We have been cataloging the collusion between many dozens of members of the elite media with the Clinton Campaign, including reporters submitting their work for approval, CNN leaking debate questions to Hillary in advance, debate moderators coordinating with the Clinton campaign and the list goes on, but this one maybe the biggest one of all as the collusion goes on for some time as revealed by DNC emails made public by WikiLeaks.
Notice that the UK Daily Mail is reporting this in a big way, but the American elite media is near mum.
Among the batch of 8,263 emails released on Sunday night, one shows that staff working for the network hosts asked DNC staffers what questions they should put to the Republican candidate.
They also asked for advice when it came to an appearance from former candidate, Ted Cruz.
An email dated April 28 entitled ‘Cruz on CNN’ reads ‘CNN is looking for questions. Please send some topical/interesting ones.’
That email was sent from DNC research director Lauren Dillon to other officials and staffers.
Days before that, on April 25 she asked for questions from officials and staffers for an interview that CNN’s Wolf Blitzer would be conducting with Trump.
The 2016 nominee has to be new blood. Voters are not buying that the same people who have been in and out of government for decades are suddenly going to reform it.
Talk about running for the wrong reasons. The American people are suffering and certain power players are treating the reigns of our country as if it their personal play thing, as if this is some sort of soap opera.
Republican lawmakers aren’t jumping on the Mitt Romney 2016 bandwagon.
Even among his onetime allies, the news that the former Massachusetts governor is considering a third consecutive run for president is being met with criticism or cool indifference on Capitol Hill.
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Romney’s congressional liaison for his 2012 run, said Tuesday he might support one of his Senate colleagues for president.
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), who backed Romney before the 2012 Iowa caucus, said he’s going to “wait and see.”
And another senator who spoke on background to offer a candid assessment of how Romney could affect the 2016 race offered a stark dismissal.
“What we know about Romney last time, he lost the election with working Americans,” said the conservative senator, who backed Romney in 2012. “[Among] those making $30,000 to $50,000, he lost it by 15 percent, and [those making] under $30,000 by 28 percent. You can’t win an election like that. And it can’t just be words. I’ll be looking for candidates who are authentic, who have credibility.”
Remember the problems with Mitt Romney in 2012:
1 – He smeared Newt Gingrich for starters in ads that were just plain dishonest. This cost Romney votes in North Florida among other areas. Millions of conservatives stayed home.
2 – He changed his views on illegal immigration and global warming depending on what group he was in front of.
3 – He trashed all the other 2012 candidates for not having perfectly conservative records when he had the least conservative record of them all.
4 – He let Obama paint him as a man who was responsible for the death of employees that had died after he left the company. These ads ran in OHIO for a month before Romney even responded. Losing Ohio alone will cost the election.
5 – His tax reform plan was the mildest proposal of all of the candidates.
Speaking of the Democrats’ war on the First Amendment.
The Federal Election Commission, Congress and the President have no constitutional authority to regulate or censor political speech. Doing so is expresly for bidden in the First Amendment to the Constitution. But one can be sure that Democrats will find some statist judges that will say it’s legal.
The Democrat-proposed S.J. Res. 19, would change the First Amendment, giving politicians the ability to determine whatever they feel are “reasonable” limits on free speech, rather than the current First Amendment that completely disallows that power by stating that “Congress shall make no law prohibiting” free speech or the establishment and practice of religion.
The FEC deadlocked in a crucial Internet campaign speech vote announced Friday, leaving online political blogging and videos free of many of the reporting requirements attached to broadcast ads — for now.
While all three GOP-backed members voted against restrictions, they were opposed by the three Democratic-backed members, including FEC Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel, who said she will lead a push next year to try to come up with new rules government political speech on the Internet.
It would mark a major reversal for the commission, which for nearly a decade has protected the ability of individuals and interest groups to take to engage in a robust political conversation on the Internet without having to worry about registering with the government or keeping and reporting records of their expenses.
Ms. Ravel said she fears that in trying to keep the Internet open for bloggers, they’ve instead created a loophole for major political players to escape some scrutiny.
“Some of my colleagues seem to believe that the same political message that would require disclosure if run on television should be categorically exempt from the same requirements when placed in the Internet alone,” said FEC Vice Chair Ann M. Ravel in a statement. “As a matter of policy, this simply does not make sense.”
She said the FEC should no longer “turn a blind eye to the Internet’s growing force in the political arena,” and she vowed to force a conversation next year on what changes to make.
The three Republican-backed commissioners, though, said in a joint statement that Ms. Ravel’s plans would stifle what’s become the “virtual free marketplace of political ideas and democratic debate.”
FEC Chairman Lee E. Goodman said what Ms. Ravel is proposing would require a massive bureaucracy digging into the corners of the web to police what’s posted about politics.
Harry Reid not only violated Senate rules in his tirade. What Harry Reid tried to do that generated the floor objection of Ted Cruz is also very worthy of noting. What Reid tried to do was have the right to add language in the bill that was not voted on in the Senate in secret.
That is correct, the Senate leadership since 2006 has been legislating behind closed doors in secret during the conference process. The House under Nancy Pelosi was doing that until the Republicans took back the House. Please see our editor’s note below.
When called out by Senator Cruz on trying to use such a dirty trick against the American people, Harry Reid went on a name calling tirade.
Senator Ted Cruz:
Senator Mike Lee:
Editor’s Note: The videos below are from 2009. The Democrats inserted language in a bill (during conference in secret) to make it legal to give bonuses to the AIG execs who we were bailing out. Those execs were big donors to Democrat Senator Chris Dodd. After lying about it, Dodd and the Democrats finally confessed at what they had done:
Editor: There are only a few in Washington that we respect because they are men of integrity, good sense, and good character. Ted Cruz is among them and this short video reveals why.
Senator Ted Cruz: The Obama administration has admitted that whet they are calling “Universal Back Ground Checks” is really a gun registration scheme.
Gun registration only has one purpose as history has proved that gun registries have no impact on gun crime. That purpose is confiscation from civilians.
Senator McCain said that members of his own party that are concerned about “Drone Strike” policy are “wacko birds” while insisting that no innocent Americans are going to be killed with drones.
The problem is that innocent Americans have already been killed, namely the 16 year old AMERICAN son of a terror suspect. The Obama Administration flippantly said “the kid chose the wrong father” when critiqued. President Obama asserted that he has the power to lock up Americans indefinitely or even kill us, his administration has even made cracks about the “kill list“.
Senator Rand Paul “I will speak until I can speak no more”
When questioned about some of these extra constitutional powers they said, “trust us” because they would give people on such target lists “administrative due process” which is something that the Obama Administration made up out of this air and essentially means that even when it comes to Americans not engaged in combat, but are merely viewed as a terror threat, the Administration can act as judge, jury and executioner.
Keep in mind that all of what we just told you are facts that are not in dispute.
This made some civil libertarians in both parties nervous for good cause. So members of the House and Senate started asking questions about how the Administration sees the limits of this power and in every case the Obama Administration would use lawyerly rhetorical slight of hand to avoid answering simple questions about the limits of such a policy.
Over and over Senators such as Rand Paul would ask simple questions, so would Senator Ted Cruz, only to get the run around. After weeks of rhetorical gymnastics and Senator Rand Paul’s epic filibuster the Obama Administration, suffering public humiliation on the issue, finally answered a straight question with a straight answer.
Why can we not just “trust them”?
Keep in mind that the Obama Administration willingly and knowingly sent guns to Mexican Drug Cartels in an effort to blame the subsequent loss of life (hundreds killed including an American border agent) with those guns on American gun owners and use the subsequent bloodshed as an excuse to attack the 2nd Amendment. The administration was outed by their own federal agents.
This is the same President and his administration that have been caught in lie after lie after lie in their cover up of the four Americans murdered in Benghazi. President Obama still refuses to let Congress have any access to the survivors of the attack.
While Rand Paul was having his epic filibuster on the Senate floor with the help of Republican Sens. Mike Lee (Ut.), John Barrasso (Wyo.), Mitch McConnell (Ky.), Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), John Cornyn (Tex.), Jerry Moran (Kan.), John Thune (S.D.), Pat Toomey (Pa.) and Ron Johnson (Wis.). Sens.Ted Cruz (Tex.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and Tim Scott (S.C.) made their first speaking appearances on the Senate floor. Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also voiced their support.
Senator Mark Kirk, made his first appearance on the Senate floor after having a stroke, he did not speak but he brought Rand Paul an apple and a thermos full of of tea (the same refreshment that Jimmy Stewart used in his famous film about a Senate filibuster).
From the House Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.) Justin Amash (Mich.), Ron DeSantis (Fla.), Doug LaMalfa (Calif.), Garland “Andy” Barr (Ky.), Trey Radel (Fla.), Michael Burgess (Tex.), Jim Bridenstine (Okla.), Raul R. Labrador (Idaho), Keith Rothfus (Pa.), Paul Gosar (Ariz.), Steve Daines (Mont.), Bill Huizenga (Mich.), Richard Hudson (N.C.) and David Schweikert (Ariz.) all came over to the Senate floor to show their support.
While Senator Rand Paul was engaging in his epic filibuster to fight for your rights under the Constitution, John McCain was having dinner with President Obama. The problem is not that Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Justin Amash are “wacko birds”, the problem is that John McCain doesn’t get Barack Obama.
Senator Rand Paul: “For 13 hours yesterday we asked him that question. Under duress and under public humiliation the White House will respond and do the right thing.”
Why have members of the House and Senate, in the case of the video below Senator Ted Cruz, has to go through rhetorical gymnastics to get Obama’s Attorney General to answer a simple question.
The question Senator Cruz is asking is a crucial legal distinction, if there is no imminent danger such as Pearl Harbor or 9/11, the Constitution demands that such a person be arrested, not summarily executed.
This is important to get nailed down because previously President Obama asserted that he has the right to be judge, jury and executioner but said “don’t worry we won’t use it that way”. Also, the Obama Administration, has a habit of using lawyerly rhetorical slight of hand to answer a question not being asked so that they have plausible deniability.
CIA Nominee Brennen, and Attorney General Holder gave slippery non-responsive answers to Senator Rand Paul’s questions when he wrote to them trying to get a straight answer, hence the epic Rand Paul filibuster.
It is also important to keep in mind that Attorney General Holder has been caught lying to Congress more than once and is facing a civil lawsuit from the House for lying.
Senator Rand Paul explains why this issue is so important:
I am sure readers have heard by now that Mitt Romney is blaming the 47% who is “on the take” and “isn’t paying taxes”.
Political Arena contributor Warren Roche put together this brilliant and entertaining montage, “Where is the love?”:
While it was impolitic for Mitt to include veterans and retirees in that number there is some truth to it, but in saying it they way he did left him open to be demagogued and attacked as hating retires, the disabled and veterans.
How many times will Republicans get whacked in the “battle of the narratives” before they learn? Or is the current crew in charge so used to fooling themselves that they have to be swept out for the party to have a chance in future elections?
At least some people get it:
I just think it’s nuts. First of all it is insulting. It is like WalMart after a bad week saying “The customers are being unruly”. – Newt Gingrich
“You have a political problem when the voters don’t like you, but you have a real problem when the voters feel like you don’t like them”. – George Will
Governor Bobby Jindal:
Yours truly had this to say a few days ago in Facebook Notes:
Much of the blue collar in this country used to be solidly in the Republican corner, but they feel like they have been lied to and taken for granted. Since the 2003 Bush tax cuts there have been ZERO domestic policy victories for this group of voters. That is why they are disillusioned and believe that no matter who they vote for government will just gets bigger, the economy will just get smaller while jobs dry up and flee the country. They feel squeezed and while they know that the Democrats are bad, they no longer have confidence in the Republican party. That is why these voters are staying home.
What isn’t helping is Republicans with an entitlement mentality who actually have the nerve to believe that just because the Democrat in power is a failed neo-Marxist Saul Alinsky radical that the man they cram down our throats is entitled to the blue collar conservative vote, and when they don’t get it they call them imbeciles.
Texas Senator Ted Cruz gets it as well and comments on why so many blue collar Republicans stayed home again:
Senator Marco Rubio:
“If you are not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.” – Malcolm X
Political Arena 