Understanding the United States of America (USA) - III

[Rammpal]

"^^^BREAKING BOMBSHELL: NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails: Money Laundering, Sex Crimes with Children, Child Exploitation, Pay to Play, Perjury.."

http://truepundit.com/breaking-bombshel ... y-perjury/

[Rammpal]

Looks like Putin Is delivering what he promised

[Dipanker]

As Modi jee said Israel thanked Bharatvarsh for being the only nation on this earth to have loved and let Jews prosper since 14 century. "Only in Bharat". Everywhere the Jews were persecuted genocided, I was amazed to read in a Ken Follet novel that before world war 2 it was common for englishmen to riot and kill in jewish ghettos.

Bolded part of the statement is not correct. The first jews "Bene Israel" landed in India in 2nd century BC.

[UlanBatori]

Oh! This is the sort of CT that should b posted IN FULL lest it disappear momentarily.
Dated Nov. 2. Note that NYPD Chief is not named. Yet.

New York Police Department detectives and prosecutors working an alleged underage sexting case against former Congressman Anthony Weiner have turned over a newly-found laptop he shared with wife Huma Abedin to the FBI with enough evidence “to put Hillary (Clinton) and her crew away for life,” NYPD sources told True Pundit. NYPD sources said Clinton’s “crew” also included several unnamed yet implicated members of Congress in addition to her aides and insiders. The NYPD seized the computer from Weiner during a search warrant and detectives discovered a trove of over 500,000 emails to and from Hillary Clinton, Abedin and other insiders during her tenure as secretary of state. The content of those emails sparked the FBI to reopen its defunct email investigation into Clinton on Friday. But new revelations on the contents of that laptop, according to law enforcement sources, implicate the Democratic presidential candidate, her subordinates, and even select elected officials in far more alleged serious crimes than mishandling classified and top secret emails, sources said. NYPD sources said these new emails include evidence linking Clinton herself and associates to:
Money laundering
Child exploitation
Sex crimes with minors (children)
Perjury
Pay to play through Clinton Foundation
Obstruction of justice
Other felony crimes
NYPD detectives and a NYPD Chief, the department’s highest rank under Commissioner, said openly that if the FBI and Justice Department fail to garner timely indictments against Clinton and co- conspirators, NYPD will go public with the damaging emails now in the hands of FBI Director James Comey and many FBI field offices.
“What’s in the emails is staggering and as a father, it turned my stomach,” the NYPD Chief said. “There is not going to be any Houdini-like escape from what we found. We have copies of everything. We will ship them to Wikileaks or I will personally hold my own press conference if it comes to that.”
The NYPD Chief said once Comey saw the alarming contents of the emails he was forced to reopen a criminal probe against Clinton.

“People are going to prison,” he said.

Meanwhile, FBI sources said Abedin and Weiner were cooperating with federal agents, who have taken over the non-sexting portions the case from NYPD. The husband-and-wife Clinton insiders are both shopping for separate immunity deals, sources said.
“If they don’t cooperate they are going to see long sentences,” a federal law enforcement source said.
NYPD sources said Weiner or Abedin stored all the emails in a massive Microsoft Outlook program on the laptop. The emails implicate other current and former members of Congress and one high-ranking Democratic Senator as having possibly engaged in criminal activity too, sources said.
Prosecutors in the office of US Attorney Preet Bharara have issued a subpoena for Weiner’s cell phones and travel records, law enforcement sources confirmed. NYPD said it planned to order the same phone and travel records on Clinton and Abedin, however, the FBI said it was in the process of requesting the identical records. Law enforcement sources are particularly interested in cell phone activity and travel to the Bahamas, U.S. Virgin Islands and other locations that sources would not divulge.

The new emails contain travel documents and itineraries indicating Hillary Clinton, President Bill Clinton, Weiner and multiple members of Congress and other government officials accompanied convicted pedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein on his Boeing 727 on multiple occasions to his private island in the U.S Virgin Islands, sources said. Epstein’s island has also been dubbed Orgy Island or Sex Slave Island where Epstein allegedly pimps out underage girls and boys to international dignitaries.

Both NYPD and FBI sources confirm based on the new emails they now believe Hillary Clinton traveled as Epstein’s guest on at least six occasions, probably more when all the evidence is combed, sources said. Bill Clinton, it has been confirmed in media reports spanning recent years, that he too traveled with Epstein over 20 times to the island.

Laptop Also Unveiled More Classified, Top Secret Breaches

According to other uncovered emails, Abedin and Clinton both sent and received thousands of classified and top secret documents to personal email accounts including Weiner’s unsecured campaign web site which is managed by Democratic political consultants in Washington D.C.

Weiner maintained little known email accounts that the couple shared on the website anthonyweiner.com. Weiner, a former seven-term Democratic Congressman from New York, primarily used that domain to campaign for Congress and for his failed mayoral bid of New York City.

At one point, FBI sources said, Abedin and Clinton’s classified and top secret State Department documents and emails were stored in Weiner’s email on a server shared with a dog grooming service and a western Canadian bicycle shop.
However, Weiner and Abedin, who is Hillary Clinton’s closest personal aide, weren’t the only people with access to the Weiner’s email account. Potentially dozens of unknown individuals had access to Abedin’s sensitive State Department emails that were stored in Weiner’s email account, FBI sources confirmed.
FEC records show Weiner paid more than $92,000 of congressional campaign funds to Anne Lewis Strategies LLC to manage his email and web site. According to FBI sources, the D.C.-based political consulting firm has served as the official administrator of the anthonyweiner.com domain since 2010, the same time Abedin was working at the State Department. This means technically Weiner and Abedin’s emails, including top secret State Department emails, could have been accessed, printed, discussed, leaked, or distributed by untold numbers of personnel at the Anne Lewis consulting firm because they can control where the website and it emails are pointed, FBI sources said.

According to FBI sources, the bureau’s newly-minted probe into Clinton’s use and handling of emails while she served as secretary of state, has also been broadened to include investigating new email-related revelations, including:
Abedin forwarded classified and top secret State Department emails to Weiner’s email
Abedin stored emails, containing government secrets, in a special folder shared with Weiner warehousing over 500,000 archived State Department emails.
Weiner had access to these classified and top secret documents without proper security clearance to view the records
Abedin also used a personal yahoo address and her Clintonemail.com address to send/receive/store classified and top secret documents
A private consultant managed Weiner’s site for the last six years, including three years when Clinton was secretary of state, and therefore, had full access to all emails as the domain’s listed registrant and administrator via Whois email contacts.

Because Weiner’s campaign website is managed by the third-party consultant and political email guru, FBI agents are burdened with the task of trying to decipher just how many people had access to Weiner’s server and emails and who were these people. Or if the server was ever compromised by hackers, or other actors.

Abedin told FBI agents in an April interview that she didn’t know how to consistently print documents or emails from her secure Dept. of State system. Instead, she would forward the sensitive emails to her yahoo, Clintonemail.com and her email linked to Weiner.
Abedin said, according to FBI documents, she would then access those email accounts via webmail from an unclassified computer system at the State Dept. and print the documents, many of which were classified and top secret, from the largely unprotected webmail portals.
Clinton did not have a computer in her office on Mahogany Row at the State Dept. so she was not able to read timely intelligence unless it was printed out for her, Abedin said. Abedin also said Clinton could not operate the secure State Dept. fax machine installed in her Chappaqua, NY home without assistance.
Perhaps more alarming, according to the FBI’s 302 Report detailing its interview with Abedin, none of the multiple FBI agents and Justice Department officials who conducted the interview pressed Abedin to further detail the email address linked to Weiner. There was never a follow up, according to the 302 report.
But now, all that has changed, with the FBI’s decision to reopen the Clinton email investigation and the husband and wife seeking immunity deals to testify against Clinton and other associates about the contents of the laptop’s emails.

[UlanBatori]

BTW, NYPD Chief of Dept is Carlos Gomez. Wonder if he's getting phone calls from the friendly nbd CFC Mafia, not 2 mention WHOTUS.
And the Editor of YourNewsWire is named Sean Adl-Tabatabai

[vijayk]

all BS

[Singha]

Wiener has checked himself into a sex rehab clinic per twitter.

[LokeshC]

Its getting better by the minute. I have no other sources of entertainment other than this as of today.

[vijayk]

For once check RW conspiracy sites.

This is what MSM in US and India doing to anyone they think is not sickular.

RW trash and MSM trash have no difference anymore

[Dipanker]

Enjoy!

[vijayk]

Instead of getting roiled up in US presidential election and fighting over 2 pathetic candidates, you should revel in it.

When NYT/WaPo tries to undermine India, laught at them and show them their own country and laugh it off.

[Mort Walker]

Enjoy!

Arre yaar, is the best you can do?

[habal]

The layers of the Clinton money machine are being peeled away.
Comey is ca-ca.
Lynch will be lunch.
Now Pepe Escobar names Peter Kadzik, Deputy (dog) in the Department of Injustice, a Clintonista who pardoned Marc Rich and now leaks to Podesta, updates on the foot-a-draggin' on the email probe.
That's easy for him -- he's been put in charge of it!
By election day, it will take vote-rigging on an epic scale to pull Hitlery's ovaries out of the fire.
Only question left is, will the Drumfster cave, and concede despite the rig? My money says, NO.

[vijayk]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11 ... s-say.html

The FBI's investigation into the Clinton Foundation that has been going on for more than a year has now taken a "very high priority," separate sources with intimate knowledge of the probe tell Fox News.

FBI agents have interviewed and re-interviewed multiple people on the foundation case, which is looking into possible pay for play interaction between then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. The FBI's White Collar Crime Division is handling the investigation.

Even before the WikiLeaks dumps of alleged emails linked to the Clinton campaign, FBI agents had collected a great deal of evidence, law enforcement sources tell Fox News.

"There is an avalanche of new information coming in every day," one source told Fox News, who added some of the new information is coming from the WikiLeaks documents and new emails.

FBI agents are "actively and aggressively pursuing this case," and will be going back and interviewing the same people again, some for the third time, sources said.

Agents are also going through what Clinton and top aides have said in previous interviews and the FBI 302, documents agents use to report interviews they conduct, to make sure notes line up, according to sources.

[Dipanker]

^
Hillary kissing Robert Byrd big deal? AFAIK he was longest serving senator from 1959 to 2010, and before that he was a congressman from 1953 - 1959. That is almost 60 years in congress+senate.

[habal]

BUSTED, HERE ARE THE COMPLETE RIGGED ELECTION RESULTS.
TRUMP LOSES.
THIS WAS RIPPED STRAIGHT OFF THE WORLDNOW MEDIA SERVER FOX, CBS, AND OTHERS USE. THIS IS NOT A SPOOF, THEY HAVE ALREADY FINALIZED THE ELECTION AND PREPARED THE REPORT PAGES.

This is a bust of the entire system with 3 different news stations used as samples.

Worldnow is a central company that helps all the news stations stay synchronized so they all report the same news. This is a bust of that company, that already has the election results ready for the stations to post, complete with their station graphics. On election day, they go live with this. This is completely confirmed in the second report on this page, including proof that the posted results are NOT a test.

check it out @ http://82.221.129.208

[habal]

lo jee election ho gaya jee

[LokeshC]

Man. Where do you get this stuff from. Lol

[Mort Walker]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11 ... s-say.html

The FBI's investigation into the Clinton Foundation that has been going on for more than a year has now taken a "very high priority," separate sources with intimate knowledge of the probe tell Fox News.

FBI agents have interviewed and re-interviewed multiple people on the foundation case, which is looking into possible pay for play interaction between then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. The FBI's White Collar Crime Division is handling the investigation.

Even before the WikiLeaks dumps of alleged emails linked to the Clinton campaign, FBI agents had collected a great deal of evidence, law enforcement sources tell Fox News.

"There is an avalanche of new information coming in every day," one source told Fox News, who added some of the new information is coming from the WikiLeaks documents and new emails.

FBI agents are "actively and aggressively pursuing this case," and will be going back and interviewing the same people again, some for the third time, sources said.

Agents are also going through what Clinton and top aides have said in previous interviews and the FBI 302, documents agents use to report interviews they conduct, to make sure notes line up, according to sources.

Killary chamchas were clamoring over the weekend that the FBI should investigate and report quickly. Now the dirt is deep and vast, so they've become quiet and throwing the kitchen sink at the Trumpanzees. The conspiracy against the Trumpanzee is deep.

[Rammpal]

Instead of getting roiled up in US presidential election and fighting over 2 pathetic candidates, you should revel in it.

When NYT/WaPo tries to undermine India, laught at them and show them their own country and laugh it off.

And it needs to go viral, over and over and ...... again !

[habal]

Proof that the elections are fixed came when media put premium on The Donald's reply that he would not concede. I mean what kind of nut media would ask one contestant, (and not the other) would he concede if he lost the election.

Did they have inside information. Did they know he would lose narrowly come what may ?

LokeshC, FBI is now on war path against the Hitlerites and leaking everything, emails, election fixing drama and media material post fixing etc to anyone interested in publishing it. It is a country divided down the middle. Media, immigrants, gold digger opportunists, soldiers of fortune on one side and sons of the soil, patriots, naionalists on the other

[Prem]

Is the news about NYPD having big time goods on HC and her gang is widely circulated and reported or just rumor?

When the elections are over, we all are going to miss some serious entertainment. Of course, if DT wins some sort of it will continue and HC all will be OOO KKK as bugs bunny says. Pity GoT 7th season, not yet started. I am going to see all GoT old episodes and some old sci fi serials like Stargate now. What to do?

Stargate Atlantis , Since Wraith of Clintonicana occupy NewYork Now ?

[Yagnasri]

http://observer.com/2016/11/bernie-sand ... inal-week/

http://observer.com/2015/08/a-bernie-sa ... is-coming/

Almost all of the people playing their games and all may even know the result.

Ya. I got SG-A full with me. Will start the second season soon

[NRao]

Pardon the OT,





We WON.


ALL the best to you all. See ya at the other end perhaps after the "elections" (yeah, what is that?).

[Mort Walker]

[svenkat]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/02/us-election-2016-barack-obama-warns-the-fate-of-the-world-at-ris/

Obama warns: 'The fate of the world is teetering'

[svenkat]

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/two-americas-why-donald-trump-still-has-a-lot-of-support

The polls say that just less than forty per cent of voters in America have a favorable opinion of Trump. Whatever their views of him as an individual, they like what he stands for: nationalism, nativism, and hostility toward what they consider a self-serving élite that looks down on them.

From Trump University to Trump’s tax records to the parade of women alleging that he harassed and assaulted them, reporters have done a pretty thorough job of illuminating and investigating Trump’s checkered past, the hollowness of many of his claims, and what sort of person he is. Meanwhile, the pundits, including many conservatives, have portrayed Trump as an existential danger to the Republic. And yet none of these journalistic endeavors has had the desired effect: to snuff out Trump’s candidacy.

Some of the blame here may belong to the Clinton campaign. While it has done an effective job of highlighting Trump’s race-baiting and sexism, it hasn’t done enough to exploit his other vulnerabilities, to paint the Republican candidate as a con man whose schemes have victimized many ordinary, hard-working Americans. To be sure, the Clinton campaign has gone some way in this direction. But they should be ramming home every day the message that Trump is a serial chiseler of the little guy, not his savior. Why isn’t Clinton regularly appearing alongside some of the people who lost their savings to Trump University? Where are the ads featuring tradesmen and suppliers and charities that Trump has stiffed?

But the explanation of Trump’s enduring appeal must go beyond political tactics. In a divided but social-media-saturated America, people on either side of the divide communicate over each other, rather than with each other. They regard news stories not as new information to be ingested and considered but as potential ammo to hurl at the other side. They see their political opponents not as well-meaning if misguided fellow-citizens but, to borrow a phrase, as deplorables who have no political legitimacy.

On the Trump side, there is a siege mentality, evident in the constant vilification of the Clintons, the chants of “Lock her up,” and the fury toward the mainstream news media. [If you tune in to conservative talk radio, as many Trump supporters do, you will hear a constant discourse of resentment, conspiracy theories, and alienation from the institutions of economic and political power—including the Republican Party establishment. Sean Hannity, of Fox News, for example, daily presents the vote on November 8th not merely as a chance to select a new President but as a last chance to save the country from politicians and liberals who are out to destroy its very essence.

The Trump movement, like the Tea Party movement it supplanted, is a reaction to the socially liberal, polyglot America that is rapidly emerging in the twenty-first century. Representing an older, whiter, and more embattled tradition, it is constantly evoking what it sees as a lost Valhalla—a place of plentiful jobs, rising living standards, conservative social values, fewer immigrants, and minorities who knew their place. To a large extent, this lost America is a myth. Since its inception, practically, the United States has been roiled by technological change, large-scale migration, economic conflicts, and ethnic and religious tensions. But it is a powerful myth, which Trump—Mr. Make America Great Again—plays to shamelessly and effectively.

On the Democratic side, the liberal mentality comes out in suggestions that Trump’s supporters, almost by definition, are uncouth, ill-educated bigots. If you adopt this attitude, vigorously opposing Trump isn’t just a political decision; it is a moral duty and a social necessity. To assert your identity as part of the enlightened America, you need to disassociate yourself from the racist hillbillies, rednecks, and suburban dolts supporting Trump.

“Liberals and Democrats are not really part of a party, as much as they are part of a new America that looks and thinks differently and has little interest in looking back, wherever that might be,” Shadi Hamid, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, who spends much of his time studying Islamic societies, pointed out in a thought-provoking piece a few months back. “More than a party, it is a lifestyle, a culture and a sensibility, with its own media, institutions, norms and values.” Hamid probably understates the importance of policy differences that divide the two parties, especially now that Trump has proposed things like introducing religious tests for immigrants and reintroducing the use of torture in interrogations of terrorist subjects, as well as promising to appoint Supreme Court Justices in the mold of the late Antonin Scalia. But the larger point, about the gaping cultural divide, stands.

Despite the recent narrowing in the polls, liberal America still has demographics, early-voting patterns, and the Electoral College map on its side. But even if Trump loses next week, the great divide his campaign has brought to the fore won’t go away. Indeed, as Hamid noted, “The risk is that as whites become a smaller majority—and eventually an outright minority—the tendencies toward ethnic politics we’ve witnessed in this election season might very well intensify.” And if, in the coming years, robots and algorithms provide another big shock to the economy, destroying tens of millions more decent-paying jobs, how many former truck drivers and displaced white-collar workers will be receptive listeners to a future Trump?

[nirav]

Desi Americans missed a. golden opportunity to show symbolic solidarity with Trump @ their Bollywood style thingamajig.

They could have mehendi-ed their hair to look just like trumps.

[Philip]

Shrillary represents everything that it wrong with the USA. A cosy cabal of the Washington establishment,Big Oil,Big Pharma,Big defence manufacturers and co.,determine the policies domestic and foreign of the US of A. Thus wars raging in the "turd world" are engineered to pauper the states which have mineral-petro resources,and to be a ready market for the Mil-Industry Complex which Gen./Pres. Eisenhower warned the US and world against taking control. Getting as much of the globe hooked onto drugs is the perogative of the CIA which along with the Afghan-ISI axis controls the heroin trade. Why the Taliban is always looked upon fondly from time to time by wWshington. This year has seen a bumper poppy crop in Afghanistan.

Thus if Hillary wins,it is going to be disaster for the globe.LIke the secret relationship between the Bush family and the Saudis,so too are the ties which link the Clintons and China.

Jst one re[port:Clinton Cash: Bill, Hillary Created Their Own Chinese Foundation In 2014

Former President Bill Clinton, left, stands on stage with his wife, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, after she spoke during a presidential primary election night rally, Tuesday, June 7, 2016, in New York. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez)
by MIKE FLYNN23 Jun 2016231

On Wednesday, in a wide-ranging speech criticizing Hillary Clinton’s record and fitness of office, Donald Trump renewed questions about the Clintons, their eponymous foundation and their financial relationships with China. In 2011, while Hillary Clinton was serving as Secretary of State, Bill Clinton received $750,000 for two speeches, paid for by a Chinese business group and an entity controlled by the Chinese government.
Those two paid speeches merely scratch the surface of the Clintons’ “China Syndrome.”

According to Clinton Foundation 990s reviewed by Breitbart News, the Clinton’s set up a separate entity, the “Clinton Foundation Hong Kong” in 2014. The filing doesn’t detail any specific activity by the new foundation, noting simply that its mission is to undertake programs of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton (BHCC) Foundation. Although it is a separate and distinct foundation, it is controlled by the BHCC Foundation, according to the 990 filings.

The Clintons have established three other separate, foreign foundations as part of their BHCC Foundation. It has created the William J. Clinton Foundation Charitable Trust in Kenya, Africa, to work on foundation programs, in addition to two foreign foundations whose primary activity is “fundraising.” The William J. Clinton Foundation UK is domiciled in London, while the Clinton Foundation Insalingsstiftelse is domiciled in Stockholm, Sweden.

All of these foreign foundations, while legally separate, are controlled by the BHCC Foundation. The existence of each ought to raise many questions, given Hillary Clinton’s service as Secretary of State. Given the long, shared history of the United States and Great Britain, a separate Clinton Foundation tasked with fundraising in the UK is at least superficially plausible. A separate fundraising arm in Sweden seems more curious, though.

With the exception of a Swedish attorney, no Swedes serve on the board of the Clinton Foundation’s Swedish subsidiary.
In any event, the existence of five separate foreign foundations raises troubling questions about the extent of the Clinton’s work with foreign interests.

The recent creation of the Clintons’ Chinese foundation ought to raise many eyebrows on its own, though. The Clinton Foundation’s work in China has been sporadic over the years. For at least a decade, the Clinton Foundation has maintained bank accounts and/or foundation offices in the communist country, according to its 990 filings.

From 2007 to 2008, the Clinton Foundation planned and organized its first Clinton Global Initiative Conference in Hong Kong. The planning for this conference coincided with Hillary Clinton’s first run for the White House. During the conference, which occurred in December 2008, after the Presidential election, several Chinese companies and entities announced large financial pledges to underwrite the work of the Clinton Global Initiative.

The Clinton Foundation, though, doesn’t seem to have undertaken significant activities in China following this conference, according to its 990 disclosures. The Foundation maintained bank accounts in the country and, of course, Bill Clinton was paid three quarters of a million dollars by Chinese interests for two speeches in 2011.

The next significant activity was the creation of the Chinese foundation sometime in 2014, just months before Hillary Clinton launched another bid for the White House. Any detail about the activities of the Clintons’ Chinese foundation won’t be available until later this year.

A complete account won’t be known until after the November election.

[svenkat]

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/will-left-vs-right-become-a-fight-over-ethnic-politics/

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/31/hillary-clinton-and-the-populist-revolt

Clinton said. “It was certainly a rejection of every other Republican running. So pick the guy who’s the outsider, pick the guy who’s giving you an explanation—in my view, a trumped-up one, not convincing—but, nevertheless, people are hungry for that.” Voters needed a narrative for their lives, she said, including someone to blame for what had gone wrong. “Donald Trump came up with a fairly simple, easily understood, and to some extent satisfying story. And I think we Democrats have not provided as clear a message about how we see the economy as we need to.” She continued, “We need to get back to claiming the economic mantle—that we are the ones who create the jobs, who provide the support that is needed to get more fairness into the economy.”

“We have been fighting out elections in general on a lot of noneconomic issues over the past thirty years,” she said—social issues, welfare, crime, war. “Sometimes we win, sometimes we lose, but we haven’t had a coherent, compelling economic case that needs to be made in order to lay down a foundation on which to both conduct politics and do policy.”

The nineteenth-century term for someone like Frisbie was “workingman.” In the mid-twentieth century, it was “blue collar.” During the Nixon years, people like him embodied the “silent majority”—seen by admirers as hardworking, patriotic, and self-reliant, and by detractors as narrow-minded, jingoistic, and bigoted. In the wake of the culture wars of the seventies and eighties, some downscale whites embraced the slur “redneck” as a badge of honor. (Not just in the South: they kicked ass in my California high school, too, showing off the ring worn into the back pocket of their jeans by cans of snuff.) In “White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America,” the historian Nancy Isenberg writes, “More than a reaction to progressive changes in race relations, this shift was spurred on by a larger fascination with identity politics.” Being a redneck “implied that class took on the traits (and allure) of an ethnic heritage, which in turn reflected the modern desire to measure class as merely a cultural phenomenon.”

Today, Frisbie is part of the “white working class.” At first, the term sounds more neutral than its predecessors—a category suitable for pollsters and economists (who generally define “working class” as lacking a college degree). But the phrase is vexing. The blunt racial modifier, buried or implied in earlier versions, declares itself up front. Without the adjective “white,” the term is meaningless as a predictor of group thinking and behavior; but without the noun “working class” it misses the other key demographic. “White working class” mixes race and class into a volatile compound, privilege and disadvantage crammed into a single phrase.

“Working class,” meanwhile, has become a euphemism. It once suggested productivity and sturdiness. Now it means downwardly mobile, poor, even pathological. A significant part of the W.W.C. has succumbed to the ills that used to be associated with the black urban “underclass”: intergenerational poverty, welfare, debt, bankruptcy, out-of-wedlock births, trash entertainment, addiction, jail, social distrust, political cynicism, bad health, unhappiness, early death. The heartland towns that abandoned the Democrats in the eighties to bask in Ronald Reagan’s morning sunlight; the communities that Sarah Palin, on a 2008 campaign stop in Greensboro, North Carolina, called “the best of America . . . the real America”—those places were hollowing out, and politicians didn’t seem to notice. A great inversion occurred. The dangerous, depraved cities gradually became safe for clean-living professional families who happily paid thousands of dollars to prep their kids for the gifted-and-talented test, while the region surrounding Greensboro lost tobacco, textiles, and furniture-making, in a rapid collapse around the turn of the millennium, so that Oxycontin and disability and home invasions had taken root by the time Palin saluted those towns, in remarks that were a generation out of date.

.... Vance points out that polls show members of the white working class to be the most pessimistic people in the country.


So it shouldn’t have come as a complete surprise when millions of Americans were suddenly drawn to a crass strongman who tossed out fraudulent promises and gave institutions and élites the middle finger. The fact that so many informed, sophisticated Americans failed to see Donald Trump coming, and then kept writing him off, is itself a sign of a democracy in which no center holds. Most of his critics are too reasonable to fathom his fury-driven campaign. Many don’t know a single Trump supporter. But to fight Trump you have to understand his appeal.

Trump’s core voters are revealed by poll after poll to be members of the W.W.C. His campaign has made them a self-conscious identity group. They’re one among many factions in the country today—their mutual suspicions flaring, the boundaries between them hardening. ...

For most of the twentieth century, the identities of the major olitical parties were clear: Republicans spoke for those who wanted to get ahead, and Democrats spoke for those who wanted a fair shake. Whatever the vagaries and hypocrisies of a given period or politician, these were the terms by which the parties understood and advertised themselves: the interests of business on one side, workers on the other.

The lineup held as late as 1968, and it’s still evident in “Miami and the Siege of Chicago,” Norman Mailer’s brilliant report on the party conventions of that lunatic year.

The sham democracy and the chaos in Chicago led to the creation of the McGovern-Fraser Commission, which reformed the Democrats’ nominating process, weakening the Party bosses and strengthening women, minorities, young people, and single-issue activists. In Thomas Frank’s recent book, “Listen, Liberal,” he describes the result: “The McGovern Commission reforms seemed to be populist, but their effect was to replace one group of party insiders with another—in this case, to replace leaders of workers’ organizations with affluent professionals.”

A different set of issues mattered to younger Democrats: the rights of disenfranchised groups, the environment, government corruption, militarism. In 1971, Fred Dutton, a member of the McGovern Commission, published a book called “Changing Sources of Power,” which hailed young college-educated idealists as the future of the Party. Pocketbook issues would give way to concerns about quality of life. Called the New Politics, this set of priorities emphasized personal morality over class interest.

McGovern’s campaign manager was a young Yale-educated lawyer named Gary Hart, who had assigned the campaign’s Texas effort to a Yale law student named Bill Clinton. Clinton’s new girlfriend from Yale, Hillary Rodham, joined him that summer in San Antonio. Hart and Clinton embodied the transition that their party was undergoing. Education had lifted both men from working-class, small-town backgrounds: Hart labored on the Kansas railroads as a boy; Clinton came from a dirt-poor Arkansas watermelon patch called Hope. The McGovern rout left its young foot soldiers with two options: restore the Party’s working-class identity or move on to a future where educated professionals might compose a Democratic majority. Hart and Clinton followed the second path. Hart emerged as the leader of the tech-minded “Atari Democrats,” in the eighties; Clinton, the bright hope of Southern moderates, became the chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council, a position that he used as a launchpad for the Presidency in 1992.

Hillary’s background was different. She had grown up outside Chicago, in a middle-class family. Her father, a staunch conservative just this side of the John Birch Society, owned a small drapery business. Her mother taught her the Methodist creed: “Do all the good you can, for all the people you can, in all the ways you can, as long as ever you can.” Hillary changed from Goldwater Girl to liberal activist in the crucible of the sixties, but she remained true to her origins. Sara Ehrman, one of Hillary’s co-workers in Texas in the summer of 1972, described Clinton to her biographer Carl Bernstein as a “progressive Christian in that she believed in litigation to do good, and to correct injustices.” Clinton had “a kind of spiritual high-mindedness . . . a kind of fervor, and self-justification that God is on her side.” Hillary went town to town in South Texas, registering Hispanic voters, her Bible in hand. For her, politics had to conform to an idea of virtue. Bill, the natural, didn’t ask if he was on God’s side—politics was all about people.

Neither of them had a carefully worked-out ideology. Their political philosophy came down to two words: “public service.” Bill and Hillary moved to Arkansas in 1974, and got married the following year. They were policy wonks, and by focussing on incremental reforms—in education, rural health care, children’s welfare—they thrived politically in Arkansas, where they spent the two decades after McGovern’s defeat. They muted some of the most divisive social issues, compromised on others, and mashed together idealism with business-friendly ideas for economic growth. Old-fashioned Democratic class politics was foreign to them, even though Bill sometimes sounded like an Ozark populist. Hillary was the more passionate liberal, and from the beginning she was a tough fighter. When she took the lead on her husband’s most important initiative as governor—raising the state’s abysmal educational standards—she made an adversary of the teachers’ union. Instead of speaking for the working class, the Clintons spoke about equipping workers to rise into the professional class. Their presumption was that all Americans could be like them.

In the eighties, the decade of conservative ascendancy, the Clintons’ brand of politics seemed to provide the ingredients of a Democratic revival. But, to some, the couple’s mixture of uplifting rhetoric and ideological elusiveness suggested untrammelled ambition and hidden agendas—anything but public service. Bill and Hillary became the objects of a deep suspicion, which they’ve never been able to shake. To the left, the Clintons were sellouts; to the right, they were spies, sneaking across partisan lines to steal ideas and rhetoric that advanced their McGovernite revolution. Because Hillary’s politics have always been joined to an idea of virtue, and because she is a woman, the suspicions about her have been the greater, even on the left. The Times Magazine notoriously mocked her as “Saint Hillary.”

Bill Clinton’s Presidency was so lacking in history-making events, yet so crowded with the embarrassing minutiae of scandalmongering, that it was easy to miss the great change that those years meant for the country and the Democratic Party. Clinton turned sharply toward deregulation, embracing the free-market ideas of his Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and the chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan. The results appeared to be spectacular. Here is Clinton’s version, in his final State of the Union Message, in 2000: “We are fortunate to be alive at this moment in history. Never before has our nation enjoyed, at once, so much prosperity and social progress with so little internal crisis and so few external threats.” The country had more jobs, higher wages, faster growth, bigger surpluses; it had replaced “outmoded ideologies” with dazzling technology. The longest peacetime expansion in history had practically abolished the business cycle. Economic conflict was obsolete. Education was the answer to all problems of social class. (His laundry list of proposals to Congress included more money for Internet access in schools and funds to help poor kids take college-test-prep courses.) “My fellow-Americans,” the President announced. “We have crossed the bridge we built to the twenty-first century.”

In our conversation, Hillary Clinton spoke of the limits of an “educationalist” mind-set, which she called a “peculiar form of élitism.” Educationalists, she noted, say they “want to lift everybody up”—they “don’t want to tell anybody that they can’t go as high as their ambition will take them.” The problem was that “we’re going to have a lot of jobs in this economy” that require blue-collar skills, not B.A.s. “We need to do something that is really important, and this is to just go right after the denigration of jobs and skills that are not college-connected.” A four-year degree isn’t for everyone, she said; vocational education should be brought back to high schools.

Yet “educationalist élitism” describes the Democratic thinking that took root during her husband’s Presidency. When I asked her if this had helped drive working-class Americans away from the Democratic Party, she hedged. “I don’t really know the answer to that,” she said. “I don’t think it is really useful to focus just on the nineties, because really the nineties was an outlier.”

In April, 2000, President Clinton hosted a celebration called the White House Conference on the New Economy. The phenomenal productivity of the New Economy was powered by the goods and services created by the rising young professional class—I.T. engineers, bankers, financial analysts, lawyers, designers, management consultants. Bill Gates was a panelist, and Greenspan gave an address. Introducing the assembly, President Clinton was euphoric. “I believe the computer and the Internet give us a chance to move more people out of poverty more quickly than at any time in all of human history,” he said. The spirit of the time was a heady concoction of high purpose and self-congratulation—a secular brand of Calvinism, with the state of inward grace revealed outwardly by an Ivy League degree, Silicon Valley stock options, and a White House invitation. Meritocracy had become the creed of Clinton’s party.

In 1999, Thomas Friedman published “The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization.” The book described globalization as supplanting the Cold War system, but, unlike the Cold War, globalization was a product of technological advances and blind economic forces, not government policies. Friedman’s approach was descriptive, but he kept slipping into ethics and metaphysics: the new world he described turned out to be both inevitable and for the best. His tone was that of a vaguely threatening evangelist: globalization was a bullet train without an engineer, and anyone who didn’t board right away would be left behind or flattened by it. The job of government was to explain the merits of globalization to citizens while softening its short-term blows, with a light cushion of social welfare and job-retraining programs, until its lasting benefits became available to everyone (right around the time the Internet was ending global poverty). Rejecting globalization was like rejecting the sunrise. Only the shortsighted, the stupid, the coddled, and the unprepared would turn against it. Resistance, Friedman predicted, would come mainly from people in poor countries—bureaucrats attached to their perks and tribes wedded to their local traditions (the olive tree of the title). The book’s heroes were entrepreneurs, financiers, and technologists, hopping airports between New York, San Francisco, London, Hong Kong. “The Lexus and the Olive Tree” was “Das Kapital” for meritocrats.

Earlier this year, an economist named Branko Milanović published a book called “Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization.” It’s a progress report on the “system” that Friedman heralded. Milanović analyzes global economic data from the past quarter century and concludes that the world has become more equal—poor countries catching up with rich ones—but that Western democracies have become less equal. Globalization’s biggest winners are the new Asian middle and upper classes, and the one-per-centers of the West: these groups have almost doubled their real incomes since the late eighties. The biggest losers are the American and European working and middle classes—until very recently, their incomes hardly budged.

During these years, resistance to globalization has migrated from anarchsts disrupting trade conferences to members of the vast middle classes of the West. Many of them have become Trump supporters, Brexit voters, constituents of Marine Le Pen and other European proto-fascists. After a generation of globalization, they’re trying to derail the train.

[habal]

Hillary Clinton astrological chart:

date of birth: from the net

Hilary Clinton.

Ms. Clinton have a Debilitated Sun and Mars, the Sun in Libra in the first house, witch represent the head, so definitely has not an illuminated or brilliant head, on the contrary has a weak head.

The Sun rules the "practical Brain the right side", she has it debilitated so will take very impractical decisions when she is emotional...And she has a weak nervous system.

She has Venus and Mercury also in the first so she is also equipped, diplomatic, balance and good in communication skills, Plus has Mars debilitated in Cancer in the 10th the house of Profession ...Not only that Mars is with Saturn in the same house. Mars is rule by Kartikeya the God of War, plus Saturn (sorrow) is a very dangerous combination. As a leader she can create serious conflicts for USA.

Mars rules two signs Scorpio and Aries.

Her Scorpio is in the 2nd House which in the body represent her tongue, so Scorpio is also heavily influence by this debilitated Mars in conjunction with Saturn.....Very expert in deceiving and covering lies.

The second house is a house of Economic development, so her money will be made by questionable means.

She has Jupiter and Ketu in the second house, so she has communication skills because of Jupiter, but has Ketu = anger, deceit, insult, sarcasm, arrogance etc. With this conjunction only Inauspicious Results will appear.

A person who has this placement will be always agitated and confused, may be wicked, unhappy and unfortunate and may be the object of neglect.

The person is mind is heated up with anger easily and one always remains unhappy. There may be obstacles at work. Work may be lost or destroyed. One may stay in the company of lowly people. May not be spiritual and poorly educated and there may be a shortage of wealth. Will always fear the Government and be agitated in financial matters. There may be a loss of wealth because of the king, will fear the king and suffer hardships. One may be deprived of paternal wealth. One may suffer from ailments of the mouth. In intimacy will not speak respectfully and in a welcoming manner to people who are close. One may be a bad public speaker. Ones speech may be harsh. This person may look upon people with bad intent. Wealth and prosperity will be destroyed. One may be dependent on the food given by others. One may quarrel with relatives and friends. One may oppose his friends and family members. One may be deprived of physical pleasures. One may close down ones business due to losses, become bankrupt and may suffer defame.

Aries is in the 7th House the house of Marriage, Sexuality etc, also rule by this debilitated Mars-Saturn.....Her husband and her marriage will be full of cheating, unhappiness and competition.... no more comments....

Plus she is born in the third pada of Purvabhadrapaad nakshatra.

Caste-Sudra (hard working)

Purvabhadrapaad nakshatra are as follows - She may not be said to have a very good character and ethical behaviour. She may try eating all types of food and may occasionally perform unworthy deeds. She may be miserly but well educated. Her life may be full of unhappiness and worry. She may try to make her husband compatible to herself. Other comforts and bliss in life may be of ordinary nature, person born in the Purvabhadrapaad nakshatra they have powerful personality, disciplined, optimistic, ambitious, clever at getting her work done through others, frugal and interested in scientific, technical and materialistic. She may be a reformist, a critic, politician, sympathetic, prudent, pleasure loving, fond of travelling, shy of men and interested in debates. She may occasionally be lazy and lethargic.

Health due to the debilitated Sun in the first, problems with the nervous system, seizure in the right side of the brain, chance for Parkinson, debilitated 2d house with Ketu, Thyroid glad problems and hormonal imbalance and also serios knee problems, controls of the legs, the elbow and the thumbs. Because the 7th house is affected, kidneys female organs etc are compromise. Because of debilitated Mars and Sun have a poor immunity and problems with men constantly.

She is running presently in her Debilitated Sun period of 6 years that started on Feb,19 2015, and goes to Feb 19 2021. Very difficult years for her, specially the present transit of Sun-Rahu until Feb 2017, and later a more increasing troubling period of Sun-Saturn from Dec 2017 until Dec 2018. Even if she is elected her life is becoming restricted by her own karma.

[habal]

On the POTUS election front, crazy stories are breaking. There was supposed to be a press conference where Trump was accused of rape yesterday, but it seems the accuser failed to show up.

[Austin]

Assange: WikiLeaks did not receive Clinton emails from Russian govt (EXCLUSIVE)

https://www.rt.com/news/365164-assange- ... ks-russia/

“The Clinton camp has been able to project a neo-McCarthyist hysteria that Russia is responsible for everything. Hillary Clinton has stated multiple times, falsely, that 17 US intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications. That’s false – we can say that the Russian government is not the source,” Assange told the veteran Australian broadcaster as part of a 25-minute John Pilger Special.


Hillary Clinton is just one person. I actually feel quite sorry for Hillary Clinton as a person, because I see someone who is eaten alive by their ambitions, tormented literally to the point where they become sick – for example faint – as a result of going on, and going with their ambitions. But she represents a whole network of people, and a whole network of relationships with particular states.

”

[svenkat]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/31/the-podesta-emails-show-who-runs-america-and-how-they-do-it

[Yagnasri]

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/ ... o-n2240791

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli ... /93202266/

All for one and one for herself?

[panduranghari]

A high school desi is more perceptive than any number of current BRFers:
http://affinitymagazine.us/2016/11/02/w ... e-to-care/

More partisan nonsense that isn't based in fact. It's not that we like Trumpanzees, but we detest Killary Klinton. Anyway, those protestors may very well have been Democratic party operatives to disrupt the opposition rally.

While Aryaman Khandelwal is doing is stellar job in helping kids learn maths, he comes across as another bleeding heart liberal who would prefer watching Karan Johar and call people wishing boycotting his movies as equal to terrorists. I see many likehim daily.

[Manish_Sharma]

Hillary Clinton astrological chart:

date of birth: from the net

Hilary Clinton.

Ms. Clinton have a ...

Habal ji from what website?

[Manish_Sharma]

http://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news/ ... ster-india

Clinton presidency will be a disaster for India
By Arvind Kumar | New York | 30 October, 2016


Every four years, during the presidential election process in the United States, a question invariably comes up, “Which candidate is better for India?”

This question is best answered if one realises that American politics has been a massive stage-managed show based on an illusion of choice, with the illusion mesmerising an entire population into believing that they choose their political leaders and vote on issues that are dear to them. In reality, the Republican Party and Democratic Party work together behind the scenes and act in tandem on important issues. Voters are asked to make the choice between these two parties only on issues that do not matter to those in power. Even in these cases, the voters are manipulated into voting along racial and religious lines so that there is an appearance of the two parties having an equal share of the vote and competing against each other. Occasionally, when it appears that a candidate who is not part of the system could win an election, those in power are not beyond using illegal means to keep out such people from succeeding.

The share of American voters, who have seen through this game, has grown in recent years, and the support for Donald Trump in the Republican Party and Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Party during the 2016 primaries was the direct result of an increase in the number of voters who have gained an understanding of the system. Even though it is possible that neither candidate is actually against the existing setup, there is no denial that the support for them is from people who are opposed to the system. Among the candidates representing the two dominant parties who have made it past the primaries, Donald Trump is perceived as the candidate who is against the corrupt establishment, while Hillary Clinton is seen as part of the establishment and as the most corrupt candidate to run for President in the history of the country.

The fact that the Clintons have used politics to make hundreds of millions of dollars and have funnelled vast sums of money from around the world to the Clinton Foundation, has only strengthened the belief that they are extremely corrupt people who sell influence in exchange for money and power. The most famous case related to the Clinton Foundation is their effort to raise money ostensibly to help the victims of the 2010 Haiti earthquake. However, the money was not used to help the victims, but for other purposes including investments in insurance businesses and luxury hotels. Bill and Hillary Clinton, as the UN Representative and the US Secretary of State, respectively, also controlled the flow of money from other sources into Haiti, and the contracts to rebuild the country in the aftermath of the earthquake were given either to friends and relatives like Hillary Clinton’s brother or to firms that donated money to the Clinton Foundation. It is little wonder that the moniker “Crooked Hillary” has stuck to Hillary Clinton and even her official campaign has not made any efforts to counter it. Instead, they have admitted in emails that Hillary Clinton suffers from problems related to trustworthiness among the people.

Republican Hindu Coalition chairman Shalli Kumar (2nd R) helps Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump light a ceremonial lamp before he speaks at a Bollywood-themed charity concert put on by the Republican Hindu Coalition in Edison, New Jersey, US on 15 October. REUTERS

Republican Hindu Coalition chairman Shalli Kumar (2nd R) helps Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump light a ceremonial lamp before he speaks at a Bollywood-themed charity concert put on by the Republican Hindu Coalition in Edison, New Jersey, US on 15 October. REUTERS

A Hillary Clinton win in the election would bring back the hostility of the 1990s towards India that existed under the presidency of Bill Clinton. India’s relationship with the US took a sudden downturn after Bill Clinton took office in 1993. For nearly a year, Clinton did not bother appointing an ambassador to India even as he went about opposing India on a number of fronts, leading to resentment in the Indian establishment. He first set about the task of disarming and weakening India by preventing access to technology and simultaneously mounted a sustained attack on the Indian economy by imposing several economic sanctions.

In 1991, Senator Joe Biden, who is now the Vice President under Barack Obama, introduced an amendment in the bill granting aid to Russia, making the aid conditional on the fact that Russia could not sell cryogenic engines for India’s space programme. The Clinton administration persisted in taking measures intended to retard the development of India’s space and technology sectors and blocked the sale of Cray supercomputers that had been approved under the Ronald Reagan administration. This was done even as the Clinton administration allowed the sale of these supercomputers to China. India was also targeted for several economic sanctions and was threatened under what was called the Super 301 clause of the American trade law.

The Clinton administration specially targeted the Indian textile and carpet industries for destruction. Throughout the 1990s, the terms “Dunkel Draft”, “Super 301”, “WTO” and “patent laws” became synonyms for the US attempting to destroy the Indian economy and led to many protests in India. In one famous episode, the Clinton administration declared Indian skirts to be flammable and banned them after an official ignited a skirt in front of television cameras.

On the security front too, the Clinton administration was consistently anti-India and pro-Pakistan. Members of the Clinton Cabinet supported terrorists in India, with Clinton’s Vice President Al Gore using the term “Khalistan” to describe Punjab. Bill Clinton’s close friend Robin Raphel was made the Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, and under her, the US State Department pursued an agenda that supported violent anti-India groups in Jammu and Kashmir, while offering F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan. The State Department also propped up the Taliban regime in Afghanistan during this period.

More recently, when Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State, Robin Raphel was appointed to oversee a $7.5 billion aid package to Pakistan, but ended up being investigated by the FBI for spying on behalf of Pakistan and lost her security clearance. The charges against her were dropped only after Hillary Clinton herself ended up being investigated by FBI for using a private email server for classified emails. Had Robin Raphel been prosecuted, it would have been impossible for the FBI to justify dropping the charges against Hillary Clinton.

By 1996, India was justified in believing that Indo-US relations had hit the lowest point, but things took a dramatic turn for the worse during Bill Clinton’s second term in office. Warren Christopher was replaced by Madeleine Albright as the Secretary of State and she made no efforts to hide her hostility towards India and her weekly outbursts on television even bordered on racism. Even after leaving office, Albright continued her attacks on India and called for a plebiscite in Kashmir, thus justifying the actions of violent groups. Albright’s cynical action of bombing Yugoslavia and then getting her investment firm to attempt a takeover of mines in that country is an example of the abuse of power by people close to the Clintons. Albright also justified the deaths of half a million Iraqi children and claimed that the deaths were “worth it”. Recently, Albright threatened women in America and claimed that there was a special place in hell reserved for them if they did not vote for Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton, during her tenure as the Secretary of State, picked up where Bill Clinton and his Cabinet members had left off and did not waste any time in pursuing anti-India activities. Within weeks of Hillary Clinton assuming office, Teesta Setalvad, an activist involved in framing Narendra Modi using false charges, was paid a handsome donation by Vikram Chatwal, whose father Sant Chatwal was at one time a trustee of the Clinton Foundation. Emails leaked by the whistleblower website WikiLeaks show that Sant Chatwal also had a role in the infamous cash-for-votes scam in which money was paid to purchase votes in the Lok Sabha. Other emails leaked by WikiLeaks show that the US government intended to fund Teesta Setalvad’s NGO and use her claims in the so-called human rights reports that could be used against India and Hindus.

Given Hillary Clinton’s background, these actions are not unexpected. Investigative reporter Jeff Sharlet has exposed the fact that Hillary Clinton is part of a secretive group in Washington DC variously known as the Fellowship, the Family, or the C Street House. This group is known to use religion to further their geopolitical agenda around the world and evangelical Christians are their main tool when it comes to interfering in other countries. The separation of East Timor from Indonesia using religious persecution as the excuse was one of their achievements under Bill Clinton, and when Atal Behari Vajpayee became the Prime Minister of India for a few days in 1996, Bill Clinton acted at the behest of this group and set up an advisory committee that would supposedly deal with religious freedom around the world.

Curiously, this committee had members from every faith except Hinduism, and it recommended the creation of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), a government agency that has used, since its inception, fictitious claims to attack Hindus and India. It was the USCIRF that was responsible for demonising Narendra Modi using false charges and recommending that he not be permitted to enter the US. According to emails leaked by WikiLeaks, Preeta Bansal, the USCIRF commissioner, who was the main person responsible for this action, has also pressured Vietnam into accepting proselytism by American missionaries and is close to people in the Hillary Clinton campaign.

It is not just the past record, but the future too portends a disastrous era for Indo-US relations should Hillary Clinton end up becoming the President of the United States. There is already talk of Joe Biden being tapped by Hillary Clinton for the position of the Secretary of State. Biden would definitely pursue his agenda of thwarting the development of India’s space programme and other technological advancements. Even more worrisome is the fact that Hillary Clinton’s closest confidante is Huma Abedin who is of Pakistani descent and whose family has links to radical Islamist elements in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Abedin could end up playing an important role in determining American foreign policy.

Another point against Hillary Clinton is that the war hawk Henry Kissinger has come out in support of her and has praised her stint as Secretary of State. Kissinger’s hostility towards India is no state secret, as many of his racist, anti-India statements have been recorded on tape.

It is in the light of this background that many Indian-Americans have opposed the candidacy of Hillary Clinton and have come out in support of Donald Trump. In contrast to the policies of the Clintons, Trump has promised to make India the best friend of the US and has stated that he looks forward to working with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Trump has also reached out to Hindus in US. While there is always a risk of the unknown and it is not clear if Trump can succeed in cleaning up the system even if he intends to do so, a Hillary presidency will certainly be an unmitigated disaster for India.

Despite these facts, some Indian-Americans support Hillary Clinton, but their support is not based on sound analysis but on flawed information fed to them by the media. Most such supporters are highly qualified when it comes to educational degrees, but fall under the category of what is known in American parlance as “low information voters”. Most educated Indian-Americans typically demonstrate very little interest in politics and have almost never been part of even informal political discussions. America has made many things accessible to most people and politics is no exception. Usually, the process of making things accessible to a large number of people has involved dumbing down the system and controlling the behaviour of people.

Just as education has been dumbed down in US in order to make it easy for everyone to be part of the school system, politics too has been dumbed down and simplified so that even the most ignorant voter can have a sense of making a choice and being politically empowered. The educated class among Indian-Americans are especially suited to this model as they have no inclination towards politics but have been conditioned to refer to books as the source of their knowledge. They have thus internalised the idea of treating the printed word and assertions they hear from “authoritative sources” as the ultimate truth. They are told through television channels and newspapers that politics consists of exactly two groups, with one group consisting of heroes and the other group consisting of villains, a simplification that they readily embrace. They even use labels like “progressive”, “liberal” and “conservative” to describe themselves, even though they do not really comprehend the meaning of these terms and do not realise that these labels are handed out by politicians. In contrast, many supporters of Donald Trump discuss political issues and seem aware of the situation.

In order for India to build a constructive relationship with US, it requires people in both countries to have good intentions. It is clear that India cannot have a good relationship with the US if Hillary Clinton is at the helm of affairs. On the other hand, Donald Trump has articulated the right intent and his tenure holds promise for India.

Arvind Kumar is a political analyst based in the US

[UlanBatori]

^^^^^ He's got into the Sunday Guardian, that's as Mainstream as it gets. Good 4 him!!!

[vijayk]

http://observer.com/2016/11/this-electi ... ournalism/
This Election Has Disgraced the Entire Profession of Journalism
Reporters queue up to submit stories for Clinton approval as Team Hillary delivers dossier on unfriendly writer

We have two unbelievably shitty candidates, neither of whom is fit to lead the country. Donald Trump is a reckless narcissist who, as his debate performances indicated, cannot string together more than two sentences, let alone articulate a coherent vision for the country’s future. His remarks about women, Latinos and African-Americans are reprehensible and, whether he believes his own statements or is merely trying to stir up anger for his electoral benefit, have emboldened people who hold retrograde and genuinely scary views.

Then there is Hillary Clinton, who has been in public life for decades and who grows more and more unpopular upon exposure —and for good reason. Whatever one thinks of the so-called “Servergate” scandal —and I personally find it troubling that she put classified information on a private server that was almost certainly obtained by foreign intelligence services — she stonewalled and lied to the FBI during its investigation, which has now been reopened. She and her family run a foundation that aggressively solicited donations from corporations, wealthy individuals and foreign governments that have interests before the government, and in some cases Clinton, as secretary of state, took actions that can only be seen as quid pro quo for big donors. These facts alone should disqualify her from political life and make her the legitimate target of criminal investigations.

Don’t bet on the best happening. It appears there may be a few late Democratic defectors but Clinton is surrounded by a core group of amoral supporters who, like her and her husband, lie without remorse or shame and with such conviction that it appears they don’t know the difference between fact and fiction. The truth is utterly irrelevant to the Clinton crowd, as are the issues. All that matters is winning — as seen in their rigging of the DNC to ensure Hillary’s nomination — and their continued ability to exploit public office for private gain.

It’s even less likely that the media, especially major outlets and Washington political reporters who have all but openly worked on Clinton’s behalf, will rethink their roles. This election has exposed as never before that there is indeed a media elite, bound together by class and geography, that is utterly clueless about its own biases and filters. A vast number of journalists covering the presidential campaign are economically privileged brats that seem blissfully unaware that for most Americans, the economy is in recession and people are terrified.

If you don’t understand that, you can’t understand Trump. That an addled, reckless, dangerous billionaire is the last electoral hope to tens of millions of Americans may be a sad reflection of the complete breakdown of our political system, but it doesn’t make Trump’s appeal to a significant chunk of the electorate illegitimate nor does it make all of his supporters irrational morons and racists, as one gathers from news accounts and liberal pundits.

“Trump Is Testing the Norms of Objectivity in Journalism.” Rutenberg wrote that journalists were in a terrible bind trying to stay objective because Trump, among other things, “cozies up to anti-American dictators,” has “put financial conditions on the United States defense of NATO allies,” and that his foreign policy views “break with decades-old …consensus.”

Rutenberg made clear that he and other reporters viewed “a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous,” which required them to report on him with a particularly critical point of view. This, he said, would make journalists “move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional,” which would be “uncomfortable and uncharted territory.”

Furthermore, how is it that the media has derogated to itself the right to decide what candidates deserve special scrutiny and what policies are acceptable? In a democracy, that is supposed to be the voters’ job.

This is where we all should worry. The PRESSTITUTION and ******** of media. It is now Open. They tried to look objective earlier but there is not even pretense any more. What this creates is total disregard for media.

Yesterday I read very nice article

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/opini ... inion&_r=0
Donald Trump Voters, Just Hear Me Out

Very well put. Very well reasoned and ... But I am sure no Trump supporter is willing to read or listen or even consider it.

All during the campaign we have watched Hillary Clinton rehearse campaign themes and, almost as if by magic, the media amplifying those themes in seeming lockstep. The hacked emails from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta have demonstrated that this was not mere happenstance, but, at least in part, resulted from direct coordination between the Clintonistas and the press.

Mark Leibovich of the Times magazine gave the Clinton campaign significant input and review into a fawning profile of the candidate. “Pleasure doing business!” campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri wrote him at the conclusion of the process.

The Clintonistas had an equally pleasurable relationship with the Times’s Maggie Haberman, who, it was said in one email, “We have had… tee up stories for us before and have never been disappointed.” Haberman even apparently read Palmieri an entire story prior to publication “to further assure me,” Palmieri wrote.

Ezra Klein, the boy wonder editor-in-chief of Vox, is considered to be the campaign’s most reliable mouthpiece, as seen in a March 23, 2015 email in which Clintonistas were wondering which journalist it could call upon to push out a campaign storyline they were then concocting. “I think that person…is Ezra Klein,” wrote Palmieri. “And we can do it with him today.”

In a July email, Neera Tanden, Hillary’s longtime friend, aide, and attack puppet, strategized with Podesta about “recruiting brown and women pundits” and pushing pro-Hillary media figures such as MSNBC’s Joan Walsh and Klein’s colleague at Vox, Matthew Yglesias, to be even more faithful stenographers. “They can be emboldened,” she wrote, as if these two loyalist PR assets needed any further encouragement.

In the same email, Tanden wrote that when New York mayor Michael Bloomberg was “having problems” with the Times he called publisher Arthur Schulzburger [sic] to arrange a coffee to complain about the newspaper’s reporting and that their chat “changed the coverage moderately but also aired the issues in the newsroom so people were more conscious of it.” Unfortunately, she added, “Arthur is a pretty big wuss” so he wouldn’t do more to help out Bloomberg without additional prodding.

Wikileaks revealed that Politico reporter Glenn Thrush, pictured here at July’s Republican convention in Cleveland, sent an email to Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta allowing him to review a story draft before publication. (Kirk Irwin/Getty Images for SiriusXM)
To get real results to change the Times’s coverage of the 2016 campaign, “Hillary would have to be the one to call” Sulzberger — a rather astonishing remark that begs a million questions about the Times’ election reporting.

Politico reporter Glenn Thrush apologized to Podesta for writing a story draft that he feared was too critical. “I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains to u,” he wrote. “Please don’t share or tell anyone I did this Tell me if I ****** up anything.” On bended knee would have been more dignified.