From Wikileaks: The HRC camp plotting “Fake News” – Smear Trump for a Putin “bromance” way back in 2015.
Tag: John Podesta
Andrew Breitbart Tweet Before His Death Implies Podesta D.C. Sex-Trafficking Ring
There’s more to this.
Less than a month before his 2011 “heart failure”, Andrew tweeted about Hillary Clinton’s long-time friend and campaign manager John Podesta:
How prog-guru John Podesta isn't household name as world class underage sex slave op cover-upperer defending unspeakable dregs escapes me.
— AndrewBreitbart (@AndrewBreitbart) February 4, 2011
From The Washington Times:
Andrew Breitbart is making news even in death.
Social media speculation of a sex-trafficking ring in the nation’s capital has burned up social media sites for weeks. Complicating matters is Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s decision not to comment on anything WikiLeaks-related for months.
Explosive claims by Internet sleuths, which were prompted after reading stolen documents belonging to Mr. Podesta, have been derided as “viciously phony” by Fox News’ Howard Kurtz. A tweet by Mr. Breitbart shortly before his March 1, 2012, death is now being cited by online researchers as proof that they are onto something big.
“How prog-guru John Podesta isn’t household name as world class underage sex slave op cover-upperer defending unspeakable dregs escapes me,” Mr. Breitbart wrote Feb. 4, 2011.
The conservative icon’s death at age 43 was attributed to “heart failure.”
Knowledge of the late conservative’s tweet sent Google searches for “Andrew Breitbart” skyrocketing Sunday night as news spread to members of Twitter, Reddit, GAB, Voat and other social media platforms.
“One of America’s best an most respected independent journalists at the time; he is making a very bold claim about John Podesta — back then — based on his own research,” former Huffington Post contributor David Seaman wrote on GAB Sunday night. “This is years before WikiLeaks came out.”
Mr. Seaman and others claim Mr. Podesta and his associates spoke in code in numerous documents released by WikiLeaks. One example includes a Feb. 9, 2014, email with the subject line “Did you leave a handkerchief.”
“Hi John, The realtor found a handkerchief (I think it has a map that seems pizza-related. Is it yorus [sic]?” a woman identified as Susaner asked. “They can send it if you want.”
Such wording led online sleuths to investigate Mr. Podesta’s connections with D.C. power-player James Alefantis, owner of Comet Ping Pong. The Democrat fundraiser and pizza place owner, who is mentioned in 16 different WikiLeaks documents, had a public Instagram account that featured sexual innuendo and bizarre images of children.
Accounts for Comet Ping Pong employees, which are now set to private, featured nudity involving men with slices of pizza strategically placed over their genitals.
“From this insane, fabricated conspiracy theory, we’ve come under constant assault,” Mr. Alefantis, 42, told The New York Times on Nov. 21. “I’ve done nothing for days but try to clean this up and protect my staff and friends from being terrorized. […] It’s endless.”
The editorial board of The Washington Post also lambasted social media sleuths on Nov. 25 in an op-ed titled “‘Pizzagate’ shows how fake news hurts real people.”
“The allegations against Comet Ping Pong, reported by the New York Times, are absurd on their face and detached from any gossamer thread of fact,” the newspaper wrote. “They took root in the dark crevices of the Web and took flight thanks to social media platforms, whose witless ‘who, us?’ posture in the face of misinformation and outright lunacy is a civic embarrassment. …”
“Like 93 percent of Washingtonians, the restaurateur happened to support Ms. Clinton for president; he has some prominent Democratic friends, past and present,” the Post continued. “Mr. Alefantis’s name surfaced in leaked email from Mr. Podesta’s account, published by WikiLeaks, in which the two men discussed holding a Clinton fundraiser. As far as anyone knows, there is no more logic than that as to why Mr. Alefantis and his restaurant became targets. The First Amendment is a bulwark of democracy but provides no protection for defamatory allegations published in knowing disregard for the truth. Mr. Alefantis is more than entitled to sue for defamation and libel, if he can find the purveyors of the garbage heaved his way.”
Fill In The Blanks
Breitbart was onto something HUGE and Wikileaks has made the info available to fill in the blanks. Now we just have to pressure our new FBI director and our new Attorney General to go after the whole mess of them. The list is very very long.
As a side note:
Remember when Breitbart’s coroner, Michael Cormier died of arsenic poisoning a few months after Breitbart died?
Previously:
Wikileaks Exposes Convicted Child Abductor Connection To The Clintons
Hey Hillary… Get Over It!
A few thoughts on the recount effort to overturn the election.
If Hillary is having a hard time accepting her loss… Here is a reminder from July when Hillary Clinton and the DNC stole the nomination from Bernie Sanders through the rigged primary: ‘Clinton campaign boss to Bernie supporters: Get over it’
The chairman of the Hillary Clinton’s campaign, John Podesta, delivered a simple and sharp message to disgruntled Bernie Sanders fans Tuesday morning: “Get over it.”
Remember this tweet?
Donald Trump refused to say that he’d respect the results of this election.
That’s a direct threat to our democracy.
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 24, 2016
Jill Stein’s recount request raises many red flags. Why?
- Jill Stein tweeted systematically against Hillary during the campaign… why would she now want to help Hillary’s campaign?
- A recount will not help her become President in any way.
- A recount only applies to the three states where Trump won tightly – these are Wisconsin (1%), Michigan (0.3%) and PA (1.2%) (The difference of percentage points in brackets). Why doesn’t it include states that Hillary won tightly? New Hampshire (0.4%) and Minnesota (1.4%)
Very suspicious.
Could it be that Hillary “joining the recount efforts” is not to overturn the election, but to make sure her own cheating is not discovered?
Podesta-Soros Master Plan – How To Take Over America – 2008 And Beyond!
Wikileaks Email ID 59125 exposes John Podesta and George Soros Master Plan on how to take over America in 2008 and beyond!
It’s all there in the memos, the whole scheme… taking over the economy, protracted war, dividing Americans and controlling the media.
Email link: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/59125
Email Screenshot:
Email Attachments:
2008 Combined Fundraising, Message and Mobilization Plan.doc
NYC meeting 2007 (Final Draft).doc
From 2008 Combined Fundraising, Message and Mobilization Plan.doc:
Memo To: George and Jonathan Soros, Peter and Jonathan Lewis, Herb and Marion Sandler, Steve Bing, John Sperling, Michael Vachon From:John Podesta (writing as a private citizen) cc: Anna Burger, Rob McKay and Tom Matzzie Date:October 30, 2007 RE: 2008 COMBINED FUNDRAISING, MESSAGING AND MOBILIZATION PLAN
This memo serves as the follow-up to our September meeting in New York. Coming out of this meeting, I was charged with putting together a more detailed and structured overview of what the combined messaging and voter mobilization elements of an independent expenditure would like in 2008.
Since then, I have met closely with Anna Burger, Rob McKay, Tom Matzzie, Susan McCue, Martin Frost, Stan Greenberg, Paul Begala and others to discuss these questions and flesh out a concrete plan for action in 2008. Tom Matzzie has produced a comprehensive campaign plan and institutional framework for the messaging effort and this memo will draw upon many of his ideas. This planning is on top of the existing work already under way by the America Votes-Catalist-Atlas network on the mobilization side.
I am confident that collectively we have produced a viable and successful model for achieving victory in 2008 (and beyond) built on transparency and full accountability for everyone involved.To win in 2008 we will need to mount two large campaigns. The first will use national, state and local media to define the issues and narratives that will ultimately shape the election—a progressive “Messaging Campaign.” The second will be a voter contact and mobilization effort in targeted states to move swing voters and mobilize progressive voters—a progressive “Mobilization Campaign.” A successful joint strategy must be developed and executed to connect the messaging component to the ground game.
We suggest that you keep in mind the following strategic goals as we try to develop a framework for electoral activity in 2008:
Create the conditions for a tidal wave against the GOP. The stakes of the election need to fit the historical moment. The country is massively off track. Nothing will change until Bush and his supporters are out and new leaders are in—leaders who will be willing and able to do what is necessary for the country. A likely downturn in the economy, the protracted war in Iraq, rising inequality and Republican resistance to change can help set the stage for widespread gains up and down the ballot in 2008. This must again be a nationalized election in terms of scope and message.
Keep the President’s numbers down and brand all conservative candidates as “Bush Republicans.” Bush’s lame duck status cannot be allowed to create space for the Republicans to claim the mantle of change or conservative principle. The Republican presidential candidate will attempt to be the true heir of Ronald Reagan and may try to position himself as an agent for change, Sarkozy-style. We must continually remind voters that the nominee and all the rest of the Republican candidates are the residual forces of the failed Bush years.
Exploit the particular weaknesses of the Republican presidential nominee. Beyond tying the candidate to Bush, we must not be shy about reminding voters of the personal faults and character limitations of the Republican Party leader. The current crop of candidates is relatively unknown to Americans and will be ripe for definition through serious opposition research and media work. This will not happen organically. It will require sustained pressure and a willingness to play politics by their rules.
Ensure that demographics is destiny. An “emerging progressive majority” is a realistic possibility in terms of demographic and voting patterns. But it is incomplete in terms of organizing and political work. Women, communities of color, and highly educated professionals are core parts of the progressive coalition. Nationally, and in key battleground states, their influence is growing. Latinos and young voters are quickly solidifying in this coalition as well. But many of these voters are new to the process. All of these groups—in addition to working class voters and independents picked up in 2006—will require significant long-term engagement in order to keep them reliably on our side.
Control the political discourse. So much effort over the past few years has been focused on better coordinating, strengthening, and developing progressive institutions and leaders. Now that this enhanced infrastructure is in place—grassroots organizing; multi-issue advocacy groups; think tanks; youth outreach; faith communities; micro-targeting outfits; the netroots and blogosphere— we need to better utilize these networks to drive the content of politics through a strong “echo chamber” and message delivery system.
Set the stage for future progressive actions. All of this electoral activity will be for naught if we do not simultaneously advance a larger vision for why progressive change is necessary and how specific progressive legislation will achieve these goals. Should progressives win in 2008, the next president and Congress will face serious challenges in both cleaning up the mess of the Bush years and moving significant reforms in health care, energy, foreign policy and Iraq, poverty and mobility.
Leave something behind. We should think of investments in 2008 as building blocks for ongoing strategic campaigns and issue work in 2009 and beyond. Simply getting progressives elected will not be enough to maintain the political pressure and support necessary to pass progressive legislation and build a long-term, working majority.
Given the existing work on the voter mobilization side, primarily through the enhanced American Votes-Catalist-Atlas network and ongoing union efforts, most of our discussion in the New York meeting centered on the messaging side. The primary questions raised were: “What is the scope of the messaging campaign?” and “Who is going to run it?”In this memo, I want to focus in greater detail on the messaging campaign, describe the mobilization effort again, and provide an overview of the governance and linkage between both efforts plus the joint fundraising through a new 527.
…. EXCERPT …..
The Messaging Campaign
The messaging component will be set-up through an existing 501(c)(4), currently named The Campaign to Defend America. This name will be changed when appropriate.
A (c)(4) board, with overlapping but not identical members from the other boards, will control the messaging component. Assuming resolution of some outstanding legal questions, I am prepared to serve as Chairman of the Board for the (c)(4) so long as I can continue to lead CAP/Action Fund. The messaging effort itself will be led by a President with full executive authority along with an executive team of three key individuals described below.
…. EXCERPT …..
• Developing a “Media Nerve Center” to align messaging across TV, radio, print, Internet, single-issue and advocacy organizations, progressive media, surrogates and new media. This “Media Nerve Center” would be connected to the Mobilization Campaign and eventually become a part of the permanent progressive infrastructure to last beyond the 2008 election.
…. EXCERPT …..
NYC meeting 2007
Controlling the Dialogue, Messaging and Media
If the structure of voter contact/voter mobilization is relatively mature, the structure of using outside forces to control the messaging and the debate in the campaign is almost nonexistent.
Ever since the 1996 Clinton campaign discovered the soft money loophole in the campaign finance law to run “issue ads” that pummeled Bob Dole before he even got the nomination, national and local television campaigns have been waged using non-federal dollars. The McCain-Feingold law closed down the loophole Clinton used to run that advertising through the DNC, but a new avenue for soft dollars to be spent on advertising quickly was found through spending by so-called 527 organizations. The FEC was in the process of narrowing this new loophole when the Supreme Court, this June, blew a hole in the McCain-Feingold laws to permit 527’s, unions, corporations, trade associations and others to run “issue ads” right up until Election Day.
The Media Fund in 2004 was built on this theory of soft money advertising and the notion that the candidate would be without resources from the spring through the convention.**
sehrman@earthlink is the original recipient of the memo; much speculation is in play over the identity of this poster – who only appears once in all the Wikileaks files – but this may in fact be a rare sighting of the elusive DC Power Maven and Hillary’s Mentor, SARA EHRMAN…
Sara currently serves as a Senior Advisor to the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace. Sara’s extensive career has provided her with a dynamic and unique knowledge of the regional issues in the Middle East.
Sara has held several key positions over the years, including Legislative Assistant to two U.S. Senators, Co-Director on the McGovern Presidential Campaign, Director of Federal Affairs for the Governor of Puerto Rico, Political Director for the American Israel Public Committee, Founder/Director of the Texas/Israel Exchange, Deputy Political Director for Clinton for President and a member of the Clinton/Gore Transition team, and Deputy Political Director of the Democratic National Committee.
This was a good strategy on their part. Unfortunately, their nominee was Hillary Clinton, the most corrupt politician possibly of all time, and the Republican nominee was Donald Trump, who is not actually a politician, is not actually a Republican, and cannot be accused of being in concert with the Bush doctrine.
Obama Didn’t Even Pick His Cabinet, CITIBANK DID
While Donald Trump decides who will be in his cabinet, here is a reminder to the Mainstream media… Obama didn’t even pick his cabinet, Citibank did.
In a John Podesta email revealed by Wikileaks, one month before the Presidential election of 2008, the Wall Street giant Citibank submitted to the Obama campaign a list of its preferred candidates for cabinet positions in an Obama administration. This list corresponds almost exactly to the eventual composition of Barack Obama’s cabinet.
The email was written by Michael Froman, who was then an executive with Citigroup and currently serves as US trade representative. The email is dated Oct. 6, 2008 and bears the subject line “Lists”. It went to Podesta a month before he was named chairman of President-Elect Obama’s transition team. He attached three documents: a list of women for top administration jobs, a list of non-white candidates, and a sample outline of 31 cabinet-level positions and who would fill them. “The lists will continue to grow,” Froman wrote to Podesta, “but these are the names to date that seem to be coming up as recommended by various sources for senior level jobs.”
Email Attachments:
Women.doc
Diversity List.doc
Cabinet Example.doc
The cabinet list ended up being almost entirely on the money. It correctly identified Eric Holder for the Justice Department, Janet Napolitano for Homeland Security, Robert Gates for Defense, Rahm Emanuel for chief of staff, Peter Orszag for the Office of Management and Budget, Arne Duncan for Education, Eric Shinseki for Veterans Affairs, Kathleen Sebelius for Health and Human Services, Melody Barnes for the Domestic Policy Council, and more. For the Treasury, three possibilities were on the list: Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, and Timothy Geithner.
Load More