http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/02/20/hillary-clinton-wins-nevada-caucus-harry-reid-culinary-union-jon-ralston/80688750/

In the middle of last week, Reid made a phone call, first reported by The New York Times’ Amy Chozick, to D. Taylor, the head of the parent of the Culinary Workers Union local in Las Vegas. Before that call, the union, facing difficult contract negotiations and seeing no advantage in enmeshing itself in a bloody internecine fight, had declared it was more Swiss than Hispanic. With the culinary union not endorsing and unwilling to even engage in the caucuses, employee turnout at six casino sites on the Las Vegas Strip was forecast at a combined 100 or so. That is, insignificant.

Taylor has “been extremely cooperative,” Reid told Chozick. “Probably 100 organizers will be at the caucus sites and in hotels to make sure people know what they’re doing.” But Reid did not stop there. He also called casino executives, Democratic insiders confirm, with a simple message: “Let your people go.” That is, he wanted to ensure the workers would be allowed time off from work to caucus. No one said no to Prince Harry.

Despite their common public neutrality, Taylor and Reid surely believe, as do most Democratic power brokers, that a Sanders nomination would be a disaster. Reid knew that Taylor would get his swarms of organizers to turn out mostly Latino workers, who would likely vote for Clinton. ... On Saturday, Clinton won all six casino sites. And instead of an aggregate 100 or so employees, hundreds of workers showed up to caucus, thanks to Reid to Taylor to organizers. But those culinary workers at the Strip sites were not the only ones who caucused — some of those who were not working went to their home sites. And Reid also encouraged leaders of other unions, I’m told, to rally their members to juice Clark County for Clinton. ..

A lot was at stake for both — Reid’s national and in-state credibility, and the state’s early-caucus status (kudos to his superb political lieutenant, Rebecca Lambe, who runs the party), and the culinary union’s reputation as a powerhouse that can sway elections.

..(non)correct the record, paid media shills to write lies. She has the best media presence money can buy. How far does the matrix go?

Blue pill please

fun and ... completely too ridiculous to take seriously.

I have an idea. Walk up to a mirror and look at the person staring back at you.

Are you having fun? Are you taking all of this too seriously?

Wink at the person in the mirror, and assure them that everything is going to be alright. Because it will be no matter the outcome.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/clintons-exaggerated-wall-street-claim/
https://www.facebook.com/1410232216/videos/10209055975662465/

Heck, I'm starting to enjoy them because they are comical.

$$$$$$$

Hilly. Says it all.

The Karl Rove of DNC...

Just as credible too...

(I'm sorry. A jester is more credible. My apology to any jester that might be offended by the comparison. However, I'm not sure about Tom Foole though...

I can handle the court settlement.

He's a village idiot now!

brock directly, such an honest and trustable person!

Does Anita Hill ring a bell?!

...Murica!

The country where lies becomes headlines and truth made suspect...

http://www.wmur.com/politics/city-clerk-turns-over-voting-records-as-ag-probes-possible-irregularities-by-sanders-staffers/38089238

A conservative group pounced on this and you can expect more of the same. And they won't just go after Bernie. They will surely go after Hillary too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511302185

Do people still take him seriously? What's next, and OpEd by Jonathan Capehart?

and will block even more people on the twitter

She will need the votes of the people currently supporting Sanders. This makes her less and less likable. To me, most of these things are blown out of proportion and NONE of them were actions taken by Bernie.

Bernie's 83 percent approval rating in Vermont makes him the Senator with the highest approval. His reputation is that he is honest and trustworthy.

Though Brock has no conscience telling him that smearing a man with a well deserved good reputation just because he choose to challenge Clinton. I guess this shows that he hasn't changed from his 1990s days. He just has a different team he is on.


As Clinton is very likely to be our nominee, she should rein him and the other surrogates making dishonest person attacks. Otherwise, it will be impossible to see her as either a good person or likable. Not a good way to win the general election.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1291477

Who say they support Bernie on the Internet and people who are high level surrogates for Clinton. Brock has been a Clinton ally for decades. In addition, she uses a loophole to coordinate with Brock ' s PAC.

I am not speaking of DU posters. You can easily find outrageous indefensible posts from supporters on both sides. That is how DU has been in primaries.

Hey if David Brock the dirtbag misogynist who called Anita Hill "slutty" said it then it must be true!

I assume he meant like Bernie's before his campaign handlers got him to cut it close to his head because then, he's just a bald guy, not a bald guy whose remaining hair is fun.

But, good for them. They got right away that you take the stuff that people are trying to use against you and make it your plus.

If they don't hang their heads in shame they're not worth it

Illegitimate child is like Illegal immigrant. Disgraceful term.

And, is slut shaming is going on in Rick's Casino?

Oh, and is it 1948 again? Must be, between the tripe about an "illegitimate child," which is a parakeet's whisker short of an oxymoron, and the red baiting.

1948 called. It wants ALL its nonsense back.

her precinct captains, etc.

There are many threads here accusing Hillary of a lot of things. Y'all are not lily white.

This pales to dirty Clinton tactics. If that video that got banned is real, it shows her staff breaking laws while registering people. Hopefully someone is going to jail from her staff.

I thought it was a done deal?

But you sure are tempting me.

I will vote for Bernie should he be the nominee. I will do ANYTHING to avoid a repuke in the WH

the sneakers are creative ...you have to give them that...it's fraud...tho shame on them

Do you have any videos of the events you describe?
Is Dolores Huerta a registered voter in Nevada? If not, how did she get into a caucus?

why do people think stuff like this is helpful?

Thanks for the post fun n serious.
Peace.
LT

aka not much. Though thanks for the laugh. I needed it

:

Thanks! I needed that.

Isn't that like in Canada?

compared to this:

... the Bernistas dismissing the above on the basis that David Brock reiterated the known facts, as opposed to their dismissing these things on the basis that they are not factual.

These events have been documented - and even Bernie himself has not challenged their actually having happened. In fact, with regard to the data breach, he fired three staffers who were involved. So unless we are to believe that he fired staffers he knew to be innocent of any wrongdoing, we have an admission on BS's part that wrongdoing was indeed done.

As for the unauthorized use of logos and BS campaigners posing as union members, I've yet to hear a reasonable explanation for why these things occurred - other than "it's no big deal", when we all know that had Hillary done so, it would have been a "bigger deal" than any event in political history.

When you're running as Senator Above Reproach, it would be wise to walk the walk instead of just talking the talk.

The fact that Bernie supporters are choosing to pretend that, despite these things already have been shown to be fact, they are simply the fabrications of David Brock - or of anyone else - goes to show that they are more interested in what Senator Above Reproach has to say, rather than what he actually does.

that I give Brock the same hearing (yes I read it) as I gave to these guys...

http://www.projectveritasaction.com/video/hidden-cameras-capture-clinton-campaign-staff-nevada-not-only-skirting-law-mocking-it

Yup, O'Keefe and Brock are swimming in adjacent swamps.

... to these factual incidents that have occurred in the BS campaign is exactly what?

The facts are not a matter David Brock's opinion, or anyone else's - they are facts. These events didn't originate with David Brock - they originated in actual events that took place.

just as I trust O'Keefe with truthiness not truth. He is a smear merchant. In fact BOTH ARE

These events have been documented. They are FACTS, not the opinion of Brock or O'Keefe. The reporting of these FACTS did not originate with Brock.

To keep reiterating that you don't trust Brock is pointless. It is no different than saying you don't believe the moon landing happened because David Brock thinks it did - and you don't trust anything he says.

Do you think Bernie fired three staffers accused of accessing HRC's computer data because it's David Brock's opinion that they did so? I'd like to believe that Bernie's actions were based on what he knew to be true, rather than on the opinions of others.

oh yes, campaign worker was FIRED... and there was no data breach.

So forgive me, you like truthiness, by all means, proceed.

never mind

I think it is time to stop responding to your truthiness smears.

... and there was no data breach."

So Bernie fired a staffer for a data breach that never happened.

That doesn't sound very ethical to me. I would think that Senator Above Reproach would have defended his innocent staffer to the bitter end, rather than acknowledge his guilt by immediately dismissing him.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

But can't deny his campaign staffers have handled themselves in a less than professional matter.

you're not funny and I am serious.

Worthless to ever even see your name again

No History, just this title.

I regret stooping to the level of the Bernie supporter on this thread. Live and learn..

Lets try trash talking the other side for awhile eh?

I don't do this very often, but here goes...