by William Skink
Donald Trump has once again taken over the news cycle with his comments that are being interpreted as a call to violence to stop Hillary when he said this:
If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks. Although the Second Amendment people—maybe there is, I don’t know.
Now the media is predictably freaking out with their saturation coverage of all things Trump.
While Trump is being portrayed as an out-of-control demagogue calling for a political assassination, Hillary Clinton is seeking the endorsement of the indochina butcher, Henry Kissinger. Here is The Nation suggesting how Bernie supporters should react to this impending endorsement:
Word comes from Politico that Hillary Clinton is courting the endorsement of Henry Kissinger. No surprise. Kissinger and the Clintons go back a ways, to when Bill in the early 1990s sought out Kissinger’s support to pass NAFTA and to, in the words of the economist Jeff Faux, serve as “the perfect tutor for a new Democratic president trying to convince Republicans and their business allies that they could count on him to champion Reagan’s vision.” Hillary has continued the apprenticeship, soliciting Kissinger’s advice and calling him “friend.”
Still, Bernie Sanders, and Sanders supporters and surrogates, should use the Politico story to draw a line, making clear that they will withdraw their support of Clinton if Clinton accepts Kissinger’s endorsement. If Sanders stands for anything, it is the promise of decency and civil equality, qualities that he has worked hard to bestow on Clinton since the Democratic National Convention. By accepting Kissinger’s endorsement, Clinton wouldn’t just be mocking that gift. She’d be sending the clearest signal yet to grassroots peace and social-justice Democrats that her presidency wouldn’t be a “popular front” against Trumpian fascism. It would be bloody business as usual.
The article goes on to describe Kissinger as a “unique monster”. The childhood taunt that it “takes one to know one” comes to mind.
One of my contentions about the danger of Democrats is that where Republicans say stuff, Democrats actually do stuff. I use this counterpoint with my dad all the time. For example, while hiking in Glacier recently, my dad lamented that Republicans wanted to destroy our national parks. I retorted that while he is afraid of that, Democrats like Jon Tester are actually doing immense damage to the environment by weakening the endangered species act to delist wolves (as a depressing side note to that, it’s now feared the entire East Fork wolf pack in Alaska has been wiped out for good).
Getting back to political assassination, while the corporate media throws out any remaining shred of journalistic standards to destroy Trump, making quite a stretch to imply that Trump’s statement were a call to violence, there is growing suspicion that one of the recent convenient deaths that have benefited the Clinton campaign may have been just that: a political assassination.
The person now hinting at this scenario has been the target of calls for political assassination himself. Julian Assange, who has had both Democrats and Republicans call for his political assassination, is now hinting that the murdered DNC staffer, Seth Rich, could have been the email leaker. This is big. Here is the exchange from a recent interview:
Assange: Whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often significant risks. There was a 27-year old that works for the DNC who was shot in the back… murdered.. for unknown reasons as he was walking down the street in Washington.
Host: That was just a robbery wasn’t it?
Assange: No. There’s no finding.
Host: What are you suggesting?
Assange: I am suggesting that our sources take risks and they become concerned to see things occurring like that.
Host: But was he one of your sources, then?
Assange: We don’t comment on who our sources are.
Host: But why make the suggestion?
Assange: Because we have to understand how high the stakes are in the United States and that our sources face serious risks… that’s why they come to us so we can protect their anonymity.
Host: But it’s quite something to suggest a murder… that’s basically what you’re doing.
Here is some more context from Zerohedge:
The mysterious circumstances surrounding the death of 27-year-old Democratic-staffer Seth Rich (shot multiple times, and not robbed, at 420am near his home in Washington D.C., where no homicides have been reported within 1500 feet) have stirred Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to offer a $20,000 reward for information leading to a conviction. But it is Assange’s comments during a Dutch TV interview that are most disturbing as he hinted that Rich – who was in charge of DNC voter expansion data – was the email-leaker and his death was a politically-motivated assassination.
Within hours of the event alternative media reporters began to suspect something was amiss, as police had no witnesses, no suspects and no motive. This led to theories that Rich, who was in charge of voter expansion data at the DNC, may have been killed to cover something up. Subsequent reports even suggested Rich may have been on his way to speak with special agents at the Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding an “ongoing court case.”
Will the mainstream media take a break from everything Trump to do some investigative journalism into this? Probably not, as most people would prefer to keep their jobs and not be added to the body count themselves.
Or maybe the media could continue providing insight into the email evidence of corruption from America’s first female presidential nominee:
The new documents reveal that in April 2009 controversial Clinton Foundation official Doug Band pushed for a job for an associate. In the email Band tells Hillary Clinton’s former aides at the State Department Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin that it is “important to take care of [Redacted]. Band is reassured by Abedin that “Personnel has been sending him options.” Band was co-founder of Teneo Strategy with Bill Clinton and a top official of the Clinton Foundation, including its Clinton Global Initiative.
Included in the new document production is a 2009 email in which Band, directs Abedin and Mills to put Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire and Clinton Foundation donor Gilbert Chagoury in touch with the State Department’s “substance person” on Lebanon. Band notes that Chagoury is “key guy there [Lebanon] and to us,” and insists that Abedin call Amb. Jeffrey Feltman to connect him to Chagoury.
Chagoury is a close friend of former President Bill Clinton and a top donor to the Clinton Foundation. He has appeared near the top of the Foundation’s donor list as a $1 million to $5 million contributor, according to foundation documents. He also pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. According to a 2010 investigation by PBS Frontline, Chagoury was convicted in 2000 in Switzerland for laundering money from Nigeria, but agreed to a plea deal and repaid $66 million to the Nigerian government.
Hillary Clinton is a political creature who turned the State Department into a den of corruption and shows no qualms about getting advice and an endorsement from a murderous butcher who oversaw the slaughtering of millions of humans. I don’t think it’s that big of a stretch to claim Hillary Clinton knows more about political assassination than Donald Trump.
Nixon’s Sec. of State, Kissinger, was no less corrupt and deadly IMO. More U.S. soldiers died than today’s perpetual “war on terror.” No draft. More like Clinton would be moving into the “den,” not creating it.
Since you saw free … Anyway, Assange is himself a Spook, and so is merely going along with the operation, or his name is merely being used as part of the scam. He is not real whistleblower, never was, is not in the Ecuadorian embassy, and only needs to put on a dark wig to walk about us freely. It is that easy.
The 27-year old staffer was not killed, shot in the back or any such thing. The number “27” has no special significance but is a signal among spooks that “It is fake, just us, move along.” (It is 3 to the 3rd power, or a subtle use of “33,” a smoke signal for spooks, again, the number having no occult significance beyond that.
Glad you asked.
Google useful idiot.
Maybe Mark can tell us who Vince Foster really is, being that his death was faked.
Regarding the loss of the Denali Wolf Pack. Any time an author uses the word “may” or “possible decline” he’s grasping at straws. No conclusive evidence on whether or not the pack has disappeared or traveled to better hunting grounds.
Besides there’s lots of wolves left so maybe the readers of the Guardian should chip in for a couple horse trailers full of Yellowstone wolves instead crying in their lattes We could spare a few.