October 31, 2016

"CNN said on Monday that the network has severed ties with the Democratic strategist Donna Brazile..."

"... after hacked emails showed that she shared questions for CNN-sponsored candidate events with friends on Hillary Clinton’s campaign...."
The network’s announcement came shortly after a new batch of hacked emails, released by WikiLeaks on Monday, revealed a note from Ms. Brazile sent on March 5 — a day before a CNN-sponsored debate in Flint, Mich. — with this subject line: “One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash. Her family has lead poison and she will ask what, if anything, will Hillary do as president to help the ppl of Flint,” Ms. Brazile wrote to John Podesta, the Clinton campaign chairman, and Jennifer Palmieri, the candidate’s communications director.
It was a debate in Flint, Michigan, so it was completely predictable that there would be questions about Flint's water problem. The help isn't even that helpful. Why cheat for so little reason? It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you.

150 comments:

damikesc said...

Also indicates she likely cheated A LOT. Why would your first or second ones be so mundane? No way these are the only two times she did it.

David Begley said...

"The help isn't even that helpful. Why cheat for so little reason? It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you."

It also suggests that they cheat because they can. Cheating is their culture and character. They also expect not to be caught.

It's over for Hillary.

Cacimbo Cacimbo said...

What about Roland Martin? He gave Brazile the questions. Will he be reprimanded? Does anyone believe he did not intend for the questions to be passed on?

Jim said...

Why cheat? It's who they are.

n.n said...

One lesson from E-mailGate is that proper framing for optimal presentation requires foresight and planning (pun intended).

Owen said...

"Why cheat for so little reason?" If they will cheat over trivia like that, what won't they cheat over? It suggests habitual and absolute arrogance; they no longer even understand what the rules are supposed to be, and how to pretend to follow them.

EDH said...

The help isn't even that helpful. Why cheat for so little reason?

Climbers always want to find ways to ingratiate themselves to power.

Burying bodies now means you know where the bodies are buried later.

Isn't that what it means to be a valued "confidante"?

Bob Ellison said...

Why does she type "ppl"? Is she trying to be hep? To save time? To look as though she's typing from a Blackberry?

Achilles said...

The entire DNC is chock full of these types of people. This has been going on for years. They all belong in jail.

By the way Brazile is who took over for little Debbie after she got canned for screwing Bernie. How long before brazile resigns for screwing Bernie? How long before Bernie supporters start their own party?

Bob Ellison said...

"Godspeed to all my former colleagues." --Brazile

Wouldn't "gdspd" be a lot more efficient?

Sydney said...

It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you.
They are so corrupt they no longer know the difference between right and wrong.

madAsHell said...

a woman with a rash.

Are all the questioners marked for identification?? Is Mdm. Defarge there with a red flower in her hair??

TWW said...

"The help isn't even that helpful. Why cheat for so little reason? It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you."

Ann, you may recall almost identical words of dismay were written of Richard Nixon during the Watergate Scandal. Why? Why? Why? He had the election won. There was no need. No need at all.

Bob Ellison said...

"gdspd to > x-clgs"

Quayle said...

When you are fighting for all that is good and right and necessary and important and brillient and progressive, and (if you believe in a God) is God's will, and that makes you and yours a lot of money - nice when that part lines up also), the concept of cheating somehow magically vanishes.

Prosecutorial Indiscretion said...

It's who they are. It's what they do.

Eric the Fruit Bat said...

It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you.

Or maybe that the friends on Hillary Clinton's campaign are so dumb they need it spelled out for them.

LYNNDH said...

Nailed it when you said cheating means so little them. Just like breathing to them.

PB said...

She felt she was invulnerable and her fellow "journalists" in the media would have her back.

Real American said...

Why break into the DNC HQ at the Watergate Hotel when you're gonna win the election anyway?

traditionalguy said...

I still like Donna. But she has lived her life in a Black Woman Privilege bubble.

glenn said...

Donna Brazil's is like so many of her contemporaries a dishonest person. To her core. So dishonest she doesn't know she's dishonest. She's in excellent company.

traditionalguy said...

How does it go: Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts media whores the most.

MayBee said...

Why cheat for so little?

This is the campaign that agonized for 8 hours about how to word a TWEET made to look like its from Hillary.
This is a woman that took whole weeks off the campaign trail to practice for her debates.
Hillary is a woman who does not do thinking-on-her-feet.

eric said...

Why did they feel like they needed to cheat?

MayBee said...

Does it bother anyone that the first thing politicians at all levels do is lie?

MadisonMan said...

Now she can be hired by the Hillary Campaign!

Michael K said...

"almost identical words of dismay were written of Richard Nixon"

I still believe he did not know about it until after the burglary.

It's speculation that Dean is the one who ordered it but I don't think anyone has ever found a tape or a memo from Nixon ordering it.

His error was trying to protect the underlings who screwed up.

SteveM said...

Does this make it more likely or less likely that Hillary received prior notice of question(s) before the debates with Trump? There are rumors that Hillary did receive such prior notice before those debates as well. This news makes it harder to just poo-poo such rumors.

readering said...

I guess there will be an announcement soon after the election of a change at the top of the DNC. She took the job because her predecessor was found to be biased against one of the candidates for the nomination. This seems worse than any of the revelations at the Convention

Barry Dauphin said...

Maybe HRC could not anticipate a question about lead in the water when doing a downhill about Flint. It might be more helpful than it appears. Or everyone feels the need to curry favor and be a sycophant because that is how she operates. Or to paraphrase George Costanza--it's not really cheating if you don't believe it is.

Barry Dauphin said...

oops. Town hall. Although it has been downhill for HRC lately.

Brando said...

A lot of people beclowned themselves in defending Hillary this year. Was it worth it?

TWW said...

"almost identical words of dismay were written of Richard Nixon"

I still believe he did not know about it until after the burglary.

Michael K: I agree with you; I don't think he knew. Shorthand. But I do believe RMN was responsible for the tone and culture that allowed Watergate to happen.

Tom said...

It's a culture of cheating.

Christopher B said...

It's a loyalty thing.

At one time I was willing to give Hillary a pass on the 'named after Sir Edmund' thing from a few years ago, figuring it was a family in-joke that slipped out. Until this year when I read more of the background on when and where she made that claim (one time, in Nepal, and never before that time).

These lies and these cheats are loyalty tests. When Hillary and her team see somebody going to mattresses defending these throwaway lines, like this one, or the 'sniper fire in Bosnia', they know they have a made man (or woman) who will stand by them for the big lies. Equivocate on the little ones, and they know you might have a pang of conscience, and you aren't to be trusted.

Brazile didn't send these because she thought Hillary really need to know the questions in advance. She did it to prove she was a part of the team, and would loyally provide the answers if and when Hillary came asking for some real dirty work.

bagoh20 said...

In a contest, if you cheat, doesn't that disqualify you?

I call forfeit, and give the election to Mr. Trump.

William Chadwick said...

As someone just commented on Instapundit re this story, the bigger scandal is that Clinton took the help.

Johnny Sokko said...

"Why cheat for so little reason? It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you."

It's the Clinton way. Why would you say you came under sniper fire when it is totally verifiable.

Yancey Ward said...

This is one of the leaked questions you know about. It is likely there were many more.

JPS said...

TWW:

"Michael K: I agree with you; I don't think he knew. Shorthand. But I do believe RMN was responsible for the tone and culture that allowed Watergate to happen."

Commander's intent: It's not just for the military.

(See also: Lois Lerner, not a smidgen of corruption; et very much cetera.)

SteveR said...

"It used to be they made cars in Flint and you couldn't drink the water in Mexico, now they make cars in Mexico and you can't drink the water in Flint."

Brent said...

"He who is faithful in little is also faithful in much"

Jesus Christ, in describing how to judge those you consider hiring (or electing), do business with, and who to trust.

Tank said...

Cheaters cheat.

End of story.

MayBee said...

Donna Brasile didn't just lie.
She said that as a Christian woman, she understood persecution.

And she was lying! Isn't that despicable?

MikeR said...

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/new-email-shows-donna-brazile-also-gave-clinton-questions-before-cnn-presidential-debate/
"UPDATE (11:00 AM ET): In a second email released Monday, Brazile promised Palmieri and Podesta she would “send a few more” questions before the CNN town hall."

robother said...

Ann doesn't seem to grasp the concept of the Favor Bank. Each one of these insider favors creates a credit redeemable down the road, with the Presidency leveraging such credits to the max. The importance of the favor to the election result is secondary: the fact that Brazile was willing to jeopardize her credibility, her Network commentator tells the Clinton Inc. principals that this is a Made Man, who can be trusted with high power.

Owen said...

Christopher B: "these are...loyalty tests." Yes. A bully establishes dominance by asking her victim to do stupid little stuff. If the victim will roll over on that, and repeatedly (with variations, escalations, habituations) then surrender on the big stuff is almost certain.

This has to be seen as dynamic, part of an ongoing process of training people to behave. As more and more of the group are trained that way, and see others conforming, it becomes self-reinforcing.

Bubble.

TreeJoe said...

My favorite part of this was 2 weeks ago there was a release of her doing the exact same thing and CNN stood by her and everyone claimed it was BS. Now she's canned. So which is it? I think I know.

Michael said...

The Progressive Elite in this country apparently believes in "progressive truth" and "progressive justice" in the same way that Leninists believed in revolutionary truth and revolutionary justice - that which was helpful to the Revolution was true and just, and those words had no other meaning. The Clintons and Braziles and their media acolytes really believe that they are the wise and good people, and therefore that whatever works for them must also be wise and good - the Judeo-Christian tradition and the liberal order be damned.

PB said...

The Democrat party leadership is one big criminal conspiracy working to impede a federal election.

cubanbob said...

“One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash. Her family has lead poison and she will ask what, if anything, will Hillary do as president to help the ppl of Flint,”

Funny that question was never asked of Barack Obama and his EPA who were in charge when this happened.

coupe said...

"Why cheat for so little reason?"

It's a power trip. The people she emailed should have corrected her immediately.

The fact that they did not, puts them in the same basket of deplorables.

Bob Ellison said...

TWW suggests above that the culture is defined at the top and that the culture is at the heart of the crimes.

That's correct.

The Clintons do not care whether they are wise or good. They just want money and power.

David said...

1. Why did CNN do this "quietly?" It's a news story. They should have reported it.
2. Brazille blamed "the Russians" in her statement. Sick and Lame.
3. "Woman with a rash?" Kind of dehumanizing don't you think?
4. Who did Brazille's info come from, if not "CNN." No curiosity about that from CNN.
5. Uncomfortable? It's a betrayal on several levels. And all they feel is discomfort?

Weasels abound.

Owen said...

Maybee @ 3:05: "...[Donna Brazile] said that as a Christian woman, she understood persecution...."

That was a brilliant play. Dropping the victim card, and doing it TWICE: religion and sex. (With an overtone of racism. Just a possible whiff of Jim Crow there).

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Anyone with any honor would recognize that, even if Podesta and Palmieri didn't use that information to help Clinton's debate prep, they had an obligation to inform both CNN and the debate moderator of Brazile's attempt at cheating. Clearly they did not.

Someone should ask Clinton why she would hire, and why she has not yet fired, people who lack that basic honor.

( Yes, of course they used it in debate prep, likely with Clinton's knowledge. No point in asking about that, as it would just be lied about. )

Bob Ellison said...

"We are completely uncomfortable with what we have learned about her interactions with the Clinton campaign while she was a CNN contributor,” said Lauren Pratapas, a network spokeswoman.

I'm completely uncomfortable when a zombie starts eating my face. Well, not completely. Mostly uncomfortable. It could be worse.

This is a spokeswoman who works for a company that speaks and writes for a living.

traditionalguy said...

To understand Hillary, it is necessary to understand liars. They do give off tells. One of the easiest to spot is the so called "Dupper's Delight." That is a quick silver hint of a smirk or a glimmer of a smile on their faces as they deliver the answer or story. They are enjoying the fooling of people, like they did their parents so easily.

Now, go watch Hillary give her answers.

Mada Gasper said...

Latest Wikileaks reveal that the Clinton camp planned a "Trump swift boat project." See -

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/38766

mockturtle said...

coupe, we are 'deplorables'. They are 'despicables'.

'TreHammer said...

Has anyone been keeping a running total of the total number of emails release by Wikileaks? It's gotta be a very large number by now. How do they get any work done if all they seem to be doing is writing emails?

Jack Wayne said...

Brazil's didn't lie. She was just doing her job. She got fired because CNN doesn't want anyone to know that helping Democrats is part of the job.

Andrew Pardue said...

TreHammer said
Has anyone been keeping a running total of the total number of emails release by Wikileaks? It's gotta be a very large number by now. How do they get any work done if all they seem to be doing is writing emails?


Hmmm, I wonder if the total of Wikileaks emails will greater or less than the number of state department emails on Huma's laptop?

tim in vermont said...

I think they are more like detestables. But they don't care. They don't see that they are paving the way for an unaccountable dictator to take over the power network they have built.

MayBee said...

About two hours ago, Brazile actually tweeted

"When they go low, we go high"

traditionalguy said...

The Great Bobby Knight in closing his introduction for DJT (in Michigan) as a winner like him, said one final thing,"WITH DONALD TRUMP, THERE IS NO BULLSHIT."

Well there goes the aghast with DaTrump speech voters. Hopefully enough real men and women will also show up and vote.

AprilApple said...

CNN is one campaign ad for Hillary. Now that's some handy dandy cheating.

Sebastian said...

"Why cheat for so little reason? It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you." Piling on late, but: they cheat because they can, because that's who they are, because no one cares -- but it does mean something: anything goes for the cause.

MayBee said...

CNN's Gloria Borger in the latest Wikileaks:

From:Gloria.Borger@turner.com
To: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2016-02-12 02:26
Subject: U r a tv star!

I have been in gop hell. Will reach out soon! U good?

Ambrose said...

Clinton people are loyal to the Clintons only - and to nothing and nobody else. All of them No surprise here.

Bob said...

I believe that would be called "rigging", for those too dense to understand that cheating is rigging.

Real American said...

As a part of the media, DB was a de facto member of the Hillary campaign. She was just doing her job.

AlbertAnonymous said...

"Why cheat for so little reason?"

Why does a Dog lick his balls?

Jimmy said...

AA>Why cheat for so little reason?

Because they are pathological cheaters, honesty feels alien and uncomfortable to them in any situation.

Jimmy said...

Can't let this one pass to AlbertAnonymous

"Why does a Dog lick his balls?"

Because he can!

Bay Area Guy said...

Donna Brazile truly is a Democratic operative with a byline.......

Clayton Hennesey said...

Now Tyler Durden at ZeroHedge is telling us John Podesta's pal Peter Kadzik will be in charge of investigating Huma Abedin's emails at DOJ:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-31/doj-tells-congress-it-will-work-expeditiously-review-abedin-emails-there-just-one-pr

It just never, ever ends.

Fen said...

"We are completely uncomfortable with what we have learned about her interactions with the Clinton campaign while she was a CNN contributor”

You're just uncomfortable that you got caught. This is like the wife coming home 15 mins early to catch you in bed with your mistress, and you trying to pretend its the only time you did it. You pushed it till 15 mins till because you have been doing it for so long that you got complacent.

Howard said...

The details of the question and questioner was absolutely helpful. Clinton was given the specific heart-rending backstory of the lead poisoning victim, so she could tailor the most caring and sensitive answer possible giving the impression of spontaneous empathy.

It helped Hillary convert a single into a home run.

Fen said...

And what's really uncomfortable?

All major stories this year are a result of leaks, hacks or FOIA requests.

CNN and the rest of the MSM are so deep in the tank for Dems that they should be subject to campaign finance laws.

YoungHegelian said...

Donna Brazile wasn't "cheating". She was being a loyal acolyte of her one true love -- the Democratic Party.

Was there some imbecile at CNN who thought they were hiring a "journalist" when they brought her on-board? That she thought herself bound by some notion of "journalistic ethics" even at the expense of the Democratic Party?

Really? I bet no one at CNN ever sat her down & explained the difference between a party activist & an opinion journalist to her. You know why? Because CNN knew exactly what they were getting with Ms Brazile, and they were thrilled to get her. Now, they are "Shocked, shocked, I tell you.." to discover that she works for the Democratic Party. What a buncha maroons!

Mike said...

Nice that Hillary's team took the cheating in stride, accepted it. Like it's routine or something.

Wilbur said...

The focus of this should not be on Brazile. It should be on the knowing recipient of the embezzlement: Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Trump is right - if he had done this they'd give him the electric chair.

mockturtle said...

CNN and the rest of the MSM are so deep in the tank for Dems that they should be subject to campaign finance laws.

Good point, Fen!

gadfly said...

The help isn't even that helpful. Why cheat for so little reason? It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you.

How can you possibly ask such a question, Ann, since every debate and every exchange with voters and the media involve multiple lies from the duopoly candidates?

Politico tracked Trump lies to about one every five minutes and Ted Cruz hit nail on the head. "This man is a pathological liar," Cruz went on. "He doesn’t know the difference between truth and lies. He lies practically every word that comes out of his mouth. And in a pattern that I think is straight out of a psychology textbook, his response is to accuse everybody else of lying."

As for Hillary, her lies have been tracked since 1974 - everything from her namesake, Sir Edmund Hillary to the William Saffire list in 1996 to Benghazi and the latest I am sure has Comey's name on it.

Gretchen said...

What is shocking is that Brazille didn't know Hillary had given the questions to the moderator before Donna saw them.

madAsHell said...

It's almost time to smear some cottage cheese on my butt, and go trick-or-treat as Hillary!!

Curious George said...

I think the parting of ways was discussed by CNN, Brazile, and Team Hildabeast and that it was mutually agreed upon by all parties. CNN can pretend to impartial and still be a major benefactor of Hillary and the DNC.

Fen said...

That's a funny twist Gretchen. And likely true.

Mary Beth said...

Her family has lead poison

+ing

It's like fingernails on a chalkboard every time I read it.

Her resignation is dated October 14. Who else thinks they just asked for it after the second question came out but asked her to backdate it. I'm guessing she told them that the first was the only one, and then, whoops, it wasn't.

Fen said...

gadfly: " multiple lies from the duopoly candidates? "

Is anyone else seeing this? Hillary lies about her secret server are coming home to roost, and certain people want to talk about how "both sides are corrupt" ?

Like I said, no shame.

joucas said...

its the sycophancy. The loyal retainers always need to be showing why they are valuable so that the crumbs continue to fall their way.

mikesixes said...

With Bill's history, the Clintons must hear questions from women with rashes all the time.

Gk1 said...

And why should be think this chicanery wasn't going on with all 3 debates this year? The whole thing is rigged. And we are supposed to pretend we don't notice or care. They are no longer hiding their contempt for us.

Curious George said...

"madAsHell said...
It's almost time to smear some cottage cheese on my butt, and go trick-or-treat as Hillary!!"

So that's why the Philly factories have been working three shifts.

Don't you go getting overheated now.

TA said...

I know CNN loves these enormous panels of discussants, liberally salted with political hacks from both sides. But that doesn't mean they had to let Donna know what the questions might be. So why did they? If you're a little cynical, you might think they were perfectly happy with that, and with the tipoff, until it was revealed by Wikileaks.

Susan said...

"Trump is right - if he had done this they'd give him the electric chair."

Oh, I don't know, Wilber, I think the case could be made that they might have had him drawn and quartered instead. Guillotined, maybe. More sustainable that way.

DanTheMan said...

Donna claimed she was being persecuted, and all the time she was lying and cheating.

As Noonan said, we are now being patronized by our inferiors.....

William said...

I can see the tip off serving a useful purpose. As a previous commenter noted, she could have a rehearsed and approriate response to the question, then she could add some details and statistics about the effects of lead poisoning that would impress everyone with her wonkery. How does this woman know so much about everything!.....At the next press conference some reporter should ask her if any of the other reporters had forewarned her of the questions they were going to ask.

ndspinelli said...

But, does Donna "smell like boiled cabbage, urine and farts."

Left Bank of the Charles said...

Is it cheating? The hack political commentator roles on the various cable news network are played by a bunch of people who are so clearly partisan that it doesn't seem reasonable to expect any level of journalistic impartiality from them at all.

So she got hold of a couple of debate questions in advance and gave them to her side. Why is that even a surprise. Certainly the egg is on CNN's face for letting her have access to information she was sure to share. But that is not cheating.

Matthew Sablan said...

After this and previous CNN debate screw ups, they have forfeited the right to host these debates. Let non incompetent people do it.

Matthew Sablan said...

Maybe you can argue her actions are not cheating, but the candidates let the audience believe that they had not known the questions. You can't absolve Clinton for accepting and not reporting the break in the rules.

traditionalguy said...

The Black Woman Protected From All Criticism Bubble is not burst yet.The Cable talking heads are making heartfelt 5 minute excuses for victim Brazile on all channels.

Rhythm and Balls said...

My prediction: This will be the first of many. Get used to a frequent repeat of the WJC pattern of axings and under-bus throwings of Clinton's most loyal allies, every time they are caught - as they inevitably will - doing the copious dirty work of HRC. How many other media companies have a surrogate concealing something damning like this that Assange has yet to break? I suspect such is the case at at least every other major network. As long as Assange is able to stay active, I predict a henchman or underling doing Clinton's dirty work could be revealed and fired every few months. Just as the CGI is a front operation, all of their allies/defenders are simple foot soldiers taking on the legal and ethical liabilities that the Clintons themselves will forever plausibly deny themselves of any culpability.

Get used to it.

tastid212 said...

WJC and HRC are the el norte equivalents of El Chapo...
Why do people sign on with them - and stay with them? How much Clinton Kool-Aid is there???

The Elder said...

Cheating becomes a habit. It becomes part of one's character.

Bye, bye Brazile.

mockturtle said...

R&B says: How many other media companies have a surrogate concealing something damning like this that Assange has yet to break?

I'm surprised he hasn't been offed! Or has he?

Fen said...

Is it cheating? The hack political commentator roles on the various cable news network are played by a bunch of people who are so clearly partisan that it doesn't seem reasonable to expect any level of journalistic impartiality from them at all.

So she got hold of a couple of debate questions in advance and gave them to her side. Why is that even a surprise. Certainly the egg is on CNN's face for letting her have access to information she was sure to share. But that is not cheating


See? Again we have the "everyone does it, so she is excused" tu quo. Gotta love the audacity of claiming that feeding someone questions before the test is not cheating....

At least this one was more subtle. Maybe someone at the Soros Troll Warehouse called in their manager:"Getting flak again over at Althouse. Talking points aren't flying. Need Blumenthall in here STAT!"

retail lawyer said...

Where's Bernie objecting to this? Hillary cheated him. Seems he's kind of a phony . . .

Fabi said...

Getting a few debate questions in advance is not cheating according to Left Bank. Please don't forget his statement when dealing with the progressives -- they don't care about anything but power. Obvious cheating? It's okay if it serves the angels.

DanTheMan said...

>>But that is not cheating

That's why Donna denied doing it, and why it was kept secret. Because it's not cheating.

Rhythm and Balls said...

I'm surprised he hasn't been offed! Or has he?

Hillary wanted to "drone" assassinate him. And she wasn't joking. Read about it. It was chilling as hell. The MSM covered that story expertly amid all the other nonsensical manufactured drama over the last month of this stupid campaign. Way to go MSM. Pathetic. Hillary will probably drone all of them someday, too.

Rhythm and Balls said...

I meant to say they "buried" it. They sure as hell didn't cover it. Unless you mean cover in the sense that dogs kick dirt over whatever they leave behind as their owners walk them.

bgates said...

Is it cheating?

The unethical act Donna Brazile was fired for? Yes. Yes, it is.

So she got hold of a couple of debate questions in advance and gave them to her side. Why is that even a surprise.

It's not a surprise - Democrat ethics doesn't extend beyond asking "will it benefit the Party / will it benefit me in the Party". Nobody's any more surprised that CNN and its employees are deeply corrupt hacks than we are that you're covering for them.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Yes. A bully establishes dominance by asking her victim to do stupid little stuff. If the victim will roll over on that, and repeatedly (with variations, escalations, habituations) then surrender on the big stuff is almost certain.

There is a spinoff series from Dr Who called Torchwood that did a TV movie on just that premise. An alien species, several decades ago, demanded that the UK give them some children (10 or so if I remember correctly) or suffer dire consequences. The government folded and did so. Then, several decades latter, the aliens reappeared and demanded that the entire earth provide the aliens 10% of the earth's children. When one of the politicians insisted to the aliens that they would not do so the alien replied that they had complied in the past, so they would comply now.

Rhythm and Balls said...

When organized crime has front operations they call it "money laundering".

The Clintons' surrogates are "politics launderers." Fall womyn, etc. who take on the liability that lets the Clintons get away with what they do.

Speaking of Brazile, was there any truth to this story of an upbraiding she received from HRC the night of the Matt Lauer interview? That depiction of H. and how she acted was horrifying.

Jon Ericson said...

"fear of federal prison and its supposed cultural intolerance for supposed predators."
Heh.
VDH @ CJ

Rhythm and Balls said...

Why cheat for so little reason? It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you.

Exactly. The pettiness and desperation is unprecedented.

You wrote a post in 2008 how it would be cool if Obama, having won the election, just decided not to go ahead with becoming president.

You won't write any similar posts in November about Hillary though, will you?

Why?

traditionalguy said...

All's fair in love and war...no, no that is a Trumpian thought.

Ever since Bobby Jones called the unseen penalty on himself in a British Open, the Golf guys have taken the attitude a gentlemen never cheats. But Bobby was from Atlanta; not Chicago.

Real American said...

Hillary lies when she doesn't need to. That's how you know it's pathological

Original Mike said...

"“I am not going to verify, deny, confirm or even try to make sense out of stolen emails that were hacked.”

What a load of horseshit.

Fen said...

Fabi: "Getting a few debate questions in advance is not cheating according to Left Bank. Please don't forget his statement when dealing with the progressives -- they don't care about anything but power. Obvious cheating? It's okay if it serves the angels."

To be fair, we *are* racist sexist homophobic xenophobes who dine off the belly of a sacrificial virgin lashed to a satanic altar. We have it coming. The ends justify the means. What's embracing a bit of wickedness going to hurt in the Greater Cause of sending us Deplorables to the camps?

[just in case anyone forgot why they demonize us 24/7. They have to make Trump into Hitler to give themselves permission to lie, cheat and assault us]

Anyways, this weekend's buffet is at Chuck's house. Bring your own virgin please.

JamesB.BKK said...

It also suggests that she (and all of them) might not be very bright. Her decision to pass on juice about something that is so obvious that the site of the debate was selected for it, shows elementary dimness. Cheating for Dummies says: "If cheating with others, don't put it in an email, dummy."

Jupiter said...

"Why cheat for so little reason?".

Who says she cheated? The questions were the property of her employer. If I gave away my employer's secrets, they would sue me and charge me with espionage. But Donna Brazile's employer is probably giving her a nice little severance package.

As to why she passed such trivial information, well, when you pass every piece of information you get, and you get a lot of information, you are sometimes going to pass some trivial information.

sane_voter said...

I haven't been watching Fox News lately, but tonight I had Megyn Kelly on and though she had done an admirable job in nailing Brazile back on Oct. 19, Kelly and her guests had to keep genuflecting about what a nice person she is, even though she is a lying hack. Makes you wonder what dirt they know about the rest of the on-air talent.

Big Mike said...

It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you.

I've been thinking about what you wrote, Professor, and it occurs to me that you're not quite right. I think that Brazile cheats because she thinks that it means little or nothing to folks like you. Surely she expects to get caught sooner or later, but she expects that no one, and especially not liberals like you, will much care.

Owen said...

All these emails returning from beyond the shredder and shrugging off Bleachbit to hunt down their authors and eat their careers and reputations... like a very bad zombie flick.

Do you think the lesson will be learned? Will we see lots of people sitting on park benches, muttering in code outside the side of their mouths?

People: please. Email is forever. It goes everywhere. It can and it will be used against you.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DavidD said...

What media bias?

Fen said...

Big Mike: I've been thinking about what you wrote, Professor, and it occurs to me that you're not quite right. I think that Brazile cheats because she thinks that it means little or nothing to folks like you. Surely she expects to get caught sooner or later, but she expects that no one, and especially not liberals like you, will much care.

"Consider, for example, how republic-killing an event was the ruling class’s support of President Bill Clinton in the wake of his nationally televised perjury. Subsequently, as constituencies of supporters have effectively condoned officials’ abusive, self-serving, and even outright illegal behavior, they have encouraged more and more of it while inuring themselves to it. That is how republics turn into empires from the roots up."

http://www.claremont.org/crb/basicpage/after-the-republic/

Hillary is only a few EC votes away from abusing the Executive Branch because Democrats have enabled her corruption for the last 20 years. Even if Trump wins, we are going to have to do something with these people. At the very least, they should be run out of the public square and shunned. They are as dishonest, immoral and corrupt as Hillary. If you consider any to be friends, it might be time to re-evaluate just how much you can trust them.

Fen said...

Subsequently, as constituencies of supporters have effectively condoned officials’ abusive, self-serving, and even outright illegal behavior, they have encouraged more and more of it while inuring themselves to it

Althouse lent her credibility as an authority on Constitutional Law to a petition(?) addressed to Congress that I believe said perjury and obstruction of justice didn't not rise to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors".

And here we are.

Can't find the original petition online, if anyone can find it and post, much appreciated.



HoodlumDoodlum said...

Ann Althouse said...Why cheat for so little reason? It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you.

Fish gotta swim...

Unknown said...

The democrats are just so corrupt and have a feeling of entitlement. Only in the democrat party can you be too corrupt for CNN but not to corrupt to be DNC head.

Terry said...

When I read about the cynical acts committed by Democrats (and Republicans) in pursuit of raw power, I remember my Nineteen Eighty-Four.
O'Brien patiently explained explained to Winston that the goal of Big Brother was arbitrary power. If your power is not arbitrary, it is not complete. Something is setting rules you have to follow. That something, obviously, has more power than you do.
So today's democrats follow no rules themselves, while they insist that, for example, if you refuse to call a human being with a vagina, who menstruates and bears children and feeds them with its breast milk, a "man", you are a bigot and unfit to hold public office.

Howard said...

You people are idiots. Hitlary, the DNC and the National Government-Media Complex stole the nomination from Bernie. Why did they cheat? Because Bernie was kicking their ass.

PackerBronco said...

==========
Why cheat for so little reason? It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you.
==========

Because they cheat all of the time Ann. They cheat all of the time.

PackerBronco said...

You can either be loyal to the Clintons or you can be loyal to the truth.

walter said...

As a Christian, Brazille knows about the sin of lying..but all is forgiven, right?
I await the original sin, fallen world defense..
Maybe a pivot to social justice/racism something or another..

walter said...

(These are all just slugs in her revolver to try)

Mike said...

Howard said You people are idiots. Hitlary, the DNC and the National Government-Media Complex stole the nomination from Bernie. Why did they cheat? Because Bernie was kicking their ass.

Seems a little backwards there. They colluded to cheat long before Bernie started kicking her ass. No in the beginning she had DWS in her pocket and the DNC lining up delegates for her to knock down. They laughed at Bernie and cleared the field of any democrat with a constituency, thinking Bernie couldn't build one with his simple schtick and his sudden switch from Independent to Democrat. They laughed. They rejoiced at having a perfect foil for her rich resume. Bernie!

Then he started kicking her ass because Hillary is the worst candidate ever to appear on the scene, and she'll prove it in just one week. Let's not reduce it to she cheated BECAUSE Bernie was strong, let's keep it in perspective. She had it BAGGED and he still almost beat her. Only the Superdelegate firewall held for HRC. What a shitty candidate.

cyrus83 said...

Three reasons to cheat on something so easy:

- That's just who these people are, they cheat even when they don't have to. When cheating is habitual, it's sometimes on autopilot.

- The Clinton campaign preferred to give a fully scripted answer that required only memorization, not thinking on her feet.

- If in fact Clinton was being fed answers visually or verbally, it was an absolute must to know the exact questions ahead of time.

protestmanager said...

It was a debate in Flint, Michigan, so it was completely predictable that there would be questions about Flint's water problem. The help isn't even that helpful. Why cheat for so little reason? It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you.

I really hope you're not just figuring out that, for the Clintons and their hangers on, cheating is just how they do things.

Because that's been obvious for decades

Michael said...

Certainly we haven't forgotten that Trump said pussy 11 years ago.

tim in vermont said...

It's not the cover up, it's the failed cover up. That's what got Brazille. Without the evidence from Wikileaks, it would never have been a problem.

David Hampton said...

What was in it for Brazile? Her current position was undoubtedly a stepping stone up the party machine ladder. Maybe an ambassador post to Somalia or Nigeria?

Ron Winkleheimer said...

the alien replied that they had complied in the past, so they would comply now

And hey very nearly did. It was only through the clever machinations of the Torchwood group that the aliens were thwarted.

But the important thing about the plot, the point that a great deal of time was spent on, was how the politicians immediately quashed the idea of a lottery and started plotting to give the children of the poor and middle class to the aliens, while making sure none of their children would be sacrificed.

So kind of a metaphor for Globalism.

wildswan said...

"It suggests cheating means just about nothing to you."

A question about Flint might have focused on the Democrats running the city so Brazile was verifying that the question would be a softball: what would Hillary do? - not curveball: what did the Democrats and the EPA do and why should we think you would be different?

Or else Hillary had been promised she would know all the questions - this is called debate prep in DNC talk - and so she had to hear about them all even the obvious ones. And the debates with Trump - did she have the questions?

These speculations and others are slinking about our "national conversation" like creepy clowns walking at dusk by highways

mikee said...

Severing ties is different from firing, banning, repudiating, and denouncing her for her unethical behavior.

They severed ties because she got caught, not because they disapprove of her.