Biden ruling nothing out…

Screen Shot 2016-02-10 at 11.04.34 AM


So, I was driving along somewhere in New Hampshire on Monday, the day before the storied primary. It was snowing, just as the clichés of the New Hampshire Primary dictate: It is always snowing in New Hampshire. (Really, though, it actually was snowing).

The email came in from an editor in New York at around 4 p.m. Subject line: “Hillaryworld.” Body content: “What do you make of the supposed looming implosion?”

What supposed looming implosion? Or, to be more precise, whichsupposed looming implosion? Isn’t Hillaryworld always on the verge of one?

Yes, but they do have a tendency to occur at this precise moment. Periods of intense hand-wringing and recrimination always occur in Clintonworld around the New Hampshire primaries, if history is any guide — and what is Clinton history, if not utterly repetitive?

These brawls traditionally follow difficult results in Iowa. In 1992, the native Hawkeye Tom Harkin beat Bill Clinton in the year’s first caucuses. Barack Obama beat Hillary in 2008 (as did John Edwards, who finished second). And last week, Bernie Sanders essentially tied the former secretary of state, setting up the latest Clinton bloodbath-in-waiting. Hillary is down big in the New Hampshire polls. Her nervous staff and extended community of sycophants, hangers-on and self-professed “confidantes” keep unburdening themselves in the press — while being granted anonymity in exchange for their self-aggrandizing candor.

Continue reading the main storySlide Show

And then Politico writes all about it, as the site’s Glenn Thrush and Annie Karni did yesterday: “Clinton weighs staff shake-up after New Hampshire.

We’ve been here before. This is how it all rolls in the Clinton precincts of Blue America. The situation is so familiar to be its own Democratic Party cliché, like nominating unelectable liberals in the 1980s or engaging in nasty platform fights in the 1990s.

Say this about the Clintons, for better or worse: They are predictable. Thrush and Karni’s New Hampshire pre-autopsy contained all the paint-by-number refrains of Clinton crackups past:

· The term “staff shake-up” would need to appear in the story’s headline (or, at least, the lede).

· Also, somewhere, the phrase “lack of trust” or “mutual suspicion.”

· The story would have to include a nod to the trusted old Clinton hands who were selflessly offering themselves up as potential campaign saviors.

· Embedded in the article would be the clear implication that all of this could have been avoided if only Mark Penn, Clinton’s 2008 strategist, were more involved.

 The story would also inevitably include at least one blind quote from a former Obama campaign aide who knows how to do things better.

· The story would have to offer up for sacrifice at least one scapegoat, whose job was allegedly in peril.

· Bonus points if said scapegoat hails from Obama’s campaigns (watch your back, Joel Benenson).

So, yes, this latest chapter in the Clintons’ book of Supposed Looming Implosions, 2016 edition, contains all the predictable elements. And I have no doubt that everything in the Politico story is 100 percent correct. Again: This is how it all goes in Clintonworld. For whatever reason — for all of their political gifts — Bill and Hillary are addicted to this high-wire act. And the slick roads of New Hampshire seem to be their preferred recurring backdrop, like those repeating cactuses in the background of an old cartoon

We, the political gallery, become codependents. Ho-hum. (My Clinton Fatigue is acting up again.) And yet here we are, back in New Hampshire, with another Clinton inevitability parade being snowed on by someone — Sanders, in this case — who is, allegedly, unelectable.

This, of course, is when the Clintons are at their best and most dangerous. Their well-honed survival instinct kicks in. The challenger gets cocky. Next thing we know, there the Clintons are again, up on another New Hampshire pedestal, claiming victory. In other words, here we are in the midst of another Supposed Looming Implosion in New Hampshire, and as of noon on Primary Day, I am ruling nothing out.

And of course Joe Biden, who is tanned and tested, is ruling nothing out either.

PROTECTING CLINTON? Iowa Dems Stonewalling on Vote Totals…



 Published February 09, 2016

After the ridiculously close squeaker in the Iowa caucuses, the state’s Democratic Party said it couldn’t release the raw vote totals for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders.

That simply isn’t how they do business, party officials insisted.

Even after they audited the results this week, Iowa Democratic officials would say only that Clinton won 49.84 percent of the vote and Sanders 49.59 percent, reducing her margin slightly to a quarter of a point.

Sanders has called for the raw vote totals to be released. The state party says that’s not the way it conducts the caucuses. And the press has pretty much let the matter drop.

But it turns out that hasn’t been the practice in past elections. Here are the raw vote totals for Iowa’s 2008 Democratic caucus:

Barack Obama, 93, 952.

John Edwards, 74,377.

Hillary Clinton, 73,663.

Joe Biden 2,328.

It’s not a secret document. It’s available on CNN’s website.

Iowa Democratic Chairman Andrea McGuire wrote in the Des Moines Register that the raw vote totals are irrelevant. “These are not contests of popular raw votes—nor do we think they should be,” McGuire said. “Asking for raw vote totals demonstrates a misunderstanding of our process.”

But if it wasn’t a problem eight years ago, why is it such a big deal now? A spokesman for the Iowa party maintains it did not release the raw totals in 2008 and that the figures reported by CNN are probably based on journalistic estimates.

“Candidates are competing for delegates in the Iowa Democratic Precinct caucuses, which is why we report the statewide delegate equivalents won by each candidate,” the spokesman said.

Which raises the question: Why would the party put the media in the position of having to do their own calculations?

Obviously the raw vote makes little difference in terms of delegates. But if Clinton, as expected, loses New Hampshire, and it turns out Sanders got more votes in Iowa, that would be a double blow psychologically—and give the Vermont senator bragging rights in the first two contests.

It’s hard to avoid the suspicion that the state party establishment is trying to protect Hillary.

Perhaps it’s just a coincidence that McGuire, an Iowa co-chairman of Clinton’s 2008 campaign, drives a Buick with the license plate HRC2016.

Obama’s Broken Campaign Promise X3

By TK Whiteman

We are leaving in 2014. Period.” -Joe Biden, 2012.

For a third time, the campaign promise made by Team Obama/Biden during the 2012 presidential race has been matter-of-factly relegated to the dustbin of politics as usual.


While Joe Biden’s promise to the American people that all US troops would be out of Afghanistan, in Biden’s words, “We are leaving in 2014. Period,” the truth of the matter is that particular Democratic Party talking point has proven itself to be a blatant lie.

For the third time since Obama/Biden promised such, it’s come to light that the “Out in ’14” deception is just that. As reported by the Associated Press on Jan. 30, 2016, “‘I don’t see any drawdowns’ in the near future, said James Dobbins, Obama’s former special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. He predicted that Obama would leave the decision to the next president.”

But going back to a report by the Bloomberg news service on March 24, 2015, reporter David J. Lynch nuanced the just released announcement that the Obama Administration will “slow the withdrawal” of the remaining thousands of American troops still in Afghanistan. At the time, a full three months into 2015, nearly 10,000 American troops, roughly the size of two Marine Brigades, remained in-country.

Almost seven months later the New York Times report on Oct. 15, 2015, that Obama told the nation and the world that instead of a “slow withdrawal,” 9,800 US troops would remain in Afghanistan through 2016. Furthering the proof of the 2012 campaign promise was in fact a lie, Obama also made clear that after leaving the Oval Office in January of 2017 there will still be 5,500 of our troops in-country.

Ostensibly, the American troops would be engaged in training mission of Afghan troops and police officers. Also not getting much press was the announcement that US troops would also be involved in a active combat mission against a growing ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Taliban resurgence.

However, not much ink is being spilled regarding Team Obama’s vow during the 2012 campaign to be completely out of Afghanistan by 2014. As seen on the YouTube video of the Oct. 11, 2012 Vice Presidential Debate between incumbent Vice President Joe Biden and challenger Rep. Paul Ryan 56%, the Veep matter-of-factly stated, “That’s why with 49 of our allies in Afghanistan, we’ve agreed on a gradual drawdown so we’re out of there by the year 20 — in the year 2014. My friend [Rep. Ryan] and the governor [Mitt Romney] say it’s based on conditions, which means it depends. It does not depend for us… but we are leaving. We are leaving in 2014. Period.”

Scooping the Western press, Satur C. Ocampo of The Philippine Star reported on Nov. 29, 2014, “What of Afghanistan? Obama has reneged on his promised troop pullout by end-December 2014. He has authorized 9,800 US troops, along with 3,000 NATO soldiers, to stay until 2015 to carry out combat missions against ‘militant groups.’” Interestingly enough, reporters Kay Johnson and Mirwais Harooni of Reuters gave a somewhat softer example of journalism on Nov. 30, 2014 when they reported that only that a “few thousand” American combat forces would remain in-country past 2014. Johnson and Harooni made no mention of the 2012 campaign promise to have all American troops withdrawn.

With the announcement by Obama of the lengthening of the American combat mission in Afghanistan, the time in the Afghan theater of war will be at least 14-years long. Nine of those years will be under Obama’s watch.

During the course of Coalition combat operations, almost three times more Americans have died in Afghanistan under Obama than during the Bush years. As cited, during the Bush years there were:

1,049 Coalition combat deaths.
630 of those were Americans.

Under Obama’s watch there have been:

2,466 Coalition deaths.
1,751 of those were American.

MSNBC: The FBI Investigation Into Hillary Clinton Is Far More Advanced Than The Public Knows

if Hillary gets indicted we gonna see Joe Biden lol this corporate media is hysterical… Take the blinders of establishment #FeelTheBern

Smh. “Cokie” Roberts needs to retire!! Indictments of this sort take time!! So, no, “if an indictment were going to come down,” it would NOT have “happened sooner.” And, lets not forget!! She had her server ‘WIPED’!!!! Which, if it involved the destruction of ANY evidence of her wrongdoing, would be a crime in and of itself!!!!!!! Annnnnnnd, we also have to remember that, because the feds have her server and have been working to undo the ‘wipe,’ they could have uncovered EVEN MORE CRIMES (like influence peddling (corruption) by both Clintons via their “foundation”)!!!! IMO, the big questions now are: Will there be a cover up? And is Shillary ‘too big to jail’??

Obama’s between a rock and a hard place with this investigation. Obviously he’s aligned more ideologically with Sanders than he is with Clinton, and the Clinton’s threw the race card against Obama’s campaign in 2008. That’s something that’s not easily forgotten, but at the same time, Sanders is never going to be put up as the Democratic Party’s nominee because he’s simply not electable. If Obama had been urging the FBI to make the findings of the investigation public, those findings would have been made public by now. That being said, James Comey, the head of the FBI, doesn’t seem to be someone who’s under Obama’s thumb, politically. It doesn’t seem he’s going to sit on the findings of this investigation forever, just because it might help Obama out politically. What’s more palatable to Obama as the country gets closer to Election Day 2016, backing a scandal-ridden Clinton, or an un-electable Sanders?

Get real, Cokie Roberts.

US & Turkey eyeing military operation in Syria against ISIS if peace talks fail

US Vice President Joe Biden says the US and Turkey are prepared for military solutions in Syria if a political settlement cannot be found. He added that Washington recognizes the Kurdistan Workers’ Party is as much of a threat to Ankara as Islamic State.

“We do know it would better if we can reach a political solution but we are prepared …, if that’s not possible, to have a military solution to this operation and taking out Daesh,” Biden said at a news conference after a meeting with Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, as cited by Reuters. ‘Daesh’ is an Arabic term for Islamic State (formerly known as ISIS/ISIL).

A US official later clarified that Biden was talking about a military solution to IS, not Syria as a whole.

Biden added that he discussed with Davutoglu how the two allies could try and work together to support Syrian rebel groups who oppose President Bashar Assad. The US vice president backed Ankara in its battle with the banned Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), saying it was as much of a threat to Ankara as Islamic State, and that Turkey must do everything necessary to protect its citizens.

However, the pair disagreed about the status of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) in northern Syria, with Biden saying there is a difference between the PYD and PKK.

“To say that these [groups] are separate, one should be unaware that those [PKK] guns are coming to [Turkey] from Syria,” Davutoglu said, according to Reuters.

Ankara believes the Syrian Kurds are looking to create a corridor along the northern border with Turkey, which would cut off Turkey from sharing a boundary with Syria.

“The PYD is a terrorist organization that cooperates with the Syrian regime. Struggling against Daesh does not grant them legitimacy,” the Turkish prime minister said.

Turkey has carried out attacks on Kurdish forces in northern Syria. In late July, the Kurds said they had been bombed at least four times, with civilians being among the casualties. Ankara maintained its airstrikes were aimed at members of the PKK.

Kurdish fighters have proved to be some of the most effective forces in helping to combat Islamic State in northern Syria, while borders in territories under its control have been sealed to stop the flow of foreign IS militants into Syria.

On Friday, Biden said Turkey’s intimidation of the media, curtailing of internet freedom and accusations of treason made against academics was not setting a good example in the Middle East.

“The more Turkey succeeds, the stronger the message sent to the entire Middle East and parts of the world who are only beginning to grapple with the notion of freedom,” Biden mentioned.

“But when the media are intimidated or imprisoned for critical reporting, when internet freedom is curtailed and social media sites like YouTube or Twitter are shut down and more than 1,000 academics are accused of treason simply by signing a petition, that’s not the kind of example that needs to be set,” he said.


More and more details are coming to light revealing that the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, variously known as ISIS, IS or Daesh, is being fed and kept alive by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish President and by his Turkish intelligence service, including MIT, the Turkish CIA. Turkey, as a result of Erdogan’s pursuit of what some call a Neo-Ottoman Empire fantasies that stretch all the way to China, Syria and Iraq, threatens not only to destroy Turkey but much of the Middle East if he continues on his present path..
In October 2014 US Vice President Joe Biden told a Harvard gathering that Erdogan’s regime was backing ISIS with “hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of tons of weapons…” Biden later apologized clearly for tactical reasons to get Erdo?an’s permission to use Turkey’s Incirlik Air Base for airstrikes against ISIS in Syria, but the dimensions of Erdogan’s backing for ISIS since revealed is far, far more than Biden hinted..
ISIS militants were trained by US, Israeli and now it emerges, by Turkish special forces at secret bases in Konya Province inside the Turkish border to Syria, over the past three years. Erdo?an’s involvement in ISIS goes much deeper. At a time when Washington, Saudi Arabia and even Qatar appear to have cut off their support for ISIS, they remaining amazingly durable. The reason appears to be the scale of the backing from Erdo?an and his fellow neo-Ottoman Sunni Islam Prime Minister, Ahmet Davutoğlu..
The prime source of money feeding ISIS these days is sale of Iraqi oil from the Mosul region oilfields where they maintain a stronghold. The son of Erdogan it seems is the man who makes the export sales of ISIS-controlled oil possible..
Bilal Erdogan owns several maritime companies. He has allegedly signed contracts with European operating companies to carry Iraqi stolen oil to different Asian countries. The Turkish government buys Iraqi plundered oil which is being produced from the Iraqi seized oil wells. Bilal Erdogan’s maritime companies own special wharfs in Beirut and Ceyhan ports that are transporting ISIS’ smuggled crude oil in Japan-bound oil tankers..
Gürsel Tekin vice-president of the Turkish Republican Peoples’ Party, CHP, declared in a recent Turkish media interview, “President Erdogan claims that according to international transportation conventions there is no legal infraction concerning Bilal’s illicit activities and his son is doing an ordinary business with the registered Japanese companies, but in fact Bilal Erdo?an is up to his neck in complicity with terrorism, but as long as his father holds office he will be immune from any judicial prosecution.” Tekin adds that Bilal’s maritime company doing the oil trades for ISIS, BMZ Ltd, is “a family business and president Erdogan’s close relatives hold shares in BMZ and they misused public funds and took illicit loans from Turkish banks”..
In addition to son Bilal’s illegal and lucrative oil trading for ISIS, Sümeyye Erdogan, the daughter of the Turkish President apparently runs a secret hospital camp inside Turkey just over the Syrian border where Turkish army trucks daily being in scores of wounded ISIS Jihadists to be patched up and sent back to wage the bloody Jihad in Syria, according to the testimony of a nurse who was recruited to work there until it was discovered she was a member of the Alawite branch of Islam, the same as Syrian President Bashar al-Assad who Erdogan seems hell-bent on toppling..
Turkish citizen Ramazan Bagol, captured this month by Kurdish People’s Defence Units,YPG, as he attempted to join ISIS from Konya province, told his captors that said he was sent to ISIS by the ‘Ismailia Sect,’ a strict Turkish Islam sect reported to be tied to Recep Erdogan. Baol said the sect recruits members and provides logistic support to the radical Islamist organization. He added that the Sect gives jihad training in neighborhoods of Konya and sends those trained here to join ISIS gangs in Syria..
According to French geopolitical analyst, Thierry Meyssan, Recep Erdogan “organised the pillage of Syria, dismantled all the factories in Aleppo, the economic capital, and stole the machine-tools. Similarly, he organised the theft of archeological treasures and set up an international market in Antioch…with the help of General Benoît Puga, Chief of Staff for the Elysée, he organised a false-flag operation intended to provoke the launching of a war by the Atlantic Alliance – the chemical bombing of la Ghoutta in Damascus, in August 2013“..