Month: May 2016

by William Skink

Unlike some armchair investigators, I don’t choose to close myself off to an entire realm of inquiry when it comes to the subject of the occult. I don’t have to directly experience something or believe in it myself to find a subject like the occult worth looking at. That powerful people in our world believe in the occult is enough for me to take it seriously.

A good book to start with is Colin Wilson’s The Occult. Here is a tidbit from the introduction:

Primitive man believed the world was full of unseen forces: the orenda (spirit force) of the American Indians, the huaca of the ancient Peruvians. The Age of Reason said that these forces had only ever existed in man’s imagination; only reason could show man the truth about the universe. The trouble was that man became a thinking pygmy, and the world of the rationalists was a daylight place in which boredom, triviality and ‘ordinariness’ were ultimate truths.

But the main trouble with human beings is their tendency to become trapped in the ‘triviality of everydayness’ (to borrow Heidegger’s phrase), in the suffocating world of their personal preoccupations. ANd every time they do this, they forget the immense world of broader significance that stretches around them. And since man needs a sense of meaning to release his hidden energies, this forgetfulness pushes him deeper into depression and boredom, the sense the nothing is worth the effort.

As an artist, I have no problem entertaining the notion that unseen forces exist in our material world. From Greek mythology, the muses were the nine daughters of Zeus and Mnemosyne, and they presided over the arts and sciences. Artists still use this concept to explain the inspiration that comes from somewhere beyond the individual artist, somewhere like the collective unconscious.

In Wilson’s book, he refers to magic as “the science of the future.” What does Wilson mean by this? Here’s a good example of what Wilson is talking about: if we had no idea of celestial movements, someone who did possess that knowledge to the degree that they could predict an eclipse would seem to be controlling that powerful celestial force, and the awed populace could then be suckered into believing the knower of this knowledge caused the eclipse to occur. Later, science comes along to rationally explain what initially seemed to be magic.

If there is power in the occult (and I believe there is), then those who lust for power will use it to their benefit. Zerohedge had a piece last week that touches on this, asking in the title are Globalists evil or just misunderstood? From the link:

To answer the question in the title of this article, yes, the globalists are in fact evil and the only misunderstandings are on the part of wide-eyed skeptics that have bought into the idea that “evil” is a moral conception created by religion rather than an inherent quality of human beings.

As Carl Jung discovered in his studies on the collective unconscious, people are born with inherent and conflicting conceptions and traits, or “dualities.” Good vs. Evil is an important duality we all come in to the world dealing with, it is not a mere product of environment or religious influence. That which is “good” is often dictated by what we call “conscience,” which again is an inherent idea or “voice,” and is only partly influenced by environment. The fact of inherent character traits and universal moral codes is present in anthropological studies as well as psychological studies beyond Jung’s very extensive work.

To define evil, we would have to look at those ideas and actions that are opposite inherent conscience. The globalists have basically constructed a festering belief system around everything that is contrary to our moral compass. I will attempt to dissect some elements of that belief system from a secular point of view. Wish me luck…

The piece goes on to put the occult into a very interesting context:

Occultism in itself is not necessarily “evil,” it only means “secret knowledge.” But the history of occultism is plagued by rather evil deeds and attitudes. John F. Kennedy once warned of secret societies and secret proceedings, and with good reason. For thousands of years, occult groups often withheld valuable knowledge from the masses as a means to influence behavior and control the direction of society. This did not have to be “magical” knowledge, whatever that means. Usually, it was scientific or psychological knowledge.

Say for example that a group of elitists withheld detailed knowledge of an impending economic collapse because this knowledge gave them a feeling of superiority and an advantage that they could exploit to gain power over others. Often, occult knowledge, secret knowledge, is driven by the selfish desire of one group to maintain a sense of dominance over another. Is it evil to withhold knowledge that could save lives for the sake of self-elevation? I would say absolutely.

Occultism can also lead to temptations of ever increasing criminality. If groups of people in positions of power maintain a well-oiled machine of secrecy that draws a dark curtain on their behavior, a machine that allows them to cover for each others actions to ensure no repercussions from outsiders, it is only a matter of time before the lack of transparency opens a door to greater evil. One act of evil left unpunished tends to breed many future acts of evil practiced with impunity.

When I was in my younger anti-authoritarian stage of development, I sneered at the Presbyterian church I attended and the nice-looking veneer of suburban goodness that bred conformity to the rat race for material success all around me. While I still maintain a healthy skepticism for organized religion, I now see more potential for allies against the organized evil that those without conscience are perpetrating today on a global scale. I don’t roll my eyes anymore when my mom tells me she prays for me. Prayer as a form of directed meditation could one day have science that reveals its actual efficacy.

A few weeks ago a ran across an interesting assertion that an epidemic psycho-spiritual sickness has taken hold of humanity. Here is a snip:

In the book Columbus and other Cannibals, indigenous author Jack D. Forbes lucidly explores a psychological disease that has been informing human self-destructive behavior that Native American people have known about for years. After reading his book, it was clear to me that he was describing the same psycho-spiritual disease of the soul that I wrote about in my book, The Madness of George W. Bush: A Reflection of our Collective Psychosis. I introduce the idea that from the dawn of human history our species has fallen prey to a collective psychosis which I call malignant egophrenia. Speaking about this very same psychic epidemic, Forbes writes, “For several thousands of years human beings have suffered from a plague, a disease worse than leprosy, a sickness worse than malaria, a malady much more terrible than smallpox.”[i] Indigenous people have been tracking the same “psychic”[ii] virus that I call malignant egophrenia for many centuries and calling it “wetiko,” a Cree term which refers to a diabolically wicked person or spirit who terrorizes others. Professor Forbes, who was one of the founders of the Native American movement during the early sixties, says, “Tragically, the history of the world for the past 2,000 years is, in great part, the story of the epidemiology of the wetiko disease.”[iii] Wetiko/malignant egophrenia is a “psychosis” in the true sense of the word as being a “sickness of the soul or spirit.” Though calling it by different names, Forbes and I are both pointing at the same illness of the psyche, soul and spirit that has been at the root of humanity’s inhumanity to itself.

There is risk involved to those who go down these types of rabbit holes, so to conclude this post here is Robert Anton Wilson describing the concept of Chapel Perilous:

“In researching occult conspiracies, one eventually faces a crossroad of mythic proportions (called Chapel Perilous in the trade). You come out the other side either stone paranoid or an agnostic; there is no third way. I came out agnostic.

Chapel Perilous, like the mysterious entity called “I,” cannot be located in the space-time continuum; it is weightless, odorless, tasteless and undetectable by ordinary instruments. Indeed, like the Ego, it is even possible to deny that it is there. And yet, even more like the Ego, once you are inside it, there doesn’t seem to be any way to ever get out again, until you suddenly discover that it has been brought into existence by thought and does not exist outside thought. Everything you fear is waiting with slavering jaws in Chapel Perilous, but if you are armed with the wand of intuition, the cup of sympathy, the sword of reason, and the pentacle of valor, you will find there (the legends say) the Medicine of Metals, the Elixir of Life, the Philosopher’s Stone, True Wisdom and Perfect Happiness.

That’s what the legends always say, and the language of myth is poetically precise. For instance, if you go into that realm without the sword of reason, you will lose your mind, but at the same time, if you take only the sword of reason without the cup of sympathy, you will lose your heart. Even more remarkably, if you approach without the wand of intuition, you can stand at the door for decades never realizing you have arrived. You might think you are just waiting for a bus, or wandering from room to room looking for your cigarettes, watching a TV show, or reading a cryptic and ambiguous book. Chapel Perilous is tricky that way.

by William Skink

Democrats must really love war and terrorism. Don’t let their disdain for domestic gun sales confuse you, Democrats delight in death and destruction and the money that comes from spreading chaos to non-aligned countries, like Libya.

The morally bankrupt debate right now regarding Libya is whether or not to send more weapons. Are these people retarded? Morally bankrupt Democrats would probably be more upset that I used a politically incorrect word to describe this insanity than the actual insanity itself. From the link:

In 2015, the United Nations Security Council expressed concern over the unchecked spread of weapons to militant groups plaguing Libya following the fall of Muammar Gaddafi. Fast-forward a year: The country has descended further into chaos, as dozens of militias, Al Qaeda and ISIS, and two rival governments backed by armed groups vie for power. So, naturally, the United States is ready to ease the UN arms embargo that was put in place in 2011.

The United States, along with many of its international partners, wants to be able to supply “necessary lethal arms” to Libya’s UN-backed interim Government of National Accord to fight ISIS and other terrorist organizations. “It’s a delicate balance. But we are, all of us here today, supportive of the fact that if you have a legitimate government and that legitimate government is fighting terrorism, that legitimate government should not be victimized by [the embargo],” Secretary of State John Kerry said on Monday.

Legitimate government? Are you fucking kidding me?

How about that legitimate government in Saudi Arabia that financed the terrorist attack on 9/11? Democrats are so enamored with state-sponsored Wahhabi terrorism that their dear president will more than likely veto the Congressional effort to hold Saudi Arabia accountable because a great customer of the arms industry is more important than giving families of the victims a chance to go after the terrorist-financers in court.

War is great, Democrats love it, and their soon to be anointed Queen will keep the weapons of war proliferating to despotic maniacs like the Saudis:

The planes, made by Boeing, have been implicated in the bombing of three facilities supported by Doctors Without Borders (Médicins Sans Frontières). The U.N. Secretary General has decried “intense airstrikes in residential areas and on civilian buildings in Sanaa, including the chamber of commerce, a wedding hall, and a center for the blind,” and has warned that reports of cluster bombs being used in populated areas “may amount to a war crime due to their indiscriminate nature.”

Bombs dropped by fighter jets are pulverizing Yemen’s architectural history, possibly in violation of international humanitarian law.

A few years earlier, as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton made weapons transfer to the Saudi government a “top priority,” according to her closest military aide.

And now, newly released emails show that her aides kept her well-informed of the approval process for a $29.4 billion sale in 2011 of up to 84 advanced F-15SA fighters, manufactured by Boeing, along with upgrades to the pre-existing Saudi fleet of 70 F-15 aircraft and munitions, spare parts, training, maintenance, and logistics.

Dirt poor Yemen being bombed to smithereens is good for business, good for America and great for Democrats. They must have a great method to keep the ghosts of dead children from haunting their dreams at night.

Speaking of dead people, women supporters of Hillary should come up with a special incantation to ward off the violently dispatched spirit of Berta Cáceres. You see, in countries where American-supported coups happen, uppity bitches get killed. I hope the actions of a government Hillary supported taking power is more offensive than the language I am using. From the link:

EARLY IN THE MORNING on March 3, in La Esperanza, Honduras, unidentified men broke into the home of the environmental activist Berta Cáceres and murdered her. Cáceres was the cofounder of the Civic Council of Popular and Indigenous Movements of Honduras (COPINH) and the 2015 winner of the Goldman Environmental Prize, and her murder has prompted an international outcry as well as investigations supported by the United Nations and the FBI. The Mexican environmental activist Gustavo Castro, who was staying in Cáceres’s home in hopes of deterring violence against her, witnessed the murder and was subsequently detained by Honduran authorities. Amnesty International has warned that Castro, who was shot twice in the attack, is in “grave danger.”

Cáceres’s activism spanned several issues, including indigenous rights, feminism, LGBT rights, and environmentalism, but recently, “more than anything,” her sister Agustina Flores told me, “it was Agua Zarca,” a proposed hydroelectric dam project, which was to be built on the territory of the indigenous Lenca people. Flores, a retired teacher, says that Cáceres had received repeated death threats related to her work. The threats were so serious in recent months that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights repeatedly called on the Honduran government to provide her with protection. Her sister said that protection was never provided. “We have feared for her life for a long time,” Flores said in a telephone interview, adding that in November, Cáceres told her she was being “seriously harassed” by three local politicians who she believed were acting at the behest of Desarrollos Energéticos, SA (DESA), the private energy company behind the Agua Zarca dam.

DESA is partially controlled by the controversial Honduran Atala family, whose members are involved in a variety of business ventures and suspected by many of having backed the 2009 coup. Best known among them is billionaire Camilo Atala, president of Banco Ficohsa, a regional bank that in 2014 acquired most of Citibank’s assets in the region, making it the largest bank in Honduras.

Please, female supporters of Hillary Clinton, explain that lesser-evil argument to me again. Maybe Montana’s Democrat matriarch, Carol Williams, can clarify how the hell she can justify saying this last night at Clinton’s campaign office opening event in Missoula:

“I knew that when she came to Washington, D.C., as First Lady, that she’d be an amazing First Lady,” Williams said. “I trust her judgment. In this day and age, with real problems in the world – the problems of terror and economic justice – these are things (Clinton) has worked on her entire life.”

Williams has apparently known Hillary for decades, which makes this statement even more audacious. I wonder, which Hillary did Carol know? Hillary Clinton, Goldwater girl? Hillary Clinton, Walmart director?  Hillary Clinton, slut-shamer?

The man Hillary Clinton had the good judgement to rise to power with will be in Billings tonight, at a Middle School. I hope every parent of a young girl at Will James Middle School will keep a close eye on their daughters tonight while Bill is in town.  Fortunately Bill’s billionaire pedophile friend, Jeffrey Epstein, isn’t allowed near children because he’s a registered sex offender now. Before being convicted and forced to register as an offender, though, I’m sure he was a great job creator for the young women he trafficked while flying around with Bill and other lecherous, powerful men in the private jet known as “The Lolita Express”.

All that said, I have a penis, so this is probably nothing more than suppressed sexism escaping through the guise of what I claim to be legitimate criticism, criticism of a political creature I assume must be a sociopath to do what she has done so adeptly, transforming seemingly intelligent people into cognitive dissonant time bombs with the fuses cut.

I’m afraid there will be no explosions of insight, or detonations of enlightenment to jolt the Hillary legions into realizing what it is they are actually supporting.

Please, DOJ, indict before it’s too late!

by William Skink

The Democratic rift between labor and environmentalists was recently detailed in this NYT piece. What seems most worrisome to Democrats about this rift is that it could negatively impact the efforts to elect more Democrats.

Glossed over in the NYT piece is the fact a rift exists within the environmental movement itself between collaborators–organizations corrupted by corporate cash–and groups resisting the siren-song of well-funded political triangulation.

The resistors are probably just as leery of hedge fund environmentalists donating millions of dollars to elect Democrats. From the NYT piece:

Two of the Democratic Party’s most loyal constituencies, labor and environmentalists, are clashing over an effort to raise tens of millions of dollars for an ambitious voter turnout operation aimed at defeating Donald J. Trump in the November election.

The rift developed after some in the labor movement, whose cash flow has dwindled and whose political clout has been increasingly imperiled, announced a partnership last week with a wealthy environmentalist, Tom Steyer, to help bankroll a new fund dedicated to electing Democrats.

That joint initiative enraged members of the nation’s biggest construction unions, already on edge about the rising influence of climate-change activists. The building-trades unions view Mr. Steyer’s environmental agenda as a threat to the jobs that can be created through infrastructure projects like new gas pipelines.

Both labor and environmentalists are constituent groups that Democrats have been taking for granted for decades now. Democrats should be especially worried this election cycle as the angry white faction of the labor demographic increasingly ignores the smug style of liberalism in favor of the loud volume of a demagogue. While I referenced this piece on the smug styler earlier, I’ll quote at length from it today. Here is the opening of the argument:

There is a smug style in American liberalism. It has been growing these past decades. It is a way of conducting politics, predicated on the belief that American life is not divided by moral difference or policy divergence — not really — but by the failure of half the country to know what’s good for them.

In 2016, the smug style has found expression in media and in policy, in the attitudes of liberals both visible and private, providing a foundational set of assumptions above which a great number of liberals comport their understanding of the world.

It has led an American ideology hitherto responsible for a great share of the good accomplished over the past century of our political life to a posture of reaction and disrespect: a condescending, defensive sneer toward any person or movement outside of its consensus, dressed up as a monopoly on reason.

The smug style is a psychological reaction to a profound shift in American political demography.

Having been on the receiving end of this sneering condescension, non-collaborating enviros and other cranky leftists know this smug style quite well. And it sure as hell isn’t expanding the base or improving the chances of Democrats getting elected.

Over at Intelligent Discontent–our local MT blog that perfectly embodies the smug style–Pete Talbot is trying his darn best to redirect this rift against Trump in a post titled This schism is getting old:

No one ever said this chasm would be easy to bridge but in this purple state of ours, Democrats cannot afford to lose either blue collar or green votes.

Now, party leadership hasn’t solicited my recommendations nor have I been tapped to replace DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Shultz, but I have some ideas.

There’s a common goal called sustainability: long term, good paying jobs along with a stable environment. Organized labor needs to work with environmental leaders to advance intensive clean energy legislation that includes high-paying union jobs in the alternative energy sector. Environmental organizations must make job creation a priority in their push to create a clean environment.

Basically, it’s time for leadership from both sides of the debate to sit down and plan what’s best for workers and the planet. A starting point could be booting from office the common enemy of the people — the living wage and climate change deniers — a.k.a. Republicans.

No where in Pete’s post is Hillary Clinton mentioned, and that’s too bad. Instead, what I think is getting old (besides the author) is the reliance on boogeyman politics to keep members of the herd from bolting.

Here is the inconvenient reality Democrats like Pete Talbot seem to want to ignore: the DNC’s choice for president is a deceitful political creature who supported NAFTA and used her position at the State Department to sell fracking to the world, so there’s something for both environmentalists and the working class to despise in the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. Making things even worse, that latter group is liking what they are hearing from Trump as he criticizes the trade agreements that have negatively impacted their lives.

Doing damage control means Democrats will continue to ignore reality. Here is more from Talbot:

I don’t believe this blue-green schism comes close to approaching the debacle that is currently the Republican Party. The destructive potential is there, though, and Democratic Party leadership better bring the factions together and get a handle on this.

What is it going to take to get Democrats like Talbot to wake the fuck up and vehemently oppose the coronation of Hillary? Like it or not, Republicans are coalescing around Trump. The Democrat dream of a contested Republican convention isn’t going to happen. What seems more likely, if the Nevada melee over the weekend is any indication of things to come, is the Democratic convention in Philadelphia turning into Chicago, circa 1968.

Here is another little dose of reality for Democrats: Trump leads Clinton Nationally for first time in latest poll. From the link:

Clinton has a net negative honesty rating of -35 points. That’s because a new low 31 percent say she’s honest, while a record 66 percent say she isn’t. Trump does better on this measure, although he is still underwater by 17 points: 40 percent think he’s honest and 57 percent say he’s not.

Ironically, as The Clinton campaign pushes for Bernie to “know when he’s beaten,” the same FOX News poll finds Sanders polling well above both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

Democrats can continue ignoring reality if they want to, berating dumb hicks for supporting Trump, but refusing to come to terms with the dynamics pushing once loyal constituents away from the blue tent will quite possibly help put the demagogue they detest in the White House.

by William Skink

Late last month a forged letter on Missoula County letterhead, that even featured the signatures County Commissioners, got the attention of the Mayor and the Sheriff’s Department. The subject of the forged letter was the Syrian refugee controversy:

The Missoula County Sheriff’s Department is investigating the origin of a forged letter suggesting that county commissioners no longer support the reopening of a refugee resettlement office in the city.

Terrible, right? Maybe even criminal. Someone went to a lot of work to be sneaky and manipulative and now they may pay the price.

If this forged letter bothers you, then take a few minutes to read this op-ed by Ben Deeble about the political shenanigans surrounding the Sage Grouse issue and the lengths one organization has gone to in order to make the Bullock administration look good:

The guest column by retired federal wildlife biologist and Montana Wildlife Federation member Dan Bricco (“Montana’s sage grouse: a model in conservation,” Missoulian, May 5) could benefit from some context. In July 2014 I was offered $10,000 by the Western Conservation Foundation to arrange 10 presentations to hunters across Montana in partnership with MWF. The topic? Gov. Steve Bullock’s imminent executive order on sage grouse conservation in our state. But after I learned the terms of the offer, I rejected it.

I had by then 15 years of experience with agencies and non-governmental organizations on sage grouse conservation planning, population monitoring and habitat assessment. I’d been invited to testify in front of Congress, and to participate in a group developing the Bureau of Land Management’s first national conservation strategy. And I’d trained and fielded more “citizen scientists” than anyone else to census grouse populations. Why didn’t I take the money? Because the foundation demanded I abandon integrity in my professional assessment and public outreach. I was told explicitly that my presentation required pre-screening and approval by the foundation’s representative, and it must only “laud” the governor’s grouse conservation efforts. Having received grants for years, this was the first which so blatantly attempted to purchase positive professional opinion on behalf of a politician.

Using money to try and control the message of a professional like Deeble is bad enough (nice to see someone choose integrity over cash), but Deeble goes on to describe how an elderly man was taken advantage of by the Montana Wildlife Federation:

MWF at the same time accepted over $14,000 from WCF to “build public support” for adoption of the Montana grouse plan. I admit the plan contains many good things, but it was also very controversial regarding the top public lands threats: energy development and mining. The conservation representatives voted against accepting the plan, and issued four minority reports on related flaws. More troubling, after receiving his advisory committee’s split-decision product, Bullock weakened the energy development stipulation still further to favor industry.

WCF dollars funded the whitewash of this political and biological misdeed, and as evidenced by Bricco’s column, the whitewash continues. I called Dan Bricco and he readily admitted he didn’t write the column submitted over his credentials. He is 80 years old, “hasn’t really followed” sage grouse science since retiring nearly 20 years ago and is in poor health. He hasn’t read the governor’s plan, didn’t attend any of the advisory council’s meetings, and couldn’t name any organizations that, as he wrote, “praised across the country” Bullock’s “model of collaborative conservation.” He said he was supplied with the column’s text directly from MWF staff, and asked to send it to newspapers. I believe he naively did so, not knowing his endorsement acts to legitimize misinformation that works against the long-term interests of sage grouse, at least according to authentic science-based opinion. The bird, our senior biologists and the public deserve better un-politicized information.

While this doesn’t rise to the same level as the forged Syrian refugee letter, it is very icky and deceitful. Ben Deeble should be commended for coming forward to describe the degree of manipulation at play during this election season.

Is the benefit to the Bullock administration really worth the cost of taking advantage of an elderly man, using his name as cover for MWF propaganda? I don’t know, maybe some journalist should ask Tracy Stone-Manning that question.

Montana Democrats seem to have problems with providing accurate information when it comes to environmental issues. Four years ago, JC highlighted a part of Stone-Manning’s work history for Tester worth noting again here:

“Stone-Manning has been Tester’s policy director based in Missoula since 2007…

While on Tester’s staff, Stone-Manning worked on details and negotiations for the senator’s Forest Jobs and Recreation Act, which combined new wilderness and recreation designations with extensive logging and forest remediation projects. She also was involved in Tester’s legislation transferring gray wolves from federal Endangered Species Act protection to state management.”

Remember, Tester used environmentalists to get elected a decade ago, then turned around to label non-collaborators as “extremists”. And when it comes to accurate information, Tester told a whopper when he claimed every single timber project was under litigation, a lie so obvious (earning him a 4 Pinnochio rating from the Washington Post) it probably made this Ochenski take-down pretty easy to pen.

Montana’s natural beauty–when it’s not burning due to climate change–is one of the state’s most valuable assets. It’s too bad Montana Democrats can’t be trusted to be good stewards of this asset once in office.

by William Skink

This week I’ll be sending in my mail-in ballot for Montana’s Democratic primary. When I darken the bubble for Bernie I’ll be doing so to spite Jon Tester, our folksy farmer who himself beat the establishment odds a decade ago, as Ochenski reminds us in his column today:

Perhaps Tester has forgotten his own underdog primary run for the Senate against John Morrison. In that race, Morrison was the anointed candidate, hand-picked by the D.C. insiders and backed by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee prior to the primary vote.

The parallels to the Sanders-Clinton primary are undeniable. Morrison, much like Hillary Clinton, was groomed for the position by long familiarity in political circles. His grandfather was governor of Nebraska, his father a Montana Supreme Court justice, his mother a successful trial lawyer. Having won a statewide race for state auditor, personal wealth and strong connections to the Washington Democrat insiders Morrison was the obvious choice.

Tester, on the other hand, was just a Big Sandy farmer who had risen to become president of the Montana Senate with virtually no statewide name recognition. He was most certainly not the pick of the Demo Party pundits. His personal wealth, like Bernie Sanders, was not significant, and the idea that he would actually run in a primary against Morrison was simply repugnant to the party insiders. After all, the fix was in, so what did the upstart Tester think he was doing?

And much like Sanders, Tester trailed in the media and polls throughout the primary campaign right up until the final weeks when an unfortunate turn of events tripped up Morrison’s campaign with allegations of infidelity and impropriety involving the wife of a man being investigated by Morrison’s office at the time.

I find it disgusting that Jon Tester made the comment he did about this race already being over because it’s not true. Once an outsider, Tester now represents the wishes of the establishment to crown Clinton, but like Morrison, Clinton has the distinct possibility of facing an unfortunate turn of events.

That unfortunate turn has everything to do with Clinton’s reckless handling of her electronic communications. The latest twist? Russia claims to have 20,000 of Hillary’s deleted emails and now officials in the Kremlin are debating whether to release them or not:

Hillary Clinton sits at the center of a raging firestorm concerning her arrangement of a private email account and server set up in her home — from which top secret information may have been deleted. But despite Bernie Sanders’ apparent annoyance with the “damn emails,” the scandal just exponentially intensified, when Judge Andrew Napolitano revealed on Monday that Russia has possession of around 20,000 of Clinton’s emails — leaving open the possibility her deletions might not have been permanent after all.

“There’s a debate going on in the Kremlin between the Foreign Ministry and the Intelligence Services about whether they should release the 20,000 of Mrs. Clinton’s emails that they have hacked into,” Napolitano told Fox News’ Megyn Kelly in an interview for The Kelly File.

How sweet would it be for Putin to derail Hillary’s bid to obtain the White House for her and her sexual predator husband. Remember, two years ago Hillary compared Putin’s intervention in Crimea to the actions of Adolf Hitler, a statement she was forced to walk back.

After years of western propaganda demonizing Russia, how will Hillary supporters absorb the fact that Clinton’s likely criminal mishandling of emails has resulted in Russia obtaining the emails Clinton tried to destroy? Will American’s conditioned hatred of Russia rise above the cult-like devotion to Hillary or will she be prematurely absolved by her followers?

And if Russia doesn’t release the emails, but sits on them instead, how can anyone make the argument that it would be a good idea to elect a candidate exposed to potential blackmail from a foreign power.

If the Department of Justice refuses to do its job, and if the FBI doesn’t leak the findings of its investigation before the primary is over (as some politicians have hinted could happen), then I hope Russia takes the initiative to disclose the emails Hillary appears to have broken the law to hide from the public.