Thursday, July 28, 2016

Latest Gallup Poll - Americans' satisfaction drops to 17% and ties record for greatest nosedive, race relations top worry

.

Dallas Police Officers Killed in Action


By PAUL BEDARD (@SECRETSBEDARD)  7/21/16 8:21 AM

American satisfaction with the way things are going in the country has nosedived to just 17 percent, according to a new survey.

Up at a still miserable 29 percent in June, the one month drop tied a Gallup record for the biggest plummet since the satisfaction poll began 15 years ago.

The drop comes amid a spike in terrorism worldwide, police shootings of suspects, shootings of police and the nasty presidential race.
Gallup tests issues in their satisfaction survey and race relations has jumped from the bottom to the top in one month. At just 5 percent last month, 18 percent now believe race is the top issue facing the country. Dissatisfaction with government is second at 16 percent and the economy third at 12 percent.


"Since 2000, mentions of race have only once previously been in double digits — in December 2014, when 13 percent mentioned race as the top problem facing the nation. Race was infrequently mentioned as the top problem facing the nation from 1970 through 2000, with the exception of May 1992, a week after the Rodney King verdicts in Los Angeles, when 15 percent mentioned race as the top problem," said Gallup.


Democrats, meanwhile, are also dissatisfied with life, said Gallup. "The decline in Americans' satisfaction this month includes a particularly sharp drop among Democrats, whose satisfaction levels — after registering 51 percent last month — dropped 22 points to 29 percent in July. This was a marked change from the 11-point jump in satisfaction Democrats expressed from May to June," said the analysis.
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com
.

Mass Media Feeding Frenzy Perpetuates Lies as Lame Street Media Destroys Journalistic Integrity proving Americans are Right, the news media cannot be Trusted

.

Not since the days of the Civil War when the news media tried to destroy President Abraham Lincoln have we seen such blatant lies pour forth from the mouths of the defenders of truth.

There is a reason 94% of Americans do not trust the news media according to the latest Gallup survey.  They lie, they cover up, they magnify untruths, and they are journalistic frauds.


Yesterday Donald Trump held a news conference in the middle of the Democratic National Committee Convention.  It was a move never before attempted by a candidate for president.  So what?

After two days of borderline libelous attacks from the pit bulls speaking at the DNC Convention, Trump, fed up with the lack of fact checking by our news media, wanted to fight back.  Every news release from the Clinton campaign was duly published as gospel truth by the media who seem to have no idea what the gospel is all about.


In fact, recent DNC emails posted by Julian Assange and WikiLeaks in England showed that members of the media were already committing the fatal act of pre-checking stories with the Clinton campaign.

Now the same hypocrites are claiming Trump is guilty of treason for something the transcript says he never said.  Excuse me, he never said?

Yet it only gets better as the feeding frenzy of the crooked media inspired an even greater frenzy in the politicians from the left who consider themselves the defenders of the Clinton Legacy the rewards loyalty with corrupt payoffs.


To wit, when WikiLeaks released the DNC emails the firestorm of unethical and possibly illegal action by the staff resulted in the forced resignation of one of the greatest liars in politics, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, head of the DNC, Obama appointee, Hillary supporter, and Sanders saboteur.

Then, when thrown off the platform of the Convention in disgrace, there was Hillary whose campaign helped engineer the departure for things Hillary said she knew nothing about.  Before the ink even dried in the newspapers, Hillary hired Debbie into a senior campaign position.  Did the media note this strange act, not a word.


My friends, corruption is the new standard in American politics and hypocrisy is the main tool to mislead the public.  We are in serious trouble because the corruption has spread from the government, political parties, and politics to the news media, those protected by our Constitution.

The only court that can stop the manipulator of mass hysteria is the court of public opinion and you have demonstrated awareness in the polls, now it is time to demonstrate by your actions.  It is time to pull the plug on the phony media, disconnect from the phony cable stations, cancel the newspaper subscriptions polluting our intellectual elite, and stop the nonsense.


We will post a Hall of Shame of those members of the news media who are a disgrace to the concept of high journalistic standards and we hope you shun them until they are no more.

Following is the latest American Press Institute Report on the public perception of, can the news media be trusted.


American Press Institute Report

Only 6% of Americans trust the media – survey

Published time: 18 Apr, 2016 23:35

Associated Press Report

As accusations of bias fly during an election year, a new report shows that Americans have serious misgivings about the media, with only six percent saying they have “a great deal of confidence” in the press.

A survey of more than 2,000 adults released on Sunday showed that trust in the media has dipped to dramatically low levels. About 52 percent of respondents said they have “some confidence” in the press, while 41 percent said they have “hardly any confidence.”


“Over the last two decades, research shows the public has grown increasingly skeptical of the news industry,” the report from the American Press Institute reads. “The study reaffirms that consumers do value broad concepts of trust like fairness, balance, accuracy, and completeness. At least two-thirds of Americans cite each of these four general principles as very important to them.”

According to the study, most people couldn’t name a specific instance that damaged their confidence in the media, but about 40 percent could remember a case, generally involving a report that turned out to be inaccurate or was perceived as biased, which caused them to lose their trust.

“The most important thing that news organizations can do is be accurate, and while we know that is a high value, this study reinforces that,” Margaret Sullivan, public editor of the New York Times, told the Associated Press.

The most essential quality for media institutions is accuracy, with 85 percent of respondents saying it’s extremely or very important for them to get the facts straight. Seventy-six percent said that timeliness is critical.

While social media has changed the way many people encounter news, it’s not necessarily for the better. Although 87 percent said they receive news via Facebook, for example, only 12 percent said they trust it “a lot or a great deal.” The social network with the highest trust rating was LinkedIn, and even then the level confidence was only 23 percent.

While the report didn’t point out any specific recent instances that have led to the erosion in public trust, the AP pointed to a Rolling Stone article on a campus rape that received widespread coverage in the US, but ultimately had to be retracted. It also highlighted inaccurate reports on the Supreme Court’s first ruling upholding Obamacare.

There have also been accusations of biased coverage of the current presidential campaigns, especially with respect to outsider candidates such as Donald Trump and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.

The American Press Institute report comes in the wake of a September 2015 Gallup poll which found that only 7 percent of Americans have a great deal of trust in the media, with about 33 percent saying they had a fair amount, and 60 percent claiming they had either little or no trust in the media.
 

Democracy Now Interview with Julian Assange of WikiLeaks on DNC emails - the interview the media does not want you to read.

.

EXCLUSIVE: WikiLeaks' Julian Assange on Releasing DNC Emails That Ousted Debbie Wasserman Schultz

July 25, 2016
Guests
founder and editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.
This is viewer supported news
WikiLeaks founder and editor-in-chief Julian Assange joins us from London about their release of nearly 20,000 emails revealing how the Democratic Party favored Hillary Clinton and worked behind the scenes to discredit and defeat Bernie Sanders. This comes as the Democratic National Convention is opening today in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, amid massive party turmoil. The DNC chair, Florida Congressmember Debbie Wasserman Schultz, has resigned following the leak. The emails also reveal a close relationship between mainstream media outlets and the DNC.


TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: The Democratic National Convention is opening today in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, amid massive party turmoil. Democratic National Committee chairwoman and Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz has resigned following the release of nearly 20,000 emails revealing how the Democratic Party favored Hillary Clinton and worked behind the scenes to discredit and defeat Bernie Sanders. The emails were released Friday by WikiLeaks.

In one email, DNC Chief Financial Officer Brad Marshall suggested someone ask Sanders about his religion ahead of the Kentucky and West Virginia contests. Brad Marshall wrote, quote, "It might may no difference, but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist," unquote. In another email, Debbie Wasserman Schultz calls Sanders’ campaign manager Jeff Weaver a, quote, "Damn liar."

AMY GOODMAN: A third email shows National Press Secretary Mark Paustenbach writing, quote, "Wondering if there’s a good Bernie narrative for a story, which is that Bernie never ever had his act together, that his campaign was a mess," unquote. Multiple emails show the DNC complaining about MSNBC coverage of the party and of Communications Director Luis Miranda once writing, quote, "F***ing Joe claiming the system is rigged, party against him, we need to complain to their producer," unquote, referring to Joe Scarborough. Other emails suggest the DNC was gathering information on Sanders’ events and that a super PAC was paying people to counter Sanders supporters online.

On Sunday, Bernie Sanders reacted to the emails during an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: I told you a long time ago that the—that the DNC was not running a fair operation, that they were supporting Secretary Clinton. So what I suggested to be true six months ago turns out, in fact, to be true. I’m not shocked, but I am disappointed. ... What I also said many months ago is that, for a variety of reasons, Debbie Wasserman Schultz should not be chair of the DNC. And I think these emails reiterate that reason why she should not be chair. I think she should resign, period. And I think we need a new chair who is going to lead us in a very different direction.

AMY GOODMAN: WikiLeaks has not revealed the source of the leaked emails, although in June a hacker using the name Guccifer 2.0 claimed responsibility for the hacking into the DNC’s computer network. On Sunday, however, Clinton’s campaign manager claimed the emails were leaked, quote, "by the Russians for the purpose of helping Donald Trump," unquote.
We go now to London for an exclusive interview with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who has been holed up in the Ecuadorean Embassy for more than four years. He was granted political asylum by Ecuador, but he fears if he attempts to go to Ecuador, if he attempts to step foot outside the Ecuadorean Embassy, that he will be arrested by British police and ultimately extradited to the United States to face, well, it’s believed, possibly treason charges for the documents WikiLeaks has released.

Julian Assange, editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks, welcome to Democracy Now! Can you talk about this email—these emails, these 20,000 emails you have released?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Yeah, it’s quite remarkable what has happened the last few days. I think this is a quite a classical release, showing the benefit of producing pristine data sets, presenting them before the public, where there’s equal access to all journalists and to interested members of the public to mine through them and have them in a citable form where they can then be used to prop up certain criticisms or political arguments. Often it’s the case that we have to do a lot of exploration and marketing of the material we publish ourselves to get a big political impact for it. But in this case, we knew, because of the pending DNC, because of the degree of interest in the U.S. election, we didn’t need to establish partnerships with The New York Times or The Washington Post. In fact, that might be counterproductive, because they are partisans of one group or another. Rather, we took the data set, analyzed it, verified it, made it in a presentable, searchable form, presented it for all journalists and the public to mine. And that’s exactly what has happened.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Julian, your reaction to the announced resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz shortly after the release of these emails?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well, I mean, that’s interesting. We have seen that with a lot of other publications. I guess there’s a question: What does that mean for the U.S. Democratic Party? It is important for there to be examples of accountability. The resignation was an example of that. Now, of course, Hillary Clinton has tried to immediately produce a counter-example by putting out a statement, within hours, saying that Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a great friend, and she’s incorporating her into her campaign, she’s going to be pushing for her re-election to the Congress.
So that’s a very interesting signaling by Hillary Clinton that if you act in a corrupt way that benefits Hillary Clinton, you will be taken care of. Why does she need to put that out? Certainly, it’s not a signal that helps with the public at all. It’s not a signal that helps with unity at the DNC, at the convention. It’s a signal to Hillary Clinton partisans to keep on going on, you’ll be taken care of. But it’s a very destructive signal for a future presidency, because it’s—effectively, it’s expanding the Overton window of corruption. It doesn’t really matter what you do, how you behave; as long as that is going to benefit Hillary Clinton, you’ll be protected.

AMY GOODMAN: I mean, it’s very interesting, because Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine appeared together, as Mike Pence and Donald Trump did the week before, on 60 Minutes. And Hillary Clinton distanced herself from all these emails and the DNC, saying, "These people didn’t work for me." And yet immediately upon the forced resignation of Deborah Wasserman Schultz, she said she’s a good friend, and immediately hired her. But, Julian, I was wondering if you can say, from your point of view, what do you think are the most significant emails that have been released, that you have released?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well, actually, I think the most significant ones haven’t been reported on, although The Washington Post late last night and McClatchy did a first initial stab at it. And this is the spreadsheets that we released covering the financial affairs of the DNC. Those are very rich documents. There’s one spreadsheet called "Spreadsheet of All Things," and it includes all the major U.S.—all the major DNC donors, where the donations were brought in, who they are, identifiers, the total amounts they’ve donated, how much at a noted or particular event, whether that event was being pushed by the president or by someone else. That effectively maps out the influence structure in the United States for the Democratic Party, but more broadly, because the—with few exceptions, billionaires in the United States make sure they donate to both parties. That’s going to provide a scaffold for future investigative journalism about influence within the United States, in general.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Julian, on that issue, clearly, a lot of the emails talk about the actual amounts of money that were being offered to donors for the opportunity to—I mean, asked of donors for the opportunity to sit at different events next to President Obama, especially, the use of President Obama as a fundraiser. Now, most people in the political world will consider this business as usual, but the actual mechanics of how this operates and the degree to which the DNC coordinates with the president, his marketability, is—I don’t think has ever been revealed in this detail. Would you agree?

JULIAN ASSANGE: That’s right. And it’s not just that the president holds fundraisers. That’s nothing new. But rather, what you get for each donation of a particular sort. There’s even a phrase used in one of the emails of, quote, "pay to play." So, yeah, I think it’s extremely interesting. There’s emails back and forth also between the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC. So, you see quite elaborate structures of money being funneled to state Democratic Party officers and then teleported back, seemingly to get up certain stats, maybe to evade certain campaign funding restrictions.
In relation to what has become the most significant political discussion as a result of the publication, which is that the DNC higher-ups, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz, were clearly against Bernie Sanders and trying to subvert his campaign in a whole raft of ways, that’s true. That’s the—the atmosphere that is revealed by hundreds of emails is that it’s perfectly acceptable to produce trenchant internal criticisms of Bernie Sanders and discuss ways to undermine his campaign. So, whether that’s calling up the president of MSNBC—Debbie Wasserman Schultz called the president of MSNBC to haul Morning Joe into line, which it subsequently has done. I noticed this morning, Morning Joe actually discussed it themselves, trying to shore up their own presentation of, you know, a TV program that can’t be pushed around. But, in fact, they did not mention the call to the president. That was something that is still unspeakable. And it was a 180-degree flip in that coverage.

And you see other, you know, quite naked conspiracies against Bernie Sanders. While there’s been some discussion, for example, about—that there was a plan to use—to expose Bernie Sanders as an atheist, as opposed to being a religious Jew, and to use that against him in the South to undermine his support there. There was an instruction by the head of communications, Luis Miranda, to take an anti-Bernie Sanders story, that had appeared in the press, and spread that around without attribution, not leaving their fingerprints on it. And that was an instruction made to staff. So, it wasn’t just, you know, a plan that may or may not have been carried out. This was an instruction that was pushed to DNC staff to covertly get out into the media anti-Bernie Sanders stories. Another thing that—

AMY GOODMAN: On Sunday, Hillary—

JULIAN ASSANGE: Another aspect that is—

AMY GOODMAN: On Sunday, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager, Robby Mook, cited experts saying that the DNC emails were leaked by the Russians in an attempt to help Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. Mook was speaking to CNN. This is what he said.

ROBBY MOOK: What’s disturbing to us is that we—experts are telling us that Russian state actors broke into the DNC, stole these emails, and other experts are now saying that they are—the Russians are releasing these emails for the purpose of actually helping Donald Trump. I don’t think it’s coincidental that these emails were released on the eve our convention here. We also saw last week at the Republican convention that Trump and his allies made changes to the Republican platform to make it more pro-Russian. And we saw him talking about how NATO shouldn’t intervene to defend—necessarily should intervene to defend our Eastern European allies if they’re attacked by Russia. So, I think when you put all this together, it’s a disturbing picture.

AMY GOODMAN: So, that was Robby Mook citing experts saying the DNC emails were leaked by the Russians. You were the one who released these 20,000 emails, Julian Assange. Where did you get them?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well, what’s not in that clip there by Robby is that, just afterwards, he was asked by Jake Tapper, "Who are these experts? Can you name them?" The answer was no, a refusal to name the experts. But we have seen one of the experts, so-called experts, that the Democratic Party is trying to base its incredible conspiracy theory on about WikiLeaks. And that is this—what we jokingly refer to as the NSA dick pic guy. He’s a former National Security Agency agent who started to produce conspiracy theories about us in 2013, when we were involved in the Edward Snowden rescue, as a means to try and undermine the Snowden publications, subsequently embroiled in some amateur pornography scandal. That’s why they don’t want to name their experts, because they are people like this.

In relation to sourcing, I can say some things. A, we never reveal our sources, obviously. That’s what we pride ourselves on. And we won’t in this case, either. But no one knows who our source is. It’s simply speculation. It’s, I think, interesting and acceptable to speculate who our sources are. But if we’re talking about the DNC, there’s lots of consultants that have access, lots of programmers. And the DNC has been hacked dozens and dozens of times. Even according to its own reports, it had been hacked extensively over the last few years. And the dates of the emails that we published are significantly after all, or all but one—it’s not clear—of the hacking allegations that the DNC says have occurred.


The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

What to do about the 2016 Presidential Election?

.



Call in  supernatural help to protect us from both parties.




You can use the spiritual -




or you can use the extraterrestrial - 




either gives us more hope than we have got.




Or is time really running out!
.

The Politics of Hypocrisy - The American Election - Bill Clinton character reference for Hillary Clinton - Part 2.

.


hy·poc·ri·sy
həˈpäkrəsē/
noun
noun: hypocrisy; plural noun: hypocrisies
the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.


Today we learned the meaning of hypocrisy in politics as last night Bill Clinton gave a rather surprising testament to the character and quality of Hillary Clinton as his girlfriend, wife, companion, mother, politician, and first mate.


Even such stalwart liberals as Rachel Maddow cringed at the thought of Bill Clinton talking about pursuing his wife in college, trying to work up the courage to touch her to get her attention, and all the great family moments.


Here in America we have a much different opinion of the character of Bill Clinton as you can tell from the following recent article in heavy.com/news.

Bill Clinton Sex Allegations: 17 Claims of Rape & Affairs

Published  
As Hillary Clinton pursues a return to the White House, this time as president, she is facing attacks from presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and his supporters over the numerous sexual misconduct allegations her husband has faced. President Bill Clinton has been accused of sexual assault by two women, Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey. At least eight other women have accused Bill Clinton of sexually harassing them or making unwanted sexual advances toward them, with the allegations dating back to the 1970s.


Trump and his supporters have said Hillary Clinton enabled her husband and victimized his accusers. At a rally in Oregon, Trump called Hillary Clinton, " an unbelievably nasty, mean enabler." Bill Clinton has brushed off questions about the allegations while campaigning for his wife. Hillary Clinton told CNN's Chris Cuomo she has "thick skin" and said about Trump she knows "exactly what he is fishing for, and you know I’m not going to be responding." As a general election showdown between Hillary Clinton and Trump appears to be likely, the attention on Bill Clinton's past with women is likely to be in the spotlight frequently. On May 23, Trump posted an Instagram video with the question "Is Hillary really protecting women?" The video includes images of Bill Clinton smoking a cigar and sitting with Hillary as she can be heard laughing. The video also features audio of Broaddrick and Willey. Bill Clinton has been accused of sexual assault or harassment by at least 10 women, a list you can see below. You can click on a name or click through the gallery to see more about the allegations:




Clinton has also admitted to or been accused of having consensual affairs with at least an additional seven women. You can click on a name or click through the gallery to see more about the allegations:






You can read the full article at this site:


Here are some of the ladies who helped keep Bill company during all those wonderful family moments, or as some might note, another notch in the belt of Mr. Irresistible.

Juanita Broaddrick

Kathleen Willey

Paula Jones

Christy Zercher

Eileen Wellstone

Becky Brown

Regina Blakely Hopper

Monica Lewinsky

Elizabeth Ward Gracen

Gennifer Flowers

Connie Hamzy

Dolly Kyle Browning

Sally Miller (Sally Perdue)

Lencola Sullivan
Sandra Allen James
.