US-led coalition strike killed dozens of civilian mourners 30km from Kirkuk – Russian MoD

(I’ve been hearing reports all evening that “ISIS” attacked someone just outside Kirkuk as a “distraction” from Mosul. I thought “a distraction? what would that do for them?” Turns out… ah…)

from RT

The Russian Ministry of Defense says that the US-led coalition is responsible for striking mourners in the Iraqi city of Daquq on Friday, killing dozens of civilians, including women and children.

The coalition jets apparently identified the mourning procession as Islamic State terrorists, said General Igor Konashenkov, spokesperson for the Russian Defense Ministry.

“Judging by the eyewitness accounts, the mourning procession was mistaken for terrorists by the coalition aviation. Dozens of Iraqi civilians died, including women and children,” Konashenkov said.

“Russian reconnaissance pinpointed two jets conducting airstrikes on Daquq, located 30 kilometers to the south of Kirkuk, where, according to our data, there are no ISIS fighters,” he added.

[read more here]

Advertisements

Joe Biden, Doing His Best Rainmaker Act, Says Our Fascist Oligarchy is Based on “Trust” and Trump is Going to Spoil Everything

by Scott Creighton

VP Joe Biden, a Clinton campaign surrogate, is angry that someone would DARE insinuate that our election system is rigged and that we don’t actually live in a democracy. He says it detracts from the “good news” we should be reading like our high school graduation rate increasing to the highest it’s been in history (that’s because all those for-profit charter schools mass produce idiots and rubber stamp them as “graduates” with students barely knowing how to read, much less teaching them how to think for themselves).

According to Biden, there is a sacred “trust” that Donald Trump is undermining when he suggests the election system, and the whole system in general, is rigged against the will of the people. He delivered his little speech with that phony, slimy pedophilesque “deep emotional passion” that better befits a rainmaker or a faith healer than it does a Vice President of the United States.

“its a threat to the democratic process which is based on (clasp hands together and look pleadingly to audience) TRUST. No democratic process can be sustained without a sense of TRUST”

You have to TRUST us and the oligarchs of this country that everything is fine and that the will of the people will be done. That’s what he is saying.

And no, we don’t.

Continue reading

Clinton Journalist Has Meltdown After His Russian Conspiracy Theory Is Debunked

from the Observer  (emphasis is mine)

In August 2016, Politico reported top Democrats held a conference call discussing damage control surrounding future releases from WikiLeaks, apparently deciding to collectively allege the leaks will include fabricated content. In a desperate and sloppy attempt to create a link between Russia and Donald Trump, Newsweek writer Kurt Eichenwald wrote an article titled “Dear Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, I am not Sidney Blumenthal.” The article claimed the publication Sputnik and Trump coordinated an attack on Hillary Clinton.

In reality, Sputnik news editor and Georgetown graduate Bill Moran rushed to publish a story about a WikiLeaks email in which Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal copy and pasted an Eichenwald article about Benghazi and sent it to Clinton campaign chair John Podesta. Moran misidentified the writer of the piece as Blumenthal, and quickly wrote and published a story about it. Trump tweeted the article, and cited it during a speech at a rally in Pennsylvania.

Once Sputnik became aware the article had misinterpreted the email, they removed it. Eichenwald, without researching what had happened, claimed Trump citing the article was proof of a conspiracy between Trump and Russia. Eichenwald’s article was used by Clinton partisans as evidence WikiLeaks had released fake documents.

Moran attempted to reach out to Eichenwald to correct his story. Eichenwald blocked him on Twitter, and the two engaged in bizarre correspondence via email, which was later published by Paste Magazine and confirmed as legitimate by Eichenwald.

Continue reading

DNC Lawyers Argue No Liability: Neutrality Is Merely ‘Political Rhetoric’

UPDATE: You know what Bernie does as a result of this betrayal from the DNC? He runs around raising millions of dollars for them. I guess he had to something for that new cottage by the lake he bought. His supporters should sue Bernie as well.

(Let me see if I got this straight: you have a woman running for president who is extremely unpopular because she is a proven habitual liar. You have that same candidate pulling ahead with the female vote because 9 other women came forward just recently and lied about decades old interactions with the other candidate. And you have Debbie Wasserman Schultz who lied to the entire party and all the party faithful when she and the DNC claimed they would give the other candidates for the nomination a fair shot at winning and they now claim we can’t hold them accountable because all those Bernie supporters KNEW she would lie and steal the nomination for her friend Hillary Clinton. All of that and the MSM is out there lying on an hourly basis about Trump doing whatever they can to ensure that lying woman candidate becomes president. Does that about sum it up? It’s a real shame and embarrassment that this woman is going to go down in history as our first female president. Just look at what it took to usher her into office. When she is sworn in, historically speaking, it will truly be a bad day for the better half of our species.)

from the Observer

Democratic National Committee (DNC) lawyers responded on October 14 in support of their motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit against the DNC and former chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, maintaining that a fair and balanced Democratic primary is just a “political promise.”

“Courts have uniformly rejected attempts to litigate on the basis of purported political promises, including ‘statements of principle and intent in the political realm’” wrote the DNC lawyers. “These decisions have not always been explicit in their reasoning, but they reflect the long-standing judicial understanding that, because they inherently raise serious questions of justiciability and threaten core First Amendment rights of political speech and association, “[p]olitical squabbles are not as easily resolved in federal courts as are some other disputes.” Wymbs v. Republican State Exec. Comm. of Fla., 719 F.2d 1072, 1077 (11th Cir. 1983) (citing Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 281-85 (1962)); see also Berg, 574 F. Supp. 2d at 529 (“[V]oters are free to vote out of office those politicians seen to have breached campaign promises,” but “[f]ederal courts … are not and cannot be in the business of enforcing political rhetoric”); Dornan v. U.S. Sec’y of Def., 676 F. Supp. 6, 7 (D.D.C. 1987) (holding action based in part on political promise nonjusticiable); see also O’Brien v. Brown, 409 U.S. 1, 4-5 (1972); Irish v. Democratic Farmer-Labor Party of Minn., 399 F.2d 119, 120-21 (8th Cir. 1968)”

The DNC lawyers’ argument here is that the charter’s demand that the chair and DNC staff remain neutral throughout the Democratic primary is a political promise, similar to policy proposals made in campaign platforms that aren’t fulfilled when in office. The lawyers cite an argument made in another court case stating that voters are free to vote out politicians. In their initial motion to dismiss the lawsuit, DNC lawyers argued Bernie Sanders supporters were aware the DNC and Wasserman Schultz were biased against their candidate. Now their argument is a neutral DNC and DNC chair are just political promises, leaving voters susceptible to the deception that the DNC would treat Clinton and Sanders equally. The lawyers argue liability only applies to consumer-merchant relationships.

[read more here]

(Pardon me for asking, but doesn’t a party member’s donation to the DNC fall under that category of “consumer-merchant relationships“? and therefore, wouldn’t that argument in and of itself set up the DNC for another lawsuit filed on behalf of Bernie voters who donated to the Democratic National Committee? Just a thought.)