You are hereElections


Focus: Donald Trump and the Polls - Mar 30, 2016

POLL (NBC News/SurveyMonkey): Trump nearly at 50 percent support among Republicans nationally, holds 21-point lead - NBC News

POLL: NBC News/SurveyMonkey weekly election tracking full results -

POLL (Public Policy Polling): Trump Most Acceptable Candidate to GOP - Public Policy Polling

POLL (Rasmussen Reports): 84% of likely Republican voters think Trump is likely to win their party’s nomination - Rasmussen Reports

POLL (Monmouth University): Most Republicans want the GOP to unite behind Trump - Washington Examiner

POLL (Quinnipiac and YouGov/Huffington Post): New polls cast doubts on anti-Trump movement - PJ Media

POLL (Morning Consult): Voters, especially women, push Donald Trump to 49% on national security after Brussels terror attacks - People's Pundit

POLL: In New York poll Trump leads Cruz by 33 points -

POLL: New poll shows Trump leading Cruz in California by 7 points - KCRA Home

POLL: Kasich trails Trump by 3 points in latest Pennsylvania poll -

POLL: Trump and Cruz in tight race in Wisconsin - Realclear Politics

Donald Trump berates Scott Walker for not raising taxes in Wisconsin, 'he cut back on schools, he cut back on highways, he cut back on a lot of things' - The Guardian

Donald Trump Is bringing message of jobs and trade to Paul Ryan's hometown in Wisconsin - The New York Times

Portraits beyond the polls: who’s really voting for Trump, two reports from RAND Presidential Election Panel and the Institute for the Study of Citizens and Politics - Yahoo News

Trump signals he’s ready to fight for every delegate, his legal team would soon file its formal complaint over 10 Louisiana delegates - Bloomberg Politics

The vast majority of Republican politicians aren't even trying to stop Donald Trump - Vox

Trump, Cruz and Kasich back away from their pledge to support GOP nominee (VIDEOS) -

VIDEO (Full): CNN Republican Town Hall: Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, John Kasich - YouTube

To contact Bartolo email peaceloverblog[at]yahoo[dot]com (replacing [at] with @, [dot] with .)

New poem by TCBH! resident poet Gary Lindorff: 'One day, in the asylum'

We were having a bad day in the asylum,

A bad 8 years, a bad sixteen years,

Oh, heck, a bad era,

Well, let’s face it, a bad history.

But we had a good leader for a change,

Focus: Clinton, Sanders and the Polls - Mar 25, 2016


The Independents are the largest segment of the American voters. According to the Gallup Historical Trends of Party Affiliation, 38% consider themselves independents while 32% are Democrats and 26% Republicans. Also Democrats and Republicans are not solidly behind their own parties: the Fox News poll shows that 38% of the Democrats and astonishingly 68% of Republicans 'feel betrayed by politicians from their political party'.


Unlike the November elections, primaries privilege the Democrats and Republicans compared to the self-identified Independents and are skewed toward the two established parties. Many states require voters to affiliate with a party in order to take part in presidential primaries and caucuses. The Fox News poll find that only 21% of the Independents vote for the Democratic party and 33% of Independents vote for the Republican party during the primaries. Moreover the presence of the superdelegates at the Democratic Convention strengthen the party establishment offsetting the influence of the grassroot movement. While the Independents play a limited role in the primaries, they will be a key factor in electing the President in November because Democrats and Republicans do not have enough votes. 


Independents are a major political force behind the popularity and success of the Bernie Sanders candidacy. While Clinton so far has the backing of the majority of the Democrats, according to the Quinnipiac poll 46% of Independents and 80% of Republicans say they would never vote for her in the presidential election. In contrast Sanders is opposed by only 19% of Independents and 58% of Republicans. With his campaign Sanders is potentially in a position to build a large coalition of a majority of Independents, Democrats and Republican swing voters. That is the reason why Sanders has a much better chance than Clinton to beat Trump. The Quinnipiac poll shows that in a November matchup Sanders beat Trump 52% to 38% while Clinton beat Trump 46% to 40%.


Below are the latest polls:


POLL: Sanders pulls even with Clinton in a new national poll. Because it’s the economy, stupid. Clinton came out on top on issues of foreign policy while Sanders on domestic issues - The Washington Post


POLL: Words used to describe Clinton and Trump presidencies aren't that great, for Hillary most frequently used word was ‘disaster’ and ‘scared' 'disappointed' rounded out the top five -


POLL: Clinton leads Sanders by 6 in Wisconsin - TheHill


POLL: New Pennsylvania poll: Clinton up 25 points over Sanders, Kasich three points behind Trump - PhillyVoice


POLL: Polls give Trump and Clinton huge leads in NY Primary ⋆ Hudson Valley News Network


POLL: California poll: Trump leads GOP; Clinton, Sanders close - POLITICO


To contact Bartolo email peaceloverblog[at]yahoo[dot]com (replacing [at] with @, [dot] with .)

Stolen primary in Arizona?: Questioning Hillary’s Tuesday Primary Win Amid Widespread Evidence of Voter Suppression in Phoenix

By Dave Lindorff


         It sure looks like there was some voter fraud committed in the Democratic primary in Arizona on Tuesday.


Focus: Hillary Clinton - Mar 23 , 2016

New emails highlight interaction between State, Clinton Foundation - TheHill

Judicial Watch: New internal State Department documents raise questions on Benghazi, Clinton Foundation - Judicial Watch

Judicial Watch submits proposed witness list, discovery plan to Federal Court in Clinton email matter - Breitbart

As Hillary bolstered Boeing, company returned the favor giving millions to Clinton Foundation and six-figure speeches to Bill - Seattle Times

Ex-Im Bank beneficiaries are heavy Clinton Foundation donors - The Daily Caller

ARCHIVE: Boeing Refuses to Disclose Any Boeing-State Department-Clinton Foundation Email Correspondence -

Clinton Foundation discloses $40 Million in Wall Street donations - Breitbart

ARCHIVE: Clinton Foundation donors got weapons deals from Hillary Clinton's State Department -

Congresswoman Blackburn to ask FTC to investigate the Clinton Foundation’s charitable status - Breitbart

Hillary’s other email server scandal: Clinton Foundation and the unethical mixing of Mrs. Clinton’s public work and her personal fundraising/speech-giving/favor-doing - WSJ

ARCHIVE: Clinton Foundation received subpoena from State Department investigators - The Washington Post

HRC's final paid speech: $260K from the ACA, Why would a non-profit promoting summer camps spend 10 per cent of its annual budget on a Hillary Clinton speech? -

Clinton Foundation hires H-1B guest workers in place of American graduates - Breitbart

REPORT: Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation -

REPORT: Special report concerning latest amended disclosures of the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation (attached) - Charles Ortel

Hillary Clinton campaign's foreign fundraisers under scrutiny -

WikiLeaks publishes searchable archive of Clinton emails - Washington Examiner

POLL: Trump, Clinton score historic unfavorable ratings -



Uproar over Hillary's role in Honduran coup grows as her campaign denies connection - Alternet

The Clinton-backed Honduran regime is picking off indigenous leaders - The Nation

Hillary Clinton needs to answer for her actions in Honduras and Haiti - The Washington Post

Hillary Clinton's response to Honduran coup was scrubbed from her paperback memoirs -

High hopes for Hillary Clinton, then disappointment in Haiti - The New York Times

Haitians protest Hillary Clinton’s ‘destruction’ of country -

7 articles to read uncovering Hillary Clinton’s Haiti record - The Haitian Times

The mysterious gap in Hillary Clinton’s Haiti emails -

Clinton aide demanded to clear Department’s travel warnings and human rights report on Haiti, releases interfered with fundraiser benefitting the country -

ARCHIVE: Gov’t memo said Clinton would steer State Department resources to donor’s Haiti Project, instead of building houses Claudio Osorio went to prison -

To contact Bartolo email peaceloverblog[at]yahoo[dot]com (replacing [at] with @, [dot] with .)

Focus: Donald Trump and the GOP Establishment - Mar 21, 2016


Trump: If GOP takes my nomination 'a lot of unhappy people', supporters won't vote in the general elections -

VIDEO: Donald Trump Interview at 'ABC This Week' - YouTube

RNC chair says GOP prepping for possible brokered convention - NY Daily News

VIDEO: RNC chair Reince Priebus: Nothing nefarious about an open convention - YouTube

TRANSCRIPT: Donald Trump, Reince Priebus, Denis McDonough, and Sen. Mitch McConnell on ‘ABC This Week'- ABC News

Republican leaders map a strategy to derail Donald Trump - The New York Times

Trump to huddle with influential Republicans in D.C. ahead of AIPAC speech - The Washington Post

Some RNC members weighs scrapping convention rule book to head off anti-Trump maneuvers - Washington Times

Conservatives call for anti-Trump unity, hint at a Cruz-Kasich ticket - POLITICO

Kasich responds to anti-Trump forces ‘split the map’ strategy -

Graham: Trump is a "demagogue of the greatest proportion” (VIDEO) - CBS News

PAC Club for Growth nets $4 million for fight against Trump - POLITICO

Anti-Trump super-PAC Our Principles raises $4.8 Million in February - Bloomberg Politics

Here's Everything the Republican party is doing to try to stop Donald Trump -

Lifelong Republican: voting for Trump is 'the middle finger vote' to a good ole boy system that lines the pockets of elites in Washington while neglecting working men and women -

Donald Trump's campaign threatens to steal tea party thunder - LA Times

Democrats beware: Donald Trump is finding success well outside the Republican fringe - LA Times

Donald Trump's type of voter found in big numbers in Pennsylvania, nearly 55,000 voters switched registration from Democrat to Republican this year - The Morning Call

VIDEO: Judge Jeanine Pirro pro-Trump opening statement: Donald Trump Vs the GOP establishment - YouTube

POLL: Trump still holds 15-point lead over Cruz nationally - Rasmussen Reports

Donald Trump Owes At Least $250 Million to Banks - WSJ



Man charged with allegedly punching and kicking anti-Trump protester at rally - ABC News

VIDEO: Protester punched and kicked at Donald Trump rally - YouTube

New York anti-Trump protest draws thousands; some detained and pepper-sprayed after scuffle with cops (VIDEO) - NY Daily News

VIDEO: Violence and pepper spray at anti-Trump rally in New York - YouTube

Protesters block road to Trump rally In Arizona, supporters getting out of their cars and walking to the rally (VIDEO, PHOTOS) - Huffington Post

Trump campaign manager accused of another physical altercation, appears to have grabbed a protester by the collar - POLITICO

VIDEO: Here is Donald Trump's campaign manager in the Tucson crowd grabbing the collar of a protester - Jacqueline Alemany on Twitter

Anti-Trump protester April Foster charged with hitting police horse in Kansas City - Breitbart

Donald Trump's sister, son receive threatening letters demanding that the billionaire drop out of the presidential race -


Donald Trump's campaign to add rally security amid violence - Bloomberg Politics

Donald Trump says protesters are violating his First Amendment rights -

To contact Bartolo email peaceloverblog[at]yahoo[dot]com (replacing [at] with @, [dot] with .)

Why I won’t be voting for Hillary in November: A Neolib Posing as a Progressive vs. a Reality TV Star Posing as a Fascist

By Dave Lindorff


            I won’t be voting for Hillary Clinton if she wins the Democratic Party nomination for president, and I won’t heed Bernie Sanders if, as he has vowed to do, he calls on his supporters to “come together” after the convention, should he lose, to support Clinton and prevent Donald Trump or another Republican from becoming president.


Hillary Is A Neocon

She has the record and the vision

"For this former Republican, and perhaps for others, the only choice will be to vote for Hillary Clinton. The party cannot be saved, but the country still can be." —Robert Kagan

"I have a sense that she's one of the more competent members of the current administration and it would be interesting to speculate about how she might perform were she to be president." —Dick Cheney

"I've known her for many years now, and I respect her intellect. And she ran the State Department in the most effective way that I've ever seen." —Henry Kissinger

Nobody Beats This Record

  • She says President Obama was wrong not to launch missile strikes on Syria in 2013.
  • She pushed hard for the overthrow of Qadaffi in 2011.
  • She supported the coup government in Honduras in 2009.
  • She has backed escalation and prolongation of war in Afghanistan.
  • She voted for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
  • She skillfully promoted the White House justification for the war on Iraq.
  • She does not hesitate to back the use of drones for targeted killing.
  • She has consistently backed the military initiatives of Israel.
  • She was not ashamed to laugh at the killing of Qadaffi.
  • She has not hesitated to warn that she could obliterate Iran.
  • She is not afraid to antagonize Russia.
  • She helped facilitate a military coup in Ukraine.
  • She has the financial support of the arms makers and many of their foreign customers.
  • She waived restrictions at the State Department on selling weapons to Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Qatar, all states wise enough to donate to the Clinton Foundation.
  • She supported President Bill Clinton's wars and the power of the president to make war without Congress.
  • She has advocated for arming fighters in Syria.
  • She supported a surge in Iraq even before President Bush did.

Further Reading




Promote Democracy Without Bombs

Demand Democratic Superdelegates Represent Their Constituents at the National Convention.

Kick the War Habit

Pledge to Work to End War.

Know anybody who just doesn't get it? Forward this to them!


What No One in the Media Has Asked the Candidates About War

If you can get presidential candidates in the Democratic or Republican parties to answer any of these, please let me know.

1. President Obama's 2017 budget proposal, according to the National Priorities Project, devotes 54% of discretionary spending (or $622.6 billion) to militarism. This figure does not include care for veterans or debt payments on past military spending. Is the percentage of discretionary spending now devoted to militarism, as compared to what you would propose for 2018,
_______too high,
_______too low,
_______just right.
Approximately what level would you propose? ______________________.

2. The United States budgets approximately $25 billion per year for non-military foreign aid, which is less per capita or in relation to the nation's economy than many other countries. Is the percentage of discretionary spending now devoted to non-military foreign aid, as compared to what you would propose for 2018,
_______too high,
_______too low,
_______just right.
Approximately what level would you propose? ______________________.

3. Does the Kellogg-Briand Pact forbid war? _____________________.

4. Does the United Nations Charter forbid war that is neither actually defensive nor authorized by the United Nations Security Council? _________________.

5. Does the U.S. Constitution require a Congressional declaration of war? __________________.

6. Do the anti-torture and war crimes statutes in the U.S. code ban torture? _________________.

7. Does the U.S. Constitution forbid imprisoning people without charge or trial? ________________.

8. The United States is the leading weapons supplier, through sales and gifts, to the Middle East, as to the world. In what ways would you reduce this arms trade?_______________________ _________________ ______________________ _________________________ _________________________ ___________________ _________________ _________________ ____________________.

9. Does the U.S. president have the legal authority to kill people with missiles from drones or manned airplanes or by any other means? Where does that legal authority originate? _____________ ____________ __________ ___________________ _________________ ______________ ___________________ __________________.

10. The United States military has troops in at least 175 countries. Some 800 bases house hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops in some 70 foreign nations, not including numerous "trainers" and participants in "non-permanent" exercises that last indefinitely, at a cost over $100 billion a year. Is this,
_____ too many,
_____ too few,
_____ just right.
What level would be appropriate? ___________ ________________ ________________ _______________ ____________.

11. Would you end U.S. war making in
_____ Afghanistan
_____ Iraq
_____ Syria
_____ Libya
_____ Somalia
_____ Pakistan
_____ Yemen

12. Does the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty require the United States to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control? ________.

13. Would you sign and encourage ratification of,
________ the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
________ the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction
________ the Convention on Cluster Munitions
________ the Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity
________ the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture
________ the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance
________ the proposed treaty on Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space

14. Should the U.S. government continue to subsidize
______ fossil fuels
______ nuclear energy

15. How, and how much, would you propose to invest in bringing renewable, green, non-nuclear energy to the United States and the world? ______________ _______________ _____________ ________________ _____________ ________________ ____________ ______________ ___________________ _________________.

Focus: Bernie Sanders - Mar 17, 2016


Following the results of yesterday’s primaries, the odds are against Bernie Sanders winning the Democratic nomination at the convention according to the delegate and superdelegate math. There are primaries in the coming weeks that will give a clearer picture. More than half of the delegates are yet to be chosen and the next races may favor Sanders campaign while the past primaries have been in Clinton territory. Clinton is winning the Democratic nomination thanks to the super Pac and rich donor money which finances her campaign and the campaigns of the Democratic congressmen that endorsed her. The Democratic party machine and a sympathetic media coverage promote her candidacy notwithstanding her domestic failures, foreign policy blunders and revelations about her private email server and the Clinton Foundation dealings.

It may come the time for Sanders to consider the option of running as an independent for President if he does not collect enough delegates to win the nomination, which is likely unless there is a political earthquake such as Hillary Clinton indicted by the FBI or else. There are more than seven months to the November elections, an arc of time long enough to turn events around. Sanders and the movement, which he represents, deserve to make their case until the November elections given the crucial issues facing the nation. As shown in several polls Clinton won the majority of Democrats in most primaries and Sanders won the independents and the new voters, two groups that will have more weight in the November elections than in the primaries which are slanted in favor of the political parties. 

If Sanders runs as an independent for President chances are he will not be a “spoiler,” the label used against third-party candidate Nader when Gore lost to Bush in 2000. On the contrary Sanders may attract Trump low-income supporters who share his same concerns on the issues of jobs, trade, economic inequality, health insurance, college tuition, etc. On the other end Hillary Clinton may lose in a matchup with Trump or Cruz because of her political past and a majority of Americans think she is not honest and trustworthy. Personally I think that Sanders has a chance to win a three way contest between him, Clinton and Trump (or Cruz.) 

Time will run out to be an independent candidate for President if Sanders wants to go this route. There are deadlines for gaining ballot access to run as an independent or 3rd party candidate in every state starting with Texas on May 9, North Carolina June 9, Illinois June 27, Indiana and New Mexico June 30 and so on. Here are filing deadlines and signature requirements for independent presidential candidates in all states.


To contact Bartolo email peaceloverblog[at]yahoo[dot]com (replacing [at] with @, [dot] with .)


By Robert C. Koehler

The snaking line was more than a mile long. Thousands of us had been waiting for hours in the bitter cold to get into Chicago’s Auditorium Theatre to hear Bernie Sanders speak. It was Monday night. The Illinois and four other state primaries were the next day and, as has been the case for the last three weeks now, the fate of the country — and the planet — seemed to hang in the balance.

Signs were everywhere: A FUTURE TO BELIEVE IN, of course. And FEEL THE BERN, and variations thereof. BERNIE: PROPHET, HILLARY: PROFIT. And my favorite: SHAMANS FOR SANDERS.

The elevated train — Chicago’s L — rattled and clattered overhead at regular intervals, adding random noise to the windy, exhilarating night. Cheers erupted here and there for no apparent reason. The camaraderie was joyous. Even the police were friendly.

What if Trump people showed up and tried to start something? That rumor had been hovering for several days, but here in the midst of this crowd nothing seemed more preposterous. “If Trump people show up we need to show them love,” a woman standing nearby said. “Welcome them! Invite them to be one of us!” This was the sort of energy that infused the crowd. If nothing else, it flooded the cold March night with warmth.

And people chanted: “This is what democracy looks like!”

Oh Lord.

What I thought was: Maybe they’re right. A day and a half later, as I write, I’m still transfixed by those words, even though all the energy has scattered. Democracy is about depth of participation, not about winning and losing. And something is happening this election cycle that is opening up a participatory consciousness I haven’t felt, at least at the national level, in four decades.

What I want is more than a fleeting image of democracy on a bitter Chicago night. I want a lasting sense of social involvement and participation in crucial change. This is what democracy looks like. Democracy is the precondition of social evolution. And for this to occur at the national and global level — for society to reorganize itself in a way that defangs the four horsemen of social collapse: war, poverty, racism and climate change — we have to be engaged not as spectators but at the level of every human soul.

The doors opened. A huge segment of the waiting crowd did not get in, but I made it. Wow. A burst of light and warmth in the historic old theater. Jill Sobule is on stage with her guitar. “When they say they want America back . . . America back . . . what the fuck do they mean?”

Speakers address the crowd. Someone says: “The only thing that’s been able to trump hatred and fear is beauty and love.” Old rock music fills the air. Twentysomethings get up and start to dance. A mom in front of me is holding a month-old baby and I can hardly contain my emotions.

The candidate himself didn’t step onto the stage till 11 p.m. He went nonstop for about 40 minutes, addressing, by my count, 15 issues, none of which — of course! — were part of the media coverage of the primaries. Here are a few highlights:

·        “This is the wealthiest country in the history of the world. We need to invest in our children. Get our priorities right. We are not going to be shutting down schools while Wall Street makes huge profits. . . . No more water systems that poison children.”

·        “This should be a country with the highest voter turnout, not one of the lowest.”

·        “Together we are going to repair a broken criminal justice system. . . . We need to demilitarize the police.”

·        “Substance abuse is a health issue, not a criminal issue. We need to rethink the so-called war on drugs.”

·        “There are 11 million undocumented people in the U.S. living in fear: We need comprehensive immigration reform.”

·         “The way we have treated Native Americans for centuries is an absolute disgrace.”

·        “Barack Obama’s father was born in Kenya. My father was born in Poland, but no one is asking me for my birth certificate. Maybe it has something to do with the color of my skin.”

·        “I’m opposed to death penalty. In a world where there is so much violence, the state should not be a part of that.”

Finally and, it almost seemed, reluctantly, Sanders brought up the matter of war. He condemned the Iraq invasion as one of the worst blunders in American history and added: “I will do everything I can to see that the men and women in the military do not get sucked into perpetual war.”

Yeah, this is what democracy looks like, on both the inside and the outside. I hear the words of the one major-party candidate who dares to question America’s militarized relationship with the rest of the world. I also hear the wiggle room. I wish Sanders’ stance on war and the unfathomable U.S. military budget had the certainty of most of his other policy positions; and I wonder if his momentum — his reach into the soul of the electorate — would be more powerful if that were the case.

I know this much. When I hear someone dismiss Sanders’ social programs, such as free college tuition, on the grounds that “the money’s not there,” I will ask why nobody ever says: “We can’t develop the next generation of nuclear weapons; the money’s just not there!”

When it comes to militarism, I have yet to see what democracy looks like.

Robert Koehler is an award-winning, Chicago-based journalist and nationally syndicated writer. Contact him at or visit his website at


Focus: Donald Trump - Mar 13, 2016

I think Bernie Sanders should refrain from calling Trump names like evil, fascist, racist, bigot, etc. Although Trump's words are hash, extreme, sometimes offensive, criticizing his views on the issues should not equal to insulting him. This means waging a positive campaign and not indulging in personal attacks. We must avoid to debase the political debate to a brawl. 

Trump's political positions should be criticized for what they really are and not distorted. For instance he said that the worst criminal elements of the Mexican society cross the border to enter U.S.. This statement is wrong but does not necessarily mean that Trump is anti-Mexican. He said that he would "temporarily" block all Muslim to enter U.S. due to the spread of the Islamic State. This measure is wrong but it does not necessarily mean that he is anti-Muslim. Finally, contrary to the hawkish attitude of Republican opponents and Hillary Clinton, Trump's foreign policy towards Russia, Syria, Libya and Ukraine is remarkably dovish, advocating against violent regime change which is at the root of the current world crisis.

Trump's supporters are mostly low income people who, in the future, may support Sanders' policies directed at addressing social reforms and economic inequality, i.e. the scandalous accumulation of wealth in the hands of the rich at the expense of the whole nation. Insulting Trump is perceived as insulting his supporters and may generate sympathy towards him. Sanders should not endorse or justify the Chicago protest that forced Trump to cancel the rally over security concerns when protesters clashed with his supporters inside an arena where he was to speak. "We came in here and we wanted to shut this down”, said a protester. Trump and his supporters must be allowed to freely speech and assemble with no threats.

To contact Bartolo email peaceloverblog[at]yahoo[dot]com (replacing [at] with @, [dot] with .)

Time for Sanders to play hardball: With Clinton Stumbling Following His Big Michigan Win, Bernie Should Attack Her Integrity

By Dave Lindorff


            Bernie Sanders, whose campaign for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination is on a roll following a stunning if narrow win in last Tuesday’s Michigan primary, where he embarrassed pollsters who were predicting a double-digit rout by Hillary Clinton only a day before the voting, has famously said he’s “not interested” in the issue of his opponent’s exclusive use, during her five years as Obama’s Secretary of State, of a private, instead of government email account and server.

Profile in lack of courage: Sen. Warren has Betrayed the Cause the Put Her in the Senate and Once Made Her a Hero to Millions

By Dave Lindorff


Sen. Elizabeth Warren just had a chance to turn the tide in this rigged Democratic primary season last Tuesday, and she ran away from it.

How a Hillary or Bernie Government Would Relate to the World

By David Swanson, teleSUR

By world standards, a U.S. government led by President Bernie Sanders would be exceptionally militarized and very much an outlier in terms of its disregard for the standards of international law and its lack of respect for the sovereignty of other nations.

By comparison to a U.S. government led by a hyper-militarist President Hillary Clinton, a Bernie government would be the peaceful, law-abiding, and humanitarian Age of Aquarius.

Bernie Sanders lacks any transformative vision of peace, international cooperation, the rule of law, or transition to a peaceful economy.

Senator Sanders has been unwilling to propose any significant reduction in military spending, despite the boon it would be to his campaign, which faces criticism over planned taxes to pay for desired domestic programs. Just stating "I would cut aggressive and counterproductive military weapons and operations," would eliminate the need to ever raise taxes on a non-billionaire to pay for anything ever again, but Sanders won't state that. I've communicated with his campaign, which has declined thus far to tell me what level of military spending Sanders favors, but it seems clear it would not be dramatically different from the world-record levels of spending now current.

Candidate Sanders tells us he would continue to kill people with drones, he would continue the wars but seek more partners and funders abroad. He rather grotesquely wants Saudi Arabia to "get its hands dirty." He also has a long history of justifying military spending as a jobs program, and of merging his support for the needs of veterans with glorification of war making. While he eventually opposed the Gulf War and then the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Sanders supported wars in Yugoslavia and Afghanistan.

Sanders lacks any transformative vision of peace, international cooperation, the rule of law, or transition to a peaceful economy. He does not propose to eliminate nuclear weapons or join the International Criminal Court or ban weapons in space or stop antagonizing Russia. He's offered no proposal for a ceasefire, humanitarian aid, or other diplomatic initiative in Syria / Iraq. There's reason to hope only that a Sanders White House would be a bit less bellicose than Obama's -- and the chief reason to hope that is that Sanders would almost certainly not include Hillary Clinton in his cabinet.

Hillary Clinton lost the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008 largely because she'd been in the Senate in time to vote for the Iraq invasion, while Barack Obama had not. That they'd both later voted repeatedly to fund that war seemed lost both on those defending Clinton's vote and those claiming Obama for the peace movement.

Prior to 2008 we already knew Clinton's history. She had pushed her husband in a militaristic direction throughout his presidency, including on Yugoslavia and Iraq. The 1998 Iraq Liberation Act had laid the groundwork for the war to come. She's urged Bill Clinton to bomb Kosovo in violation of the U.N. Charter and against the will of Congress. She'd not only voted for the war on Iraq, and against an amendment to pursue inspections first, but she'd promoted all of Bush-Cheney's lies as her own, despite having been well informed of the facts. She'd then continued to defend her actions for years, and to argue for continuing and escalating the war.

In 2006, Democrats had won Congressional victories principally on the public demand to end the war on Iraq. Clinton protégé and future despot of Chicago Rahm Emanuel openly told the Washington Post that the Democrats would keep the war on Iraq going in order to run against it again in 2008, and that's what Hillary Clinton did. In time for the 2008 primaries, she turned against the Iraq war and began lying that she'd never supported it and only ever wanted inspections pursued, a lie she has articulated in recent weeks as well.

None of this has changed in the past 8 years. On top of it we can add the following. Hillary Clinton turned the U.S. State Department into an arm of the military, redefined "diplomacy" to mean the communication of threats of violence, made diplomats work as marketing staff for weapons companies, waived restrictions on arms sales to brutal governments that donated to her personal foundation, led the advocacy for escalation in Afghanistan, led the lobbying for a war to overthrow the government of Libya creating the disaster now found there, backed a military coup in Honduras, defended dictators and torturers in Tunisia and Egypt until the last possible moment, and in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia until the present moment, threatened assault on Iran and lied about Iranian nukes even after finally being compelled to support the nuclear agreement with Iran, supported the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara, opposed opportunities for peace in Syria at every turn, and much much more. Clinton had in fact joined Republicans in pushing for the disarmament of Syria as early as 2004. On Afghanistan, Libya, and the attack on Osama bin Laden, Secretary of State Clinton was more hawkish than Secretary of "Defense" Robert Gates.

Much of the additional information we know comes from WikiLeaks which exposed the Clinton State Department as a cynical Machiavellian club for contemptuous rogues out to dominate the world for the sake of corporate profits. The fault here lies not with Chelsea Manning for exposing these outrages, but with Clinton for leading them. But her attitude toward whistleblowers like Manning and Edward Snowden has exposed another difference with Sanders, to Sanders' advantage. A Hillary Clinton administration promises to be as secretive and vindictive as Obama's.

A Sanders White House would not cut off the free weaponry and legal immunity for Israel, but a Clinton White House would expand on those policies, offer unlimited support to openly racist Israeli assaults on and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Sanders has proposed normalizing relations with Iran, while Clinton has denounced that idea and demanded that all (meaning nuclear) options be "on the table." If peace should come to Syria with Assad still in power, Clinton can be expected to continue the line she has already promoted, namely that Obama should have overthrown Assad with massive force long ago. Sanders, in contrast, could be expected to breathe a sigh of relief and focus on domestic matters until the next crisis develops.

While Clinton has accused Sanders of heresy for disagreeing with Obama's disastrous domestic policies, she herself has frequently criticized Obama's foreign policies for being insufficiently militaristic. Clinton does not hide who she is. She's fear mongered 9/11 in a debate. She's giggled jubilantly while bragging about the murder of Muamar Gadaffi. She's suggested the possibility of "obliterating" Iran. She talks up her dedication to the Israeli rightwing in public as well as behind closed doors with donors. Donors like Boeing have successfully hired her, while Secretary of State, to personally market their products to foreign governments.

I've asked the Clinton campaign what her military budget proposal would be, and have thus far heard nothing back, but it's hard to imagine how she could do what she would do without raising it, and it's easy to imagine that her election would boost the campaign to add young women to the selective service draft registry.

Pollsters imagine that Donald Trump's negatives make him easily defeatable, but they imagined that in the primaries as well. Polls also suggest that Hillary would be weaker than Bernie in a general election and that many Bernie supporters might not support Hillary. Imagine an election in which the mad militarist with the comb-over fear mongers Muslims but accurately accuses Clinton of lying about Iraq and helping to create ISIS. Would she counter with the promise of another bigger, better war? Would such a situation create a new opportunity to move public opinion against war? What would peace advocates do? How many would hold their nose and flee the country? What would Henry Kissinger advise?

DNC defection: Rep. Tulsi Gabbard’s Surprise Endorsement Gives Sanders a Chance to Change the Whole Primary Game

By Dave Lindorff


            Just as the media, in the wake of Hillary Clinton’s landslide win in South Carolina’s Democratic primary Saturday, are predictably writing the obituary for Bernie Sanders’ upstart and uphill campaign for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) has handed him an opportunity to jolt the American people awake.

New TCBH! poem by resident poet gary Lindorff: 'The Pink Bear'

Wow. I had a dream that went on all night.
There was a pink bear sighting in Alaska.
Then there were pink bear sightings
In South Dakota and Colorado,
All thought to be hoaxes but then
The New York Times published a photo, front page;
It looked real enough.
The article interviewed a hiker
Who reported talking to the Pink Bear.
He said it was standing up.
When asked what the bear said
The hiker said he couldn’t repeat it;
The bear was talking trash.
The hiker said the bear was heading for Washington.
What happened next is hard to believe.
(I mean in my dream it was hard to believe.)
There were signs that great changes are coming:
Mount Shasta was waking up, sending out a plume of ash.
Native Americans warning, This is it.

I’m just sayin’... Who Cares About Democratic Primary Results in South Carolina -- a State Democrats Will Lose in November?

By Dave Lindorff


            I'll be the first to admit I'm no pollster or even political scientist, but when I read that Bernie Sanders is going to be crushed by Hillary Clinton in Saturday's primary in South Carolina, the state that fired the opening shots in the Civil War and that only last year took down a Confederate battle flag in front of the capitol building, I have to shake my head at the absurdity of it.

South Carolina Democratic Party Means Well

The chair of the South Carolina Democratic Party called to complain that I was being unfair to him, and maybe he was right. But I'd simply urged the need to avoid any appearance of bias, and if the chairman doesn't understand that, he's in for a heck of a lot more criticism than he's ever imagined. This is his bio on the party website at 11:15 a.m. ET on Friday, February 26, just after he called me:

The Washington Times had prompted Harrison's call with this article:

. . . What his bio on the party’s Web page doesn’t mention, though, is that Mr. Harrison is also a principal at the Podesta Group, a lobbying firm founded by brothers Tony and John Podesta — the same John Podesta who is chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Mr. Harrison’s day job is likely to get more scrutiny as the presidential campaign turns to South Carolina and questions continue to swirl about whether the Democratic Party apparatus is fairly treating Mrs. Clinton’s challenger, Sen. Bernard Sanders of Vermont. . . .

“If you want to avoid appearances of conflict of interest, you need to be completely open and reveal that,” said David Swanson, a spokesman at, a progressive online group that also has organized a petition asking for the ouster of the head of the Democratic National Committee. “Someone can be in favor of one candidate and still conduct a fair primary election, but if they’re hiding that they have close ties — beyond just electoral interest, but with actual monetary interests — that starts to look bad.”

Harrison called me up and recounted his long connections with staffers for Bernie Sanders, and said that he had been the first to invite Sanders to come speak even before he was officially a candidate. Harrison said he'd also had Sanders as the first ever guest in his video series called "Chair Chats." Here's that video:

And here's one with Hillary Clinton, which has about half as many views.

Harrison said he'd offered Sanders the party's resources and conference room, that his own Deputy Executive Director had gone to work for the Sanders campaign, that anything he and the party had done for Clinton they'd done for Sanders, and that I could ask the Sanders campaign and they'd say as much.

I said I was certain they would indeed, whether true or not, but that I had merely answered a reporter's question on one point, that of Harrison's bio on the party site leaving out what he did for a living, namely that he worked for a Clinton-affiliated organization. Amazingly, Harrison claimed not to know whether his bio included that info or not. He blamed me for not investigating it myself, while he himself claimed not to have looked into it either. And he assured me that if I "googled" him I'd see that he worked for the Podesta Group.

But isn't that the point, I asked? If I google Santorum I'll find something else entirely, but that's what Google shows, not what Santorum chooses to display. If everyone can find out that your paycheck comes from a Clinton-associated group, but that's left out of your bio, how does that look? Harrison promised to look into it and to make sure that it said from now on right at the top: "Jamie Harrison, chair of the South Carolina Democratic Party and Principle at the Podesta Group...."

I said I thought that would be a good idea.

The Podesta Group was founded by John and Tony Podesta, the former serving also as Hillary Clinton's campaign chair.

I explained to Harrison that my concern was not over any actual unfair treatment I knew him to have engaged in, but over the appearance of it in a context that had everyone understandably on the lookout for bias. I pointed out to him that the DNC Chair was quite openly on Hillary Clinton's side, had sought to minimize debates and hide them on Saturday nights and other times of low viewership, had sought to deny Sanders access to his own voter files, had just opened up the Democratic Party to money from corporate lobbyists to benefit one candidate, had refused to release the results in Iowa, etc., and that the Party had its superdelegates lined up for Hillary in open defiance of popular will.

Harrison said he agreed with me that the superdelegate system and the electoral college for that matter should be scrapped. And he agreed with my blaming the DNC, which he pointed out was not the South Carolina Democratic Party.

The funny thing is, after I hung up, I looked at Harrison's bio on the Podesta Group website. That bio is very open about his Democratic Party identifications. And they include this: "Member of the DNC Executive Committee."

The 2016 Election's Obama Problem

I was looking for love in all the wrong places
Looking for love in too many faces
Searching your eyes, looking for traces
Of what I'm dreaming of  --Waylon Jennings

Why do the Republican presidential debates resemble world wrestling matches without all the formality and politeness?

Why do the Democratic presidential debates always end up with the two candidates deeply respecting the other's admirable efforts to destroy everything decent in the world?

Because the Republicans are going after voters who are thoroughly disgusted with the U.S. government, including the man running it, Barack Obama, while the Democrats are going after voters who are thoroughly disgusted with the U.S. government but in love with the man running it.

Senator Bernie Sanders explains that we need the opposite of what Obama's been doing, then claims to agree with Obama. Why? Because he wants to win over voters who think exactly that, who believe that Obama has done everything wrong but who love Obama despite, or even because, of his disastrous conduct. Sanders knows that many of the same voters feel (that's the key word) the same way about Hillary Clinton.

Pick up a book called I [Heart] Obama by Erin Aubry Kaplan. In it, she explains that she and others she's asked love Obama for his looks, his voice, his poise, his attitude, his facial expressions, and his skin color. She and others she quotes fell in love with him before they'd learned anything about his political performance. And whatever they later learned entirely confirmed their sentiments. If he did something terrible, they imagined he'd tried to do something good. If he failed, they loved his failure and blamed it on his racist opponents. Because racists hate him, one must love him, they feel.

Kaplan hoped for change, but when Obama didn't meet her expectations she condemned anyone so misguided as to complain. Then she blamed the public for not rising up and complaining, without which Obama couldn't very well be expected to do anything, could he? But even when Obama didn't do the right thing, you could be sure he knew what the right thing to do would have been. And that was good enough. Hell, that was better. And if he lied about it, that was better than truth. Even his bullshit smelled sweet. Kaplan writes:

"Does the fact that  his 'Hope/Change' campaign was more a matter of brilliant branding than anything else diminish the fact that hope and change are exactly what black folks need?"

Perish the thought!

Racists would even object to Obama murdering people. Not the Obamaphiles Kaplan quotes: "'I know it's hard for people to look at the drones, to look at why he doesn't do this thing or that thing,' says Ward. 'But the tightrope is one that he has to walk. I have a friend in the South who says she's seen bars with calendars on the walls that count down the days to when Obama gets assassinated.'"

Get it? Racists want to murder Obama, so he should go on murdering all those dark-skinned foreigners, and you should shut up about it and love him even if you hate what he's doing.

Do the old people and black people backing Hillary Clinton in primaries associate her with Obama and his lovable odiousness? Or do they associate her with the Democratic Party and identify with that party as they might with a racial group? Or do they want to feel the warm tingles of watching a woman, instead of a man, pilot the empire over the cliff? Are good people going to double down on tokenism while the fascists prepare to play their trump card?

The answer is, of course, not to elect all white guys. The answer is to end the election obsession, and build a movement. And when we must have an election, elect the best person. Democrats need to stop loving the people who have created everything Sanders wants to fix. Obama and Hillary do not love you back, my friends. They're using you. They have nothing but contempt for you. And if the morning ever comes, you'll hate yourself in it.

Republicans, of course, need to stop bowing down before a fascist clown who openly tells them that he only loves himself and they should love him too. For him, you are beneath contempt, unworthy even of notice. You'd better hope the Democrats don't run the woman you hate against him, because then he'll be president, you'll be the woman scorned, you'll hate yourselves more than the Democrats hate you, and most people will give up hope for the electoral system -- which will of course turn out to be even worse than falling for false hope with a nice smile.

Talk Nation Radio: Harvey Wasserman on the Stripping and Flipping of Elections

Harvey Wasserman is a life-long activist who speaks, writes and organizes widely on energy, the environment, history, drug war, election protection and grassroots politics. He teaches (since 2004) history and cultural & ethnic diversity at two central Ohio colleges, and is married with five daughters and five grandchildren. Harvey works primarily for the permanent shutdown of the nuclear power industry and the birth of Solartopia, a democratic and socially just green-powered Earth free of all fossil and nuclear fuels. He writes regularly for a wide internet readership through and, which he edits. His articles also appear at Commondreams, CounterPunch, HuffingtonPost, Buzzflash and others. He hosts the Solartopia Green Power & Wellness Show at In this show, Harvey discusses the stripping and flipping of U.S. elections.

Total run time: 29:00

Host: David Swanson.
Producer: David Swanson.
Music by Duke Ellington.

Download from LetsTryDemocracy or Archive.

Pacifica stations can also download from Audioport.

Syndicated by Pacifica Network.

Please encourage your local radio stations to carry this program every week!

Please embed the SoundCloud audio on your own website!

Past Talk Nation Radio shows are all available free and complete at

and at

Striking out at the NY Times: Hit Piece on Sanders Proposals Relies on Pro-Clinton Economists Mislabeled as ‘Leftists’

By Dave Lindorff


As Bernie Sanders’ insurgent campaign for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination continues to strengthen, so do the attacks on him by the establishment corporate media, which are reflexively backing the status quo corporatocracy.


Focus: Clinton and Sanders in the Polls - Feb 18, 2016

POLL (Quinnipiac University): Dead heat: Sanders, Clinton in virtual tie nationwide - TheHill

POLL: Full results of the Quinnipiac University poll -

POLL (Economist/YouGov): Hillary Clinton Least Trustworthy Of All Candidates - The Daily Caller

POLL: Hillary Clinton loses to four top Republican presidential contenders, including Donald Trump, - TheHill

POLL (Public Policy Polling): Clinton leading Sanders in 10 of 12 early March primary states - TheHill

POLL: Full results of Public Policy Polling -

POLL: Voters Say Money, Media Have Too Much Political Clout - Rasmussen Reports

POLL: Nevada: Clinton, Sanders tied; Trump way ahead - Las Vegas Sun

POLL: Clinton leads Sanders by 26 points in Tennessee -

POLL: Sanders ahead of Clinton in Mass., poll finds - The Boston Globe

POLL: Clinton, Trump lead in Va., poll says, but voters have doubts - The Daily Progress

POLL: Clinton, Trump leads getting smaller in North Carolina -

POLL: Poll shows Democratic primary race tightening in Oklahoma -

POLL: Trump, Clinton hold strong leads in South Carolina polls -

Big Win For Bernie: AFL-CIO Holds Off On Presidential Endorsement -

House Dem uses online poll to decide between Sanders, Clinton - TheHill

Hillary Clinton's Wal-Mart ties breed mistrust among liberals, boost Bernie Sanders - Washington Times

Superdelegates Could Affect US Presidential Nominee Selection - VOA

Lobbyist superdelegates tip nomination toward Hillary Clinton -

Unpacking the Role of the Superdelegate in the Democratic Party Primary -

N.H. GOP urges Democratic superdelegates to support Sanders - AP

Trying to predict the election? Forget about Twitter, study concludes - The Guardian

Thomas Piketty op-ed on the rise of Bernie Sanders: the US enters a new political era - The Guardian

VIDEO: This looks like video evidence of Bernie Sanders getting arrested in 1963 as a young activist fighting racial discrimination -

Clinton email chain discussed Afghan national's CIA ties, official says - Fox News

To contact Bartolo email peaceloverblog[at]yahoo[dot]com (replacing [at] with @, [dot] with .)

Focus: Hillary Clinton - Feb 13, 2016


POLL: Who won the Democratic debate? Hundreds of thousands voted online and declared overwhelmingly Sanders the winner - Huffington Post

POLL: Bernie Sanders closing the gap, pulls within 7 points of Hillary Clinton in national poll -

POLL: Clinton, Sanders deadlocked in Nevada - Washington Examiner

Is the Clinton campaign panicking over Nevada? -

POLL: Sanders gaining on frontrunner Hillary Clinton in Illinois - The Daily Caller

Spearheading a $4.5 million effort Super PAC makes big play to lift Hillary Clinton in primary states - The Washington Post

DNC rolls back Obama ban on contributions from federal lobbyists, some suggested it could provide an advantage to Hillary Clinton’s fundraising efforts - The Washington Post

Hillary Clinton’s Congressional Black Caucus PAC endorsement approved by board awash in lobbyists -

VIDEO: Who endorsed Hillary Clinton? The Congressional Black Caucus or its PAC filled with lobbyists? - Democracy Now!

VIDEO: At Democratic debate Clinton and Sanders spar over super-PACs and megadonors -

Hillary Clinton's paid speeches to large Wall Street banks reportedly bordered on 'gushy’ - Business Insider


FBI, foundation controversies missing from Clinton questioning at debate - Fox News

VIDEO: Fox News panel excoriates PBS moderators, Sanders for ignoring Hillary Clinton’s scandals -

Clinton Foundation received subpoena from State Department investigators - The Washington Post

Clinton campaign accuses State Dept. IG of Targeting Hillary -

VIDEO: Hillary Clinton FBI investigation has 2 tracks: classified email & public corruption - YouTube

Judge orders Clinton’s last emails public before Super Tues. - KSN-TV

State Dept. won't rule out more 'top secret' Clinton emails - Washington Examiner

Official: Clinton aides also handled ‘top secret’ intel on server - Fox News

Emails appear to show how key Clinton aide manipulated media coverage - Fox News

Benghazi panel nears final report examining Clinton's response - Bloomberg Politics

To contact Bartolo email peaceloverblog[at]yahoo[dot]com (replacing [at] with @, [dot] with .)

Bernie Sanders: The 2016 Peace Candidate

On February 10, 2016, Peace Action—the largest peace organization in the United States—announced its endorsement of Bernie Sanders for the Democratic nomination for President.

What Obama Did While You Were Watching Elections

Pass the popcorn! Wait till I tweet this! Did you see the look on his face?

Ain't elections exciting? We just can't get enough of them, which could be why we've stretched them out to a couple of years each, even though a small crowd of Super Delegates and a couple of state officials with computer skills could quite conceivably decide the whole thing anyway.

Through the course of this marvelous election thus far I've been trying to get any human being to ask any candidate to provide just the most very basic outline of the sort of budget they would propose if president, or at least some hint at the single item in the budget that takes up more than half of it. Do they think military spending should go up, go down, or stay right where it is?

Who knows! Aren't elections wonderful?

I'd even settle for the stupid "gotcha" question in which we find out if any of the candidates knows, even roughly, what percentage of the budget military spending is now.

Why is this topic, although seemingly central, scrupulously avoided?

  • The candidates all, more or less, agree.
  • None of the candidates brings it up.
  • Nobody in Congress, not even the "progressive" caucus, brings it up.
  • Nobody in the corporate media brings it up.
  • The corporate media outlets see war profiteers as customers who buy ads.
  • The corporate media outlets see war profiteers in the mirror as parts of their corporate families.
  • The fact that the military costs money conflicts with the basic premise of U.S. politics which is that one party wants to spend money on socialistic nonsense while the other party wants to stop spending money and build a bigger military.

Those seem like the obvious answers, but here's another. While you're being entertained by the election, President Obama is proposing a bigger military than ever. Not only is U.S. military spending extremely high by historical standards, but looking at the biggest piece of military spending, which is the budget of the Department of so-called Defense, that department's annual "Green Book" makes clear that it has seen higher spending under President Barack Obama than ever before in history.

Check out the new budget proposal from the President who distracted millions of people from horrendous Bush-Cheney actions with his "peace" talk as a candidate eight years ago. He wants to increase the base Do"D" budget, both the discretionary and the mandatory parts. He wants to increase the extra slush fund of unaccountable money for the Do"D" on top of that. This pot used to be named for wars, but wars have gotten so numerous and embarrassing that it's now called "Overseas Contingency Operations."

When it comes to nuclear weapons, Obama wants to increase spending, but when it comes to other miscellaneous extras for the military, he also wants to increase that. Military retirement spending, on the other hand, he'd like to see go up, while the Veterans Administration spending he proposes to raise. Money for fueling ISIS by fighting it, Obama wants raised by 50%. On increasing hostility with Russia through a military buildup on its border, Obama wants a 400% spending boost. In one analysis, military spending would jump from $997.2 billion this year to $1.04 trillion next year under this proposal.

That's a bit awkward, considering the shade it throws on any piddly little project that does make it into election debates and reporting. The smallest fraction of military spending could pay for the major projects that Senator Bernie Sanders will be endlessly attacked for proposing to raise taxes for.

It's also awkward for the whole Republican/Hillary discussion of how to become more militarized, unlike that pacifist in the White House.

And, of course, it's always awkward to point out that events just go on happening in the world rather than pausing out of respect for some inanity just uttered by Marco Rubio.

Focus: Hillary Clinton - Feb 8, 2016

VIDEO: Clinton says she’ll release speech transcripts if opponents do the same - ABC News

VIDEO: Clinton: Sanders putting artful smear on my Wall Street donations…I’m not going to sit and take it anymore - CBS News

Hillary Clinton has made millions from her Wall Street speeches... but what did she say? - Daily Mail Online

GOP: Hillary, Release the Transcripts - GOP

Contracts indicate Clinton owns transcripts, controls their release - The Wichita Eagle

Hillary's Goldman Sachs speech fee set by her agent, not 'what they offered' - Washington Examiner

Here’s What Hillary Clinton’s Paid Speaking Contract Looks Like -

Hillary won't release her speaking transcripts, but LOOK what we found! - Allen B. West

Sign the petition: Hillary, release the transcripts of your paid speeches to Wall Street banks - Vets For Bernie

Wall Street Distrust Fuels Millennial Opposition to Clinton -

VIDEO: Donna Brazile: Wall Street issue is playing same role for Clinton that Iraq war vote did in 2008 - RealClearPolitics

$153 million in Bill and Hillary Clinton speaking fees, documented -

Meet the lobbyists, donors and bundlers behind Hillary’s $157 million campaign juggernaut - Yahoo News

Fund-raising alliances with 33 state Democratic parties fuel Clinton with cash -

The vote for bankruptcy reform that haunts Hillary Clinton - The New York Times

VIDEO: George Stephanopoulos presses Clinton on Elizabeth Warren’s criticism on bankruptcy bill - YouTube

VIDEO: Elizabeth Warren on Hillary Clinton and bankruptcy bill (2004) - YouTube

Time for Chelsea Clinton's easy ride to end, she’s a board member at Barry Diller’s IAC (paid a reported $300,000 a year, plus stock awards) and charges $65,000 per speech -

Goldman Sachs chief Lloyd Blankfein: Sanders candidacy a 'dangerous moment' -

To contact Bartolo email peaceloverblog[at]yahoo[dot]com (replacing [at] with @, [dot] with .)

Speaking Events

David Swanson in Fairbanks, Alaska, October 22, 2016.


Find Events Here.


Support This Site


Get free books and gear when you become a supporter.



Speaking Truth to Empire


Families United


Ray McGovern


Financial supporters of this site can choose to be listed here.

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image.