, his voice growing louder, as Clinton told the man, “I’m not your commander in chief anymore but if I were, I’d tell you to be more polite. Sit down.”

“And I wouldn’t listen,” the man shot back. “I would just raise my voice.”

The video then shows deputies approaching the man to remove him from the building. As the man was taken out of the building, Clinton said, “Do you have the courage to listen to my answer? Don’t throw him out. If you’ll shut up to listen to my answer, I’ll answer.”

Clinton then addressed the crowd: “Can I just say something? That’s what’s wrong. his mind has been poisoned by lies and he won’t listen.”

A woman can be heard in the video shouting, “Hillary lied over four coffins! Four coffins! She lied! And she lied to those families! So all those families are liars? All those families are liars? I want to know, I want to know. Did she lie?”

The video shows the crowd becoming increasingly noisy and unsettled as Clinton and the woman continued to argue before the woman was also removed from the building by deputies.

According to local news station WSAV3, Clinton’s response was that his wife was not responsible for the attacks in Benghazi. Clinton later spoke to the crowd to address the issue. “The ambassador of Libya was a personal friend of Hillary’s. You can imagine how she feels when people make these charges,” said Clinton. “And she, believe me, lost a lot of sleep over it.”

According to The State newspaper of Columbia, South Carolina, Clinton said that Republicans have attempted to “politicize the deaths of brave Americans because (they) want to win this next election.”

Clinton also reportedly claimed that his wife “has never once played politics with the lives of the men and women in uniform.”

The man who confronted Clinton did not identify himself to The State beyond being a “Marine Sergeant,” and told the paper that he “wanted answers, and I wanted to make my point.”

“The deputies started coming over, so obviously my point wasn’t able to be made,” he noted.

Hillary Clinton Responds to Criticism Over 1996 ‘Super Predator’ Remark

On Wednesday, Ashley Williams, a Black Lives Matter activist, confronted Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton during a fundraiser in Charleston, South Carolina before the Democratic primary on Saturday.

Activist Calls Out Hillary Clinton for calling black teens and…

Activist Ashley Williams, interrupts private $500 per person speech of Hillary Clinton to ask her why she called Black children "super-predators" 20 years ago? Here's the video… I'll give this a Reality Check next week

Posted by Ben Swann on Friday, February 26, 2016

During the fundraiser, Williams held up a sign containing a quote from a speech Hillary gave in New Hampshire in 1996. The sign read, “We have to bring them to heel.”

Williams confronted Clinton and said, “I’m not a ‘super predator,’ Hillary Clinton.”

Williams demanded that Clinton apologize for calling black children “super predators” and for “the mass incarceration of black people.”

Clinton responded by saying, “You know what? Nobody’s ever asked me before. You’re the first person to ask me and I’m happy to address it.” But Williams was escorted out by the secret service before she heard any response from Clinton.

Clinton’s comments created a firestorm on social media. The hashtag #WhichHillary started trending, which put into question if she has really been honest with black voters on criminal justice reform.

Clinton said in 1996: “They are often the kinds of kids that are called ‘super-predators.’ No conscience, no empathy, we can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel.”

The term “super predator” was not first coined by Clinton; according to the Washington Post, “the idea wasn’t Clinton’s, but rather it had been invented by researchers studying crime in the 1990s. And it was used to explain the rise in violence perpetrated by youths— particularly in predominantly minority inner cities. The concept has since been largely abandoned and decried for its racial undertones.”

Many activists, including Williams, are calling out Clinton’s comments and questioning whether her concern for the mass incarceration of black individuals in America is authentic, or just an attempt to win the black vote.

https://twitter.com/ShaunKing/status/702900086204997633

Clinton provided a statement regarding the incident via the Washington Post:

“In that speech, I was talking about the impact violent crime and vicious drug cartels were having on communities across the country and the particular danger they posed to children and families. Looking back, I shouldn’t have used those words, and I wouldn’t use them today.

My life’s work has been about lifting up children and young people who’ve been let down by the system or by society. Kids who never got the chance they deserved. And unfortunately today, there are way too many of those kids, especially in African-American communities. We haven’t done right by them. We need to. We need to end the school to prison pipeline and replace it with a cradle-to-college pipeline.

As an advocate, as First Lady, as Senator, I was a champion for children. And my campaign for president is about breaking down the barriers that stand in the way of all kids, so every one of them can live up to their God-given potential.”

In response to Clinton’s statement, Williams reportedly told CNN: “One of the things I don’t hear in that response is an apology for mass incarceration. I also don’t hear her taking responsibility for the ways in which those words and her backing certain policies has affected black communities and communities of color.”

N.H. GOP Issues Petition Urging Democratic Superdelegates to Vote for Sanders

Strange bedfellows have emerged in the 2016 presidential race, as the New Hampshire Republican Party has launched an online petition urging superdelegates in the Democratic Party to vote for Senator from Vermont Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign at the Democratic National Convention.

Bernie Sanders embarrassed establishment favorite Hillary Clinton by overwhelmingly defeating her 60%-38% [in the New Hampshire Democratic primary]. However, despite his commanding victory, Sanders leaves New Hampshire with the same number of delegates as Clinton. How is this possible? Because Democrats have set up an undemocratic system that allows party elites called ‘super delegates’ to single handedly cancel out the votes of thousands of grassroots activists,” explained the petition.

[RELATED: DNC Chair: Superdelegates Exist to Protect Party Leaders from Grassroots Competition]

The petition called out certain specific superdelegates by name and said, “Given the results of the primary, the vote of one New Hampshire super delegate is equal to the votes of about 10,000 grassroots activists. This means that Governor Hassan, Senator Shaheen, the senator’s husband William Shaheen and Congresswoman Kuster are going to cancel out the votes of 40,000 of Granite State Democrats. This is an outrage and an obvious attempt to rig the nomination process for Hillary Clinton despite her dismal primary showing.

WMUR-TV identified the six New Hampshire superdelegates supporting Clinton as Democratic National Committeeman William Shaheen, DNC member at-large Joanne Dowdell, Gov. Maggie Hassan, Democratic National Committeewoman Kathy Sullivan, U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, and U.S. Rep. Annie Kuster. Two other superdelegates, state Sen. Martha Fuller Clark and N.H. Democratic Party chair Raymond Buckley, have yet to choose a candidate, though Buckley, who is vice chairman of the Democratic National Committee, is prohibited from backing a candidate until after the party has chosen a nominee.

[RELATED: Reality Check: After Being Trounced By Sanders in NH, Clinton Still Wins More Delegates Thanks to DNC Insiders]

The N.H. GOP’s petition clarified, “New Hampshire Republicans are committed to upholding the integrity of our elections. Even though we vehemently disagree with Senator Sanders on his radical socialist agenda, we stand with his supporters who want their voices to be heard.

It’s time for Governor Hassan, Senator Shaheen and Congresswoman Kuster to listen to their constituents and pledge to cast their votes at the DNC Convention for New Hampshire’s primary winner— Bernie Sanders. Any attempt to cancel out the voters of tens of thousands of grassroots activists of either party threatens the integrity of the nominating process and creates the perception of dirty politics and favoritism,” the petition urged.

 

 

Ben Swann recently examined the Sanders-Clinton superdelegate controversy in a below-embedded CBS 46 Atlanta Reality Check video.

Reality Check: After Being Trounced By Sanders in NH, Clinton…Hillary Clinton was trounced in the New Hampshire Primary and yet thanks to the way the DNC rules work, she actually won the most delegates. Is the primary system a huge scam?

Posted by Ben Swann on Thursday, February 11, 2016

According to Bloomberg Politics, Hillary Clinton leads in the Democratic race for delegates with 394 supporting her candidacy versus Sanders who has secured the support of 44. 4,325 delegates are still up for grabs. Sanders or Clinton must obtain the backing of 2,382 delegates in order to clinch the nomination.

For more election coverage, click here.

DNC Chair: Superdelegates Exist to Protect Party Leaders from Grassroots Competition

Democratic National Committee chair and Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz explained the motive behind the Democratic Party’s appointment of unpledged delegates, also called “superdelegates,” who are former party leaders and elected officials who are allowed to ignore the outcome of primary elections’ popular vote totals and instead vote for the presidential candidate of their personal choice at the party’s nominating convention.

CNN’s Jake Tapper asked Wasserman Schultz on Thursday, “Hillary Clinton lost to Bernie Sanders in New Hampshire by 22 percentage points, the biggest victory in a contested Democratic primary there since John F. Kennedy, but it looks as though Clinton and Sanders are leaving the Granite State with the same number of delegates in their pockets because Clinton has the support of New Hampshire’s superdelegates, these party insiders. What do you tell voters who are new to the process who says[sic] this makes them feel like it’s all rigged?

[RELATED: Reality Check: After Being Trounced By Sanders in NH, Clinton Still Wins More Delegates Thanks to DNC Insiders]

Wasserman Schultz replied, “Well, let me just make sure that I can clarify exactly what was available during the primaries in Iowa and in New Hampshire. The unpledged delegates are a separate category. The only thing available on the ballot in a primary and a caucus is the pledged delegates— those that are tied to the candidate that they are pledged to support, and they receive a proportional number of delegates going into our convention.

She added, “Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists. We are as a Democratic Party really highlight and emphasize inclusiveness and diversity at our convention, and so we want to give every opportunity to grassroots activists and diverse, committed Democrats to be able to participate, attend, and be a delegate at the convention. And so we separate out those unpledged delegates to make sure that there isn’t competition between them.

Tapper responded, “I’m not sure that that answer would satisfy an anxious young voter, but let’s move on.

[RELATED: NH Primary: Sanders Beats Clinton in Nearly Every Demographic]

Responding to Wasserman Schultz’s comments, Hot Air’s Jazz Shaw voiced concerns that the superdelegate system seems to be disenfranchising Sen. Sanders’ voters and asked, “There were a total of 151,584 votes cast for Bernie Sanders, giving him 15 delegates. That means that 10,105 people had to drag themselves out in the snow for each delegate he received. Why should voters have any faith in a system where one person appointed by the party leadership can cancel out the votes of more than ten thousand people who chose the other candidate?

Reality Check: After Being Trounced By Sanders in NH, Clinton Still Wins More Delegates Thanks to DNC Insiders

Reality Check: After Being Trounced By Sanders in NH, Clinton…

Hillary Clinton was trounced in the New Hampshire Primary and yet thanks to the way the DNC rules work, she actually won the most delegates. Is the primary system a huge scam?

Posted by Ben Swann on Thursday, February 11, 2016

For more election coverage, click here.

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton Claims Russia Has ‘Not Gone After ISIS’

During the latest Democratic Debate Thursday, Hillary Clinton defended her reservations towards Russia by claiming that the Russians “have not gone after ISIS or any of the other terrorist groups.”

Clinton’s statement was in response to comments made by rival Bernie Sanders when he was asked if he was prepared to “move militarily” against Russia, or to “institute further economic sanctions.”

Sanders called the United States’ relationship with Russia “complicated,” and said that although he believes the U.S. should “do our best in developing positive relations with Russia,” he also stands by President Obama in believing that Russian President Vladimir Putin needs to be shown that his “aggressiveness is not going to go unmatched.”

Clinton replied that she believes an agreement on a cease-fire is “something that has to be implemented more quickly than the schedule that the Russians agreed to.”

[pull_quote_center]You know, the Russians wanted to buy time. Are they buying time to continue their bombardment on behalf of the Assad regime to further decimate what’s left of the opposition, which would be a grave disservice to any kind of eventual cease-fire?[/pull_quote_center]

Clinton also said she is worried that the Russians are doing “everything they can to destroy what’s left of the opposition,” and she claimed that “the Russians have not gone after ISIS or any of the other terrorist groups.”

[pull_quote_center]So let’s support what Secretary Kerry and the president are doing, but let’s hope that we can accelerate the cease-fire, because I fear that the Russians will continue their bombing, try to do everything they can to destroy what’s left of the opposition. And remember, the Russians have not gone after ISIS or any of the other terrorist groups.[/pull_quote_center]

Russia began launching airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Syria in Sept. 2015. Syrian State media claimed the airstrikes began after Syrian President Bashar al-Assad requested help, and that the move was criticized by the U.S.

[RELATED: Russian-Backed Syrian Army Defeats ISIS at Aleppo]

A report from Reuters on Jan. 20 claimed that Russian airstrikes in Syria are gradually weakening both ISIS militants and the Free Syrian Army, allowing Assad to gain more power and to make one of its most significant gains since the start of the Russian intervention,” by capturing the town of Salma in Latakia province.

The report noted that out of the “3,000 people killed by Russian air strikes in Syria since they began in September, nearly 900 were members” of ISIS. The group lost control of the city of Ramadi in December, and has cut fighters’ pay since its “oil-smuggling operations are hit by plunging prices.”

However, the report also noted that Russia’s operation has harmed rebel groups in the area, who are “reporting intensified air strikes and ground assaults in areas of western Syria that are of greatest importance to Assad.”

[RELATED: Reality Check: Proof U.S. Government Wanted ISIS To Emerge In Syria]

Investigative journalist Ben Swann reported on the origin of ISIS in March 2015, and he noted that ISIS grew out of a group of U.S.-backed rebels who were attempting to defeat Assad.

However, Swann said that even when the U.S. government became aware that ISIS was capturing U.S. equipment, it did nothing, “because ISIS fighters were taking the equipment back into Syria to continue fighting Assad, which was what the U.S. government wanted.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6kdi1UXxhY

For more election coverage, click here.

New Emails Show Press Literally Taking Orders From Hillary

By Blake Neff – The emails were obtained by Gawker as part of a large Freedom of Information Act request it made back in 2012. They show a 2009 exchange between Marc Ambinder, then-politics editor of The Atlantic, and Philippe Reines, a close assistant and adviser to Clinton during her days as Secretary of State.

Ambinder asked Reines for an advance copy of a speech Clinton was scheduled to give at the Council on Foreign Relations. Rather than simply say yes or no, Reines cut a deal with Ambinder, turning over the speech provided Ambinder agreed to three conditions:

[quote_box_center]1) You in your own voice describe [the speech] as “muscular”

2) You note that a look at the CFR seating plan shows that all the envoys — from [Richard] Holbrooke to [George] Mitchell to [Dennis] Ross — will be arrayed in front of her, which in your own clever way you can say certainly not a coincidence and meant to convey something

3) You don’t say you were blackmailed![/quote_box_center]

Ambinder agrees in the exchange, and his subsequent article shows that he followed Reines’ demands to the letter. Clinton’s speech is dubbed “muscular” in the second sentence, and the suggestive arrangement of Holbrooke, Mitchell, and Ross is noted immediately afterward. Ambinder never reveals that he was fulfilling demands made by Reines. In essence, in return for a scoop, Ambinder allowed Clinton’s team to dictate part of his coverage.

The Atlantic has updated the nearly seven-year-old article to reflect Gawker’s revelations.

“On February 9, 2016, Gawker called the reporting of this post into question. It is The Atlantic’s policy never to cede to sources editorial control of the content of our stories,” the magazine said.

Ambinder wasn’t the only person who may have followed demands from Reines. Mike Allen of Politico also used the “muscular” label for Clinton’s speech, and he also made a note of the arrangement of figures like Holbrooke and Ross. Allen taking orders from Reines wouldn’t be a huge shock, as it was recently revealed that Allen allowed Reines to ghostwrite an item in his popular daily Playbook email.

Ambinder is still a contributing editor at The Atlantic, but his main job is now as editor-at-large of The Week. Ambinder justified his action by saying he also corresponded with Reines by phone and that the email record was at best an “incomplete” log of what happened.

“Since I can’t remember the exact exchange I can’t really muster up a defense of the art, and frankly, I don’t really want to,” Ambinder told Gawker. “I will say this: whatever happened here reflects my own decisions, and no one else’s.”

Ambinder’s willingness to essentially produce Clinton press copy is particularly notable given an article he wrote in 2015 claiming the press would have a combative relationship with a Clinton presidential campaign.

“They’ll give her no quarter, and they’ll provide a good source of accountability tension until Walker (or whomever) emerges from the maelstrom,” he predicted.

Ambinder’s behavior isn’t necessarily a surprise, though, based on other emails Gawker published that showed an almost sycophantic attitude towards Clinton. In one brief message to Reines he said Clinton “kicked A[ss]” on Meet the Press, and in another he effusively said Clinton was “PITCH f#$*& PERFECT” at a press conference.

Follow Blake on Twitter

Send tips to blake@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

 

 

 

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

NH Primary: Sanders Beats Clinton in Nearly Every Demographic

The results from the New Hampshire primary Tuesday showed Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders beating former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton in nearly every demographic.

Sanders received 60% of the vote with over 142,000 votes comprising 13 delegates, while Clinton received 38.3% of the vote with over 90,500 votes comprising nine delegates.

[RELATED: After Crushing Defeat, DNC Quirk Still Gives Hillary More New Hampshire Delegates Than Sanders]

The New York Times noted that Sanders carried support in the majority of nearly every demographic, including men and women, moderates and liberals, voters with and without college degrees, seasoned and first-time primary voters, and gun owners and non-gun owners.

Clinton received the majority of the support from voters aged 65 and older, and those with an income of over $200,000. She also carried support from voters who aren’t worried about the economy, and who want to see a continuation of President Obama’s policies.

Sanders was projected to win early on after the polls closed in New Hampshire Tuesday night, along with his counterpart in the Republican party, Donald Trump.

In his victory speech, Sanders praised the “huge” voter turnout, and said that his win sends a message “from Wall Street to Washington” that the U.S. government “belongs to all of the people and not just a handful of wealthy campaign contributors, and their Super PACs.”

[pull_quote_center]What happened here in New Hampshire in terms of an enthusiastic, and aroused electorate, people who came out in large numbers. That is what will happen all over this country. Let us never forget, Democrats and progressives win when voter turnout is high. Republicans win when people are demoralized, and voter turnout is low.[/pull_quote_center]

In her concession speech, Clinton said she will continue to fight to win “every vote in every state,” and she promised that when she says “no bank could be too big to fail and no executive too powerful to jail, you can count on it.”

[pull_quote_center]In this campaign, you’ve heard a lot about Washington and about Wall Street. Now, Senator Sanders and I both want to get secret, unaccountable money out of politics, and let’s remember, let’s remember, Citizens United, one of the worst Supreme Court decisions in our country’s history, was actually a case about a right-wing attack on me and my campaign.[/pull_quote_center]

For more election coverage, click here.

Despite Sanders Win in New Hampshire, Clinton Still Has More Delegates

Following presidential candidate Bernie Sanders’s first-place finish in the New Hampshire Democratic Primary on Tuesday, rival Hillary Clinton, who finished a distant second, is set to gain the same amount of delegates in the state.

Sanders, who won the state’s primary with 151,584 votes over Clinton’s 95,252 votes, gained 13 delegates and The Hill reported that Sanders is expected to officially receive 15 when the total results are in.

CNN and Yahoo Politics reported that Sanders and Clinton each currently have 15 delegates in New Hampshire.

While Clinton won 9 delegates, Clinton also reportedly has the support of 6 superdelegates.

“New Hampshire has 8 superdelegates, 6 of which are committed to Hillary Clinton, giving her a total of 15 delegates from New Hampshire as of Wednesday at 9 a.m.,” the Daily Caller reported.

The Hill reported that “superdelegate support is fluid, though, so some of those delegates now backing Clinton could switch to Sanders” ahead of the Democratic National Convention, “but as it stands, the superdelegate support gives Clinton a total of 15 New Hampshire delegates.”

CNN’s most recent estimate claims that Clinton has 431 delegates total and Sanders has 52 delegates. An estimate from the Associated Press has provided different numbers, claiming that Clinton has 394 delegates and Sanders has 42.

FBI Formally Confirms Its ‘Ongoing’ Investigation Into Hillary Clinton’s Email Server

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has confirmed that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is under an “ongoing” investigation for her use of a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state.

The investigation was confirmed in a letter from FBI general counsel James Baker, released Monday to the State Department. He noted that he is writing to update a response he gave the department on Sept. 21, 2015, when asked if Clinton was formally under investigation.

At the time, I informed you that that the FBI could neither confirm nor deny the existence of any ongoing investigation,” Baker wrote. “Since that time, in public statements and testimony, the Bureau has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server.”

Baker also said that while he cannot give any details on the “ongoing investigation,” the FBI’s response regarding the case has “changed to some degree” because it is now admitting that the investigation exists.

“The FBI has not, however, publicly acknowledged the specific focus, scope, or potential targets of any such proceedings,” Baker wrote. “Thus while the FBI’s response to you has changed to some degree due to these intervening events, we remain unable [to] provide the requested information without adversely affecting on-going law enforcement efforts.”

As previously reported, the FBI insisted that it could “neither confirm nor deny the existence of any ongoing investigation” when Judge Emmet G. Sullivan sent a court-ordered inquiry to the State Department in September 2015, instructing it to reach out to the FBI to find out if any information could be recovered from Clinton’s server.

[RELATED: Former House Majority Leader Claims FBI is ‘Ready to Indict’ Hillary Clinton]

On Jan. 25, former U.S. House Majority leader Tom DeLay said that according to his sources within the FBI, the Bureau is “ready to recommend an indictment and they also say that if the attorney general does not indict, they’re going public.”

Read more about Hillary Clinton’s Email Scandal Here

Steinem Apologizes for ‘Misinterpreted’ Comment About Young Female Sanders Supporters

On last Friday’s episode of Real Time with Bill Maher on HBO, journalist and feminist activist Gloria Steinem controversially suggested that young women who support U.S. Senator from Vermont Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Democratic presidential primary do so in an effort to meet male Bernie Sanders supporters.

When host Bill Maher pointed out that progressive-leaning Sen. Sanders is leading Clinton among young female voters, Steinem said, “First of all, women get more radical as we get older… I don’t mean to over-generalize … but men tend to get more conservative because they gain power as they age, and women get more radical because they lose power as they age. So it’s kind of not fair to measure most women by the standard of most men, because they’re going to get more activist as they grow older.

[RELATED: In Tight Race with Sanders, Clinton Reportedly Wins 6 Precincts By Coin Toss]

And when you’re young, you’re thinking, you know, ‘Where are the boys?’ The boys are with Bernie,” added Steinem.

Maher replied, “Now if I said that, ‘Yeah, they’re for Bernie because that’s where the boys are,’ you’d swat me, come on.”

According to The Hill, Sanders won 84 percent of the 18-29 demographic in the Iowa Caucuses. Clinton only garnered 14 percent of that segment of the vote.

[RELATED: Reality Check: Sanders and Clinton Would Make Same Mistake On Middle East?]

After experiencing significant backlash, Steinem authored a Facebook post on Sunday apologizing for her “misinterpreted” remarks on the show.

In a case of talk-show Interruptus, I misspoke on the Bill Maher show recently, and apologize for what’s been misinterpreted as implying young women aren’t serious in their politics. What I had just said on the same show was the opposite: young women are active, mad as hell about what’s happening to them, graduating in debt, but averaging a million dollars less over their lifetimes to pay it back. Whether they gravitate to Bernie or Hillary, young women are activist and feminist in greater numbers than ever before,” said Steinem.

For more election coverage, click here.

Sanders Is Crushing Clinton In The Polls Ahead Of New Hampshire Primary Read

By Juliegrace Brufke – A new survey shows Sen. Bernie Sanders crushing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by a whopping 16 percent in the Granite State just one day before the New Hampshire primaries.

The University of Massachusetts Lowell/7News poll, released Monday, has Clinton coming at 40 percent, Sanders at 56 percent and 4 percent undecided among likely voters.

Sanders still holds a commanding lead over Clinton, but he saw a slip from where he was in the Feb. 2 survey when he held a 63 to 30 percent advantage.

When voters were asked if it’s possible they could have a last-minute change of heart, 21 percent of Clinton supporters and 18 percent of Sanders supporters said yes.

Women in the state seem to be unfazed by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s recent call for females to back Clinton, having told “Meet the Press” anchor Chuck Todd “there’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.” Sanders holds a 5-point lead over the former first lady among women in the state.

When put against Republican front-runner Donald Trump, Clinton held a 5-percent lead over the billionaire at 45 percent and 40 percent respectively. Sanders held a much larger margin over Trump – beating the outspoken businessman 55 percent to 34 percent.

Clinton – once considered a shoo-in for the nomination – managed to edge out Sanders in Iowa by less than 1 percent.

The poll was conducted from Feb. 5-7 using phone interviews of 1,411 registered voters and leaves a margin of error of +/- 2.99 percent.

Follow Juliegrace Brufke on Twitter

 

 

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Iowa Democratic Party Asserts Private Right Not to Disclose Vote Counts

By Shawn M. Griffiths – The Des Moines Register is calling for an audit of the Democratic caucus results after several reports of precincts being decided by coin flips and missing caucus-goers. The newspaper wants the Iowa Democratic Party to swiftly act to ensure that the results are accurate.

“What happened Monday night at the Democratic caucuses was a debacle, period. Democracy, particularly at the local party level, can be slow, messy and obscure. But the refusal to undergo scrutiny or allow for an appeal reeks of autocracy,” the Register’s editorial board writes.

[pull_quote_center]“Too many accounts have arisen of inconsistent counts, untrained and overwhelmed volunteers, confused voters, cramped precinct locations, a lack of voter registration forms and other problems. Too many of us, including members of the Register editorial board who were observing caucuses, saw opportunities for error amid Monday night’s chaos.”[/pull_quote_center]

However, such an audit is unlikely to come. The Sanders campaign has done its own investigation, rechecking the results precinct by precinct. According to the campaign, it has found some irregularities, but the Iowa Democratic Party won’t allow the campaign to compare the math sheets and other paper work filed by precinct chairs.

“The answer is that we had all three camps in the tabulation room last night to address any grievances brought forward, and we went over any discrepancies. These are the final results,” Dr. Andy McGuire, chairwoman of the Iowa Democratic Party, said in an interview for the Register.

The party has never released head counts, and it won’t this time as Democratic leaders claim a private right to keep that information from the public. McGuire said that the winner of the Iowa caucus is determined by state-delegate equivalent, rather than the final head count for each candidate.

In other words, garnering the most votes in the Iowa caucus may not guarantee a candidate a win. There are no paper ballots and precinct results can apparently come down to coin tosses, in accordance with party rules, to determine the allocation of local delegates.

 

 

This article was republished with permission from IVN.

In Tight Race with Sanders, Clinton Reportedly Wins 6 Precincts By Coin Toss

The Democratic primary race appeared to be incredibly close during the Iowa caucus Monday night, where candidate Hillary Clinton reportedly won at least six precincts by way of a coin toss.

While the caucus numbers led former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley to drop out of the race, it left Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in a virtual tie in several precincts.

Some precincts solved the tie by flipping a coin and various reports show that in at least six different cases, Clinton was declared the winner of the precinct based off of the coin toss.

One of these coin tosses occurred at a precinct in Ames. David Schweingruber, an associate professor of sociology at Iowa State University and a Sanders supporter, told the Des Moines Register that after 484 eligible caucus attendees were recorded, only 424 participants were counted when they were split up by candidate, “leaving 60 apparently missing.”

“When those numbers were plugged into the formula that determines delegate allocations, Clinton received four delegates and Sanders received three — leaving one delegate unassigned,” Schweingruber said.

Because of the missing numbers, Schweingruber said the Sanders campaign challenged the results, and the Democratic Party officials they reached out to on a hotline recommended they settle the dispute with a coin toss.

Fernando Peinado, a political reporter at Univision, reported on Twitter that a precinct in Des Moines was also given to Clinton after being determined by a coin toss.

A similar result came from another precinct in Des Moines, according to Twitter user Sage Rosenfels:

In a Newton precinct, New York Times reporter Trip Gabriel said he was told that Clinton was given an extra delegate via coin toss after she and Sanders were in a tie, 34-34.

Twitter user Julia LaBua claimed that the “same situation, same result” occurred at a precinct in West Branch.

Clinton also received an extra delegate in a precinct in Davenport, as shown by a video posted by Twitter user Andrew Tadlock.

https://twitter.com/andytadlock/status/694340486908088320

While Monday night’s results showed Clinton with 699.57 delegates and Sanders with 695.49, Sanders said he looked at the difference as a technicality. “We started our campaign 40, 50 points behind,” he said. “Whether we lose by a fraction of a point or we win or whatever, we’re very proud of the campaign that we won.”

For more election coverage, click here.

Former House Majority Leader Claims FBI is ‘Ready to Indict’ Hillary Clinton

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has been under investigation by the FBI for several months, and former U.S. House Majority leader Tom DeLay said Monday that the FBI is “ready to indict” her for using a private email server to conduct government business.

During an interview on “The Steve Malzberg Show,” DeLay, a Republican from Texas, said he has friends in the FBI who tell him they’re ready to indict” the former Secretary of State.

“They’re ready to recommend an indictment and they also say that if the attorney general does not indict, they’re going public,” DeLay said.

[RELATED: FBI Refuses to Release Information in Hillary Clinton Email Investigation]

Clinton’s use of personal email on a private server during her tenure as Secretary of State was revealed in March 2015, and while she has maintained that she never sent or received any classified information on the server, her claims have been contradicted by the Intelligence Community.

Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III sent a letter to Congress on Jan. 14, revealing that not only did “several dozen” of Clinton’s emails contain classified information, but some of the information was classified as SAP or “special access programs,” which is beyond top secret.

“To date, I have received two sworn declarations from one [intelligence community] element,” McCullough wrote. “These declarations cover several dozen emails containing classified information determined by the IC element to be at the confidential, secret, and top secret/sap levels. According to the declarant, these documents contain information derived from classified IC element sources.” 

[RELATED: Report: Dozens of Hillary Clinton Emails were Classified from The Beginning]

DeLay said he believes Clinton is “going to have to face these charges” eventually, whether it’s through an FBI indictment or through the “public eye.”

“One way or another either she’s going to be indicted and that process begins, or we try her in the public eye with her campaign,” DeLay said. “One way or another she’s going to have to face these charges.”

Hillary Clinton Responds to Critics Questioning High-Paying ‘Big Bank’ Speeches

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton defended the millions of dollars she has received in speaking fees and campaign contributions from Wall Street banks on Sunday, and asserted that they have not led to a conflict of interest.

During NBC’s “Meet the Press,” moderator Chuck Todd noted that the money Clinton has received has been used by her opponent Bernie Sanders to criticize her ties to Wall Street, and he asked, Why do you think one of these big banks paid you over $200,000 for a speech?”

Clinton insisted that she “gave speeches to a wide array of groups,” including healthcare groups and auto dealers. She said Americans wanted to hear about her expertise on the world, and that there was “a lot of interest in the bin Laden raid.”

[pull_quote_center]Coming off of four years as secretary of State, in a complicated world, people were interested in what I saw, what I thought, they asked questions about the matters that were on their mind, a lot of interest in the bin Laden raid, how such a tough decision was made and what I advised the president. You know, I think Americans who are doing business in every aspect of the economy want to know more about the world. I actually think it’s a good conversation to be having.[/pull_quote_center]

Todd asked Clinton if she thinks the banks “expect anything in return?”

“Absolutely not,” Clinton replied. “You know, first of all, I was a senator from New York. I took them on when I was senator. I took on the carried-interest loophole. I took on what was happening in the mortgage markets. I was talking about that in 2006. They know exactly where I stand.”

On the campaign trail in Iowa, Sanders criticized Clinton for taking in over $675,000 in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, saying “You got to be really, really, really good to get $250,000 for a speech.”

According to The Intercept, Clinton earned over $2.9 million off of twelve speeches to various banks between 2013 and 2015. The Intercept noted that “Clinton’s most lucrative year was 2013, right after stepping down as secretary of state. That year, she made $2.3 million for three speeches to Goldman Sachs and individual speeches to Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley, Fidelity Investments, Apollo Management Holdings, UBS, Bank of America, and Golden Tree Asset Managers.”

When Sanders said that the banks “expect to get something, everybody knows that” during a Democratic presidential debate in November 2015, Clinton responded that she has “hundreds of thousands of donors— most of them small,” and she went on to talk about her involvement in New York on 9/11. 

[pull_quote_center]I represented New York, and I represented New York on 9/11 when we were attacked. Where were we attacked? We were attacked in downtown Manhattan where Wall Street is. I did spend a whole lot of time and effort helping them rebuild. That was good for New York. It was good for the economy, and it was a way to rebuke the terrorists who had attacked our country.[/pull_quote_center]

For more election coverage, click here.

Clinton Attacks Backfire; Lead to Huge Money Bomb for Sanders

By Gabriel Saint Cyr – It seems that supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders have given their response to Hillary Clinton’s newest line of attack. The Sanders team reports that his campaign pulled in about $1.4 million in just 24 hours, nearly quadrupling their daily average.

“Thanks, Team Clinton,” says Michael Briggs, spokesman for the Sanders campaign.

The surge in contributions comes in the wake of interviews and speeches by Mrs. Clinton in which she questioned his electability in a general election against a Republican opponent and called attention to his vote for a 2005 bill that shielded gun manufacturers from liability lawsuits.

Even her daughter, Chelsea Clinton, has stepped into the fray, charging that Sanders wants to “dismantle” Obamacare and Medicare. For the record, Sanders proposes a single-payer health care plan, but has yet to offer details on how he would fund it.

Mrs. Clinton likely stepped up her attacks after seeing the latest poll numbers coming out of Iowa and New Hampshire. A Monmouth University Poll has Clinton trailing Sanders in New Hampshire by 14 points, with 39 percent to his 53, while the Des Moines Register shows the double-digit lead she had in Iowa a month ago shrinking to just two points.

On the national level, the latest polls paint a race that is tightening by the day.

It is hard to imagine that eight years ago a candidate as far removed from the party establishment as Bernie Sanders would have broken out of the single digits in national polling, much less offered a serious challenge to the party’s front-runner. Sanders’ clashes with the Democratic National Committee — from the inconvenient weekend scheduling of the debates to temporarily cutting off access to the DNC’s voter database — have done little to blunt his support.

In fact, they may be helping him.

Though their policy proposals couldn’t be more different, Sanders’ rise mirrors Donald Trump’s unexpected success in courting the Republican base. Both candidates have found their voices by pitting themselves as the underdogs battling the elites in their respective parties in addition to the other side — an ironic twist on the “triangulation” strategy that Bill Clinton used in his re-election campaign in 1996.

Even if November ends with a President-elect Clinton or Rubio, 2016 is already looking to be the year of the outsider.

 

This article was republished with permission from IVN

Clinton Says U.S. Should Impose New Sanctions on Iran Over Ballistic Missile Program

2016 Democratic presidential candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Saturday that the U.S. should impose new sanctions on Iran over its ballistic missile program and over allegations of its involvement in the disappearance of Robert Levinson, an American who went missing in Iran in 2007.

Iran is still violating UN Security Council resolutions with its ballistic missile program, which should be met with new sanctions designations and firm resolve,” said Clinton on Saturday according to The Hill, just hours after U.S. sanctions on Iran expired under President Obama’s nuclear deal.

Clinton said that she believes President Obama should not thank Iran for releasing hostages under the nuclear deal’s terms or for releasing 10 U.S. Navy sailors who allegedly entered Iranian waters last week.

[RELATED: Iran Releases 10 U.S. Navy Sailors Held for ‘Trespassing’ on Iranian Waters]

These prisoners were held unjustly by a regime that continues to threaten the peace and security of the Middle East. Another American, Bob Levinson, still isn’t home with his family,” said Clinton.

ABC News notes that Iranian officials claim to have no knowledge of Levinson’s whereabouts and maintain that he is not in Iranian custody.

U.S. officials say that Levinson was working as a private investigator when he went missing in Iran, but his family says that he was working for the Central Intelligence Agency.

[RELATED: Bernie Sanders Beating Clinton in N.H., Tied In Iowa]

The treatment of our Navy sailors earlier this week was offensive, including the release of demeaning and provocative videos,” added Clinton. She said that if she is elected president, her attitude towards Iran would be to “distrust and verify.”

However, Clinton praised President Obama’s nuclear deal and called it an “important achievement of diplomacy.

According to USA Today, on Sunday, the U.S. Department of the Treasury imposed new targeted sanctions against 11 individuals and companies who it claims were involved in facilitating an Iranian ballistic missile program.

For more election coverage, click here.