The depths of Hillary's Photogate ratfuckery are truly unfathomable.

[mhatrw]

Sally Cook, the retired government lawyer University of Chicago alumni who contacted the University of Chicago archives to get the caption of the photo changed, conceded to Time magazine reporter Sam Frizell that she could not "say for certain the man is not Sanders."

So what made it so important to her that she felt she needed to change the caption in the University of Chicago archive in order to identify the individual at a sit in that took place over 40 years ago as some long dead acquaintance rather than as Bernie Sanders?

Who then told Sam Frizell, Time magazine's Clinton pool reporter, about this trifling photo flap? What induced Sam Frizell to devote 1000 words to this complete non-story without making any attempt to contact the original photographer? How did Sam Frizell manage to locate three other University of Chicago alumni besides Sally Cook to cast doubt on Sanders' being the person leading the sit in in the photo? Who found these old friends of Rappaport and served them up to Sam Frizell?

What then induced the WaPo's Jonathan Capehart, the live in partner of a rich Clinton campaign staffer and longtime Clinton employee, to pick up this complete non-story and spin it into a direct attack on Sanders' integrity without making any attempt to contact the original photographer?

Why did corporate cable news then trot out Capehart on several different shows to promulgate this complete non-story?

Altering Jonathan Capehart's own words smearing Sanders to reflect the truth of the situation:

What is at issue is Clinton's ratfuckers' craven use of a photograph to tarnish Sanders' integrity. For a candidate who garnered just 8 percent of New Hampshire Democratic voters who said the most important trait for a candidate was that he or she be “honest,” the least Clinton and her campaign could do is come clean about how they disgustingly used some University of Chicago alumni, a Clinton pool reporter, and the life partner of Clinton campaign staffer to swiftboat a lifelong civil rights activist.

[AtomicKitten]

1. That's why I support Bernie. He's not an asshole.

[cali]

6. Now there's a campaign slogan!

[AtomicKitten]

16. an increasingly rare commodity in politics nowadays it seems

[Enthusiast]

134. That's exactly what I was thinking.

Please, just give us someone that isn't an asshole!

[mmonk]

181. +1

[Live and Learn]

33. +10,000 nt

[MissDeeds]

35. Yep

she can't fling poop without getting hit by blowback.

[840high]

50. Perfect.

[LittleBlue]

66. ...

[malthaussen]

183. Succinct

Regrettably, many voters hope to elect the biggest asshole available, on the mistaken assumption that asshole = strong.

-- Mal

[DBoon]

195. Papoon for president

Not insane

[2banon]

199. This!^^^^^^10000!

[madokie]

209. Not only is he not an asshole

He's as honest as the day is long, solid as a rock and a gentleman too boot. Whats to not like.
Like I read in a post earlier its not we're wanting free stuff we're wanting whats rightfully ours that has been stolen from us by the top 1%. Thats all

[EdwardBernays]

2. Times like this

Make me really wish Bernie had a surrogate to go out on nation television and point this out.

Because this is simply a continuation of the dishonesty and establishment bullshit thst are making people turn away from her in droves.

This isn't proof that Bernie is dishonest. It's proof her campaign is.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

151. The Clinton camp is so desperate - they look really stupid!

[Octafish]

197. Might not have been HRC camp, plausible deniability and all.

Photos that show Bernie doing what he said he was doing were forgotten to focus on one side ancillary side shot? No big deal to refute easily.

What was PUBLICIZED shows a path of breadcrumbs from UChicago to TIME to WaPo. Obvious from their a science are crumbs to Langley and Cass Sunstein's chums running today's MOCKINGBIRD.

Whoever was responsible isn't as important as what it accomplished: They smeared a good man.

[Fumesucker]

3. Gives both rats and fucking a bad name

[Volaris]

180. It can no longer be tolerated.

Think about all the actual rats that need to actually fuck.


On a serious note, yeah this is the kind of thing I want to not have to vote for.

[mainer]

4. Glad you turned this into its own thread

I want to know who Sally Cook is and why she chose to focus on this piece of history after all these years.

[dreamnightwind]

12. +1

Hopefully we will find out who she is and what motivated her.

[Kittycat]

85. +1 Email

I think Ms. Cook deserves an email bomb of the facts. Including links to the photographers statements and supportive photographs. This is just unacceptable.

ETA: Or better yet, Higher up. Who is her superior?

[dorkzilla]

92. Hear hear

A pox on all their houses!

[ksc]

193. Sally Cook...

I have a few possibilities- the primary one being a relative--but not 100% clear on their relationship-still trying to figure it out.

[TubbersUK]

5. "So what made it so important to her that she felt she needed to change the caption ?"

Good question.

It would also be interesting to know when the archive label was changed.

[Lordquinton]

11. Was the archive label actually changed?

The last time I heard of that stuff happening it was to do with W's service record.

[TubbersUK]

17. I believe so.

The photographer pointed it out in his 2nd blog piece on the subject.

[Lordquinton]

18. That's some premeditated actions there

I expect this stuff from the Republicans, not from the Democratic party.

[Gore1FL]

87. Yep.

Fear doesn't work well with Democrats. It is strange that she has now employed it (unsuccessfully) for two straight campaigns.

I don't know if she is a horrible politician, her staff is dismal, or a combination of the two, but they walk into mistakes, trip over themselves, and generally find ways to self-destruct. It doesn't help that they keep assuming she is running unopposed. That part is s like Martha Coakley in 2009-2010.

She needs to do better. She needs to stop assuming that the general election voters she needs are between the 40 yard lines.

[Unknown Beatle]

107. It's all Hillary.

Think about this for a moment, if she self-destructed in 2008 because of her staff, why would she surround herself again with basically the same kind of staff this election cycle? The answer is because that's who she is and that's how she plays. She surrounds herself with like-minded people. It backfired on her in 2008 and it's backfiring on her again this year.

[Lordquinton]

123. Now I'm reading that it doesn't matter either way

And we're immature for not simply dropping it.

I think everything that's coming out over it makes it more important to highlight what's going on. We drop it, the WaPo gets to keep on wih the "don't post this pic" meme, we get to be called the bad guys for disagreeing with Lewis, Bernie has his civil rights record taken out of play. I'm sure there's more riding on this.

This was a dirty move on the behalf of the HRC campaign, they need to walk it back and apologize. Lewis threw his record into play, he made a poor move and lost.

[cprise]

109. Or Stalinism.

that's what the incident reminds me of.

[Lordquinton]

125. The vanishing Commissars.

Fortunately we're not in a dictatorship, and the photograer is alive to fix the smears.

[white_wolf]

169. Didn't he airbrush Trotsky out of photos?

I'm pretty sure I've seen photos of Lenin and Trotsky alongside examples of the very same picture except Trotsky had vanished as if he were never alive at all.

[malthaussen]

185. He airbrushed many people out of photographs.

I once had a book with several examples. Basically, if Joe Stalin decided to purge someone, they ceased to exist. He was very effective at it.

He could never have pulled that off if there had been an Internet, but the modern problem is that no record can be taken as true.

-- Mal

[marlakay]

113. Funny you said that because this reminds me of the Dan Rather thing

and how the story became all about whether the font was true on the paper whether than what Bush did or didn't do.

This smells of Rove stuff....ugh!

[Lordquinton]

127. Remember how Rove spent millions in his crossroads pac?

And everything he supported failed? I'm hoping that happens again.

[UglyGreed]

7. It's all about trust

Bernie has the trust of 93% of the people who were polled in NH, Hillary well lets just say not many. They have to chop him down and make it seem he is not trust worthy. Will it work or will it backfire??? I'm going with the latter.

[chervilant]

13. It's already backfiring,

as I suspect you already know.

I find it fascinating watching Hi11ary supporters try to spin this as though it's a 'misunderstanding' or as though it's just "hard to tell" whether a picture of Bernie is "actually him" or it just "might be Bruce Rappaport." Jesus H. Christ on a Cracker!

The pretzel logic is sad, actually. SMDH...

[HooptieWagon]

8. Yep, it was coordinated by the Clinton campaign.

Lewis, Brock, and Capehart had their scripts rehearsed. Media whores on standby. Good thing it collapsed in a pile of bovine feces so rapidly, because the original photographer is still alive and has the out takes from the same roll of film.

[Fumesucker]

21. Not only are they crooked and creepy they're plain stupid..

That was a dumb trick that could have been shown to be folly with ten seconds on Google.

[questionseverything]

78. and she wants us to let her decide about going to war? geesh

[Arugula Latte]

83. They are incredibly short-sighted, too.

They react to their immediate landscape, like goldfish. And all this stuff piles up at the bottom of the tank like, well, goldfish doo doo.

[-none]

189. A symptom of Republicanism.

Little or no planing past the next bottom line, goal, etc.

[malthaussen]

187. The ineptitude astonishes me.

If you're going to attack someone, you should make damned sure your accusation can not be disproved. I thought Bill and Hillary were supposed to be competent politicians. But then, wasn't Jeb! supposed to be the "smart one?"

-- Mal

[LovingA2andMI]

79. This^^^^^

Is Truth.....

So Lewis Could Not Be Attacked Because "He's A Civil Rights Icon" and all....

And Brock Could Not Be Attacked Because "He Was Behind The Scenes" and all....

Plus Capehart Could Not Be Attacked Because "He's a Actual Journalist For the Washington Post" and all...

But what they did not count on....

Lewis -- going WAY TOO FAR by not only lying on Bernie but saying he pretty much met Bill and Hillary in the 1960's -- when he did not.

Brock -- thinking folks would not be able to connect his Ratfuckery to his past of GOP Sponsored Ratfuckery of Anita Hill.

Capehart -- For Playing to The World Like He Is a Journalist When He Is a HACK.

[wavesofeuphoria]

120. Awesome and on point analysis! Bravo!

[LovingA2andMI]

147. Thanks!!

[Lorien]

174. They're just wildly throwing crap at the walls now to see what sticks

you can smell the desperation. NO forethought at all. Not the qualities one needs in a world leader!

[2banon]

201. Well Said!

[Punkingal]

9. Mind-boggling, isn't it?

[TwilightGardener]

10. It is super odd, isn't it? How all the pieces came magically together during oppo-research time,

and then it became a story (again) in WaPo right after NH and before SC.

[farleftlib]

14. Part of me wants Bernie to take off the kid gloves

because this is some sleazy, Rovian crap going on, but at the same time it looks so desperate and shows so clearly the total lack of integrity of one candidate and the class act of the other one I say screw it.

[Bluenorthwest]

25. If I was the candidate I'd let social media take off the kid gloves while I remained serene.

It is not possible to ratfuck as clumsily as Capehart and Co in this era. He failed to even find out that the photographer would have a legion of defenders of his own, Jon is a lightweight and is in over his head. We on the other hand are genius because we are legion.

[farleftlib]

49. I like it

"We are Bernie Bros and we are legion."

All thy ratfuckery shall be exposed and thine sleaze shall be tweeted unto the ends of the earth.

[Glamrock]

167. Thoughts

A. He won't. He doesn't want to be responsible for damaging her too badly for the general if she is to win the primaries.
B. I don't think he'll have to. His message is resonating. Loudly. There's evidence that Nevada and S. Carolina are in play.

[Katashi_itto]

15. K&R!

[dragonfly301]

19. Isn't everyone sick of the dirty tricks kind of politics?

I know I am - that's why Bernie is so refreshing. That's also why the younger demographic is overwhelmingly for Bernie.

[FlatBaroque]

20. Two Rats copulating

on a swiftboat, comes to mind.

[Bluenorthwest]

22. Someone needs to send Capehart a photo of Hillary opposing his right to marry that handsome Italian

boyfriend of his. Maybe he can figure out a way to claim it's not Hillary in the photo.

[mhatrw]

28. LOL. nt

[pangaia]

62. OH, THAT is good. That is really good.

For that, you get a heart.

[hifiguy]

63. Blammo.

Drop the mic.

[frylock]

65. Oh damn!

[farleftlib]

67. Oh snap!

[LovingA2andMI]

73. K/R!!!

Your Comment!!

[MerryBlooms]

76. .

[JI7]

96. for some reason Gay Men seem to be her biggest defenders and most passionate in it also

this goes back to 2008 also. even more than lesbians and black women and others who are big supporters of clinton.

[Lorien]

98. I don't get it either. My lesbian friends all love Bernie, without exception

but my gay friends are split between Bernie and Hillary, and the ones that love Hillary REALLY love her. They won't say why other than "she has experience and she's tough!" They can't list many issues that they've consistently agreed with her on, though.

[Gene Debs]

170. That's nothing new. The ones that are all Tiger Beat-squealy about Hillary really can't

articulate what it is they like about her or why they want her to be President, other than some vague sense that she's "awesome."

[Lorien]

175. I keep asking them for specifics. They give me a handful of easily debunked

anti-Bernie nonsense, and that's about it. Two friends (one gay, one not) told me that it was her "experience" that appealed to them. When I asked them specifically WHAT experience they were talking about-since Bernie has more-one changed the subject, and the other said defensively "my wife and I met her once and we liked her, so we're voting for her!". I asked him to make an issue based case for her to me, because I want to be reassured that she's not as awful as I believe her to be. Nothing. It's the kind of thing I would expect from Republicans, but not from "Democrats"!

[navarth]

207. 'Tiger Beat-squealy' LOL

Boom!

[SammyWinstonJack]

110. Ouch!

[klook]

133. *SNORT*

... Or encouraging whites to think his youthful self just might be a "super-predator."

[brooklynite]

23. You think the Clinton campaign is really worried...

...that a 50 year old photo that might be Bernie Sanders being progressive is going to affect the outcome of the Primary?

[bbmykel]

32. I think it's about attacking his integrity

I'm sure the polls show that he is seen as trusted and honest. This is a way to start to drive those poll numbers down. They know they can count on the media to blow it up into something. They also know the retraction never gets as much attention as the original "scandal"--at least in the old days. I think that maybe this doesn't work as well now with social media? Here's hoping.

[SusanCalvin]

52. ^Bingo^ nt

[ChairmanAgnostic]

72. What ewe sed

[mhatrw]

36. The issue is not the photo. The issue is the ratfucking.

What is at issue is Clinton's ratfuckers' craven use of a photograph to tarnish Sanders' integrity. For a candidate who garnered just 8 percent of New Hampshire Democratic voters who said the most important trait for a candidate was that he or she be “honest,” the least Clinton and her campaign could do is come clean about how they disgustingly used some University of Chicago alumni, a Clinton pool reporter, and the life partner of Clinton campaign staffer to swiftboat a lifelong civil rights activist.

[Empowerer]

41. Thank you for changing "hero" to "activist" nt

[tblue37]

155. Not to mention the extremes they went to, even having the photo caption

falsified to "disappear" Bernie from the approved history, like the Soviets used to do to those who had fallen out of favor. That is some sick, twisted behavior. We expect such rat f***ing and swiftboating from Rove and his ilk on the rght, but it really creeps us out when one of our candidates allows her surrogates to engage in such corrupt practices.

Hillary needs to loudly and publicly denounce the swiftboating of Bernie's record and the smears against his integrity (rather inartful smears, I might point out).

[mak3cats]

38. Yes, Mr Insider, I do believe the Clinton campaign is worried...

...about the outcome of many primaries. And as someone who once supported Mrs Clinton as a New York committee person, I have lost every bit of respect I ever had for her. It actually makes me rather sad.

[OrwellwasRight]

58. If she isn't, why is her campaign attacking his integrity about it?

[Amimnoch]

116. Her "campaign" hasn't. Time did.

And they used a quote that came directly from a Sanders spokesperson as the central part of it.

Do you have a single statement from the Hillary campaign link talking about it? I haven't seen one.

[mhatrw]

131. Don't insult our intelligence. Who do you think handed Time's Clinton pool reporter this ratfucking?

Who gave Time's Frizell this amazingly newsworthy EXCLUSIVE?

[OrwellwasRight]

135. ...

This is all happening without her knowledge. Who called Time? Who called Capehart?

[tblue37]

156. I suppose you have never heard of politicians and officeholders practicing "deniability." nt

[paleotn]

61. sweep it under the rug, eh?

...after the ham handed rovian smear goes down in flames.....Smear? What smear? I don't know what you're talking about.


Of course, had it actually stuck, you hilllarians would be beating it to a death like some damn pinata. Such slime.

[JimDandy]

115. Yes, when the stink gets flung back on their candidate

they suddenly en masse want to stop talking about Clinton's failed photo smear of Bernie. It's hillarious.

[Fearless]

90. I think you're scared your candidate is losing. You have every right to be scared.

She is.

[myrna minx]

91. It's about smearing and attacking the integrity of a man's reputation and life's work.

In an entrenched political system of dark money and corruption, this may be surprising - but integrity matters.

And yes, this David Brock attack has backfired. I guess Brock forgot he wrote a book about the dirty tricks that he pulled on Anita Hill and ironically, the Clintons - so we can recognize the professional handiwork.

Remember - David Brock worked on overdrive to give the United States the gift of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. He tried to publicly destroy Anita Hill and referred to her as "a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty".

He's now changed targets - to Senator Sanders.

[Ned Flanders]

104. Of course HRC supporters aren't worried.

They've demonstrated pretty well by this point that no matter what their candidate or her surrogates does, they're sticking with her.

[Matariki]

220. NOT "might".

And that answer is both to your misguided comment as well as your question.

[LovingA2andMI]

24. This Sounds Like The Work of....

One David Brock....Ms. Anita Hill Ratfuckery -- ex-GOP Hit Man David Brock.

The author of a best-selling book that attacked the credibility of Anita F. Hill has disavowed its premise, and now says that he lied in print to protect the reputation of Justice Clarence Thomas.

David Brock, the author of the book, ''The Real Anita Hill'' (Free Press, 1993), has also suggested, in a magazine article to be published this week, that Justice Thomas used an intermediary to provide Mr. Brock with damaging information about a woman who had come forward to provide support for Ms. Hill's accusations of harassment by Justice Thomas. Ms. Hill's accusations became the focus of Senate hearings into Justice Thomas's nomination to the Supreme Court in 1991.

Mr. Brock reported that he then used the information to force the woman to retract her statements about Justice Thomas. The article, in the August issue of Talk magazine, is excerpted from Mr. Brock's new book, ''Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex Conservative'' (Crown Publishers), which is scheduled to be published in September.

Describing an article he wrote for The American Spectator, a conservative magazine, in 1992, which became the basis for his book on Ms. Hill, he said he did everything he could to ''ruin Hill's credibility,'' using ''virtually every derogatory and often contradictory allegation I had collected on Hill into the vituperative mix.''

''I demonized Democratic senators, their staffs, and Hill's feminist supporters without ever interviewing any of them,'' he continued.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/27/us/book-author-says-he-lied-his-attacks-anita-hill-bid-aid-justice-thomas.html

It's Rare That A RAT changes their colors and in this case, the RAT is David Brock.

David Brock, founder of the pro-Hillary Clinton super-PAC Correct the Record, confirmed he was planning to go after Sanders over the release of his medical records as early as last weekend, but refrained.

“I was prepared to bring that up,” Brock said on Bloomberg's With All Due Respect, referring to a story published by Politico on the issue. “I was scheduled to do a couple of interviews over the weekend in Charleston, so I was prepared to bring that up.”
Releasing the records is part of the normal vetting process for candidates, Brock argued. “It’s usual for all candidates in the presidential, particularly someone who’s doing well and becoming a top-tier candidate,” he said. “And look, they said they were gonna do it, so clearly I was on the right path.”

During an appearance on CNN's State of the Union on Sunday, Sanders said he had no problem releasing his medical records. “Thank God, I am very healthy,” Sanders said. “We will get our medical records out the same way that Secretary Clinton has gotten her records out. It is not a problem.”

Brock and his pro-Clinton super-PAC have been on the defensive since Politico reported Saturday that he was “expected to hit the airwaves this weekend from Charleston,” and released a statement Saturday night denying that he planned to release ads attacking Sanders over his medical records. He also denied any direct involvement from the Clinton campaign.

“Correct The Record is not going to attack Senator Sanders on the issue of his medical records, nor am I,” read the statement. “I've said nothing about the issue. This has nothing to do with the Clinton campaign.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-01-20/david-brock-i-was-prepared-to-bring-up-sanders-s-medical-records

And You Know What -- Bernie and His Campaign are so NICE They Have Not Hit Clinton with her slimy Association with All Things David Brock YET -- but they damn sure should!

"An aide to Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders said Thursday evening that rival Hillary Clinton "should be ashamed" of her association with longtime ally David Brock.

Brock, who heads several groups supporting Clinton's bid, slammed a new ad from Sanders on Thursday and accused the Vermont senator of not caring about black people.

Sanders spokesman Michael Briggs issued a scathing statement directed at Brock's comments and stressed that Sanders has "one of the strongest civil rights records in Congress."

"He doesn’t need lectures on civil rights and racial issues from David Brock, the head of a Hillary Clinton super PAC," Briggs said in the statement.

"Twenty-five years ago it was Brock — a mud-slinging, right-wing extremist — who tried to destroy Anita Hill, a distinguished African-American law professor," the Sanders spokesman continued, referring to Brock in 2001 disavowing a book he had written attacking the woman who accused Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment.

"He later was forced to apologize for his lies about her. Today, he is lying about Sen. Sanders," Briggs said.

Briggs slammed Clinton for hiring "a mudslinger like David Brock," adding: "She should be ashamed of her association with Brock."
Brock had remarked to The Associated Press earlier in the day that a new Sanders ad depicting overwhelmingly white supporters was a "significant slight to the Democratic base."

"From this ad it seems black lives don't matter much to Bernie Sanders," Brock told the AP of the ad, which optimistically showed large crowds applauding Sanders to the tune of Simon and Garfunkel's "America."

Clinton is seeking to fend off an upset by Sanders in the early-voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire, where ballots will be cast in early February and polls indicate a close race."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/266671-sanders-aide-clinton-should-be-ashamed-of-david-brock

GAME-MATCH!!!

It Is High Time To Talk About The History Of David Brock Throwing African-Americans Under The Bus for Republicans in this Race. HIGH-TIME to Discuss The History of David Brock!!

[KoKo]

203. ...! Recommend for those who didn't know and those who need to be refreshed

on David Brock's scurrilous past.

[TubbersUK]

26. Jonathan Capehart is doing some checking apparently

After doubling down for the first part of the day, he tweeted this about 4 hrs ago. There's been nothing since as far as I can see.

Jonathan CapehartVerified account
?@CapehartJ
Quite the crazy day. I've intrvu'd ex-wife of Bruce Rappaport AND the photographer of the disputed "Sanders" photo. Now transcribing.

https://twitter.com/CapehartJ

[mhatrw]

29. If the WaPo had an ounce of integrity, he would already be fired for his active participation

in this little toilet of ratfuckery.

[LovingA2andMI]

30. He's Probably....

Looking for a New Job -- As We Speak. It is one thing to say something wrong in the D.C. Politico Circles -- and quite another to Go Onto MULTIPLE Programs on MSNBC representing the Washington Post and repeat a flat out lie with a bunch of unverified Rumor Mill BS on Television.

Let's say he is likely done as a Washington Post employee.

[jeff47]

44. This is the WaPo we're talking about. He'll get a promotion and a bonus. (nt)

[TTUBatfan2008]

45. He failed in the most important aspect of journalism...

Triple check the facts before you claim that they are facts. Didn't even bother to reach out to the photographer until the photographer stood up and called it a bunch of nonsense.

[OrwellwasRight]

59. The post is still up, no corrections.

Capehart and the WaPo have zero integrity.

[Warren Stupidity]

27. I expected the sink, I didn't expect it to be full of shit.

[me b zola]

51. I did

When they said they were going for the kitchen sink in '08, thats when they switched to the southern strategy, complete with racist dog whistles to white voters. So when they mentioned that they were headed to the kitchen sink after their huge defeat in NH I knew it was going to be bottom of the barrel nasty filth.

[GeoWilliam750]

69. Given the staggering amount of money at stake for the oligarchy - this is no surprise

This is only just the beginning of the slime. Not even so much as a taste, merely a whiff.

The difference between this and what happened to Kerry is that both sides of the establishment are going after Senator Sanders, which really makes me wonder whether they actually think that Senator Sanders could put through some real change.

This makes me like Senator Sanders yet more - he really seems to scare the super-powerful.

[Botany]

31. this act has now made me a JEB! guy

JEB! = Just Elect Bernie!

It also tells me that team Clinton knows that they are in deep trouble and so they
go for the rat fucking.

[LovingA2andMI]

37. They Threw Shit At The Bus....

And The Shit Bounced Back Two Folds.....

Me Thinks The Clinton Campaign is In a World of Desperation Trouble and They KNOW IT.

Thus is why they have deployed the full services of David Brock to engage in this Ratfuckery.

But did they just forget about the history of David Brock and African-American Democratic Lawyer - Anita Hill.

[Botany]

53. Just last night I met a friend who used to be republican and he is now for Bernie ....

..... and all the young folks working at the restaurant were for Bernie too.

I bet HRC's internal polls are really bad.

[jberryhill]

34. Utter Pieces of Shit

And Skinner had to keep the thing alive here on DU once it was revealed to be the lying work of spineless craven shitbags, since juries on DU caught on.

This was no accident - no surprising coincidence on the same day that John Lewis remembered meeting Hillary in the 60's.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

124. Alerters are gonna alert:

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Using this language to describe anyone is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, and over the top as well as inappropriate.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Feb 12, 2016, 10:17 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Since when is it inappropriate to call lying craven spineless shitbags lying craven spineless shitbags. He is talking about Clinton campaign ratfuckers.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: jberryhill has reason to be pissed. carry on.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No, that actually about describes the situation quite accurately.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerters are gonna alert.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Whole thread should be dumped...

[renate]

39. I feel as though I missed out on the beginning of all of this

My understanding (which is limited) is that

1) There was a Time photo showing that Bernie Sanders was in fact involved in the civil rights movement a zillion years ago. (Did the Sanders campaign release it, or was it just quietly in existence? This is one of the things I missed.)

2) The Clinton campaign tried to have the caption identifying him changed retroactively.

3) The original photographer says Yes, it's Bernie.

4) Those involved in trying to alter history have been busted.

So a picture merely showing that Bernie has indeed been a good guy for decades was considered too threatening to the Clinton campaign to be allowed to exist? If that's correct,

I keep saying that I will or would happily vote for Hillary (and it's still true), but her campaign really is not showing her in her best light, I must say.

[ms liberty]

81. I think this is the gist of it with the added

impetus of Rep. John Lewis' comments when endorsing Hillary. I do not yet feel I am familiar with all the intricacies of the events. What I see so far I don't like, and would not be surprised if it backfired in some faces.

[jeff47]

84. The photo wasn't from Time.

The photo was from SNCC or CORE (I'm not sure which...CORE event, SNCC photographer), from back in the 60s. It was put in the Univ of Chicago archives, labeled as Bernie Sanders.

An alumna just recently decided to "correct" the caption of the photo, to a different man who was at the sit-in in question. This man is (conveniently) dead.

Time, WaPo, and Chris Matthews were somehow "alerted" to this "fraud"....pretty obviously by the Clinton campaign.

Time, WaPo and MSNBC ran with "OMG! SANDERS IS A LIAR!!" stories. Which bled onto DU.

The guy who actually took the photos said, "Nope. Sanders. Here's more pictures."

Time reveals the alumna is not completely sure it was the guy she claimed it was.

The WaPo reporter doubles down....and then goes radio silent.

Many DUers continue to push "It's not Sanders!!".

Eventually, even the DUers stop pushing the story, and are now going with "Who cares?!!!".

And here we are today.

[renate]

88. thank you! (and thanks to msliberty, too!)

I hope the alumna genuinely believed it wasn't Bernie, at least.

But the "Sanders is a liar" thing is really too bad. Whether it's him in the picture or not is immaterial, I would think; he's not the one who originally captioned it anyway. But making a big deal out of it seems like a pretty dumb move for the Clinton campaign.

Thank you for the explanation! I really appreciate it!

[JimDandy]

128. It is not immaterial. Bernie apparently had the photo on his website.

Clinton's campaign was trying to impeach Bernie's integrity by swiftboating him in the same manner that her Sec of State successor, John Kerry, was swiftboated during his presidential run.

[renate]

158. you're right. "immaterial" wasn't the right word

What I meant was, the absence of a picture of Bernie at an event like this would have meant nothing.

Trying to distort his record or impugn his character means a lot about the person (or that person's surrogates) who behaved in that way.

[mhatrw]

129. Even if she thought it was not Sanders, what in the world motivated her to petition

the University of Chicago archive to identify the individual at a sit in that took place over 40 years ago as some long dead acquaintance rather than as Bernie Sanders?

The student in the picture is Bernie Sanders. The spurious claim that the student in the picture is not Bernie Sanders is pure ratfuckery.

[Amimnoch]

118. center piece from Time's article was a direct quote from a Sanders spokesperson.

He's the one who gave the info that they weren't 100% sure it was Bernie.

[mhatrw]

130. Nobody is 100% of anything.

And the centerpiece of the Time's article is Rovian ratfuckery.

Sally Cook, the retired government lawyer University of Chicago alumni who contacted the University of Chicago archives to get the caption of the photo changed, conceded to Time magazine reporter Sam Frizell that she could not "say for certain the man is not Sanders."

So what made it so important to her that she felt she needed to change the caption in the University of Chicago archive in order to identify the individual at a sit in that took place over 40 years ago as some long dead acquaintance rather than as Bernie Sanders?

Who then told Sam Frizell, Time magazine's Clinton pool reporter, about this trifling photo flap? What induced Sam Frizell to devote 1000 words to this complete non-story without making any attempt to contact the original photographer? How did Sam Frizell manage to locate three other University of Chicago alumni besides Sally Cook to cast doubt on Sanders' being the person leading the sit in in the photo? Who found these old friends of Rappaport and served them up to Sam Frizell?

[corkhead]

192. I agree with what you said at the end there, except the "happily" part

I suspect the reason I have been somewhat in the dark on this subject is because my ignore list has spared me from seeing their dirty work.

[Iggy Knorr]

40. Contact the Ombudsman!

OOPS, SUPRISE!!! This piece of shit rag hasn't had one since 2013.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/post-ombudsman-will-be-replaced-by-reader-representative/2013/03/01/c50c86d2-82c3-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html

“Our intention is to make sure that the job has the heft within the organization so that unquestionably they get the answers readers want,” he said.

[EndElectoral]

42. Despicable and Rovian

[jfern]

111. Brockian

[me b zola]

43. That anybody would diminish the lifelong activism of another

...to just rewrite history, to erase a persons activism from decades of work. I have no words, no kind words, for anyone who takes part in this. I certainly could never take them seriously again. Just filthy.

[SusanCalvin]

57. From what I know so far,

That's just a side effect. Looks like the real motive was to impugn Bernie's integrity.

[polly7]

190. The timing of it all, combined with the Lewis comments and what's directly ahead says everything. nt

[Mabus]

212. +1000

The timing looks suspicious in light of last week's debacle with the Gloria and Madeleine, both of whom tried to play the women's card. This week it is Lewis and photographs.

Keep it coming Hillary surrogates because it keeps backfiring on you and her.

[highprincipleswork]

46. Disappointing. If you don't have much to run on, except fear, then you've got to tear down.

[hifiguy]

47. The sleaze-o-meter now reads a Mega-Nixon. nt

[OrwellwasRight]

60. +1

I want to see your meter!

[Cheese Sandwich]

48. Clinton ratfucking it is. More Clinton dirty tricks.

[elehhhhna]

54. She and her bosses and minions are amoral.

[Doctor_J]

55. disgusting. she has no principles at all. those who still support her are just as

depraved

[SammyWinstonJack]

114. NO MORE CLINTONS!

[PufPuf23]

56. Those details are incredibly slimy.

These folks do not care how much they harm the Democratic Party or the Nation as long as their ambitions are satisfied.

People don't forget stuff like this (and shouldn't).

[whereisjustice]

64. Hillary's dirty tricks she'll use to explain how sending your job to Asia is actually going to

increase your wages. They'll just alter the data.

[CanonRay]

68. This shit is what David Brock used to do for the right wing.

Tried and true propaganda.

[nashville_brook]

191. Spot on

[valerief]

70. K&R

[grasswire]

71. excellent review of the situation

thanks.

[libtodeath]

74. Do Hillary supporters here have no shame?

[hifiguy]

89. Are there polar bears in Antartica?

Penguins at the North Pole?

[Duval]

75. I characterize this as "sleazy politics".

I think it's terrible that she and her campaign have resorted to this. it's irresponsible and shows lack of judgment.

[Carolina]

102. Lack of judgment

Is putting it mildly

It's Nixonian...

[StoneCarver]

77. OK I usually don't post a lot but...

This is seriously disgusting. It broke my heart to see John Lewis insinuate those smears against Bernie (I didn't see him there). WTF! I love John Lewis and have stood by him through time. But WTF!!! Has he sold out? It's like hearing MLK sold out. I'm glad it back fired. Thanks to all the people on DU and the internet who came through and kept it real.
Stonecarver

[marlakay]

119. Thats how I feel sad to see black leaders doing this type of stuff

the african american community needs all the help they can get and having a black leader lie is NOT helping!

[SoapBox]

80. Fuck Capehart...

Have never been able to stomach the weasel.

[Iggy Knorr]

105. Never realized til today, but check out his twitter stream

he's a real piece of work. reposted this lie over 30 times, bragged about doing "Andrea" today, aka Mrs. Greenspan to drop his latest scoop aka smear.

[Beacool]

82. "Ratfuckery" is the nonsense you just wrote.

Last night one of Sanders' surrogates said that he wasn't sure whether that was Sanders or not in that photo. Frankly, I personally don't care one way or the other.

It appears that some of you have a burr on your rear end because of what John Lewis said. Take it up with him, instead of whining on and on in post after post as if Lewis would be Hillary, or anyone else's, puppet. He stated that he never met Sanders back in the 60s. So???

This place is beyond ridiculous. Anything and everything that someone says that doesn't favor your candidate is immediately ascribed to Hillary.

[LovingA2andMI]

93. And John Lewis...

Never Meet Bill or Hillary Clinton in the 1960's Either So What Does That Mean?

[Beacool]

94. I don't know. People should ask Rep. Lewis those questions.

[LovingA2andMI]

95. Maybe Lewis....

Need to Clarify His Comments or the Public At Large Needs to Dismiss It Completely Due To The Glaring Inaccurate Nature of It.

[Perogie]

100. Pot meet Kettle

[mhatrw]

121. Why was one of Sanders' surrogates even being asked such a demeaning question?

What does any of this have to do with John Lewis?

[LovingA2andMI]

86. Jeff Weaver....

Senator Sanders Campaign Manager JUST CONFIRMED on CNN -- That The Picture At The University of Chicago Is In Fact -- Bernie Sanders.

FIRE JONATHAN CAPEHART NOW WASHINGTON POST!!!!

[Autumn Colors]

99. Please make this an OP (if someone hasn't already)

... so we can kick & rec this to the front page and keep it there for a while.

[LovingA2andMI]

101. Will do!!!

MTS....

[LovingA2andMI]

106. The Post Is Up....

Right Here .

[Pakid]

97. Hillary is doing a great job

of turning the voters off when it comes to her. I can't help but wonder what kind of President she would make if this is how she plays the game.

[Lorien]

103. Her political instincts are crap

she really does believe that voters are incredibly stupid, forgetful, and easy to manipulate. Whenever she's opposed at all she lashes out, instead of making a decent case for herself. Yes, she's been protected by those in power so far, but social media has made them a lot less powerful than they used to be. This story is all over my FB news feed right now, and people are PISSED with HRC and her cronies.

[GoneFishin]

145. She seems to think she is more clever than she actually is. These things blow back on her a lot.

[Lorien]

148. The poster children for the Dunning-Kruger effect

She and DWS both!

[GoneFishin]

182. I had to Wiki it. Very interesting.

[Gene Debs]

171. Not only that, but one of her most consistent attributes is her staggering inability to

learn ANYTHING from her past mistakes. Ever. Not a good trait in someone whose judgment is often abysmally shitty to begin with.

[Lorien]

173. So true. That's another reason why the prospect of her in the White House

is downright scary. Unlike Bush or Reagan, she's absolutely sure of her infallibility (whereas they were just willing hand puppets). Since she refuses to honestly own up to her mistakes, she never learns from any of them. How she can continually make the same blunders over and over again and *still* have avid followers makes me think that it's some kind of weird personality cult that the rest of us just don't get.

[tomp]

178. the stupid, forgetful, and easy-to-manipulate voting block...

...has always been fairly large. I mean, 50 million people voted for bush/cheney, TWICE. A very large number of democratic party voters haven't realized the complicity of the democrats in protecting the 1%. Hopefully, this is trending in a more positive direction with the sanders candidacy.

[Akamai]

108. Psychologist Jonathan Haidt importantly notes: If you really want to believe in something, then you

might ask yourself, "Can I believe in this thing? Is there any reason at all for me to believe in this thing? Is there any reason at all -- no matter how unreliable -- that let's me believe in it?"

And if you don't want to believe in something, then you can ask yourself, "Must I believe in this -- is there any reason at all for me not to believe in this thing? Can I think of any reasons at all not to believe in this?"

This sure works for global warming, for the belief that being given millions of dollars in cash does not influence your views, etc

And that apparently is where Hillary is now. Finding justifications for her views and demanding unreasonable justifications for the views of others. (To Bernie: "Where is your proof that any activities was influenced by the money (many millions of dollars) I was given?&quot

Well, maybe Hillary was not influenced, but if so, she is a totally remarkable person. Possessed of great intellect, knowing the major factors in her life (including vast pools of money), and remaining totally neutral regarding the monies she has been given. I know of no one else who has been so immune to the sweet Siren songs of money of money. Such songs have led more people than Odysseus's crew onto the rocks, and certainly if someone offered most of us such vast sums of money, soon we would learn our views comport with our benefactors' views, and that is f***ing why Teddy Roosevelt declared corporations giving money to elected officials was was illegal, why until citizens united was invented out of whole cloth it was illegal for corporations and rich people to donate monies in elections, why the average American is opposed to the ruling, etc.

Go Bernie!!!

[MisterP]

202. or believe in NOTHING and mask that little detail with lots of screaming and mudslinging

[Fast Walker 52]

217. good points!

Go Bernie!

[Dem2]

112. lol

I find the people who are making this out to be some sort of big deal to be over the top fragile IMO. This O/P is screaming a little too loud, it's ineffective.

Also, we haven't even begun to see real attacks on Bernie yet. This is child's play compared to what the Republicans are going to do - better toughen up a little.

[mhatrw]

126. LOL. So it is fragile to fight back?

So what would be the "tough" response? To just lie back and try to enjoy the ratfucking?

[Dem2]

132. Your enemies aren't here

It's wasted energy IMHO....

[mhatrw]

136. My enemies are indeed here. They are the paid political operatives.

Message board mercenaries. I just try to stretch them out. And they sure had a bad day at the office today.

[Dem2]

140. Uhm, OK then

You really believe that the minority of pro-Hillary posters here - what's it like 20-30 people? are having an effect outside of the little DU sphere?

[mhatrw]

142. No effect at all. Full ratfucking ahead. nt

[Dem2]

144. ratfucking is the hot word of the day on DU

[NanceGreggs]

141. Name them. n/t

[mhatrw]

143. I don't know their names.

Was that a test? Do you have the answer key?

[NanceGreggs]

150. You know their user names.

So name them.

[tblue37]

159. That's an absurd demand, because you know directly accusing a specific DUer would get him

in big trtouble because it is a TOS violation.

[NanceGreggs]

164. Yes, it was an absurd demand ...

... in direct response to an absurd statement.

"I KNOW there are paid operatives here - but I can't tell you who they are, because it will get me in 'big trouble'."

It's always easy to claim you "know" something when you have the easy-out of saying you can't say HOW you know, WHY you know, exactly WHAT you KNOW, and WHO is doing what you KNOW they're doing because it's against the rules.

The ultimate poster's strawman - making a ridiculous statement, and then hiding behind the "I'm not allowed to say" defense.



Oh, and it's also childish. I didn't specifically point that out, because I figured that part was obvious.

[Z_California]

161. This is the definition of trolling

[liberal_at_heart]

166. Are Hillary supporters fragile when they defend Hillary?

[Uncle Joe]

117. Excellent OP, while raising some most astute questions.

Thanks for the thread, mhatrw.

[jalan48]

122. LOL! Well put.

Hillary's starting to get quite a stench about her.

[blondie58]

137. They're getting desperate

I just hope that the voters know they're being played.


Poor Hillary is so desperate. Doesn't everyone know it s her turn?

[Enthusiast]

138. K&R! This post received hundreds of recommendations! Yay!

[Aerows]

139. The opposition tried to smear him

tripped over their own narrative which was not vetted (while pretending to vet Sanders) and ended up face first in the mud.

This is Mitt Romney level political ineptitude, and that's saying something.

[MFM008]

146. what a strain

Sanders people are becoming as bad at the GOP in assuming Hillary is behind everything. For it being a "Non-Story" your sure making a big deal of it. I dont understand what anyone would see in a man who likely wont make it through a 4 year term. I will vote for him if he is the nominee only because I dont vote republican under any circumstances, but damn.

[concreteblue]

149. Please educate us to the mechanism

That explains this. At a minimum we have Clinton surrogates engaging in slander in an attempt to assist Hillary's ambitions.
Again, please tell us how it happened.

[MFM008]

213. are you voting for the nominee?

I will if its Sanders. Will you if its HRC?

[concreteblue]

218. Probably

But I will not commit until I see how the rest of the campaign plays out. Yes, all of the R's are shithouse rat crazy. ATP, Hillary is heading in that direction re: flip flops, campaign tactics, etc. Don't know if I can hold my nose hard enough to keep out the stink. We will see.

[Fairgo]

152. Its a damning sequence of events

[Horus T Light]

153. Step away slow like....

Wow, you sound like you are one beer away from going back into the bunker for the night. You could be right. It's all a big conspiracy. Everyone is out to get Bernie. Only you know the truth! Come on and save it for the real fight. Hillary is going to need all of us in the battle against the Frankenstein monster that is the GOP nominee.

[mhatrw]

157. Yes, it was all my beers that resulted in the Clinton campaign ratfucking the Sanders campaign.

Why is it that not a single Clinton supporter has attempted to answer a single question asked in the OP?

Your post is utterly exemplary of that of each and every Clinton supporter in this thread.

An ad hominem attack. Feigned disbelief that any of this could have anything to do with Hillary Clinton. A conflation of an obvious political dirty trick with an outlandish conspiracy theory. Finally, an admonishment that fighting back against Clinton's ratfuckery is a completely meaningless exercise.

Good form!

[Wig Master]

204. Ratfuck, gaslight, repeat

[historylovr]

154. Kick

Very good questions and points raised here.

[BainsBane]

160. Wow, Clinton's power truly is awesome.

According to you, she controls any and everything. Time magazine is a mere puppet of Clinton. The Washington post too. Now the FEC is even a Clinton conspiracy for daring to expect Sanders to follow campaign finance law.

The fact is Sanders took the photo down from his website. That signals they found it problematic.

Fact is I really don't care about the photo, but you all are certainly up and arms about it. You'd think there were no actual issues to discuss.

I do find absurd this notion that the entire world is engaged in a conspiracy on behalf of Clinton to smear a man who many clearly believe perfection itself, infallible in all ways. This entire approach to politics is disconcerting. I can't even begin to understand what it it like to invest so much in one man's career that one's entire political consciousness comes to be defined around promoting him and cultivating intense antipathy toward anyone who dares to challenge him.

[concreteblue]

162. So, can you tell us

How this story came to be? I am parti cularly interested in the impetus to change the caption on a 40 year old photo by an archivist.
Do tell.
Please.

[mhatrw]

163. Why is it that no Clinton supporters have attempted to answer a single question asked in the OP?

Your post is utterly exemplary of that of each and every Clinton supporter in this thread.

An ad hominem attack. Feigned disbelief that any of this could have anything to do with Hillary Clinton. A conflation of an obvious political dirty trick with an outlandish conspiracy theory. Finally, an admonishment that fighting back against Clinton's ratfuckery in any way, shape or form is a completely meaningless and pathetic exercise.

Good form!

[Lorien]

176. You nailed them mhatrw

we'll never get an honest answer to our honest inquiries, because they've got nothing.

[sabrina 1]

165. Two words, Smear Monger, would be future Global Propagandist to replace Murdoch, DAVID BROCK!

And this is already BACK FIRING like all Brock's OTHER Corp Funded Smears.

Shame on Hillary for unleashing this Corporate Tool, right wing smear monger on Democrats. She is going to regret this, as the Clintons eventually came to regret their 'trust' in Dick Morris.

Hillary has some pretty questionable 'friends' doesn't she?

She is beiing villifiec all over Social Media for her allegiance with Brock the very poster child for all that is WRONG with our electoral system.

Tell Brock to release the names and the amounts of money his Hillary Super Pac has received.

[democrank]

168. It`s about the coronation.

Get that tiara in any way possible.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

172. the original photo caption should be restored.

[davidpdx]

177. After the shit she pulled in 2008, this doesn't surprise me at all

Hillary Clinton is willing to say or do anything to get elected. It was her downfall in 2008 and I hope it happens again.

[leftofcool]

179. Oh horseshit!

[rhett o rick]

186. And I do agree that this whole mess is horseshit. But it's what's to be expected from

a campaign that has unlimited funds. Funds to hire people to dig up this horseshit. To SwiftBoat. The Oligarchy will not yield easily. What good is their money if they can't buy an election?

[randome]

184. It's this kind of hyperbolic screeching that ensures that Sanders supporters on DU...

...will never be taken seriously. Calling this 'Hillary's ratfucking' when someone else did the deed shows an incredible lack of respect for the nominating process.

Jesus, why don't we blame Sanders for hateful things Cornell West has said in the past? Oh, wait, I get it, he's a Sanders supporter so that doesn't count.

Incredible.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[mhatrw]

194. Who did the deed? What was the motivation of each individual actor?

I guess it is possible that each is a Clinton supporter who tried to inartfully help Clinton is his or her own way without any campaign coordination.

Why didn't Nixon claim this about his plumbers?

[Bluenorthwest]

215. Jesus, DU hangs Cornell around Bernie's neck as if Cornell was a human turd.

And that's just because people don't like his opinions, not because Cornell lies about good people for sport like Capehart, who makes targets out of civilians of great esteem.

Hillary most certainly could speak up for Danny Lyon who is being denigrated by many people who do so for her benefit, even if they do so without her approval. She owns this, and this is McCarthyist and unacceptable political behavior, it is not an opinion I don't like it is the savaging of a good, non candidate to make fodder for Clinton's attack crew.

She owns it until she disowns it.

Meanwhile, I'm still looking for any photo of Hillary landing under sniper fire....with or without Chelsea and Sinbad. Got one? Of course not.

[Red Oak]

188. K&R

[Octafish]

196. TIME magazine and WaPo were part of a conspiracy?

Who'd ever think it, among those who never heard of Operation MOCKINGBIRD?

[avaistheone1]

198. What the hell then are the Clinton going to pull off an October Surprise?

The Clintons and their surrogates have already proven they are bottom of the barrel scum-sucking puke.

I just am worried about how far they will go in fabricating s*** to win the presidency.

[Babel_17]

200. We have front row seats for how well accountability worls in the media

Usually pretty crappy, but maybe it will be better this time as the smear attempt was nipped in the bud. (Good job, and thank you, those who rose to the task!)

So now most of the media doesn't have egg on its face, and so they get to point their fingers at the stupidity of those who didn't do due diligence. I hope they see their responsibility here to do just that.

[Merryland]

205. And who the hell is Sally Cook?

I hope somebody can figure that out.

[99Forever]

206. The is no place for integrity or honesty in the Clinton campaign.

Owning their ratfucking is not how they roll.

[ksc]

208. Archives Corrected on University of Chicago site

Now reads BERNIE SANDERS
http://photoarchive.lib.uchicago.edu/db.xqy?one=apf4-01698.xml

[NotHardly]

210. Shame on you for such language ... depths of depravity

... enough said.

[Bluenorthwest]

214. Attempting to censor the expression of others is just more ratfuckery.

Shame on you for playing the scold.

[Fast Walker 52]

216. good post-- truly despicable stuff

[mhatrw]

219. .

[blm]

221. Why would an entire campaign risk so much for something so easily debunked down the line?

.

[Fumesucker]

222. They are, if you'll pardon the expression, sucking fumes