Mediaboss Marketing

Remember that time when Susan Sarandon said she wouldnt vote for Hillary Clinton and all hell broke lose in liberal land?

The actress and activist who had previously been a vocal Bernie Sanders supporter told MSNBCs Chris Hayes in March last year that although she hadnt decided which person to vote for, some people felt that Donald Trump would bring the revolution immediately whereas Clinton was all about shoring up the status quo.

This naturally led to cries of outrage from the Clintonista center-left. Sarandon is not a good feminist, they seethed. Shes a traitor to the liberal cause, they fumed. She would put the country at risk. It was people like her, they said, that risked putting Trump in office. This went on for a while, with articles popping up all over the place condemning Sarandon for not falling in line with the rest of politically-conscious Hollywood. Newsweek writer Kurt Eichenwald called out Sarandons narcissistic purity on Twitter and blamed her for Trumps win.

Sarandon was back on Hayes show recently and was asked this time how she felt now that Trump had won. There was a strong undercurrent of blame throughout the interview:The implication from Hayes was that Sarandon should get down on her knees, grovel and apologize profusely for failing to vote for Clinton. Much to his obvious disappointment, she defended her earlier comments and even doubled down on them.

But heres the thing: If liberals werent too busy tweeting abuse at Sarandon and writing think pieces about her white privilege, they might just be able to see that she makes some salient points about the American political system, the media and the Trump presidency.

So, liberals, hold your fire for a second, and lets look at this with an open mind.

1. Its uncomfortable for Clintonsupporters to admit this, but the fact is, Sarandon was awake when many Democrats werent. She was a vocal supporter of Sanders, the only truly progressive candidate with any chance of securing the nomination. Clinton was a status quo candidate and, as Sarandon has pointed out, if you back the status quo when people are desperate for change, youre going to have a difficult time.

Well never know if Sanders could have beaten Trump, but we do know that Clintoncouldnot. We know that the Democrats allowed Clinton to run a status quo campaign when people were hungry for revolution. We also know they schemed and connived against Sanders and paid the price. For that, Sarandon cant be blamed.

2. Now, how bout that revolution? Sarandon was right there, too. OK, revolution may be too strong a word. But she is correct in saying that Trumps presidency has woken up people in a way that never would have happened if Clinton had won. The popular retort to this is: Oh, but Clinton would have been much better than Trump.So there would have been no need for revolution! Therein lies the crux of the liberal con.

While Trump is brash and in-your-face about his awful policies, Obama and Clinton simply put a kinder, sugarcoated face on some of the very same things. Take fracking, for example. Fracking boomed under Obama. At one point, Clinton even tried to tar the image of anti-fracking environmentalists by linking them to a Russian plot to hamper the U.S. energy industry.

Gasland director Josh Fox whose 2010 documentary went a long way toward reshaping progressive consciousness of the fracking issue said the following in the same MSNBC episode with Sarandon:

Obama is the one thats left us with the legacy of 300 frack-gas power plants. Thats thousands of pipelines. Thats millions of fracking wells. That was Hillary Clintons and Obamas plan Obama was the fracker in chief for eight years.

While Clintons State Department was promoting fracking around the world, we were reading The Huffington Posts 65 Reasons Hillary Clinton Is a Badass and perusing BuzzFeeds 40 Most Adorable Pictures of President Obama.Now the media has suddenly cottoned on to how awful this is for the environment and were all supposed to dutifully pretend that fracking was invented by Trump.

3. Its worth including a note here about foreign policy, too. Sarandon has made multiple comments about Clintons foreign policy record. She told The Young Turks:She did not learn from Iraq, and she is an interventionist, and she has done horrible things and very callously. I dont know if she is overcompensating or what her trip is. That scares me. I think well be in Iran in two seconds.

While it looks like Trump might also be salivating for conflict with Iran, Sarandon was not wrong about Clinton. Comparedwith TrumpClinton is a rabid interventionist.(Trump appears to be at least somewhat more of an isolationist, which is problematic for other reasons.) She is an unashamed hawk and proponent of U.S.-led and -engineered regime changes around the world under the guise of liberal humanitarianism, of course.

Clintons role in supporting the 2009 Honduras coup and subsequent destabilization of that country has been well documented. She led the charge for a failed intervention that turned Libya into a failed state, and she was a proponent of implementing a no-fly zone in Syria, which could have resulted in a shooting war with Russia. As for Obama? Well, he only bombed seven Muslim-majority countries during his time in office.

4. Sarandon has also laid some blame for the current political situation on the media. In one particularly awkward exchange with Hayes, she questioned his journalistic credibility:

Sarandon: You consider yourself a journalist, right?

Hayes: Yeah, I spend 15 hours a day covering whats going on.

Sarandon: So how many hours did you spend on Standing Rock?

Hayes: Not very much.

A while later, Hayes asked Sarandon to look him in the eye and say whether Trump was as bad as she expected him to be as president. She dismissed the question and asked him this:

Can you look me in the eyes and tell me you were doing your job to cover these issues completely? You just told me that you didnt really cover DAPL. Are you covering now all of these [pipeline] explosions that have just happened? Because thats what we need you to do what we need from you is to allow people to understand whats happening.

Again, Sarandon is right. The press treated Obama and Clinton with kid gloves compared tothe battering they are giving Trump. Its not the job of members of the media to decide that a presidents policies are less deserving of harsh criticism if he seems like a nice guy. Its their job to be rigorous in their coverage of every president, with no exceptions.

Democrats who blame people like Sarandon for the Trump mess reveal a lot about themselves. Could it be that the real reason they dont want to listen, or even entertain her opinions, is because if they did, theyd come face to face with their own hypocrisy?

Thats the crux of the matter. When Sarandon says Trump is bringing the revolution faster, what shes really doing is pointing out liberal hypocrisy. Far too many liberals who have developed a newfound passion for environmentalism and world peace displayed little interest in either of those things during Obamas presidency and very likely would not have batted an eyelid over a Clinton continuation of similarly disastrous policies either.

To say all this is not a defense of Trump, lest anyone interpret it that way. Its simply to say that nothing changes if nothing changes. If liberals really want to see progressive policies put into action, theyre going to have to open their eyes and vote for actual progressives.

Read the original here:
Susan Sarandon was right: She warned us Hillary was doomed; liberals didn't want to listen - Salon

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh believes that Hillary Clinton approved the sending of sarin gas to Syria. At a time when Clinton is trying to secure the 2016 democratic presidential nomination, Hersh is coming forward with allegations that the democratic presidential front-runner and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was a go-between the Obama Administration and the leaders of Middle Eastern nations (namely Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey) to set up a horrific sarin gas attack and place the blame on the shoulders of Assad. Why? So that the U.S. could invade Syria and blame Assad.

By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafis arsenals into Syria.

Hersh didnt elaborate as to whether the arms he referred to encompassed the chemical precursors for creating sarin gas, which Libya stockpiled. However, multiple independent reports have independently confirmed that Gaddafi of Libya did, indeed, possess such stockpiles. Additionally, theThe Free Thought Projectreports, the much-touted U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was operating as a rat line for Gaddafis weaponry whileHillary Clintonwas at the helm.

Seymour Hersh isnt the first or only reporter to publicly call out the Hillary Clinton/Syria connection. Christopher Lehmann said on October 7, 2013 that top U.S. (and Saudi) officials were responsible for the chemical weapons being used in Syria. Interestingly, Lehmanns sources were completely different than Hershs.

Evidence leads directly to the White House, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, CIA Director John Brennan, Saudi Intelligence Chief Prince Bandar, and Saudi Arabias Interior Ministry.

The headline of Lehmanns article? Top US and Saudi Officials responsible for Chemical Weapons in Syria.

To make matters more damning for Hillary Clinton, two industry-leading U.S. analysts determined that Lehmann was correct. Indeed, the Lloyd-Postal report reportedly concluded that the U.S. governments public claims regarding the attack are inaccurate.

The US Governments Interpretation of the Technical Intelligence It Gathered Prior to and After the August 21 Attack CANNOT POSSIBLY BE CORRECT.

As one news outlet reports, Obama has clearly been lying.

However, for the first documented time, Hersh has now pointed the finger at democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton. Indeed, during an interview withAternet.org, Hersh said that during the Hillary Clinton Secretary of State/Obama Administration, the Benghazi role was to collect weapons from Libyan stockpiles and send them through Turkey into Syria for a set-up sarin-gas attack, to be blamed on Assad in order to justify the US invading Syria, as the US had invaded Libya to eliminate Gaddafi.

That ambassador who was killed, he was known as a guy, from what I understand, as somebody, who would not get in the way of the CIA. As I wrote, on the day of the mission hewas meeting with the CIA base chief and the shipping company. He was certainly involved, aware and witting of everything that was going on. And theres no way somebody in that sensitive of a position is not talking to the boss, by some channel.

According to Hersh, this was (in fact) a large part of the Hillary Clinton State Departments operation in Libya. While Hillary Clinton was running the show, her job description reportedly included doing to Syria what had already been done successfully in Libya.

Hersh ultimately wrote a book,The Killing of Osama bin Laden,in which an ex-U.S. intelligence official says that the Hillary Clinton White House rejected 35 targets because they were insufficiently painful to the Assad regime. Later, the Hillary Clinton White House put forth a target list that included, among other things civilian infrastructure.

What would the toll to civilians have been if the White Houses proposed strike had been carried out?

In response, Hersh said that he U.S. tradition had been to ignore civilian casualties, and he presumed that the tradition would continue under Hillary Clinton.

U.S. attacks are okay or even desired (so as to terrorize the population into surrender) not an issue, except, perhaps, for the PR people.

When asked why Obama and Hillary Clinton are so obsessed with replacing Assad in Syria, the answer was not forthcoming.

Nobody could figure out why. Our policy has always been against him [Assad]. Period.

This White House policy came long before Hillary Clinton. Indeed, since the Baath Party in 1957, Assads party has been the subject of a CIA coup. Why? To enable an oil pipeline for the democratic (and Hillary Clinton) favorites, the Saudis through Syria. Before Hillary Clintons decades-old plan could come to fruition; however, a multitude of Syrian coups took place.

Despite the efforts of the Hillary Clinton State Department and the Barrack Obama White House, the Trans-Arabia pipeline still doesnt exist.

However, Obama, via Hillary Clinton, is the first U.S. president to serious tried to push for the long-anticipated Syrian regime change that would be required for the pipeline to come to pass.

The issue has drawn Russia into the most substantial conflict with the U.S. since the Cold War, all under Hillary Clintons leadership of the State Department.

The US is allied with the Saud family (and with their friends, the royal families of Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, and Oman). Russia is allied with the leaders of Syria as Russia had earlier been allied with Mossadegh in Iran, Arbenz in Guatemala, Allende in Chile, Hussein in Iraq, Gaddafi in Libya, and Yanukovych in Ukraine (all of whom except Syrias Baath Party, the US has successfully overthrown).

Maybe Hersh was incorrect to proclaim that nobody could figure out why Obama (and previously Hillary Clinton) were so obsessed with overthrowing Assad. According to Hersh, they have all been hired to do specific jobs. Jobs that remained the same after the Warsaw Pact was disbanded.

Hersh then said that Obama wanted to fill Syria with foreign jihadists to serve as the necessary ground forces for his planned aerial bombardment there,and, if you wanted to go there and fight there in 2011-2013, Go, go, go overthrow Bashar! So, they actually pushed a lot of people [jihadists] to go. I dont think they were paying for them but they certainly gave visas.

However, Hillary Clintons America is not required to ally so closely with her Middle Eastern allies.

Rather, the support of the U.S. government to the Syrian rebels is solely at the behest of Hillary Clinton and her friends. If things go right, the Hillary Clinton-supporting aristocrats in the U.S. will be both supplying salaries for jihadists and walking off with a substantial profit.

AsCNNreports, Ted Cruz dropped out of the 2016 presidential race tonight. It looks like its going to be a contest between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Do you really want a U.S. president in 2017 that is conspiring with our enemies, as Hillary Clinton is reportedly doing?

Link:
Did Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton Approve Sending Sarin Gas to Syrian Rebels? - Center for Research on Globalization

Public spaces across the city have been plastered with posters that read: Hillary for Mayor promising the start of a possible election campaign for the former First Lady.

Supporting her possible comeback, a Quinnipiac University poll said Hillary Clinton could beat the current Democrat mayor Bill de Blasio when New Yorkers vote again again in November.

TWITTER/GETTY

Mr de Blasios campaign is reportedly spiralling out of control because of his inability to control the homelessness crisis, which has caused public and political furore.

Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll told the US news-site: New Yorkers aren't in love with Mayor Bill de Blasio, but they seem to like him better than other possible choices - except Hillary Clinton, who probably is an impossible choice.

"None of the possible contenders has made any real noise or spent any money, so this race still could get interesting."

Recent figures suggested that Clinton would beat de Blasio 49 to 30 per cent and polling suggest she leads among male, female, black, white and hispanic voters.

The signs of the 69-year-olds return to politics have emerged days after French voters begged the former US President Barack Obama join their countrys elections.

Last week, a group of Parisians launched a petition dubbed Obama 17 which aims to collect one million votes for Obamas return to politics.

GETTY

The petition urged voters to make a radical choice and choose the former President because he is foreign.

Clinton's predicted victory in the mayoral race would follow recent bad news that Arkansas largest airport named after her and her husband, former President Bill Clinton could have its name changed.

Express.co.uk have contacted Clinton's campaign team for comment.

See the rest here:
'Hillary for Mayor' Posters around New York City hint Clinton may RETURN to politics - Express.co.uk

At first, it's always exciting when they announce a new season ofAmerican Horror Story. What will the next theme of Ryan Murphy and Brad Falchuk's psycho-sexual-horror show be?

After the haunted house, the asylum, the coven, the freak show, the hotel and then reality TV, it was anybody's guess what the next season would be about. And we all know how the showrunners love to keep it a secret until the very last moment.

But for the seventh season, it didn't take much begging to get Ryan Murphy to dish on the new theme: the American presidential election. Murphy shared the news on the showWatch What Happens Live!after a few martinis.

Or at least that's what he admitted later, clarifying his surprising lapse.Either way, it's official:American Horror StorySeason 7 will discuss the 2016 election, but no, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton won't actually be in it.

We're not sure how many martinis he had this time, but Ryan Murphy just admitted toE! Onlinethat the two candidates will be played by actors. He also specified that the season won't be totally focused on them.

"I think people literally think Sarah Paulson is playing Hillary Clinton, and I wanted to clarify that that is not true. Horror Story is always about allegory, so the election is allegory.

It's our jumping off point. It is about the election we just went through and what happened on that night and the fallout of that night, which to many people, from all sides of the camps is a horror story."

Ryan Murphy added that the plot for this season will begin on the night of Trump's victory, when the results are in. Even though he hasn't cast Trump's and Clinton's avatars yet, we do know that Sarah Paulson and Evan Peters will be part of the cast.

American Horror Storycomes back this fall, but the release date hasn't been announced yet.

Read More->Jack Sparrow Is Drunk And Pantless In New 'Pirates of the Caribbean' Trailer

Originally posted here:
American Horror Story Season 7 Will Portray Hillary Clinton & Donald Trump - Konbini US

Patrick Svitek, The Texas Tribune

People are #StillWithHer, however. Click the gallery to see social media reactions to Clinton's loss. less

People are #StillWithHer, however. Click the gallery to see social media reactions to ... more

Hillary Clinton to speak in Houston in April

Hillary Clinton is coming to Texas for one of her first political appearances since her devastating defeat in the presidential election last year.

Clinton is set to speak at a luncheon on April 7 in Houston for Annie's List, a group that works to elect Democratic women in Texas. Annie's List announced Clinton as a speaker Wednesday night.

The luncheon will honor Amber Mostyn, a top Democratic donor who has long been involved with Annie's List, and "distinguished guests working to turn Texas blue," according to an invitation.

Clinton has kept a low profile since losing to Donald Trump on Nov. 8. She made her first public appearance since the election about a week later, when she spoke at a charity event in Washington, D.C.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune on March 1 at https://www.texastribune.org/2017/03/01/clinton-speak-houston-april/.

The Texas Tribune is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans and engages with them about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

See the original post:
Hillary Clinton to speak in Houston in April - Chron.com