Screw Paul Krugman: Bernie Had Better Keep Exposing Hillary’s Legendary Level of Corruption

by Scott Creighton

Leave it to Paul Krugman, the voice of the “responsible” left, to tell us when it’s time to stop exposing the criminal face of the shape-shifting chameleon that is Hillary Clinton so that we can “win” the upcoming election and keep a globalist Business-first war-mongering self-serving Democrat in the White House. Because, as you know, it’s always better than the alternative. Right?

In an op-ed for the New York Times, Krugman writes about how Bernie Sanders has to start acting like an adult and stop “feeding the right-wing disinformation machine” by talking about how corrupt Clinton is.

“Engaging in innuendo suggesting, without evidence, that Clinton is corrupt is, at this point, basically campaigning on behalf of the RNC. If Sanders really believes, as he says, that it’s all-important to keep the White House out of Republican hands, he should stop all that – and tell his staff to stop it too.” Paul Krugman, NYT

By far and away, Krugman’s career-minded pandering aside, Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt politician left standing this election cycle. Period. And she’s dishonest. That’s been proven time and time again.

Let’s take a look at a few of the most recent examples of work establishing Hillary Clinton’s criminal bona fides, shall we? Let’s see if it’s just Bernie doing that work “on behalf of the RNC” as Paul seems to suggest.

Right now there are as many as 147 FBI agents working on her email case. That’s the story about how as Sec. of State, Hillary Clinton decided to set up her own email server, in her home, so that she and her staff could edit her communications while serving this country in that position. It was TOTALLY illegal and done for the sole purpose of getting away with criminal behavior without leaving an email trail behind that could expose her down the road.

Clinton lied about Benghazi when she knew for a fact that the attack on the compound had nothing to do with some stupid video the FBI paid a snitch to make for a honey-pot sting in L.A.

She had her lifelong friend, Sidney Blumenthal, running around in Libya trying to cut deals with anyone he could so they, the Clinton Foundation, could make money in the rubble that was left in the wake of her regime change operation in the country. Blumenthal sent her an email back then suggesting the French and Brits really only wanted the oil in Libya and to keep the country’s beloved leader from using his vast gold reserves to usurp French control of the region. So much for her “humanitarian intervention”

Clinton’s “compassionate invasion” of Haiti following the 2010 earthquake has been an unmitigated disaster for everyone involved EXCEPT for Bill and Hillary Clinton and a few of their favorite businesses. Her email scandal revealed how the state department worked diligently to put a bright smiley happy face on the story, trying to make it look less corrupt.

In 2013, Hillary Clinton’s brother took a job on the advisory board of a Haiti gold mining company. I wonder what kind of influence that hire bought them.

Just this past month, Haitians are protesting in large numbers the corruption and graft of the Clintons in their country and how they practically stole the billions of dollars of recovery money the people of the world donated for the people of Haiti, to help them rebuild after the earthquake. Hillary Clinton, then Sec. of State, put her corrupt husband in charge of that money.

“Six years after the massive earthquake in Haiti, many people in the country continue to hold Hillary Clinton’s State Department and the Clinton Foundation responsible for a botched recovery effort that cost billions for seemingly little returns.

The New York Times reports that the Clintons have been a top target of protesters in Port au Prince, who claim earthquake aid money was mismanaged and lucrative deals went to Clinton cronies.” Alana Goodman, Mar. 2016

Back in 2009, when Manuel Zelaya was illegally removed from office in a coup in Honduras, the Clinton machine worked overtime to make sure the leftist president remained out of office, and the far-right coup leaders who replaced him, remained in power.

As for the Clinton connections, Grandin wrote, “In the Nation,Dana Frank and I covered that coup as it unfolded. Later, as Clinton’s emails were released, others, such as Robert Naiman, Mark Weisbrot and Alex Main, revealed the central role she played in undercutting Manuel Zelaya, the deposed president, and undercutting the opposition movement demanding his restoration. In so doing, Clinton allied with the worst sectors of Honduran society.” AlterNet, Mar. 2016

Before her murder, anti-coup activist Berta Cáceres, singled out Hillary Clinton as the one leading the charge to bolster legitimacy for the illegal government that took over Honduras.

Not only was that government that Hillary backed (and helped create) an illegal one, they were and are a brutal military junta, for the most part, serving the interests of foreign businesses who have flooded into the country in the wake of the coup in order to strip the nation of it’s natural resources.

The Clinton-brokered election did indeed install and legitimate a militarized regime based on repression. In the interview, Cáceres says that Clinton’s coup-government, under pressure from Washington, passed terrorist and intelligence laws that criminalized political protest. Cáceres called it “counterinsurgency,” carried out on behalf of “international capital”—mostly resource extractors—that has terrorized the population, murdering political activists by the high hundreds. “Every day,” Cáceres said elsewhere, “people are killed.” The Nation, Mar. 2016

As far as the murder of Berta Caceres is concerned, it’s still unsolved at this point. There is one witness, Gustavo Castro, a well known Mexican national, activist, and journalist but he is currently in custody of the illegal military junta running Honduras at this point and is not likely to ever be seen again.

We still don’t have a clear idea of the events surrounding Cáceres’s murder. There is one witness, Gustavo Castro, a Mexican national, activist, and journalist, who was with Cáceres when gunmen burst into her bedroom. Berta died in his arms. Castro was himself shot twice, but survived by playing dead.

The Honduran government—that “unity government” Clinton is proud of—has Castro in lockdown, refusing him contact with the outside world. The Nation, Mar. 2016

So I wonder who killed the activist woman who fingered Hillary Clinton. Right before her run for the White House.

Hmmm…

In a recent interview with Rachel “Suck Up” Maddow, Hillary Clinton was asked if she would consider shutting down the Clinton Foundation or the Clinton Global(ist) Initiative while she was president in order to avoid any perception of corruption or influence peddling.

Clinton’s response was too say the way to fix that was through “transparency” with the for-profit institutions. Translation: “hell no. I can make a lot of money with those things while running the country”

Transparency or lack thereof,  is Hillary’s biggest weakness in the eyes of the general population. At least that is true of those who are paying attention these days, and a lot of us are paying attention these days.

When it comes to real lefties like myself refusing to back Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee for the White House, the reason is simple: it’s the corruption, stupid.

She is a liar. She is a whore to Goldman Sachs and any other major corporation or financial interest that has money to stuff in her panties. She installs brutal dictatorships that literally kill real leftists with impunity while she sings their praises and calls them “democracies” until she can’t anymore as the rest of the world expose them for what they are. Forget Honduras and Haiti… she was family friends with Mubarak in Egypt and supported his brutal dictatorship up until the moment she finally had to admit he was killing protesters like it was going out of style and called for his removal.

Hillary Clinton doesn’t deserve to be in the White House and I don’t care how many op-eds Paul Krugman writes on the subject, I’m not going to stop reporting on her corruption just like those “right wing” publications I just quoted or linked to like: Salon, Politico, AlterNet and the Nation.

Truth be told, it’s not the Republican Party that is fragmented these days, it’s the Dems. We’ve been busted up since Obama was the projected winner of the nomination back in 2008.

The anti-war, anti-globalization left was unified under the Bush administration like never before in my way too many years of adulthood.

With the coronation of the neoliberal Business Firster Barack Obama, the real left broke from the petite bourgeoisie, play it safe, DNC “pragmatic” left and ever since then, our numbers have grown while the Business Party left of Clinton, Obama, Clinton is dying on the vine. Just check out Bernie’s rallies if you don’t believe me. Or check out the massive difference in the voting in states that don’t use the hijacked electronic voting machines… that’s show you what the real numbers should look like.

Paul Krugman is essentially saying “ignore Hillary’s corruption and war-mongering and lies because The Donald is bad” and frankly that argument, though it is going to be the call to arms for the Killary Campaign in the near future, is spurious at best and insulting beyond measure.

And because The Donald is so “bad”, we are supposed to rally behind a proven criminal and war-mongering war profiteer? And that’s Paul’s assessment of the situation? We have to shut up about the truth about Hillary because we want to empower her and the Clinton Foundation even more by sticking her and her private email accounts in the White House?

Is he insane?

I don’t care if Bernie steals the nomination at this point. He better not stop talking about how corrupt she is… because she is corrupt and there are plenty of left-leaning publications that have exposed the remarkable level of corruption she has reached over the years.

If she looses to Cruz the televangelist or Comb-over Trump, you will see the left come together instantaneously. They’ll be back out on the streets where they belong protesting like they should have been during the left cover days of ObamaGod.

Unfortunately, that’s exactly why she will “win” the presidency. Four more years of left cover war-mongering and neoliberal regime change ops across the world. That’s what we will get and that is why I hope Bernie keeps raking her corrupt ass over the coals every chance he gets.

15 Responses

  1. Good article Scott. Tell it like it is. Your indignation is entirely appropriate. Go Bernie!

  2. Agree 100%

  3. Killary’s lies about Benghazi are the least of that story.

    The Ambassador was co-ordinating arms transfers to the mercenary Sunnis trying to overthrow Assad. Among those mercenaries were men that had killed and maimed US military in Iraq & Afghanistan. THAT would rile a good section of Americans. Not to mention she was violating international law. At that time, our Divider-in-Chief was publicly proclaiming that the only aid he was willing to provide the Syrian “rebels” was humanitarian. We’ll probably never know if he was in on it or not.

    Ambassador Stevens was in a real life “Mission Impossible”. Had the media given more publicity to his activities, I’ve no doubt the State Dept would have disavowed any knnowledge. This tape will self-destruct in 10 seconds.

  4. Scott, I have a question. I am far from a “leftie” and your statement that “real” leftists oppose globalization has me confused.

    To my undestanding, open borders and the unlimited migration of 3rd worlders to the West is a part of the Globalists’ game plan. Yet, the Social Justice Warriors aka Fascists (in my view) are Open Border proponents.

    Is the disconnect that these Soros funded activists really are not lefties, or that opposing globalization does not mean opposing free migration?

    I honestly thought Lefties were Globalists.

    • Open borders are part of the neoliberal economic plan, that’s true. But it’s not really the point. Open borders only serve their agenda in terms of what they call a “flexible workforce”. That means having a pool of skilled and unskilled workers who can be moved from area to area, working low paying jobs and keeping their mouths shut. Like the UAE, Qatar and the transitory migrant workers of the United States these are practically slaves. The H1b program here is similar. In fact, so is the Bush plan for comprehensive immigration reform. It would have created a second class of citizen, one depending on the businesses they serve for practically every right they enjoy. If they piss off the massa, they get deported and a new slave comes in to take his place. While having open borders serves the interests of Big Business in certain positions, it’s not the only way they fill their need for cheaper and cheaper labor. Real leftists support working people. They support unions which are demolished under open border systems. That’s part of the whole reason for open borders.

      Real leftists (IMHO) support the notion of fair trade which means that one’s neighboring nation isn’t subjected to neoliberal economic austerity and the starvation wage race to the bottom. I, for instance, support breaking NAFTA and forcing US companies in Mexico to pay a comparable wage to what US workers should be paid for similar work. If that happened tomorrow, the huge sucking sound you would hear would be people rushing back to live and work like human beings in their home countries, where they would rather be were it not for the slave wage system created by the neoliberal NAFTA.

      AS far as any other part of neoliberal globalization, I’m not sure how you think it would be acceptable by us real leftists.

      deregulation of industry
      privatization of state assets and programs
      free trade agreements
      reductions in government spending except where it comes to privatized services (in those, it is often increased like in the prison system and the charter school system)
      deregulation of the financial industry

      Which of those seems like a “leftist” ideology to you? They are all geared toward empowering corporations and the financial sector and breaking the backs of hourly workers, consumer rights protections and especially public sector unions (they do that so they can privatize them easier. Example: how they are currently demonizing the teachers unions here in the states)

      Yes, I know the Soros type “leftists” are out there protesting for open borders because they think it does the migrant some good coming over here to this country (or which ever) to find work, but those aren’t real leftists any more than Paul Ryan is a real conservative. They think they are. They think they are doing good work. But not really. If they wanted to help people forced to relocate in order to make a less than minimum wage here in the states, they should be protesting NAFTA and globalization and working toward fair trade agreements which would force companies to pay a good wage in places just south of us. That’s what I think real leftists should be doing. But this is all my opinion.

      • My opinion too, Scott. Thanks for giving it voice …

      • Scott,
        Thx for taking the time to respond. Looks like these kids advocating for illegals and the new wave of North American colonizers have good intentions, but aren’t too smart. Sigh

        BTW, you are spot on about Ryan not being a “real” conservative. Say what you will about Trump but I think he has helped open the eyes of more people to the Kabuki Theater that is our 2 party system. If nothing else, this cycle has served to expose the fascist system we are already living under. I chuckle at these misguided Social Justice idiots who call Trump a fascist.

        I fear Ryan will endup as the GOP nominee AND next POTUS because I still have enough faith in our country to doubt they will elect the despicable Hillary. Crazy Bernie stands no chance, as he is just as unpalatable to TPTB as Trump. Maybe more so.

        Sadly, as long as the enrtrenched powers in DC can keep us peons polarized over social issues nothing will really change. The Obama years have been nothing if polarizing.

        • I still think the original plan was to have a Bush back in the White House. But Jeb turned out to be the wrong Bush at the wrong time. They spent nearly 100 million in his short run to repackage his image, but it didn’t work. I think Trump was supposed to be the “bad seed” that opposed him in the primaries and got all the attention and eventually explained how the conservatives backed another Bush for the White House. I think that has changed now. I figure Hillary has been tapped to hold the big office in his stead for now. She was supposed to be the foil for him in the general, but not it looks like Trump will be hers. Unless they pull off a complete RNC coup and run Bloomberg or someone like that in Trump’s stead, my guess is, Trump is the designated fall guy for Hillary. But again, I think that is their backup plan. Jeb was supposed to be the man, but he was too weak in too many ways to pull it off.

        • What’s wrong with social justice?

      • The label “leftist” is utterly inadequate to explain anything about left politics. It is only an extremely general and fuzzy term. For instance communists, socialists, and anarcho-syndicalists are all “leftists” and usually at least nominally against fascism, but the “left” solutions each group prefers are radically different from each other. So just saying “leftist” has only the most general fuzzy meaning, and is generally not useful for anything that involves realpolitik or a specific idea or program..

        • I get what you mean about “leftists” being fuzzy, but there is no way in hell I will call the current Democrat Party, or Bernie Sanders “progressive” or “liberals” as there is nothing progressive or liberal about their ideology or behavior.

          To my conservative eyes, the “social Justice” movement is the face of the far left. The intolerant, uncivil, self righteous people who feel entitled to block streets, highways, SF Bay Bridge, rail lines. Who think it’s ok to shout “fuck the police” in public and in the faces of cops. Who also believe it is their “right” to “shut down” any meeting or gathering where opinions contrary to theirs may be discussed.

  5. Krugman is only ‘left’ on the neoliberal spectrum. The so called New Keynesians have almost nothing in common with Keynes, let alone any genuinely progressive positions.

  6. Good article Scott! It goes hand-in-hand with the blog I wrote not long ago (also WordPress) and I have attached the link along with my intro to a Facebook post of your article:

    “If HRC is a political whore (and I have said so in a blog), then Paul Krugman is her “Pimp in Chief.” That man should no longer be regarded as a credible source in economics since he doesn’t even understand the tragic consequences of Obamacare. He has completely lost his integrity.”—Thomas Baldwin

    “Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Who’s the Biggest Political Whore of All??”

    https://proactvoice.wordpress.com/2016/01/25/mirror-mirror-on-the-wall-whos-the-biggest-political-whore-of-all/

    • [this is “fer realz”… once again. The professional troll who wont take “no” for an answer. He’s been banned MULTIPLE times and I remove his comments when he leaves them.]

  7. […] April 2nd I wrote “screw Paul Krugman” and suggested Bernie Sanders go right ahead and continue exposing Hillary Clinton as the career […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: