This Circus is Rigged

Hillary's plot to steal the election

When Hillary Clinton launched her campaign on April 12, 2015, few would have imagined the machinations that would follow.  Instead of beginning with the usual round of public campaigning, she stalked the presidency like a leopard uncertain of its quarry.  Speeding around in the Scooby van, she went from place to place, conducting secret meetings not with voters but rather with the powers of the Democratic party.  To many it appeared that her campaign had failed leaving many questioning whether someone else would have to carry the Democratic nomination.  However, they misread her odd maneuvering.  Instead, she was pursuing new measures, measures meant to grab power with certainty rather than be subject to the uncertainties of democracy.  She calculated she would secure the votes of the superdelegates before moving on to other matters.  She would persuade them that she alone was fully motivated to protect the party from the consequences of its abuse of power since she was implicated in the same with Barack Obama.  She would need this support for her plan for an uncontested grab for power because the superdelegates – representing between 15 and 19.6% of the delegate count – could prevent a simple majority win by any rival.  Even now, it is an issue for some that the great majority of these superdelegates are saying they will vote for Hillary. Consider also that recently the Democratic National Convention (DNC) has reversed their rule preventing contributions from federal lobbyists and SuperPACs, a move benefiting only Hillary since they knew Bernie Sanders has avowed not to use such sources.  The same source alleges that the DNC has leveraged party campaign money to secure superdelegate loyalty to Hillary.

A joint fundraising committee between the Clinton campaign and the DNC – called the Hillary Victory Fund – raised $26.9 million as of December 31, 2015, much of which has gone directly to the DNC and other Democratic candidates across the country. Thirty-three state Democratic parties signed pacts with Ms. Clinton's campaign, meaning she is essentially buying support from Democratic leaders around the country. In short, the Clinton campaign controls the money and decides which states receive it after the campaign and the DNC get their cut. According to Bloomberg, New Hampshire received $124,000, where six out of six superdelegates supported Ms. Clinton while over 60 percent of the primary vote favored Mr. Sanders. Nevada and South Carolina also have pacts with the Hillary Victory Fund, where Ms. Clinton has already won support from three of Nevada's eight superdelegates and three out of South Carolina's six superdelegates.¹

It appears that Hillary has persuaded her party's favoritism.

However, it was not enough to slant the Democratic primary in her favor.  Barack Obama had so turned much of the public against Democratic politics that something had to be done to thwart the Republican opposition.  Conveniently, Donald Trump had been confiding in Bill Clinton his aspirations to run for president and sought his advice.  When the time was right to gain an advantage for Hillary against the Republicans, Bill made their next calculated move.   According to the Washington Post:

Former president Bill Clinton had a private telephone conversation in late spring with Donald Trump at the same time that the billionaire investor and reality-television star was nearing a decision to run for the White House, according to associates of both men.  Four Trump allies and one Clinton associate familiar with the exchange said that Clinton encouraged Trump's efforts to play a larger role in the Republican Party and offered his own views of the political landscape.  Clinton's personal office in New York confirmed that the call occurred in late May, but an aide to Clinton said the 2016 race was never specifically discussed and that it was only a casual chat.  The talk with Clinton – the spouse of the Democratic presidential front-runner and one of his party's preeminent political strategists – came just weeks before Trump jumped into the GOP race and surged to the front of the crowded Republican field. ...²

A clever Bill Clinton would have surely bent his conversation very carefully to defeat the Republicans.  He persuaded Trump that his brash style would win many voters and not to be too polite.  "Destroy your enemies with accusations if they resist," he would tell them.  Bill calculated that this scheme would create the sort of interaction with others that would put the remainder of the Republican contenders in the hard spot of having to discuss issues that would alienate the majority of voters in order to win a specific few.  Clinton likely did not calculate that Trump would instead become enormously popular.  However, this unexpected turn of events likely doesn't diminish the Clintons' hope that their scheme will succeed.  Though some chance has been raised of it backfiring, perhaps they think their plan been accelerated beneficially instead.

Of course a liberal media looking to do their part in stealing an election could not help but participate.  Although initial reaction was to condemn Trump for his every violation of political correctness, it did not take long to for them to realize he was their gift.  I had noticed one journalist – Chuck Todd, who seemed as if ready to lambast Trump – bite his tongue as if he did not want to spoil their use of him; perhaps he will bring the matter up at a more opportune time.  Indeed, it is was said in the same time frame that his network NBC would do an expose on Trump at a later time.  It seems that the liberal media found and contributed to their place in Hillary's plot almost as if they knew the details.  Another turn revealed crass greed in their motives as well.  At a Morgan Stanley Technology, Media & Telecom Conference in San Francisco just prior to Super Tuesday, CBS CEO Leslie Moonves said of the presidential race "It may not be good for America, but it's d–n good for CBS," a "circus" full of "bomb throwing" that he wants to continue.  "Man, who would have expected the ride we're all having right now? ... The money's rolling in and this is fun, ... I've never seen anything like this, and this going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It's a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going,  Donald's place in this election is a good thing."³

Into this twisted grab for power, it is all too convenient to this plot that Antonin Scalia's death with its improper lack of an autopsy would benefit the scheme as well.4  Many aspects of this scheme might require a Supreme Court slanted in favor of the Democrats especially if some misdeed were discovered.  The first thing that comes to mind is that if the superdelegates won the primary for Hillary in spite of a popular win by a rival the matter could go to court.  For actors desperate to finish this plot, this sort of inconvenience could not be allowed if there were any way to avert it.

Liberal media bias and bold lies by liberal operatives have seemed to tamper most important elections in recent years.  However this is the boldest stunt yet.  Are there no laws against tampering with the election process?  Who is guarding democracy?

Come one, come all!  See the greatest show on earth!

¹Michael Sainato, "How the DNC Helps Clinton Buy Off Superdelegates," February 18, 2016, News & Politics, The Observer, www.observer.com, link.
²Robert Costa and Anne Gearan, "Donald Trump talked politics with Bill Clinton weeks before launching 2016 bid," August 5 2015, The Washington Post, link.
³Paul Bond, "Leslie Moonves on Donald Trump: 'It May Not Be Good for America, but It's D–n Good for CBS'," February 29, 2016 The Business, The Hollywood Reporter, www.hollywoodreporter.com, link.
⁴See article:  Is Scalia a Martyr?

Document History
March 4, 2016  Created.
March 4, 2016  Correct a misspelling and added more links to footer.