How Wrong Could Webster Tarpley Be in Lead-up to Election Day? Let’s see…

by Scott Creighton

Webster Tarpley was a huge Obama supporter in 2012 and it isn’t shocking he carried through with that same agenda with regards to this election as he was very much in the bag for Hillary Clinton. In the following Tweets after the break he tells his followers (20k of them) they should place their faith in CNN polls and that the Dems would take control of the senate when they win 4-5 seats. The CNN polls were way off, as was explained even BEFORE the election and the Dems didn’t make up any ground in the senate at all.

Webster also said the notion of GOP “enthusiasm” before the election was “bunk” and that the “reckless” Brexit vote caused massive stock market losses and the same would happen if Trump won so folks should “vote responsibly” which sounds an awful lot like Kissinger telling us to “vote the right way” to me. Stock market is currently up to record highs.

He Tweeted at one time she would win with 300+ electoral college votes and in another prediction he tempered his enthusiasm with a count of 274. As of right now, she has 228 to Trump’s 290.

On Nov. 9th, one of his last Tweets, he seems to have decided to try to pick up the scraps by offering “organic mass leaders” the opportunity to come hang out as his political action committee, the Tax Wall Street Party, so they can “create a meaningful opposition together”

Anyone ever play Rust? What you do when you get raided and killed by some dickhead clan and all your loot is stolen and you wake up naked on the beach with only a rock and a torch, you run toward the sound of gunfire in hopes that you can scavenge like a vulture from the dead bodies of geared guys. It’s kind of a pathetic tactic but it could pay big dividends in that you could get geared up pretty quickly, if you don’t get wasted in the process.

It’s a desperation move and it rarely works.😉   A little wink for Webster there.

So Mr. Tarpley was flat out wrong on most points leading up to the election and he picked a corrupt, criminal, vile human being as his candidate of choice. And now he’s trying to pick through the remains of the Clinton coalition for some personal gain to build his own party that he sits at the head of so he himself can be the next candidate on the path to be our Glorious Leader.

How very opportunistic of him. No wonder he backed Hillary Clinton.

I got one more message for Webbie: come on man. ಠ_ಠ (Tweets after the break. Get ’em for he erases them!)

adf

11 Responses

  1. Tarpley is a great believer in FDR and New Deal. This may explain his sympathies and antipathies. I would not read more into his views in terms of ulterior motives. His views do not have much impact.

    But I would support taxation of Wall Street. Even if only 0.01% of every transaction. This would be a huge sum. Nobody talks about taxing Wall Street. The lefties at Counterpunch do not talk about it but Tartly does.

    Anyway, if you are fighting neoliberalism Tartly might be your ally.

    • I’m certainly a supporter of the New Deal. That’s why I don’t another left-cover president undermining it, bit by bit like Obama and B. Clinton did over the past couple of decades. Because we wont let Bush or Trump do it. Which makes me wonder why Mr. Tarpley supported H. Clinton. That’s my point.

  2. OFF TOPIC

    I’m still gloating. The losers were not just Hillary and the DNC, but all of the fake-leftist Hillary-bots. All the smug, smirking self-satisfied sycophants for neoliberalism, and for “humanitarian” genocide. They arrogantly decreed that, “You’re gonna get Empress Cough-Cough no matter what, and there’s nothing you can do about it, ha, ha, ha!”

    When it was proven that the DNC used dirty tricks to torpedo Sanders, forcing DNC chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to resign, Hillary immediately made Ms. Debbie the titular head of Hillary’s own campaign.

    This and everything else connected with Hillary was a long series of “Fu*k you’s” to the nation.
    It caused the masses to privately interpret every media attack on Trump (which was non-stop) as another “Fu*k you” from Hillary and her fake-leftist toadies.

    Meanwhile Sanders disgraced himself by rejecting the Green Party’s petition to make him their candidate, and becoming a shill for Hillary and the DNC who had sabotaged him, and who continued to berate the working classes with chants of “Fu*k you!”

    It was all too much, even for today’s comatose Americans. And now the fake leftist Hillary-bots are screaming in impotent rage. “We’re smarter and better than everyone. How could this have happened?”

    Trump’s victory was not so much an endorsement of Trump as a collective, “Fuc*k US? No…fu*k YOU!”

    • –Trump’s victory was not so much an endorsement of Trump as a collective, “Fuc*k US? No…fu*k YOU!–

      HahahahahaHAAAAAAAAAA!!! Best one-line summary of what happened ever. Agree with the rest, too.

      God, I actually know people who thought they were “fighting the power” by publicly denigrating Trump. The hell of it is, these were people whom I’d spent a lot of time with personally walking them through Wall Street crimes and deception both before and after the bailouts.

      I was in DISBELIEF when they got behind Hillary. I’m convinced that a huge swath of the so-called left is nothing but starfuckers, like the people I’m talking about. They got behind Occupy Wall Street when that was the thing to do, but when it was trendy to get behind the Goldman Hag’s hatred of Trump, they mindlessly went along with that.

      Just cattle.

      • “I was in DISBELIEF when they got behind Hillary.”

        Yes, that is why I am still gloating. We all know people who we thought were reasonably intelligent, but who appalled us by militantly attacking anyone who did not grovel to Empress Cough-Cough. Their smugness was shocking; their sophistry insufferable.

        It was not that they had renounced everything they had previously stood for. No, it was worse than that. They claimed to still stand for those things while they championed a warmongering, arch-neoliberal; a Wall Street elitist who called you a sexist pig (and a “deplorable”) if you questioned her divine right to reign.

        The Hillary-bots were so sure of themselves that they did not need to reason with you. They did not debate; they shouted. They did not consider; they besmirched. They did not seduce; they cheated, always calling themselves brilliant, and you an idiot.

        These were people you had trusted enough to share your honest opinions with; people who exploited your open heart to belittle you. Sometimes they attacked, but more often they just smirked like gods pitying you, the pathetic peasant.

        They abandoned all humanitarian pretenses, and instead cheered for the pre-arranged “winner.” They worshipped power, greed, and cruelty while calling themselves “enlightened,” and you a KKK fanatic. And Sanders became one of them!

        How smug they were as they sneered at you, the worm at their feet. They had no inkling that the worm was an anaconda that they fed with their bile until it became so big that the serpent will now squeeze the living sh*t out of them.

  3. Ridiculous commentary.

    Tarpley penned not one but TWO books describing Obama as a Manchurian candidate, Wall St. agent, fake-leftist, a “megalomaniac front man for a postmodern coup…” before Obama was elected. It is absurd to describe Tarpley as a “huge Obama supporter” in 2012 or any other year. Nor was he “very much in the bag” for HRC. Characterizing Obama as preferable to Romney or Clinton as preferable to Trump is not entirely unreasonable.

    Tarpley is an extremely erudite scholar and arguably the world’s greatest living historian. Tarpley’s “9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in the USA” is by far the most impressive work on 9/11 I have ever come across.

    You are describing Tarpley as a contemptible figure who is only trying to fulfill some insidious personal ambition and go out of your way to rub his face in the mud. Derisively referring to him as “Webbie”?

    Psychoanalysts would refer to your work here as an example of “reaction formation.” Certainly not your finest hour Mr Creighton.

  4. Tarpley was exactly right about Benghazi. He finds “this interesting merit” of Obama’s in the same way you find one in Chris Matthews.

    Now if someone would accuse you of “supporting the MSM” that would be ridiculous and I would come to your defense.

    The Tax Wall St Party is not HIS party. That is an absurd statement. And it’s “organic mass leaders let down by Democrats” he is addressing with his Tweet, not the shattered Killary coalition. Perfectly clear, pretty obvious? Sorry, don’t see it.

    I’ve been critical of Tarpley at times(much too harsh in his criticism of Ron Paul i.e.) but describing him as this evil figure who “turned” or whatever is just ridiculous. Claiming he supports mass murder in Egypt and all of this type of talk. Nonsense. Do you support Erdogan locking up cartoonists?

    • that’s ridiculous. making a comparison between me posting a video of the ONE TIME chris mathews says something accurate while I continue to call him out for being a sycophant to Hillary to Tarpley’s continued sucking up to both Obama and Clinton is absolutely ridiculous. no one’s going to buy into that. and of course the TWSP is Tarpley’s. He started it and runs it. And did you not read the links I provided showing his support for al-Sisi?

  5. No. Saying that a Clinton regime is preferable to a Trump regime is NOT “sucking up,” whether you agree with that or not. Tarpley saying that he found something to support in Obama because he seemed to resist the “bomb Syria” campaign is not “sucking up” either. Your characterizing Tarpley as though he were the HuffPost or DailyKos and all the rest. No way. Go read his biography of Obama, which was written BEFORE he was elected. And where is the tweet where Tarpley condemns Obama for not attacking Wall St during the run-up to the election? Skipped over that one. Tarpley definitely was in Sanders’ corner at the onset. No mention of that either.

    As far as the TWSP, there is no “cult of Tarpley” there. So no, it’s not HIS party. You are describing some kind of scenario wherein Tarpley backed Clinton because he knew she would fail and he could then exploit the aftermath, for his own personal gain? Because he wants to be the next President? That seems to be what you’re saying. I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

    In Egypt, should Morsi and the MB have been supported instead? The “brutal bloody coup” against whom exactly?

    • oh I don’t know, the thousand or so that al-Sisi killed when he took over. And “supported” Morsi and MB? Uh, I guess they had a little election thing and the VAST majority of the people of Egypt supported them before Obama and Kerry got al-Sisi to overthrow him… ah, so yeah, I say “support” democracy in Egypt as opposed to an Obama dictator, yeah, I’ll go with that. and we are done here.

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: