Mediaboss Marketing

In an interview for a Sirius XM radio show on Tuesday, former US Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton said that President Joe Biden is old, but [has] been an effective president and does not pose a threat to our democracy, while his competitor, ex-president Donald Trump, is old, barely makes sense when he talks, is dangerous,and threatens our democracy.

Pick between your two old ones, Clinton said, laughing, And figure out how youre going to save our democracy. Because no matter where you stand on the political spectrum, you want to maintain freedom, and the rule of law, and protection for peoples fundamental rights, or at least I used to think so.

The presidential election in November is on track to be a rematch between President Biden, who was elected in 2020 amid the coronavirus pandemic and exploding racial tensions and now sees his approval rating among the lowest in history, and Donald Trump, the lightning rod of controversy who, after four years as president himself, sought to overturn the results of that election, culminating in the riot at the US Capitol building on January 6, 2021.

The issue of President Bidens aging has been a major concern for voters and the media, with a recent New York Times poll finding that a majority of those who voted for Biden in 2020 say he is too old to be effective in a second term. Biden, who will turn 81 shortly after the election, is the oldest person ever to serve as US president beating the previous record of 74, set by former President Trump.

Both men have been accused of cognitive decline, and both deny that they have dulled.

Clinton, who lost to Trump in 2016, also addressed the Supreme Court decision this week that overturned Colorados disqualification of the ex-president to appear on their states ballot in November. The case hinges on an interpretation of the Thirteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, which prohibits those who have engaged in insurrection from holding federal office.

The justices disagreed on the reasoning behind their opinion, with the conservative members of the court making a larger claim about the enforcement of that amendment, while the liberal justices limited their decision to a narrower response to this particular case. The nine members of the court, however, were unanimous in their decision.

Clinton said that while she does believe Trump should be considered an insurrectionist, she is not surprised this court would make this decision, adding that ultimately, its up to the American people to prevent [Trump] from getting near the Oval Office again.

Original post:
Clinton: Both candidates are old, but Trump endangers democracy - The Jerusalem Post

At the World Economic Forum, the former presidential candidate highlights the potential upside of Bitcoin toward global financial stability.

The World Economic Forum, held annually in Davos, Switzerland, is a prestigious gathering that brings together leaders from across the globe, including political figures, business executives, and prominent intellectuals, to discuss pressing global issues.

In a statement at the forum, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed her concerns about the impact of cryptocurrencies on global finance. Clintons words reflect a growing debate around the role and influence of digital currencies in the international economic landscape.

I hope nation states start to pay attention to the rise of cryptocurrencies because what looks very interesting and somewhat exotic effort to literally mine new coins in order to trade with them has the potential for undermining currencies, for undermining the role of the dollar as the reserve currency.

Clintons comments on cryptocurrencies touch upon a broader economic phenomenon called de-dollarization. De-dollarization refers to the process where countries reduce their reliance on the U.S. dollar in international trade and finance, often by switching to other currencies or assets for their transactions and reserves.

This would lead to the global economys further adoption of Bitcoin and crypto.

Read more from the original source:
Hillary Clinton: Bitcoin could replace the dollar as the reserve currency - crypto.news

A Columbia University student criticized former Secretary of State Hillary Clintons decision-making class for lacking depth and authenticity, saying she came across more as a politician while reading passages from her book.

Clintons class Inside the Situation Room, which she co-teaches alongside Dean Keren Yarhi-Milo, exposes students to foreign policy topics and is supposed to instruct students about how to make decisions at a national level. Fox News reported that the student, Laalitya Acharya, found the former secretary of state unrelatable, according to a TikTok video posted in December 2023.

I would have really, really hoped that she would bring in some more unique insights rather than her almost basically reciting passages from her book word-for-word during lecture, Acharya said in the video.

She went on to say the class felt like a one-sided speaking engagement, with Clinton failing to bring fresh perspectives on the classs topic, which Acharya said wasnt already expressed in Clintons book. Her assessment of Clintons teaching performance as uninspiringcontradicts the course description.

[The class] employs insights from diverse academic fields including political psychology, domestic politics, and international relations and the direct experience of high-level principals in the room to understand the key factors which underpin a nations most crucial decisions, according to the description.

Though Acharya said she did not regret taking the class, she had hoped Clinton would have been more candid.

I would have really, really hoped that she would bring in some more unique insights and more vulnerability and discussion on why she made the decisions that she did, what her insights were, what her thoughts were, Acharya continued in the video.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Acharya is not the only student who has criticized Clinton for being a disingenuous professor. Yahoo News reported in December that another student, Cate Twining-Ward, who wrote a letter to HuffPost, was initially eager to take the course but described her experience as feeling like the audience on a late-night talk show.

I am also discouraged that neither Clinton nor the dean attended a single weekly discussion section, let alone read the assignments we poured hours of work into writing, Twining-Ward wrote.Instead, these duties were handed off to the teachers assigned to lead the discussion groups.

Go here to see the original:
Hillary Clinton criticized by Columbia University students for lackluster class - Washington Examiner

OPINION:

Lets rewind back to October 2016. Hillary Clinton held a 12-point lead over then-candidate Donald Trump, according to traditional polling. Weeks from Election Day, she had cracked 50% support nationally in the polls, while Mr. Trump dwindled in the 30s.

No one in the political establishment expected Mr. Trump to put up much of a fight. Pundits were generally convinced he stood no chance, and the liberal media was ready to crown Mrs. Clinton.

Then Election Day came, and Hillary lost. The polls and the pundits were proved wrong again.

That the polls were dead wrong and Mrs. Clinton lost isnt as important, however, as why she lost. Within her own party, Mrs. Clinton could rely on plenty of rank-and-file zealots who were excited to elect the first female president. But she wasnt popular or likable beyond them.

Mrs. Clinton was so unpopular even among Democrats that a self-proclaimed democratic socialist from Vermont posed a credible challenge, and she was beset upon by lackluster support from within while relying too heavily on mercenary consultants. On the other side, voting against Hillary was an article of faith for Republicans. Mrs. Clinton lost because the middle the swing voters who ultimately decide elections just didnt like her.

Fast forward to January 2024, and if the polls are to be believed (they shouldnt be), Mr. Trump maintains a 30-point lead in the Republican primary cycle. Legacy polling sees Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley as little more than long shots. And Mr. Trump is neck and neck with President Biden in key battleground states again, according to traditional polls.

But should Republicans keep taking the polls at face value? Should we trust the polling that has Mr. Trump beating Mr. Biden in states like Michigan? Absolutely not.

If traditional polls have taught us anything in recent years, it is not to trust them or the paid consultants and fundraisers promoting polls, and the legacy media parroting them. The polls have been dead wrong since 2016, leading to Republican losses in 2018, 2020, 2022 and even 2023.

Traditional pollings failures start with the wrong, limited and arbitrarily defined data sets to decide whom to call, and it goes further off the rails by generally reaching and getting responses only from the most ardent political zealots those desperate to convince you (and themselves) their outsider views are right.

No amount of weighting applied by pollsters to fix their oversampling of extremes will work. It just makes the results more unreliable. Even polling averages dont help, since the average of all that junk is still junk.

The more accurate measure of U.S. public opinion is anti-polling, which monitors actual behavior of massively large populations over time what they say and what they do when theyre not aware of being monitored. Anti-polling uses observational analysis to strip away the biases and errors that make traditional polling unreliable.

After nearly two years of monitoring real data on the Trump, Biden and DeSantis dynamic, there is one constant: Mr. Trump cant win swing voters.

Mr. Trump is so unpopular even within his own party that his Napoleonic return is blunted by a serious challenger, and he is beset upon by lackluster support from within while relying too heavily on mercenary consultants. On the other side, voting against Mr. Trump remains an article of faith for Democrats. Above all, swing voters generally dont like Mr. Biden, but they loathe Mr. Trump.

Sound familiar?

Mr. Trump has experienced a constant series of post-indictment bumps among swing voters aggravated by the weaponization of government. They believe, rightly so, that he is being treated unfairly by the establishment. But the bumps always fade fast, and they are not enough to carry him through a general election.

Most swing voters oppose the Democrats legal chicanery and are generally negative on Bidenomics and this failing presidency. But that sentiment pales in intensity with their distaste for Mr. Trump. Opposing Biden Democrats is one thing; casting a vote for Donald Trump, however, is untenable.

Like Mrs. Clintons own loyalists, Trump voters dont represent a large enough voting bloc to cross the finish line. Third-party data from Eyesover confirms that, while there are almost always more social media posts about Mr. Trump, his supporters are more likely to post, and post more frequently.

Case in point: Since October, those making positive online posts about Mr. Trump have grown by 6%, while the volume of those posts has grown by 7%.

A separate eight-month study of nearly 20 million home IP addresses makes the Trump prison all too clear 17% to 22% of the electorate that doesnt grow, but from which his now-former supporters slowly get paroled.

So ask yourselves, Republicans: Do we want Mr. Trump to be our Hillary? Do we want to enter Election Day with the same supreme confidence, only to lose for the fifth time in a row?

Im sick of losing. It is time to start winning again, and this is coming from a two-time Trump voter.

Heading into the Iowa caucus, Donald Trump may appear to be the strongest Republican in the field, but that means nothing come November. By then, we could be looking at the next Hillary Clinton.

Dan Backer is a veteran campaign counsel, having served more than 100 candidates and political action committees, including the pro-DeSantis Ready to Win. He practices law as a member of Chalmers, Adams, Backer & Kaufman LLC.

See the rest here:
Is Donald Trump the GOP's Hillary Clinton? - Washington Times

Claim:

An "extreme snuff film" called "Frazzledrip" that supposedly shows Hillary Clinton and aide Huma Abedin torturing and killing a child to extract "adrenochrome" from its blood, actually exists.

Rating:

In late January 2024, the word "Frazzledrip" echoed across the internet after an X account known for sharing right-wing conspiracy theories posted the screenshot of a five-year-old article claiming that a "Hillary Clinton snuff film" was circulating "on the dark web":

(@dom_lucre/X)

The article, which first appeared on the website Your News Wire (later renamed News Punch) on April 15, 2018, reported that the "horrific" video, "code named Frazzledrip," was discovered on the hard drive of a laptop belonging to former Democratic congressman (and former husband of Clinton's assistant, Huma Abedin) Anthony Weiner, who was jailed in 2017 for texting obscene material to a minor):

An "extreme snuff film" featuring Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin raping and mutilating a prepubescent girl is circulating on the dark web, according to sources familiar with the material.

The video, code named Frazzledrip, has been circulating on the dark web since Monday, according to reliable sources who have viewed the material and confirm the content is "worse than any nightmare."

"The people who are coming back from viewing this tape are just not the same.".

Many people are unable to watch the video due to the horrific nature of the content, according to sources familiar with the tape.

In the video, they take a little girl and they fillet her face, according to reports, and then they take turns wearing the little girl's face like a mask. It is believed they were terrorizing the young girl, deliberately causing the child's body to release Adenochrome into her bloodstream before bleeding her out and drinking the blood during a Satanic ritual sacrifice.

Adrenochrome is an oxidation product of adrenaline (ephinephrine, norepinephrine) that is extracted from a living donor's adrenal gland. According to those familiar with the elites' drug of choice, the high is "intense" and "exotic".

The article's author, "Baxter Dmitry," rehashed elements of a conspiracy theory known as Pizzagate, which alleged without evidence that Clinton and other "deep state" conspirators ran a massive Satanic ped*ph*le ring out of a Washington, D.C. pizzeria called Comet Pizza. Your News Wire had granted uncritical credence to such theories in the past.

The raw material for the article was aggregated from social media posts of images allegedly extracted from the mysterious and supposedly impossible-for-ordinary-people-to-find "Frazzledrip" video. One of the earliest such posts appeared on Facebook during the first week of April 2018, and looked like this:

(Facebook screenshot)

Similar posts were widely shared on Twitter:

(Twitter screenshot)

It only took a few moments of investigating to determine that the sepia-toned images came not from incriminating footage hidden in some dank corner of the dark web, but rather from a maniacally inscrutable YouTube video uploaded (coincidentally or not) on April Fools Day 2018 (regrettably, that video has since been deleted).

We found, moreover, that the image described as showing Abedin wearing a mask made from the face of a mutilated child was actually taken from the website of a well-known Indian restaurant in Washington, D.C., called Hush Supper Club. The masked woman is the restaurant's proprietor, Geeta, who has been profiled in a number of national news venues.

Here is the photo in its original context:

Insofar as it's supposed to serve as evidence that Huma Abedin participated in a Satanic ritual involving the mutilation of a child, then, the video is demonstrably a hoax. However, that hasn't stopped social media users from trying to find other imagery in the video to support the "snuff film" thesis, though the results even with the addition of visual aids remain laughably incomprehensible:

(Screenshot)

In point of fact, there appeared to be some disagreement among conspiracy theorists as to whether the two-minute, now defunct YouTube clip and the much-ballyhooed "Frazzledrip" snuff film were even one and the same. Some claimed the YouTube video was only a teaser, and that somewhere a full-length version existed, which, if and when it were made public, would expose Hillary Clinton for the murderous satanic, adrenochrome-addicted, pedophilic ringleader she truly is. Others have admitted the possibility that "Frazzledrip" may never have actually existed, and it was a deep-state prank (or "psy-op") meant to make them look foolish.

Five years hence, "Frazzledrip" is still touted by some as a reality, even though not an iota of evidence to that effect has come to light since the "snuff film" was first whispered about in the dark recesses of QAnon.

Casarez, Jean. "Anthony Weiner Reports to Prison." CNN. 6 November 2017.

Friedberg, Brian. "The Dark Virality of a Hollywood Blood-Harvesting Conspiracy." Wired. 31 July 2020.

Henry, Sarah. "Hush Supper Club Quietly Reveals Spicy Secrets." KQED-TV. 5 August 2011.

Read more here:
Fact Check: 'Frazzledrip,' the 'Horrific Hillary Clinton Snuff Film' Touted by QAnon, Never Existed - Yahoo News