Back in the USSR

People react to bad news in a number of ways. They freak about the message, or freak about the messenger. After it was revealed the Democratic National Committee screwed Bernie Sanders and his supporters, by favoring Hillary Clinton, media is angry at the possible messenger.

Yes, the more information profession is pissed off about more information. So, when in doubt, blame the Russians. It reminded me of this scene from “Dr. Strangelove.” Media jumped on that narrative faster than Slim Pickens on a nuke.

drstranglovebomb
Photo courtesy: Dr. Strangelove/Columbia Pictures

Never mind it took the FBI up to a year to determine they couldn’t figure out if the Russians, or others, hacked Hillary’s server of convenience and obstruction. Within days, we hear it’s likely the hackers were the Russians. From “experts.” As a former TV producer I can find an expert to tell you Guam is sinking. In Congress. But, that’s a story for another time.

And it’s not like the DNC wasn’t warned.

This morning, Donald Trump dared to go where Hillary hasn’t since December 4, 2015. The candidate for US president held an open press conference and took questions from reporters for about an hour.

Here’s what made the media crap themselves today.

While answering questions from reporters in Florida today, Trump looked directly into the cameras and said, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” (ABC News)

Clinton’s camp was in high dudgeon. The media followed.

Clinton’s senior policy adviser, Jake Sullivan, released a statement in response to Trump’s comments.

“This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent,” Sullivan said. “That’s not hyperbole. Those are just the facts. This has gone from being a matter of curiosity and a matter of politics to being a national security issue.” (ABC News)

Now, here’s the part of that exchange that isn’t getting a lot of play. It changes the context of Trump’s “Russia, if you’re listening…” remark.

“By the way, if they hacked, they probably have her 33,000 emails. I hope they do. They probably have her 33,000 emails that she lost and deleted.” (ABC News)

Trump mocked the press and they bit.

Now, to be clear, if the Russians are trying to influence our politics it’s a bad thing. But that bad thing has been going on forever. We do the same. Look at Barack Obama trying to oust Benjamin Netanyahu. Despite the administration’s earlier denials, look at what a Senate committee turned up.

And it’s not the first time a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent.

Think “Lion of the U.S. Senate” and, bad driver of Oldsmobiles, Ted Kennedy.

Kennedy (lost to Jimmy Carter in 1980 and had to withdraw because of the Oldsmobile in 1972) was so desperate to keep Ronald Reagan from being re-elected in 1984, he secretly went to the Soviet Union for help. This was made public in the early 90’s after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Never mind that the current administration and current Democratic candidate for president underestimated Russia and mocked Republicans about the Cold War.

But back to the media.

Not all WikiLeaks are equal. Or so it would seem.

The Washington Post was thrilled to invite its readers to find what they could in the so-called “Cairo cables.” They went as far as crowd-sourcing the database to turn up more information faster.

Just like the Cairo WikiLeaks, the DNC WikiLeaks are about information. Sure, the Russians may be a secondary story and a big one at that, but the screwing over of a candidate and his followers is really the story right now.

Bernie Sanders knows darn well what happened. When asked if he trusted Hillary to carry out the “left leaning platform” for the Democrats, Sanders balked.

“Sorry, I’m not going to get into the trusted or not,” he responded.

“Hillary Clinton, you know, as I just said a moment ago, [you asked me to] characterize somebody in a way I’m not going to. Hillary Clinton is a very, very intelligent person . . . I’ve known her for 25 years.” (NY Post)

Just as Ted Cruz didn’t endorse Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders wouldn’t, when he could, say he trusted Hillary Clinton.

And, if you believe for a second that Debbie Wasserman Shultz wasn’t in the tank for Hillary Clinton, look at it this way instead.

Who knows more than DWS about collusion between the DNC and Hillary camp against Sanders? Best way to silence people: hire them. Debbie also needs party backing in a potentially tough re-election to the House.

So yeah, go ahead and be outraged by Russian mischief. I’m into nostalgia.

It takes me back to the good old days of duck and cover.

DuckandCover

And given the Trump press conference took place near Miami Beach, I couldn’t help but think of the Beatles send-up of the Cold War.

Here’s Paul McCartney performing in Kiev in 2008.

No matter how you feel about the DNC leaks and who leaked them, it’s hard to see why the content rather than the alleged leaker is the main story. I expect our enemies to mess with us. But neither Obama’s “flexibility,” or Clinton’s “reset button,” look like good foreign policy right now.

Funny thing. When I was a TV news manager I took many calls from disgruntled (love that word) viewers who had issues with stories. Only a tiny percentage of those stories had factual problems.

I always touched base with the producer or reporter involved with the questioned piece. More often than not one of us uttered this phrase of frustration, “they always want to kill the messenger.”

 

 

© 2016 carlgottliebdotnet

Advertisements

WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks_Logo

It’s hard to know where to even start with the revelations of the leaked Democratic National Committee e-mails. Is this where I thank WikiLeaks for some great summer reading?

For starters, the Democratic National Committee seems to have rigged the primaries for Hillary Clinton and screwed Bernie Sanders and his supporters.

It also looks like there was media collusion to help Hillary Clinton.

One example was a Politico reporter sending a complete story to the DNC before publishing it. Generally not a good practice. Why is at always Politico? Remember Mike Allen?

But there’s more. I love that phrase.

Gateway Pundit put together this list of insanity.

Different media outlets and pundits (can I call them pound-its?) found their own outrage.

Here’s what the Washington Post found newsworthy

However, they didn’t find this e-mail about fundraising interesting.

Ron Fournier, who made his bones covering the Clintons, was on the mark in criticizing Hillary. This passage from his first point can only remind you of Richard Nixon and Watergate:

“So righteous in their cause and paranoid of their enemies are the Clintons, that they cut corners to victory—even when, as was the case in the race against Sanders, they would likely win without shenanigans.”

Like Tricky Dick against George McGovern, Hillary knew she’d win but couldn’t take a chance.

Then the coup de grace:

“Another hallmark of the Clinton tradecraft is to keep a safe distance from the dirty work while others get soiled.”

This is where Hillary’s machine outshines anything Nixon dreamed of.

Hillary always gets away and someone else always takes the fall. Bye bye, Debbie Wasserman Shultz.

And as always, Hillary blames others for her troubles while feigning ignorance of the whole mess. Sure, expect the nation to believe Debbie did this on her own.

Check out this portion of Clinton’s interview with 60 Minutes’ Scott Pelley that never made air.

And just for fun, check out how “conservative” Twitter exploded when Hillary said she was “held to different standards.”

I always encourage news consumers to go straight to the source when possible. Here’s the WikiLeaks searchable database. Maybe you’ll come up with a gem overlooked by others. Let me know.

Search for your favorite media person, network, or cable news outlet and decide for yourself if they’re aiding a particular candidate. Or just search to your heart’s content.

The immediate response by the Democrats was to say the hacking was the work of the Russians to aid Donald Trump. Yup, those same Russians Barack Obama mocked candidate Romney about.

The aptly named Robby Mook, Clinton’s campaign manager, delivered that theory.

Those same Russians that couldn’t have possibly hacked Mrs. Clinton’s private server.

It’s certainly possible the Russians hacked the DNC. Maybe even likely.

What’s not likely is that they wrote the e-mails. Much beleaguered GOP boss Reince Preibus put it this way.

Of course the FBI is already investigating the hacking of the DNC. My guess is their involvement is more to send a chilling message to WikiLeaks and Adrian Assange, than anything. Besides, after the Hillary investigation does anyone really trust the FBI?

This administration hates leaks. [See Coleridge Election and the prosecution of journalists.]

Here we are at the end of July. We are in the midst of a political shit storm once again caused by someone whose name is Clinton. It’s clear the former Secretary of State has been the media favorite in this election cycle.

It’s now been seven months and twenty-one days since Clinton’s last open press conference. The elite media can pretty much force Clinton into a presser if they want to.

Think of what’s happened since May. The State Department Inspector General shredded HRC’s e-mail defense. The FBI’s James Comey indicted Mrs. Clinton in the court of public opinion. [See: The Immaculate Indictment]. Now, it’s obvious Hillary and her operatives rigged the Democratic primaries.

I think it’s time for the media to start asking some questions.

 

© 2016 carlgottliebdotnet