Mediaboss Marketing

Democrats are on edge over Hillary Clintons forthcoming book that is likely to dredge up the controversies surrounding her 2016 defeat to President Trump, just as the out-of-power party is trying to "move on" and chart a course back to the majority.

The former secretary of state, U.S. senator and first lady who added Democratic presidential nominee to her resume last year apparently isnt done with public life. She plans to release her book, What Happened, next month and reportedly will focus the memoir in part on the role that Moscows meddling and former FBI Director Comeys public statements about her email investigation played in her defeat.

But Bloomberg reports that Democrats are privately concerned that Clintons book will help Trump, by fueling his case that Democrats are going after him because theyre bitter.

The feeling in the party was captured by Sen. Al Frankens comment in June that she and the party have to move on from her shock loss.

Other prominent Democrats also have needled Clinton for her post-defeat comments.

In an interview last month, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., suggested its time to look forward.

When you lose to somebody who has a 40 percent popularity, you dont blame other things -- Comey, Russia -- you blame yourself, Schumer told theWashington Post. So what did we do wrong? People didnt know what we stood for, just that we were against Trump. And still believe that.

Democrats, including Schumer, have tried to rebrand the party under a new slogan, A Better Deal, looking ahead to the 2018 midterm elections.

Former Vice President Biden has also criticized Clintons candidacy in recent months, questioning whether Democrats are paying enough attention to blue-collar economic issues.

Clintons public standing may have something to do with the concern: A Bloomberg poll from July showed she remains deeply unpopular, even more so than Trump, who has historically low approval ratings. The poll showed 58 percent viewed her unfavorably Russian President Vladimir Putin had only slightly worse ratings.

Bloomberg reported that Democrats would much prefer the approach taken by 2000 presidential nominee Al Gore, who launched into climate change advocacy work and more after his contested loss to George W. Bush.

The Hill reportedlast month that Clinton has told friends she wants the whole story out there about the 2016 election, for her new book.

The report suggests Clinton would return to hammering allegations Russia was involved in the hack of emails from Democratic officials including her campaign chairman, as well as the election impact of Comeys late-stage decision to briefly reopen the email case.

She really believes thats why she lost, and she wants to explain why in no uncertain terms, an individual identified as a longtime ally told The Hill.

Original post:
Hillary Clinton's book release has Dems worried, irritated - Fox News

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The Trump colluded with Russia narrative is alive and well in the United States. With the media and the Marxist left lacking any facts to support this falsehood, they have now resorted to guessing what evidence hackers overseas may provide to resuscitate their attempt to unseat a duly elected U.S. president.

The Associated Press and The New York Times reported this week that a Ukrainian hacker named Profexer had turned himself in and is now a cooperating witness for the FBI. The mainstream media is beside itself reporting what facts this new twist of the Russia story may uncover. Why do you need facts when you can pollute the news cycle with things you can make up about what a man might say about President Trump?

According to the AP account, There is no evidence that Profexer worked, at least knowingly, for Russias intelligence services. But hey why does that matter when you can attach all kinds of innuendo and made-up stuff to an overseas arrest for hacking?

But that story aside, some real news is coming out of Ukraine on the collusion front. Im not talking about Russian collusion against Hillary Clinton; Im talking about collusion between the Democratic National Committee and the government of Ukraine to try to stop Donald Trump from winning the presidential election.

We all know what Mr. Trump said about trying to work with Moscow on the world stage during the campaign. Essentially, it was a recognition that Washington should seek better relations with Russia you know, that really big nation that has the most nuclear weapons in the world. Mr. Trump essentially said we should respect Moscows concerns about its near abroad and work with Russia where we could to defeat the Islamic State and other threats to both countries.

This obviously didnt sit well with Kiev, which has been fighting a pro-Russian insurgency in the eastern Donbass region for the past few years. Would Mr. Trump end sanctions on Russia? Would Mr. Trump end support for the Ukrainian armed forces in its conflict against Moscow?

Once in office, however, Mr. Trump has done just the opposite. He has buttressed support for Ukraine and even attacked a Syrian air base with 59 cruise missiles even with hundreds of Russian technicians deployed there.

Evidence has been released suggesting DNC operatives may have worked with the government of Ukraine to manufacture evidence against Paul Manafort, Mr. Trumps onetime campaign manager who has emerged as a central figure in the Russian meddling probe. After speaking with the Ukrainian National Anti-corruption Bureau (NABU), I wrote in this space a year ago that they knew at the time that a ledger published in The New York Times supposedly showing that Mr. Manfort received illegal payments from a source tied to ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was bogus. NABU investigators clearly said at the time that the newspaper took the phony document from the internet.

This week, Ukrainian parliamentary member Andrei Derkach sent a letter to the countrys chief prosecutor demanding an investigation into illegal collusion with the Clinton campaign to defeat Mr. Trump.

Only a transparent and thorough investigation into the unlawful interference of Ukrainian officials with the U.S. election campaign can restore the trust of our strategic partner, Mr. Derkach wrote.

He said there has been illegal interference in the election of president of the United States organized by a criminal organization consisting of Ukrainian government officials, an effort that had harmed relations with the U.S.

I spoke with NABU officials again this week, and they provided a canned statement saying essentially they had washed their hands of the Manafort affair.

Will special counsel Robert Mueller do the right thing and investigate this collusion as well? Or will he act in a partisan manner and ignore the evidence?

This week we also found out that rocket engines from a Ukrainian factory may have found their way to North Korea and vastly improved Kim Jong-uns ability to attack the U.S. mainland with nuclear weapons. I guess we are supposed to ignore this revelation as well.

L. Todd Wood is a former special operations helicopter pilot and Wall Street debt trader, and has contributed to Fox Business, The Moscow Times, National Review, the New York Post and many other publications. He can be reached through his website, LToddWood.com.

Go here to read the rest:
Beyond the fake news, a real scandal of Clinton collusion with Ukraine - Washington Times

Weird alliances always emerge in politics, but when marijuana gets thrown into the mix, the partnerships can get downright trippy.

Now, weed has brought together one of the right wings most notorious, flamboyant, conspiracy-slinging publicity hounds with an equally voluble trial lawyer from the left who was one of Hillary Clintons biggest financial benefactors.

On the right is Roger Stone, the boastful dirty tricks aficionado and sometimes guest host on the Infowars broadcast, a news staple for the fringe right.

Stone was a mastermind behind then-candidate Donald Trumps rise and an enthusiastic promoter of some of Trumps most vicious attacks against Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail. Stone often pushed the envelope much further than Trump himself, for example, publishing a widely discredited book accusing Hillary Clinton of helping her husband cover up rape.

Clintons campaign has charged that Stone coordinated with the hackers who broke into its computer system and published campaign emails on WikiLeaks. Stone was banned during the campaign from appearing on CNN and MSNBC after making racially charged and sexist attacks on fellow commentators on Twitter.

On the left is John Morgan, the deep-pocketed, publicity-seeking trial lawyer who is perennially rumored to be exploring a run for governor of Florida, the politically colorful state where Stone is also based at least part time.

Stone has a tattoo of Richard Nixon on his back. Morgan owns three thoroughbred race horses.

The only thing the two men seem to have in common, beyond their taste for publicity and good living, is revulsion at laws that ban marijuana.

For a while, that was not enough to bring them together. A few years ago, while Morgan was bankrolling an ultimately unsuccessful ballot measure to legalize medical pot in Florida, Stone accused him of nefarious scheming, suggesting it was all part of a plot to expand Morgans personal fortune and political power. (A separate Morgan-sponsored medical marijuana measure was passed by Florida voters in November.)

Now, Stone and Morgan are smoking the peace pipe. They have formed the United States Cannabis Coalitionto pressure Trump to let states continue to pursue their own paths on marijuana. The group was created in response to warnings from the administration that a crackdown on pot may be coming.

These Trump administration officials are disserving the president and ignoring the forthright position he took during the campaign, Stone said in a statement. It is our intention to identify, reachand mobilize millions of pro-cannabis voters to urge the president to keep his word.

Originally posted here:
Trump dirty tricks man and Clinton mega-donor smoke a weed-filled peace pipe - Los Angeles Times

He coined the nickname Crooked Hillary. He led his supporters in chants of Lock her up! And even long after their bitter contest ended, President Trump can rarely resist an opportunity to take a jab at Hillary Clinton.

So it may come as something of a surprise that a lavish plaque, dedicated to the accomplishments of Trumps vanquished opponent,is still prominently displayed at the U.S. Agency for International Development in downtown Washington at least, for now.

[Trump can usually make it about a third of the way through an interview without mentioning Hillary Clinton]

The plaque has a rather convoluted history, with an on-again, off-again presence in the stately Ronald Reagan Building. The 800-pound bronze plaque is 6 feet wide by 9 feet tall and features an excerpt of one of Clintons speeches, as well as glowing quote from former USAID administrator J. Brian Atwood: May all who pass through these portals recognize the invaluable contribution to worldwide development made by the First Lady of the United States, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

It first went up in 1999, framed by a dozen photographs capturing the former first ladys visits to countries across the world. The display, which cost over $27,000 to create and tens of thousands more to install, transformed the lobby into a shrine for Clinton, Washington Post columnist Al Kamen wrote in 2010.

But it didnt last. When George W. Bush took office, the plaque was first covered, then ultimately removed and shipped to a warehouse for storage. It wasnt until 2010 during Obamas firstterm, after Clinton became secretary of state that the plaque was reinstalled in USAIDs lobby (minus the surrounding haloof framed photographs).

[Why Trump and the conservative media are still obsessed with Hillary Clinton]

Clinton had joked about the whereabouts of the missing plaque during a visit to USAID in January 2009. I was quite honored upon leaving the White House to have a plaque put up in the lobby recognizing my work, she said, And if anybody knows where that plaque is, Id just love to see it again.

She later told The Post that if the plaque was returned, she did not want public funding to pay for the cost so unidentified private donors covered the bill, according to Kamens column.

But now, of course, the political tides have turned again. The White House is home to a new president, one who has made it clear that he has hardly forgotten his volatile battle with an opponent who won the popular vote. Trumps nominee to lead USAID, Mark Green, was sworn in as the agencys new administrator this month.

As for the future of Clintons wall-mounted tribute, a spokesman for the agency declined to offer any comment beyond a statement confirming the plaques current location: The plaque is in the USAID lobby.

Here is the original post:
Bush removed it. Obama reinstalled it. Will a plaque honoring Hillary Clinton stay in place under Trump? - Washington Post

Democrats, reveling in President Donald Trumps plummeting popularity and the Republican Partys civil wars, are looking forward to September. Except for one thing: the rollout of Hillary Clintons next book right after Labor Day.

Clinton has promised to let my guard down in the book, What Happened, explaining her shocking loss to Trump in November. She has already offered up several explanations, blaming Russian interference, former FBI Director James Comey, and misogyny, while also acknowledging tactical errors by her campaign.

Many Washington Democrats, though unwilling to criticize her in public, wish shed move on, as Minnesota Sen. Al Franken has put it. They fear that her complaints help Trump make his case that the controversies surrounding him flow from the Democrats bitterness about their 2016 loss.

They prefer the approach taken by Al Gore after his equally controversial loss in 2000. Gore didnt really criticize the administration of President George W. Bush for almost two years even though he, like Clinton, won the popular vote while losing in the Electoral College. Gore went on to start a new career, winning a Nobel Prize and an Academy Award for his work on climate change.

Associates hoped Clinton would also find a way to make a different contribution, perhaps as a university president or foundation head. Clinton could make a contribution speaking out selectively on important issues, drawing on her wealth of experience.

But she remains haunted by her defeat. The gist of her message next month, based on her public statements and accounts of private conversations from people whove talked to her, will be: I accept the blame for what happened, but the bigger problems were Russian meddling, Comeys on-again, off-again handling of the Federal Bureau of Investigations probe of her private email server, the Democratic Party, and maybe even some of her own campaign staffers.

The Clintons, associates say, are convinced that the election was stolen. They may be right; well find out soon enough whether theres proof that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. If investigations by congressional committees and special counsel Robert Mueller turn up new facts, thatll provide a better basis for analyzing the impact.

But Clinton is the wrong messenger. She just comes across as a sore loser.

Or as Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer told the Washington Post: When you lose to somebody who has 40 percent popularity, you dont blame other things Comey, Russia you blame yourself.

She could take a lesson from another prominent Democrat, one who has kept a relatively low profile since January. Thats former President Barack Obama, who has mostly resisted the temptation to strike back at repeated Trump cheap shots. Today, surveys of voters have found, hes the most popular American politician. Some Democrats want him to take on Trump a bit more, and are pleased hell be out campaigning for a few Democrats this fall.

By contrast, Clinton has moved from being an admired former New York senator and secretary of state to becoming a divisive and unpopular figure.

In last months Bloomberg national poll, 58 percent of respondents rated her unfavorably compared to 39 percent who gave her favorable marks. More than one in five people who voted for her in November now regard her unfavorably. That was even worse than Trumps standing in the same poll.

Indeed, the only figure with higher negatives in the survey, which was conducted by the Iowa polling firm Selzer & Co., was her old nemesis, Russian President Vladimir Putin.

More:
Albert Hunt: Democrats fret the return of Hillary Clinton - Omaha World-Herald