Conclusions: While Hillary Clinton, technically, didn't do anything illegal in the last election cycle she did prove herself to be a Republican style politician who is a pathological liar who uses her gender as a political weapon (inaccurately). She suppressed opponents with back room financial deals that only came out later (after she has attacked the Democratic process from within with her un-American tactics - see info below). She's also attacked colored people as per the Republican's Southern Strategy (a tactic she and her husband used if office as well). She's a Republican style oligarch who shouldn't be allowed to run for office as families running for office creates dynasties like monarchies. Look what the Bush dynasty has already done. The Clinton's were in the White House and Hillary wants to go in there again while pushing her undemocratic cons, indicates a power hungry tyrant at best. Hillary even enabled GOP crimes as Senator by voting for action on their lies showing she lacks judgement. While Hillary hasn't committed any crime, to put someone of such obvious lack of moral responsibility or even moral awareness puts our country and our democracy at risk, i.e. character becomes very important and clearly Hillary lacks that, as every Republican politician does. Trump is simply an extreme Republican while Hillary is a moderate Republican. Both are Republicans though and the Republicans need to be investigated as a Domestic Terrorist party and not treated like they are honorable and truthful politicians. [Note: Obama seems to have accepted the role of "house nigger" since he became President, putting Republican traitors in his administration and killing innocents for no reason and can be expected to support Hillary for the sake of friendship the way media kisses the Bushs asses (and the Obamas do too). Given that the South does dominate American politics, it does make sense that Obama would adjust to a black persons's role in Southern politics/society].
The following simply outlines pieces of recent evidence that supports this (besides the links above) and that if Hillary runs again there will be Republican style lies, Republican style politics, Republican style foreign policy, and Republican style election rigging and opponent suppression through undemocratic means. Note: the whole "Democratic" party still uses the undemocratic "Super Delegate" to pick thier friends, like they did with Hillary last time...
Asked if DNC system was rigged in Clinton's favor, Warren says 'yes'
Inside Hillary Clinton’s Secret Takeover of the DNC When I was asked to run the Democratic Party after the Russians hacked our emails, I stumbled onto a shocking truth about the Clinton campaign.
When I got back from a vacation in Martha’s Vineyard, I at last found the document that described it all: the Joint Fund-Raising Agreement between the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund, and Hillary for America. The agreement—signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias—specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings. I had been wondering why it was that I couldn’t write a press release without passing it by Brooklyn. Well, here was the answer.
When the party chooses the nominee, the custom is that the candidate’s team starts to exercise more control over the party. If the party has an incumbent candidate, as was the case with Clinton in 1996 or Obama in 2012, this kind of arrangement is seamless because the party already is under the control of the president. When you have an open contest without an incumbent and competitive primaries, the party comes under the candidate’s control only after the nominee is certain. When I was manager of Al Gore’s campaign in 2000, we started inserting our people into the DNC in June. This victory fund agreement, however, had been signed in August 2015, just four months after Hillary announced her candidacy and nearly a year before she officially had the nomination.
Clinton Campaign Had Additional Signed Agreement With DNC In 2015
Updated at 11:56 p.m. ET: NPR has obtained the full memo from a Democratic source. Read it at the bottom of this story. What, exactly, did the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign agree to in 2015, before any votes had been cast in the Democratic primary? The question has roiled Democratic politics since Thursday morning, when Politico published an excerpt of Donna Brazile's upcoming book about the 2016 presidential race. Brazile took over the DNC as interim chair following Debbie Wasserman Schultz's sudden resignation during the Democratic National Convention. Once she was at the party's helm, Brazile wrote that she discovered an agreement that "specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party's finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff."
This is one reason that killed election turnout and convinced people there was no point voting in the Democratic primary as the Democratic party wasn't Democratic (or even honest) at all...
Hillary’s Superdelegate Coup Just Confirms to Millennials: The System Is Rigged
Clinton and the DNC Are Not Just Colluding — They’re Changing the Rules for Superdelegates
Back-channel conversations have already begun between Clinton’s campaign and the DNC about what role the party will play in the general election. These discussions are happening out of sight for now to avoid the appearance of collusion before the party has formally selected a nominee.
- Hillary Clinton: 451
- Bernie Sanders: 19
Basically, The Superdelegate System Isn't Just Rigged—It's Designed to Destroy the Will of the People
Note - Corporate media always supports the rich special interests and their representatives over the people of the United States helping to subvert democracy and the democratic process:
It’s not over. Far from it. The economic and political establishment, which includes the Democratic National Committee, its Wall Street and corporate backers and the major media—most of it now owned by a half dozen big corporations—have worked feverishly to turn the Democratic primary process into a coronation for Hillary Clinton. Bottom line: they wanted to declare it over before actual voters could vote, but their carefully crafted strategy began to #FeelTheBern. Here are 10 ways the establishment has sought to orchestrate the results, and why the race has a long ways to go.
1. Major Media Blackout When Sanders began his campaign, as he often recounts, he had virtually no national name recognition and trailed Clinton by 60 to 70 points in national polls. The major media barely breathed his name, even when he began drawing crowds of 20,000 or more to summer rallies. This was partly the result of the obsession with Trump, but also because the conglomerates controlling the media hardly wanted to promote such a fierce critic of Wall Street and the 1 percent. In December, the nightly news networks had allotted Trump 23 times more coverage than Sanders; on ABC alone 81 minutes to Trump for the year, compared to only 20 seconds for Sanders. While Sanders was holding extensive campaign events and press availabilities for months, Clinton was mostly avoiding public events and media avails, with the media largely ignoring its rebuff. (Even today, Clinton often passes on press conferences.) 2. They’re Debating When?