UH-OH: Sarah Palin Sounds Ready To Declare WAR On Trump

UH-OH: Sarah Palin Sounds Ready To Declare WAR On Trump

Featured image via YouTube


Sarah Palin has stepped out of the shadows and sent a warning shot across Donald Trump’s bow. Largely silent for most of the election since she endorsed Trump some months ago, Palin is speaking out after Trump made comments that have been interpreted as a change in his anti-immigration position.

While there’s no actual concrete policy shift, and just comments made on cable news, Trump has said he could back away from his proposed plan for a mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.

That has angered Palin, who went on the record with the Wall Street Journal.

In recent days, Mr. Trump has shifted away from calling for mass deportation of illegal immigrants to suggesting some could stay if they paid back taxes.

“If Mr. Trump were to go down a path of wishy-washy positions taken on things that the core foundation of his support has so appreciated, and that is respecting our Constitution and respecting law and order in America, then yeah, there would be massive disappointment,” Mrs. Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president in 2008, said in a telephone interview with the Wall Street Journal. “Parts of that message we heard in the last week are clearly not consistent with the stringent position and message that supporters have received all along.”

Support from Palin undoubtedly helped Trump during the primaries, especially when she had previously been associated with more traditional conservatives like Senator Ted Cruz.

But since then she has been on the backburner. He has done few campaign events with her, and she did not receive a speaking slot at the Republican Convention in Cleveland. When asked about the apparent snub, Trump made the bizarre claim, “It’s a little bit difficult because of where she is. We love Sarah. Little bit difficult because of, you know, it’s a long ways away.” Palin has previously spoken at conservative events like CPAC on the east coast without any transportation problems.

By Oliver Willis

Trump ripped the scab off our country’s racism. Let’s get to work at eradicating the infection

attribution: Getty Images


Every thinking American knows that Donald Trump has ripped the scab off a very infected wound. We all know that America still suffers from the infection that is racism. But most people figured as long as we didn’t talk about it, we could avoid dealing with it. There were many who remained willfully ignorant.

Then Trump came along, and dissed political correctness. He gave many the freedom to say what they genuinely felt. And guess what shocked the willfully ignorant? The increasingly clear fact that a large percentage of the American population is still racist.

Before anyone in our progressive sphere starts feeling smug, rest assured that when it comes to race relations, liberals are not that different. They are just better at controlling their worse angels. Go to the websites of most NGOs. Attend a Netroots Nation conference. Attend any liberal organization’s conference (I have attended many). How much do they look like America? They almost never do. How inviting are these organizations?

A quick story: When Black Lives Matter interrupted Netroots Nation 2015 in its attempt to have the conference and the candidates address an existential problem, half of the ballroom was irate. Reporters from Blue Nation Review stood outside with cameras, interviewing people exiting the ballroom. When I noticed only black people were getting interviewed, I proceeded to ask the BNR reporter why they were only interviewing black people. She said no white person wanted to go on camera.

I saw three white men and a young white woman in a group, conversing. I approached them and told them what the reporter told me, and encouraged them to talk to BNR. None of the guys would, but he young lady said she was willing. One of the guys blurted out with disdain, “Go be our token white person.” I looked at him with disgust and he immediately apologized. The young lady gave a passionate and progressive interview that detailed her transition to understanding what had occurred on the conference stage. I could relay similar stories at many liberal conferences, and know many minorities in fact simply feel like props in these organizations, used to illustrate a point: “We are better than they are.”

And now there is Trump, who is allowing the examination of various types of racism. And it is way overdue.

Trump preys on racism born out of fear and socioeconomic displacement. He makes it clear with his inferences that those others (read: minorities) are stealing their birthright. This gets traction because our derelict media fails to articulate the reality: That their plight is borne from the economic policies which are crafted by and benefit a select few—people like Trump himself. At the end of the day, there is little left to extract from the poor. As such, white middle-class America is being welcomed to the reality of the less fortunate others. Fertilizing and nurturing the inner racist in a segment of our society is just a deflection, a survival mechanism for the plutocracy.

But Trump does more than that. He touches a nerve in some who believe America’s “natural pecking order” must be restored. I read between the lines when otherwise intelligent engineers and lawyers tried to explain to me why they are voting for Trump. What they were unable to say spoke much more clearly than their bumbling reasoning.

And then there is an insidious racism—racism effected through invisibility, disregard, and neglect. This type is manifested in dozens of ways, but most aren’t easily pinpointed. It’s apparent in things like potholes that are fixed promptly in predominantly white neighborhoods but rarely in poor, predominantly minority areas. It’s the poor service received by people of color at restaurants and other places of business, the assumptions made about the intelligence of kids and their promotion into higher-level classes. It’s the disregard of input provided at work or at conferences, being offered less than preferable rates on loans, and important medical news reports and research that ignore segments of the population.

Many of these have economic—and life or death—consequences. A few years back there was a meningitis scare in my area. One of the symptoms described had to do with how the skin would change color. That characteristic does not apply to 40 percent of the Houston area, based on citizens’ skin color.

Many view the South, or tea party members, or folks supporting Trump and other overtly racist politicians as the problem. That would be much too simplistic. The South is no more racist than the North. While some politicians are happy to blurt out their racist rants, we should fear the ones who actually write policies that are implicitly biased. While Trump voices anti-immigrant rhetoric, many others quietly exploit the immigrant. While Trump denigrates blacks, it is Hollywood and others that stereotype them. While Trump wants a ban on Muslims entering the U.S., many others discriminate against them in a myriad of ways. Trump is just America’s exaggerated alter ego.

Racism is an ingrained problem that is taught. From childhood, we are presented with subjective standards of beauty. Those in power make assumptions about crime, intelligence, and worth. Racism is a necessary tool to keep us divided, and most of us don’t realize it’s on autopilot. An unfair, extractive economic system needs racism as a tool in order to deflect the plutocracy’s failures.

Trump is upsetting that status quo. He turned off the autopilot and went full-throttle. The question is whether we will have the courage address the problem head on, once and for all. We must not only throttle back: We must eradicate the autopilot once and for all.

By Egberto Willies

Michele Bachmann Says She’s Advising Trump On Foreign Policy, Because Why Not


Two peas in a pod.

Former Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), who has claimed President Barack Obama’s foreign policy would lead to the rapture, says she is advising Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump on foreign policy.

Speaking to reporters outside a private fundraiser that Trump held in Minneapolis on Friday evening, the 2012 GOP presidential hopeful and tea party stalwart said she has known Trump for several years and supports his proposals to crack down on immigration and terrorism.

“He also recognizes there is a threat around the world, not just here in Minnesota, of radical Islam,” she told Minnesota Public Radio. “I wish our President Obama also understood the threat of radical Islam and took it seriously.”


Bachmann also serves on the real estate mogul’s evangelical advisory board, working on outreach to conservative voters.

Last month, she warned that Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton would create “certain destruction” and “catastrophic decline” if elected president. She also celebrated Trump for his “1950s sensibilities” and “1950s common sense,” and argued that because he “gets and understands religious liberty,”people of all faiths will be allowed to say “Merry Christmas” during a Trump presidency.

Like Trump, Bachmann is an avid conspiracy theorist. Last fall, when she visited Israel, she argued that there is violence and unrest in the country because Jesus is “coming soon.” She warned Christians that they must convert as many people as possible, “even among the Jews.”

In 2011, when Trump raised questions about whether Obama was born in the U.S., Bachmann was among the GOP lawmakers calling for the release of Obama’s birth certificate, though she did say that “if the President says that he was born here, then I take him at his word.”

It was unclear why Trump was campaigning in Bachmann’s home state; a GOP presidential nominee hasn’t won there since 1972. While polling on Minnesota is limited, most results indicate that Clinton has a comfortable lead.

But during Friday’s fundraiser, Trump claimed he has “so many friends” in the state and hopes to visit “a lot,” according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar,rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

Marina Fang

WATCH: Maddow Catches Trump Doc Trumping Up His Credentials

MSNBC screenshot


With help from a viewer, an obviously delighted Rachel Maddow discovered on Thursday that Donald Trump’s doctor exaggerated his credentials in the signature of his letter about the Republican nominee’s health.

Harold Bornstein is the gastroenterologist who declared Trump “will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.” He was once a fellow at the American College of Gastroenterologists, and signed his letter vouching for Trump’s good health using acronym still defining him as a fellow at the association.

But Bornstein’s membership with the group lapsed in 1995, Maddow learned.

When asked by MSNBC about using the title in his signature without maintaining membership, Bornstein said that the title “has no value” but that he will continue to use it.

Watch the segment via MSNBC:

Caitlin MacNeal



Tom Williams via GETTY IMAGES

Steps Down As Campaign Chairman Following Demotion And Ukraine Revelations…Emails Expose Covert Pro-Russian Lobbying Campaign… Tried To Obscure Foreign Party’s Efforts To Influence U.S. Policy… REPORT: Designated $12.7 Million In Undisclosed Payments From Pro-Russian Political Party… Denies Receiving Cash… Fineman: Manafort ‘Overestimated His Own Skill Set And Donald Trump’s Sanity’…

Is Comrade Trump Playing Us For Fools?

Is Comrade Trump Playing Us For Fools?

REUTERS/Eric Thayer


Are we watching an American presidential campaign or the pilot episode of a bizarre new TV series? Or both? The hallmark of “reality TV,” of course, being its extreme unreality.

On a daily basis, the Trump campaign invites sheer disbelief. Recently, Ivanka Trump, the statuesque daughter her father talks about dating, posted an Instagram photo of herself sightseeing in scenic Croatia with Wendi Deng Murdoch.

The New York Daily News explains that “Deng, who was divorced from Rupert Murdoch in 2013…has been linked romantically to Russian strongman Vladimir Putin.” The newspaper adds that “the optics of the photo could raise further questions about the relationship between Ivanka’s father and Putin.”

Geez, you think? Maybe I’ll ask Boris and Natasha, my pet names for the Russian operatives who started sending me obscene emails after a recent column critical of Trump. (The original Boris and Natasha were smarter and funnier.) The subject line in Boris’s latest message reads “TRUMP SHOULD [DEFECATE] IN YOUR TRAITOROUS MOUTH!”

With impressive tradecraft, Boris calls himself “Jason Larenzen,” a name that appears not to exist in the United States.

Anticipating the latest Fox News fantasy theme, Natasha (masquerading as “Karyn”) asks “Will lying c**t Hillary last to the election before brain blood clot ruptures?” Her IP address links to Yandex.com, which a Google search locates in Moscow, within walking distance of the Kremlin.

They aren’t especially subtle.

Of course, in Putin’s Moscow offending journalists get shot dead in the street, so I shouldn’t complain. Besides, having grown up in New Jersey, profanity makes little impact on me.

Yo, Natasha, you eat with that mouth?

But think about it: Russian operatives are openly intervening in an American presidential election: hacking Democratic Party emails and harassing obscure political columnists.

Always on Donald Trump’s side. You’ve got to ask yourself why.

One possible answer may have appeared in the New York Times. Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort’s name turned up 22 times on a secret ledger detailing $12.7 million in illegal payola handed out under deposed Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych.

Supposedly, Manafort was also involved in a “murky” $18 million deal to sell Ukrainian cable TV “to a partnership put together by Mr. Manafort and a Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska, a close ally of President Vladimir V. Putin.”

Him again.

The information was given to Times reporters by the Ukrainian government’s “National Anti-Corruption Bureau,” no doubt tasked with putting as many of the current regime’s political rivals as possible in prison.

At the expense of being a spoilsport, I’ve learned to be highly skeptical of New York Times “blockbusters.” From the Whitewater hoax onward, the newspaper has produced a series of abortive Clinton scandal stories, culminating in last April’s abortive attempt to hint that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had corruptly engineered the sale of a Wyoming uranium mine.

“Look,” I wrote last April “there’s a reason articles like theTimes‘ big expose are stultifyingly dull and require the skills of a contract lawyer to parse. Murky sentences and jumbled chronologies signify that the ‘Clinton rules’ are back: all innuendo and guilt-by-association. All ominous rhetorical questions, but rarely straightforward answers.”

So it comes as no great surprise that Ukrainian investigators “have yet to determine if [Manafort] actually received the cash.”

So is Manafort a victim of the “Clinton Rules?” Could be.

But there’s no doubt about this: “Before he fled to Russia two years ago, Mr. Yanukovych…relied heavily on the advice of Mr. Manafort and his firm, who helped them win several elections.”

On evidence, little things like democratic institutions and the rule of law don’t appear high on Manafort’s priority list. Among his previous clients were Philippines dictator Ferdinand Marcos and Zaire’s infamous Mobutu Sese Seko, aptly described as “the archetypal African dictator.” Both regimes were essentially kleptocracies, characterized by nepotism, brutality and extreme corruption.

Comparatively speaking, Vladimir Putin would appear to be one of Manafort’s more savory associates.

So when candidate Trump expresses a Russia-friendly foreign policy agenda—musing aloud about recognizing Putin’s illegal occupation of Crimea, and hinting that President Trump might refuse to defend NATO allies against Russian attack, it’s reasonable to wonder what’s being said behind closed doors.

Or when Trump invites Boris and Natasha to conduct cyber-warfare against his Democratic opponent. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said in July.

Later, of course, the candidate alibied that he was being sarcastic. He’s a great kidder, Trump. Something blows up in his face, it was a joke.

Washington Monthly‘s David Atkins poses the million ruble question: “How much does [sic] Trump and his team need to do before we start asking serious questions about whether they’re a Manchurian Candidate campaign actively working on behalf of a foreign nation?”

Basically, that depends upon how big a piece of Trump Russian oligarchs own—one big reason we’ll never see his income taxes.

Photo: Republican U.S. presidential nominee Donald Trump speaks at Youngstown State University in Youngstown, Ohio August 15, 2016. REUTERS/Eric Thayer

Trump: Obama Bribed New York’s Attorney General To Sue Trump University



There is no evidence to support Trump’s claim.

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama arranged for New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to receive a $15,000 donation in exchange for investigating Trump University, Donald Trump alleged in February in comments that were overlooked, likely due to the even more ridiculous and offensive remarks that he was making at the time.

Trump didn’t quite accuse Obama of handing Schneiderman an envelope with $15,000 stuffed in it. Instead, Trump said, Obama appears to have arranged a campaign contribution to Schneiderman from a law firm representing victims of Trump’s scam. (Like Trump’s usual claims, there’s no evidence to support this one.)

“The attorney general of New York meets with Barack Obama in Syracuse,” Trump said at a rally in Bentonville, Arkansas. “The following day he sues me. What they don’t say is, I believe, fifteen thousand or a lot of money was paid to the attorney general by the law firm in California that is suing me.”

While relaying his theory about Schneiderman and Obama, Trump told the crowd the judge in the case had “tremendous hostility, beyond belief ― I believe he happens to be Spanish, which is fine, he’s Hispanic, which is fine,” adding that he was considering asking the judge to recuse himself. (The media largely missed his comments, but Trump helpfully went to war with Judge Gonzalo Curiel again in June, and it made national news.)

Trump repeated his charge against Obama just moments later. “All of a sudden the attorney general ― his name is Eric Schneiderman, not respected in New York, doing a terrible job, probably is not electable in New York, but who knows ― and he meets with Obama, gets a campaign contribution, I think, I think it’s fifteen thousand dollars, and all of a sudden, he meets with Obama in, I believe, Syracuse, and the following day or two he brings a lawsuit against me.”

Trump’s math here gets a little fuzzy. Trump and Trump University are facing three lawsuits, not just one. The first suit was filed in California in 2010, by a woman named Tara Makaeff, who along with other plaintiffs, accused Trump University of fraud, breach of contract and false advertising. That case is moving forward.

The second class-action lawsuit in California was filed in 2013 by businessman Art Cohen. In this case, the complaint alleges that the “Live Events” sold by Trump University were never intended to teach attendees how to invest in real estate, they were merely meant to convince people to pay for more seminars. This case is scheduled to go to trial in late November, with jury selection starting a few weeks earlier.

The third case is the only one filed in New York, brought by Schneiderman in August 2013. It alleges that Trump University, Donald Trump, and former Trump University president Michael Sexton all engaged in “persistent fraudulent, illegal and deceptive conduct” in their running of the seminar company.

As for Trump’s claim that Schneiderman met with Obama and then “got a campaign contribution,” it’s pure fantasy.

In 2010, three years before Schneiderman sued Trump, and five years before Trump announced he was running for president, Schneiderman was running for state attorney general in New York. In October 2010, Schneiderman’s campaign received two separate contributions from lawyers at a California law firm, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd. One donation, for $5,000, came from partner Michael Dowd. Another contribution, for $10,000, came from Patrick Daniels, also a partner.

Six months earlier, in April, Robbins Geller Rudman and another California law firmjointly filed a class-action suit in California on behalf of customers who said they’d been defrauded by Trump University. At the time, Trump wasn’t a candidate for president, Schneiderman wasn’t attorney general and Gonzalo Curiel wasn’t the judge in the case. In fact, Curiel wouldn’t be appointed to the federal bench until 2012, two years after Trump’s case got underway in California.

How Trump leapt from these facts all the way to a secret payoff meeting between Schneiderman and Obama is vintage Trump. It’s as if he took all the things that happened over a six-year period, compressed them into one day and poured them into an extremely implausible John Grisham novel.

Trump’s charge is also a useful window into how he perceives the judiciary. Six months after Schneiderman filed suit against Trump in 2013, Trump filed a complaint accusing the attorney general of shaking Trump down for campaign contributions.

Revealed in the complaint was that Trump himself had donated $12,500 to Schneiderman’s campaign in 2010, more than either of the lawyers who Trump accused of trying to buy the attorney general.

Trump also claimed in his complaint that Schneiderman hit up Trump and his employees for more contributions after he was in office, and that Schneiderman “repeatedly approached members of Trump Org. at different fundraising and social events to assure them, unsolicited, that the investigation into [Trump University] was not something they needed to worry about, and that it would eventually go away on its own.” New York’s ethics commission reviewed Trump’s claims and voted not to pursue them. 

Around that time, the fall of 2013, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi was deciding whether to follow New York’s lead and bring a case against Trump University. Bondi asked Trump for a contribution: Trump’s charitable arm gave Bondi $25,000, in September, and Bondi dropped the case. She now faces calls for a federal investigation into whether she took an illegal bribe.

By Ryan Grim / Christina Wilkie

This article has been updated to include Trump’s $12,500 contribution to Schneiderman’s campaign.
Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liarrampant xenophoberacistmisogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims ― 1.6 billion members of an entire religion ― from entering the U.S

Team Trump is a disaster: It’s not just the candidate — his entire staff is ill-equipped for a presidential campaign

Team Trump is a disaster: It's not just the candidate — his entire staff is ill-equipped for a presidential campaign

Donald Trump; Betsy McCaughey (Credit: AP/David Furst/Faleh Kheiber/Photo montage by Salon)


Trump has filled out his economic policy team with a long list of wealthy donors and female right-wing cranks

Donald Trump says he isn’t running against crooked Hillary Clinton anymore, he’s running against the crooked media. This comment was in response to a couple of scorching articles by The New York Times and the AP over the week-end that featured off the record interviews with people inside the campaign making it clear that it’s in chaos with Trump himself having serious mood swings and refusing to listen to anyone. This seems obviously true judging by the “low energy” desultory performances in Florida on Friday followed by his highly agitated behavior in a rally in Connecticut on Saturday after the articles were published online. By Sunday he was refuting the notion that he’d ever agreed to follow the advice of his small cadre of political advisers, tweeting like Popeye: “I am who I am!”

It had been yet another bad week in which he pretty much stepped all over what was supposed to be his big economic speech. He’d gathered quite a group of big donors along with a few of the GOP old guard to pull together a policy designed to reassure contributors and confused normal Republicans that he had some kind of economic plan.

Though the speech was obviously conceived as a standard issue conservative economic manifesto, the Fact Checks were brutal which raises an interesting question. If that speech was a product of Trump’s team rather than his own off-the-cuff remarks at a rally, who are these people?

Prior to the speech it was announced that he was being advised by 13 CEOs, hedge fund managers, Wall Street investors, a couple of obscure economists and the Club for Growth’s Steven Moore. There are some big names among them, like hedge fund manager John Paulson, best known for his prescient 2007 bet against the mortgage market and Hollywood financier Steven Mnuchin, Trump’s finance chair. (In fact, there are so many men named Steve among them that wags are just calling his advisory group “the Steves”.)

Trump promised to flesh out more details as time went on but nobody’s heard a word about it from him since, leaving members of of his team to spend the rest of the week trying to explain his plans on TV while Trump was on the stump creating firestorm after firestorm. Steven Moore was everywhere explaining Trump’s innovative view that tax cuts for the wealthy always create growth while CEO of CKE restaurants, Andy Puzder, spent the weekend on CNN defending Trump’s electoral strategy for some reason and told the Huffington Post that he believes in Trump because “he certainly has all the indications of wealth.” Trump’s senior economic adviser, former Reagan official David Malpass ineffectually tried to make a case for the estate tax helping the average Joe.

Trump, meanwhile, added a little zazz to his usual red-faced stump rant by holding up charts (which only the people in the front row will be able to see.) One of them is a list of Arab countries from which the Clinton Foundation supposedly received millions of dollars after which the “Clinton State Department” then sent military equipment.Trump surrogate Jason Miller said the charts originated from “the policy department” which is odd since this one came from a far-right web site and was tweeted out weeks ago by David Duke, replete with a Star of David. (It’s unclear if the star was on the chart Trump used for the rally.) It turns out that Trump has quite the diverse policy department: hedge fund managers to KKK Grand Wizards.

But for all that the one thing everyone noticed about his economic team was the fact that he couldn’t manage to find even one worthy woman in the whole country. This is not surprising since when Trump was asked recently which women he would consider putting in his cabinet the only name he could come up with was his daughter Ivanka. But never say he is unresponsive to criticism. Last Thursday he released an additional list of economic advisers that included eight women and one man to his team. (The man was Anthony “the Mooch” Scaramuchi who I wrote about here.)

The most interesting of the bunch of mostly businesswomen (no economists among them) is the notorious former lieutenant governor of New York Betsy McCaughey best known for being one of the tools that tanked Hillary Clinton’s health care plan back in 1994 and years later spreading the malicious misinformation that Obamacare featured “death panels.” She’s also known as a fierce foe of immigration reform due to the danger it presents to the GOP’s electoral prospects and she cheers on government shutdowns and Bundy-style anti-government protests. There couldn’t be a more perfect female “policy adviser” for Trump. It’s a wonder she took so long to jump on his crazy train.

So Trump has filled out his economic policy team with a long list of wealthy donors and female right-wing cranks even as he still gets a good bit of his information from his Twitter feed. Today he is slated to give another stilted teleprompter speech on foreign policy which his campaign says Trump will use to “put blame for the rise of ISIS at feet of Obama and Clinton dating to 2009.”  It’s clear that the 70 plus foreign policy bigwigs who signed a letter condemning Trump are not among his advisers and nobody really knows who they might be. Speculation is that Senator Jeff Sessions is a big influence along with the flamboyantly Strangelovian General Michael Flynn. Newt Gingrich and Rudolph Giuliani are fluttering around in the background.

Oh, and there’s his campaign manager Paul Manafort who knows a lot about foreign affairs, especially in the Ukraine. (This blockbuster New York Times expose headlined “Secret Ledger in Ukraine Lists Cash for Donald Trump’s Campaign Chief” hit the internet like a nuclear bomb last night.) Everyone will no doubt listen closely to Trump’s speech about NATO and Russia in light of what we’ve learned.

But there’s really only one serious adviser to Donald Trump as he will tell you himself: “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things.”

OOPS: Trump Supporter Argues Hillary Could Rig Election Because Republicans Do It All The Time

OOPS: Trump Supporter Argues Hillary Could Rig Election Because Republicans Do It All The Time

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images


Talk about throwing your own party under a bus. This Trump supporter literally said the GOP has rigged elections and that is supposed to prove that Hillary Clinton has rigged the 2016 Election.

Roger Stone is one of Trump’s biggest supporters and in defense of the Republican nominee’s assertion that the 2016 Election is “rigged” in favor of Hillary he wrote a column for The Hill in an attempt to demonstrate that Trump is right to be concerned. Not only did it go badly, but the Republican Party must be totally pissed off about it.

That’s because Stone claimed that Wisconsin Republicans, under Reince Priebus’s leadership, were successful at rigging five elections in the state to make sure things went their way.

“As someone with great sentimental attachment to the Republican Party, as I joined as the party of Goldwater, both parties have engaged in voting machine manipulation,” Stone claimed before naming names. “Nowhere in the country has this been more true than Wisconsin, where there are strong indications that Scott Walker and the Reince Priebus machine rigged as many as five elections including the defeat of a Walker recall election.”

Stone even accused Priebus of orchestrating Ted Cruz’s victory over Trump in Wisconsin earlier this year:

When the Trump vs. Cruz primary took place, the same pattern emerged again of a Marquette University poll showing a 20 point shift from Trump ahead by 10% to Trump behind by 10%, which was simply absurd. Shifts like that don’t happen over brief intervals of time, absent a nuclear explosion. It didn’t make any sense — unless you knew what was going on was an “instant replay” of Walker’s victories. The machine Priebus built was delivering for Cruz big time.

In short, Trump’s longtime ally just tried to prove that Hillary could rig the election by accusing Republicans of rigging five elections and a primary in Wisconsin.

Of course, this doesn’t prove Trump’s accusation against Hillary. What it does do, however, is call into question the trustworthiness of Republicans. If Reince Priebus is capable of rigging elections in Wisconsin to the point where Republicans can win five of them he is definitely capable of rigging a national election to make sure Republicans gain absolute power even though all of the polls indicate that Trump is losing this election badly.

Trump own man just kneecapped the GOP nominee’s own claims by shifting the election rigging accusation to Republicans.

By Stephen D Foster Jr

5 absurd right-wing moments this week: Katrina Pierson displays most stunning ignorance yet

Katrina Pierson (Credit: CNN)

This article originally appeared on AlterNet.


Hard to compete, but Tucker Carlson also had the most ridiculous hissy fit ever

Sure, sure, sure, Donald Trump had his worst and most heinous week ever. (If we had a dollar for every time we’ve said that!) The man floated the idea of assassinating Hillary Clinton; insisted repeatedly that President Obama founded ISIS, then chided everyone for taking him seriously; suggested illegally trying U.S. citizens at Gitmo; and railed about a rigged election that has not occurred. More conservatives and dozens of national security officials fled the Republican nominee, as did voters. Just another week in the Trumpoverse.

But man, this guy attracts the best and the brightest. Winners like Katrina Pierson,Jeffrey Lord and now Carl Paladino.

Not familiar with these three outstanding political thinkers, these Trumpian spinners of tales? Read on for some of their latest antics.

1. Katrina Pierson just can’t stop revising history.

It’s very hard for Katrina Pierson to keep track of who started which war. C’mon guys, that’s hard. Especially when these wars go on and on forever. Also history, schmistory. It’s all Obama’s fault.

After being severely dressed down recently for saying that Captain Khan was killed in Iraq under Obama’s watch in 2004 — when Bush was president and Obama a senator who had opposed the war — Pierson decided to put her knowledge of recent wars on display again Saturday.

This time, she accused Obama of owning the war in Afghanistan, which is odd, because he was a state senator when that war was launched in 2001.

“Remember we weren’t even in Afghanistan by this time,” Katrina Pierson told a puzzled CNN host. “Barack Obama went into Afghanistan, creating another problem.”

Asked to clarify whether she meant he launched that war, she said, “That was Obama’s war.”

Well, no, though he did announce a surge there in 2009 when he actually became president.

Next up? Pierson blames Obama for WWII. Stay tuned.

2. Meet Carl Paladino! He’s completely awful!

Although Donald Trump declared the Khan family controversy over and “put to bed” this week (and Mika Brzezinski tried to point out to him that he does not get to choose when people stop talking about it), apparently the chairman of his New York campaign did not get the memo. Carl Paladino, an atrocious GOPer who has run for governor of New York and been thoroughly humiliated in that attempt, is of the belief that it’s always a good idea to attack Muslim families, no matter who they are.

On Friday, Paladino said this about Clinton and Trump to the host of “Imus in the Morning.”

“We’ve got an un-indicted felon [Author’s note: OK, not a thing] as his opponent and you’re talking about Khan, about him making a remark about this man? All right, I don’t care if he’s a Gold Star parent. He certainly doesn’t deserve that title, OK, if he’s as anti-American as he’s illustrated in his speeches and in his discussion. I mean, if he’s a member of the Muslim Brotherhood or supporting, you know, the ISIS-type of attitude against America, there’s no reason for Donald Trump to have to honor this man.”

It’s hard to be worse than Trump himself, but apparently manageable for some.

Keeping the level of discourse as high as possible, Paladino went on insist that Obama is a Muslim and Hillary Clinton is “devious” for hiding her alleged health problems, health problems that have been debunked.

“But if you’re really looking at what’s been exposed about Hillary and Hillary’s demeanor, I mean, just look at the deviousness. If it is true about her health problems, I mean, how devious can a woman possibly be? And not telling the American people that she’s got some sickness, she’s definitely impaired.”

3. Tucker Carlson’s has a new hissy fit defending Trump.

Things are getting desperate over at Fox News. To the difficult question of how to spin the Orange One’s really bad, no-good, horrible week, Tucker Carlson had to dig really deep.

The headscratcher he came up with? The fact that mean old Hillary Clinton acknowledged the existence of white privilege back in June is just as bad as all the bad things Trump has said lately.

Here’s the core of what Hillary said:

“White Americans need to do a much better job of listening when African Americans talk about the seen and unseen barriers you face every day. We need to recognize our privilege and practice humility, rather than assume our experiences are everyone else’s experiences.”

Man, that is hurtful stuff. That is like a personal attack on privileged, thin-skinned white guys like Carlson. Why doesn’t the media get all up in her face about that, like they do with Trump when he suggests assassination, or that Obama founded ISIS.

Carlson’s whine fest:

“I think [the media] have a right to ask Trump tough questions…Totally fair. But they are giving Hillary a complete pass. They’re acting on her behalf and they’re devaluing their moral authority in doing it. It’s a big mistake. […]

“He can’t back down. That’s for sure. I just wish that they would apply the same standard to Hillary when she says, for example, all white people are privileged and therefore should apologize. It’s like, really?”

Putting aside the insanity of comparing Clinton’s reasonable and inarguable statement to Trump’s incitement of violence, might we also mention that no one else seems to have heard Clinton saying all white people should apologize.

Tucker tantrumed on, undaunted:

“If you’re an unemployed machinist in Toledo, you’re really more privileged than the millionaire, Harvard educated African-American President of the United States? That’s actually an insane statement. And not one person called her on it or even noticed it. So just apply the same standard to Hillary.”

Get the sense he might still be a little upset about the whole African American in the White House thing?

4. Karl Rove loses his shit.

You know it’s bad when Karl Rove thinks you’ve gone off the deep end.

On a Fox show with host Charles Payne, Republican guru Karl Rove was unable to maintain the fantasy that Trump is a reasonable person to be the party’s nominee for the presidency. The former Bush chief of staff went off at the suggestion that it is in any way a good idea for Donald Trump, “as a New Yorker,” to “hit back” at every perceived slight.

“Yeah, well, you know what?” Rove began. “If he does that between now and the election, what do you think is going to happen? The Clinton campaign is going to provoke him every day to stay off of message. And he is going to fall for all of these things and waste valuable time. Does he want to win or does he want to respond? If he wants to be the New Yorker and punch back at everybody who comes his way — fine! That’s an open invitation for everybody to come his way with things like this.”

Might we just interject that it seems Rove is no great fan of New Yorkers in general? Also, Donald Trump has a message?

Rove was just getting started.

“He has 88 days to make his case,” Rove said. [Author’s note: 85 days now] “He has squandered the last three weeks by responding to the Gold Star mother. The day after he had his presidential nomination, he became the official nominee of the Republican Party. The first news conference he had was not devoted to laying out the case against Hillary Clinton or bashing Barack Obama or laying out what he wants to do as president. It’s renewing and revisiting all of things he said about Ted Cruz, who was yesterday’s news at that point!”

“And why? He felt compelled to do it. He ought to get control of his impulses and keep focused on the main target. Otherwise you’re going to have more of these Republicans saying ‘why do we want to stand by this guy when he just keeps going after the wrong target.’”

Your guess is as good as ours, Karl. No, we don’t exactly feel your pain, but we acknowledge it.

5. We can’t. We just can’t.

Simone Manuel won a gold medal in Olympic swimming competition this week, becoming the first African American ever to do so.

That’s big.

Michael Phelps added four more gold medals and a silver one (how terrible) to his history-making tally.

The San Jose Mercury News covered the news of these events with this headline, and an identical tweet:

“Olympics: Michael Phelps shares historic night with African American.”

And the winner of the most Olympically offensive headline is…!

Note, unlike Trump, the paper’s editors did apologize.