5 Questions The “Minion Media” Won’t Ask About “Russian Election Meddling”

In the latest progressive meme, the “Minion Media”, The White House, and Democrat politicians around every corner are crying that the Russian Government hacked the Democrats to change the 8 November election in Donald Trumps favor. Note: democrats are blaming the Russian Government, Putin himself, not some random unsponsored Russian hacker.

The Minion Media ignores the real questions, while running full speed creating another Mountain out of a Mole Hill. The questions that they should be asking are:

Why would Putin want Trump elected over Hillary? Bill Clinton traveled to Russia and got paid a massive speaking fee. The Clintons helped broker a deal where the Russians bought 20% of US uranium mines. The Clinton Foundation received over $100M from wealthy donors involved with the deal.

Why harm an ideologically aligned globalist like Hillary over an anti-globalist like Trump? Democrats are known for loving communists and Marxists, and socialists, which is well documented in Trevor Loudon’s book The Enemies Within.

FBI Director Comey stated that it was extremely likely that Hillary’s illicit home-brew server was hacked by at least 5 foreign governments. If we can assume, as democrats are, that Russia hacked Podesta’s Gmail account, its a safe bet they hacked Hillary’s home-brew server, and have copies of all of her 33,000+ destroyed emails. If they have those emails, which would very likely contain damming information, why would the Russians not also use them to trash Hillary’s campaign?

Could the Russians have been led to John Podesta’s Gmail account from Hillary’s hacked home-brew server? Perhaps Podesta was hacked only because they had information from her unprotected, unsanctioned, and illegal server, and brought this on herself? This is, after all, why government employees must use protected government computers to conduct Americas business?

Why did Wikileaks publish Podesta’s emails yet nothing from Trump? Because Podesta’swere EARTH SHATTERING!

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said WikiLeaks has ‘some information’ about Trump’s campaign but he can’t compete with what the candidate himself says”. In other words, I can’t harm Donald Trump anymore than he appears to harm himself, so why bother.

These questions, all very simple and basic for any true journalist, wont get asked let alone answered by the Minion Media or the progressives egging them on because they are devastating to Hillary Clinton and the Democrat Party. They will continue the Snipe Hunt instead, in a clear effort to delegitimize Trump’s election, and to destabilize America.

Why The Stein/Clinton Recount Was So Predictable

AnacondaHillary Clinton was soundly defeated on 8 Nov, losing to Donald Trump in an Electoral College blowout 232 to 306, with 270 needed to win. Now, consistent with the Anaconda Strategy, Green Party leftist candidate Jill Stein is leading a Democrat effort to overturn the will of the American People by demanding a recount ofthe results in MI, PA and WI.

NOTE: She isnt worried about challenging any states that Hillary narrowly won (ex. NH, NV or MN)!

The Stein/Hillary challenge also highlights the hypocrisy of the democrat party and Minion Media. From the last debate on 19 Oct, when candidate Trump stated his reluctance to blindly accept any election result, Hillary and her machine eviscerated Trump for attacking the heart of Americas democracy.

According to the left wing HuffPo on 7 Nov, not accepting the results could result in:

  • Undermining The Next President
  • Triggering Violence
  • Undermining Democracy

Has the HuffPo demanded Hillary accept the results? President Obama mocked Trump telling him to stop whining, and to accept the results. Is he telling Hillary to stop whining now? No!

rp_IMG_0606-194x300.jpgNo need for that, as Hillary and the progressive movement follow the Saul Alinsky model, which allows 11 extensions of Machiavellis The Ends Justifies the Means. Accepting election results is only for republicans who get beat, not for democrats. Thr

The Anaconda Strategy exposes that democrats resist at every turn to prevent the uncoiling of the Progressive Agenda. To that end, they can make any charge, invent any story, demand any recount to stay in power.

This is just the beginning of the Holding Phase. Hillary and Stein will fail, but the energy and money put into this hopeless effort only shows the strength of their authoritarian convictions.

Trump’s Victory and the Principles of War, Part I

Heavy Artillery Located at the Battle of Yorktown

Heavy Artillery Located at the Battle of Yorktown

Analysts are touting Donald Trump’s 8 November 2016 victory as the greatest political upset in American history. No doubt countless volumes will be written over the coming years on what happened in this race and how an outsider overcame the most vaunted democrat political machine any candidate ever had backing them, while also defeating an entrenched republican establishment, overwhelming “Minion Media” and Hollywood support, and double the campaign funding.

Hillary Clinton: $1.19 Billion vs Donald Trump: $646.8 Million

In the end, the one thing that Donald Trump did have was the American people’s support.

Over the next three blogs I will assess the race from a singularly unique perspective. My 29 Sep, 2013 Blog “Applying The Principles of War to American Politics” discussed the US Military’s Principals of War, and how the Republican Party needed to learn from these principles, peacefully apply them to defeat progressives and the Democrat Party, and use them as a critical strategic component to return Constitutional freedoms to the American people. Donald Trump’s Campaign Manager, and recently selected chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon, recently said that “politics is war”.

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part II

Trump’s Victory And The Principles of War: Part III

Saul Alinsky’s Version Of The Principles of War

President Elect Donald Trumps campaign, knowingly or instinctively applied the Principles of War to enable his victory over Hillary Clinton. The lessons are clear for republicans going forward: consciously apply these principles and win.

  • Mass: Donald Trump perfected the Principle of Mass. He massed his supporters at rallies across the country. Pundits argued that the size and energy of his crowds didn’t matter. They were wrong! Trump massed his small campaign staff, a fraction of the size and cost of Jeb Bush’s, or Hillary Clinton’s, to great effect. He massed his campaign funding, getting far out spent by Bush and Hillary. Trump’s campaign also held most of their add spending until the last two weeks of the campaign, unleashing the adds and outspending Hillary down the stretch. This might have made the difference in the election. Finally, and most importantly, Trump massed his voters setting the record for the most votes any candidate ever got in the GOP Primary process, and soundly beating Hillary in the electoral college. Democrats are touting Hillary’s popular vote numbers as evidence of her greater support. In fact, it doesn’t matter. She massed voters in the wrong places, concentrated in California and New York, and not in critical states like Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania. The popular vote is debatable as well. If Hillary massed illegal voters, as some are claiming, then she may well have been beaten here as well.
  • Objective: Both Trump and Clinton shared the objective of winning the Presidency. Trump however spelled out his overarching objective in four words: Make America Great Again. That was his campaign’s objective, clear and concise. Winning the presidency was only a means to Making America Great Again. In contrast, Hillary’s objective was purely winning the presidency. Her campaign slogans, like Stronger Together, or I’m With Her were mere window dressing enabling her election. The American people were more likely to support Trump’s objective, which elevated them, vs. Hillary’s which elevated Hillary. According to Vice President Joe Biden in a CNN interview:


    “Hillary Clinton felt compelled to run for president despite lacking a clear campaign vision”…”I don’t think she ever really figured it out”


  • Offensive: Donald Trump set himself apart from other GOP candidates by going on, and maintaining the offensive. Although he was criticized for defending himself too much, he never stopped going on the attack. In contrast with how John McCain and Mitt Romney treated Barack Obama, Trump went straight after Hillary, refusing to ease up, and maintaining the offensive. If anything, Trump was criticized for attacking too often, too harshly, and for attacking not just Hillary, but the corrupt media, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, President Obama, and others. In the end, America wanted a fighter, and they believe that they got one. In contrast David Brock, democrat strategist savant, lamented that Hillary wasn’t more like Donald Trump in going on the offensive against the media saying

“Clinton’s biggest problem was simply not being more like Trump, at least when it came to dealing with the press.”

  • Economy of Force: Donald Trump wrote the book on The Art of the Deal, and during this campaign he wrote the book on political Economy of Force. No Principle of War was better put into practice than this one. Trump’s campaign was run largely from his own money or small donors, and it was wisely spent. His staff was only a fraction of the size of Hillary’s. Trump maximized the use of volunteers throughout the country, tying into local and state Republican Party volunteers. Support from the RNC and its get out the vote effort defeated the vaunted Democrat GOTV machine, even though it was outspent. Trump was also heralded for his skill at dominating news cycles. Although much of the “Minion Media” coverage was grossly pro-Hillary, Trump was still effective at getting his message out for free.
    • Significantly, Donald Trump used social media to go over the heads of the “Minion Media”. His 36 million followers between Twitter, Facebook and Instagram heard directly from Trump and they spread the word, at next to no cost to his campaign. The Trump campaign spent only $160,00 for example producing and posting short policy videos and got 74 million views.
    • Trump’s Social Media Director, Dan Scavino, described the slim nature of the campaign to Breitbart News:

“…there was not some boardroom of political consultants pre-testing talking points for tweets and Facebook and Instagram posts before they went out. It was him, Trump and his iPhone, that led the way in making this happen.”

Clinton Wikileaks Revelations

NOTE: So much crying about how the Russians hacked these emails yet Clinton says it’s impossible anybody hacked her illicit home-brew email server???


  • Podesta called Sen Bernie Sanders a Doofus
  • Focus group tested that Obama’s father was a Muslim
  • President Obama know about Hillary’s secret emails, used pseudonym to communicate
  • Asked potential voters about Obama’s past cocaine use
  • Campaign believed Obama committed voter fraud in 2008
  • Obama knew about Clinton’s private email server
  • Aides thought Obama’s remarks about private server didn’t make sense
  • Bernie’s healthcare plan: “His actual proposal sucks, but we live in a leftie alternative universe”
  • Hilllary’s Campaign/DMC rigged primaries against Sanders

Gross Hypocrisy

  • Clinton has “Public and Private position” on issues
  • Clinton wanted Obamacare to “Unravel”
  • Campaign found women paid less than men at Clinton Foundation
  • Podesta listed potential VP Candidates by racial and gender “Food Groups”
  • Clinton claimed Saudi Arabia and Qatar funded ISIS, but still took money from them
  • Clinton comments to Brazilian bank that her dream was a hemispheric trade zone with “open trade and open borders.”
  • Moroccan King paid Clinton Foundation $12M for her to attend event in Morocco
  • Bill Clinton received $1M “birthday gift” from Qatar, while Hillary Sec State
  • Clinton showed concern about vetting refugees, knew ISIS would infiltrate Syrians
  • Clinton bragged about being invited to Putin’s “Inner Sanctum”
  • Clinton praises Putin “An Engaging and Very Interesting Conversationalist”
  • Clinton said she’s removed from “Struggles of Middle Class”
  • Clinton attacked Catholics and Evangelicals (Catholicism is “an amazing bastrdization of the faith.”
  • Clinton Campaign manager (Podesta) set up two front groups to instigate a revolution within the Catholic Church, a Catholic Spring
  • Clinton admitted Syria no-Fly Zone would be very difficult
  • Clinton went back and forth over Keystone Pipeline
  • Clinton said Fracking was a “Gift” in paid speech
  • Clinton praised Wall Street in paid speeches
  • Clinton supported plan that would cut social security
  • Paid people to incite vilolence at Trump events
  • Conspired to hide emails from Congress
  • Believed Iran Nuclear agreement was “…the greatest appeasement since Chamberlain gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler.”

Media/Government Collusion

  • rp_Minion-Media-379x1024.pngPolitico reporter offered campaign chance to edit story
  • 37 Page Poll Rigging Operations Guide
  • CNBS’s John Harwood offered advice
  • NYT allowed quote edits
  • Boston Globe pumped up campaign
  • Univision pressured to attack Trump
  • MSNBC producer praised Clinton
  • Campaign bragged about media support
  • Donna Brazile leaked Town Hall/Debate question
  • Campaign colluded with DOJ and State Department over released documents
  • “Off the recotd” dinner with 25 press attendees”
  • Glen Thrush from Politico admits to being a Hillary “Hack”

Hillary and Underling Thoughts of Democrats/Americans

  • Podesta called Latinos “Needy”, Latino outreach is “taco bowl engagement”
  • Called other liberals “Pompous”, “Naive”, “Dumb”, “Radical”, “Freeks who need to Get A Life”
  • Clinton Campaign wants “unaware” and “compliant” citizenry
  • Donald Trump supporters are “a basket of deplorables” and “irredeemable”
  • “Clinton’s treatement of Dept State agents on her protective detail was so contemptuous that many of them sought reassignment or employment elsewhere”
  • Most blacks and Muslims will fail no matter the situation

Clinton Campaign Staff Revelations

  • Podesta wished San Bernadino shooter was named “Chris”
  • Mook called Clintons taxes and health “Hyper Sensitive issues”
  • Clinton hated using phrase “Everyday Americans”
  • Hillary needs a podium, unable to Walk around
  • Hillary called “Spacey”, “Doesn’t seem to know what planet we are all living in”
  • Staff says she is “arrogant” and has a “character problem”

Sources: Wikileaks -John Podesta’s Purported hacked account emails, Hannity/Fox News, Millennium Report, Lifezette

Other Clinton Scandal Summaries:

More “Clinton Speak” From Hillary

Hillary Clinton Delivering Campaign Speach

Hillary Clinton Delivering Campaign Speech

America got another dose of “Clinton Speak” on 2 July when Chuck Todd interviewed Hillary Clinton on Meet The Press, and asked her:

CHUCK TODD: “Let me ask you this, your husband made an unannounced visit to the attorney general on the tarmac in Arizona. I’m curious of your initial reaction when you found out the news”

First, its telling that Todd asked about her initial reaction, and she spoke to her initial reaction. The interview was days after Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch held their secret meeting. Why didn’t Todd ask her about what she knew now? Why not ask her what her husband told her regarding the meeting? Why not ask about the questions that she asked her husband as to what he was thinking?

Because of the question, Hillary had an easy “Clinton Speak” answer:

HILLARY CLINTON: “Well, I learned about it in the news and it was a short, chance meeting at an airport tarmac and on both of their planes, as I understand it, were landing on the same tarmac at about the same time and the Attorney General’s husband was there. They said hello. They talked about grandkids, which is very much on our minds these days, golf, their mutual friend and former attorney general Janet Reno. It was purely social. They did not veer off of speaking about those kinds of, you know, very common exchanges.”

Hillary should be the world’s authority on what happened. It involved her husband, impacted an FBI investigation the she was the target for, was headline news for most of a week, and cast shadows on her presidential election bid.

Instead, she finished with her understanding from the news reports:

HILLARY CLINTON: “Well I think, you know, hindsight is 20/20. Both the Attorney General and my husband have said they wouldn’t do it again, even though it was from all accounts that I have heard and seen, an exchange of pleasantries”

Why is it so hard to get a straight answer from the Clintons? Could it be because they have so much to hide?

Infographic: Where Does Hillary’s Email Scandal End?

Hillary Clinton, and the Democrat Party, are entering a very treacherous time while Hillary faces the pending FBI Primary over her illegal home-brew email server scandal. Her presidential ambitions, hinge on whether or not the FBI brings a case to the Justice Department, and subsequently, what the Justice Department does with that case. The potential paths, and likely implications, are traced through this Pitfalls Infographic:

Infographic Depicting Potential Events/Actions That Could Greatly Hinder Or Block Hillary Clinton's Nomination

Infographic Depicting Potential Events/Actions That Could Greatly Hinder Or Block Hillary Clinton’s Nomination

























The Presidential power to pardon, is a wildcard, as shown in the infographic. Per the Constitution:

The President…shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.


The Constitution provides the President the power to pardon once the offense is committed. It does not require a trial, conviction, etc. In theory, President Obama could have already pardoned Hillary Clinton, protecting her from any Justice Department prosecution. Whether such an event could be kept from the public, and for how long is unknown.

The damage to America that such a pardon would do is likely lost on President Obama. He is now motivated by his legacy, and continuing his radical leftist agenda once his presidency ends. Would he pardon Hillary Clinton if doing so achieved these objectives? Is it possible that he would use a pardon to get Hillary out of the way and open the door to a Joe Biden nomination? Only time will tell, but it appears a near certainty that the FBI will bring a case to the Justice Department. I’ve written why she is undoubtedly guilty of serious felonies.

Related Blogs:
Clinton Speak and Hillary’s Illegal Server

Why Criminal Risk Exposure From Hillary’s Home-Brew Server Is Increasing

What The Media Continues To Miss About Hillary’s Emails

The Massive Risk Posed By Hillary’s Emails

Clinton Email Releases the Key to Servers Legality

Judge Andrew Napolitano’s Latest Analysis

Latest (Prepping theBattle-space):

Hillary May Be Mortally Wounded Even Without Indictment

Hillary May Not Be the Democrat Nominee (Doug Schoen)

Democrats May Turn to Biden

How Energized Are Democrat Voters In 2016?

How energized are Democrat voters in the 2016 primaries so far? My last Blog showed that the GOP turnout has blown away both 2012 and 2008 so far, but what about the Democrats?

Using the same comparisons as used for the GOP, CHART 1 shows that the opposite trend prevails in the Democrat primaries. Voter turnout in 2016 is below the 2008 turnout in 11 of the 14 states shown.


  • No totals from 2012 are shown, as President Obama was unchallenged as the incumbent president.
  • Iowa isn’t in the chart due to the State Democrat party’s reluctance to release an official vote total.
CHART 1: 2016 Compared With 2008 Vote Totals. More Votes Were Cast in 11 of 14 Contests in 2008.

CHART 1: 2016 Compared With 2008 Vote Totals. More Votes Were Cast in 11 of 14 Contests in 2008.

When the total votes from all 14 states are compared, as shown in CHART 2, the size of 2016’s Democrat turn out is revealed as lagging far behind 2008. So far, 2.6 million fewer votes were cast in 2016 than in 2012.

CHART 2: 2.6 Million More Votes Were Cast In 2008 In These 14 States Than In 2016.

CHART 2: 2.6 Million More Votes Were Cast In 2008 In These 14 States Than In 2016.

So how would Hillary Clinton be doing if she ran against the winner’s totals from 2008?

CHART 3 compares the winning candidate vote totals from each of the first 14 states, minus Iowa as noted. The data shows that the winner in 2016 would have lost with the same votes in 2008 in 9 of the 14 states.

CHART 3: The Winners In 2016 Would Have Only Carried Only 5 of 14 States vs 2008

CHART 3: The Winners In 2016 Would Have Only Carried Only 5 of 14 States vs 2008

TABLE 1 shows the raw vote totals, and breaks out the states won by then Senator Obama in 2008, and Hillary Clinton, the 2016 front-runner, in blue. Barack Obama would have won 5 states vs. the 9 he actually won in 2008. Hillary Clinton would have won only 5 states, vs. the 9 she has won so far in 2016.

TABLE 1: The 2016 Willer's Votes Would Have Only Carried 4 of 14 States vs. 2008.

TABLE 1: The 2016 Winner’s Votes Would Have Only Carried 5 of 14 States vs. 2008.

So what does this data mean?

First, it indicates that the 2016 Democrat turnout is lagging way behind 2008. Going into this weekends contests, Democrat votes were 2.6 million fewer than in 2008. Added with the GOP increased turnout, there is a delta of 6.3 million votes in favor of Republicans. Some of that delta is the result of democrat and independent voters moving into the Republican primaries.

Second, if the general election follows the path of the primaries, it bodes well for the eventual Republican nominee. The challenge for the GOP is to keep the energy up, carry every primary vote into November, and to unite the party.

Why Criminal Risk Exposure From Hillary’s Home-Brew Server Is Increasing

SECRET Coversheet: Hillary Clinton Knows That Not All Classified Information Comes With a Coversheet

SECRET Coversheet: It’s The Information That Makes Something Classified, Not The Markings.

Criminal risk exposure from Hillary Clinton’s illegal use of a home email server to conduct her Secretary of State duties grows by the day. Recent statements from her campaign, the State Department and the White House show the intrigue surrounding violations of Hillary’s legal responsibilities to protect America’s secrets continues to mount.


On 14 January, Intelligence Community IG Charles McCullough III sent an unclassified memo to senior Congressional lawmakers detailing the intelligence community’s findings of highly classified email/information on Hillary Clinton’s server. Some emails included the highest level of classification (above TOP SECRET) involving Special Access Program (SAP) information. Even the historically damaging espionage by Edward Snowden didn’t compromise that level of classified information.

According to a Fox News Report:

“Highly classified Hillary Clinton emails that the intelligence community and State Department recently deemed too damaging to national security to release contain operational intelligence and their presence on the unsecure, personal email system jeopardized sources, methods and lives, a U.S. government official who has reviewed the documents told Fox News.”

What’s most telling about this revelation is the lack of outrage from the Democrat Party. Remember, it was the Democrat Party that went after President Bush and his Administration over the Valerie Plame “outing”. That was treated by Democrats as treason, but not a word regarding Hillary’s unprotected server, which according to FOX’s source, has done far worse.

The Clinton campaign tried to deflect criticisms regarding emails that the intelligence community marked as too sensitive and damaging to release. The campaign responded with:

We firmly oppose the complete blocking of the release of these emails. This appears to be over-classification run amok. We will pursue all appropriate avenues to see that her emails are released in a manner consistent with her call last year.

Hillary’s campaign seems to be confusing the “complete blocking” of her State Department emails with the protection of National Security. This isn’t surprising since Secretary Clinton herself had the same confusion as the Secretary of State. If she wanted to protect America’s National Secrets and protect OUR records, she never would have set up the illegal server in the first place.

In another, of a series of irrelevant comments regarding classification markings, John Kirby, the State Department’s spokesman, stated on 29 January that the documents referenced in Inspector General Charles McCullough III’s Memo were “not marked classified at the time they were sent”and that the State Department will look at “whether they were classified at the time they were sent”.

As far as whether Federal Laws were broken or not, it doesn’t matter if it was marked, or when the information was classified. The mishandling of it, intentionally or accidentally is all that matters. In the case of Secretary Clinton’s unsecure server, the information was not protected, and puts her in grave legal danger. It’s fair to say that just about anybody else in America would already be under indictment and on their way to prison.

The White House, which refuses in other instances to comment on ongoing investigations, did not hold back regarding Hillary Clinton’s FBI troubles. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest was asked by a reporter on 29 January:

“Can you say with certainty and confidence that Secretary Clinton will not be indicted because of this email scandal?”

He responded:

“That will be a decision made by the Department of Justice and prosecutors over there…What I know that some officials over there have said is that she is not a target of the investigation. So that does not seem to be the direction that it’s trending. But I’m certainly not going to weigh in on a decision or in that process in any way. That is a decision to be made solely by independent prosecutors but again, based on what we know from the Department of Justice, it does not seem to be headed in that direction.”

Ernest also stated:

“I can tell you with full confidence that there is has been no political interference in this process! think the extraordinary request that Secretary Clinton put forward to actually release her emails is something that, Im not sure has a precedent, at least for federal office holders.”

His comment drips with “Clinton Speak”. There shouldn’t be a precedent regarding the requests to release emails, since nobody else in the government was careless enough to use a private server to conduct classified government business. The need to release the emails stems from Hillary’s gross negligence in protecting America’s CLASSIFIED Programs and information.

The State Department also announced that 18 emails between Clinton and President Obama would also be withheld from Friday’s release. It would be fascinating to know what they discussed. Clearly, if the President was emailing Hillary Clinton at her home server, with a home address, he should have known that the address wasn’t a “.gov” address. Obama stated before that he learned of Hillary’s server from the press. The 18 withheld emails suggest otherwise.


The Missing Question In The Hillary Email Scandal?