If you want to go down the rabbit hole in a big way, all you have to do is start looking into the history of Marco Rubio’s brother-in-law. In particular, start looking into his boss, Guillermo Tabraue, and his connections to the CIA. The internet is filled with references to this history, although it’s almost all from “alternative” media sources of varying quality. Much of it is simply speculation and paranoia. Because the events occurred mainly in the pre-internet era, the sources tend to be from old newsletters or contained in excerpts that you can capture from Google Books. Some of it can be characterized as far right conspiracy and some of it as far left, so you have to read it all with a couple shakers of salt.
Collectively, however, I think the following links tell a story that has been buried deep in the weeds of our nation’s War on Drugs and foreign policy.
If you’re bored today and have hours to explore this history, have at it.
Creating a Crime: How the CIA Commandeered the DEA, by Douglas Valentine
The Rise of Marco Rubio, By Manuel Roig-Franzia
The Death in Arizona of the Kemper Marley Machine, By Brian Quig
Make sure to bring a roadmap back to reality.
Ginger Thompson – The New Yorker – Trafficking in Terror
This is a twofer:
On a pandering effectiveness scale of 0 for LOL eye rolling to 10 for capturing a majority of the targeted voters, Failorina gets a -5.
On picking a winner – Stanford 45 Iowa 16:
Why do people who know nothing about football try to make football allusions?
Carly wouldn’t have tried to sing La Traviata, she wouldn’t have tried execute a Snake Creeps thru Grass, she wouldn’t have tried to predict a winning horse … but somehow people always think they can fake the intricacies of football rivalries without knowing a damn thing about them.
Stupid.
Doubt she was making an allusion — “I’m with the underdog because we’re both going to win” is about the best she could have made. Of course that risked being heard as trash talk about Univ Iowa football.
Nor did she attempt to quarterback for Iowa which would be comparable to your example to sing La Traviata. There’s a huge industry out there that;s available for people to predict a winning horse and the outcome of any sporting event; so, not to bothered by those with no expertise making bets.
Suppose I should give her some credit for not doing a full on pander with “I’ve always been a huge fan of the Univ of Iowa football team. …”
Not exactly unheard of for Cubs fans to pick an out-of-town team to root for in the American league, though.
But we get it – HRC is Richard Nixon yada yada yada.
Worse. The word is that she is Barry Goldwater. A conservative and sure to lose. Even without Mark Penn’s advice.
Trying to get an undoctored shot of Hillary Clinton with a five o’clock shadow is going to be damn difficult for the yada-yadas. And dogwhistling Southern whites takes a backseat this year to reviving the “first black Presidency” connections.
Bernie Sanders has enough strength is enough places that this could get as interesting as 2008.
Rubio’s about to flame out and Cruz is next up in the dance contest. Watch what music the media put on for them to dance to.
Seriously, Marie, I find this oppurtunistic seizing of pretexts to bash Clinton pretty tiresome, and I fail to see where anything useful is communicated by calling HRC “Nixon.” Besides, it reminds me of Gore = Bush, not a fond memory.
Given the likely makeup of Congress, I can’t picture Sanders accomplishing much of anything different than Clinton, so I don’t get what all the Clinton bashing is supposed to achieve, anyway.
Interesting what you did there.
Touchy much?
Neither of my comments in this thread named any politician other than Failorina. On a zero to ten pandering effectiveness scale, I gave her a minus 10. Maybe it should only be a minus five as she is likely to lose support with her pander among both Repubs and Inds in Iowa. Had she added “I have always supported Iowa,” it would have been a minus ten because it would also have cost her support outside Iowa.
Martha Coakley did a home sports team pander and it cost her votes, but not likely among partisan DEMs in MA, which is the only state where voters mattered in her campaign. If forced to score Clinton’s Yankee pander, I’d give it a 5. Didn’t help and didn’t hurt in NY.
wrt the Nixon comparison, how about you not take my comment out of context? I purposely phrased it very carefully and stand by it. I’m not responsible for those that can’t handle larger or smaller truths, particularly during a primary election cycle.
Given the likely makeup of Congress, … you’ve omitted additional important considerations. In case you haven’t noticed, Sanders supporters are quite clear that legislatively from 2017-2019, Congress will be no less obstructionist to a Sanders’ administration than a Clinton administration. However, Sanders will be less likely to pander to Congress or meet the GOP nutcases halfway. Further, there is a much higher chance that Sanders will make effective use of the bully pulpit and won’t get bogged down or hampered by suspicions or questions of his authenticity and ethics. That can set up better opportunities for DEMs in the 2018 mid-terms. Which in case it has escaped you from 1994-2014 is where “DLC” type DEMs lose (the exception being the 2006 meltdown of the GOP because of both GWB and GOP sex abuse scandals).
Finally, the Bushes set a precedent for a familial Presidential dynasty. This is an exceedingly bad precedent for a democracy. Although, we probably shouldn’t exclude a close relative of a prior President if there’s at least a thirty year gap between the end of one and the beginning of the “next” if the “next” has established a record of his/her own. Who knows — John Q. Adams might have become one of our better Presidents if he’d waited another four years before running.
” … Suppose I should give her some credit for not doing a full on pander with “I’ve always been a huge fan of the Univ of Iowa football team. … “
So the similarity of that to a famous HRC quote is just a coincidence, then?
” … However, Sanders will be less likely to pander to Congress or meet the GOP nutcases halfway. … “
Less likely than who? Ted Cruz? Only if it is Sanders and not Cruz who gets inaugurated.
” … if there’s at least a thirty year gap between the end of one and the beginning of the “next” if the “next” has established a record of his/her own. … “
Why? You don’t think HRC has enough of an established record of her own?
So, your gripe is that an allusion to something Hillary once did (and not so many would remember if they heard of it at all) is off-limits? Why? If pandering is okay with you, why not bitch about my criticism of Fiorina’s pandering? Or am I supposed to have different standards depending upon whether the actor/speaker is a Republican or a Democrat? Feel free to be a hypocrite but don’t demand or expect me to join you in that.
Ah, but how quickly you retreat to playing dumb wrt my projection of the difference between a President H Clinton and Sanders.
wrt you last question. First — it’s not a thirty year gap. (I had someone more like Justin Trudeau in mind.) Second, she was gifted a campaign fundraising list and open Senate seat in a “blue” state that doesn’t mind political carpetbaggers as much of some states do. (Again Justin Trudeau, politically active for years for the liberal party and various causes, but not handed a political appointment. He had to win a nomination and general election to a seat in Parliament on his own — although his name was an advantage. Then win the party leadership and finally leading the party candidates to a huge victory.) On big questions, she got it wrong as a Senator (“marriage is a sacred bond between a man and woman”). Third, her tenure as SOS stinks (“we came, we saw, he died, ha ha).
” … Feel free to be a hypocrite but don’t demand or expect me to join you in that. … “
How so? Because I have observed you long enough to notice (and draw attention to) your hyper alertness to opportunities to bash the Clintons?
” … Ah, but how quickly you retreat to playing dumb wrt my projection of the difference between a President H Clinton and Sanders. … “
Not playing dumb, just drawing attention to another possible difference, the notion that Sanders has comparable electability to HRC, which I view as a fact not in evidence. Also, your “projection” of differences is just your subjective and speculative opinion.
Maybe it’s you that is hyper-alert to any criticisms of Clinton? Contrary to your impression, I don’t look for or create opportunities to criticize Clinton. In this instance, that has gotten you so worked up, it flowed rather naturally from what was being discussed. If I did what you claim I do, I would have included the allusion in my first comment on this thread, but I didn’t do that did I?
As I made no claim as to Sanders’ “electability” in comparison to Clinton’s, you’re changing the subject. I merely addressed possible post-election expectations from Clinton and Sanders based on their public records. Speculative? Sure. Not wholly my opinion because others share my view. Not wholly subjective either because it is based on their records.
Projecting from the known out to the unknown is only a bit of art — it mostly depends on getting a good enough read of the knowns. Excluding “black swans,” the largest projection errors result of poor reads of the knowns, often accompanied by not looking further for better or more complete information, relying on overly optimistic or pessimistic assumptions and/or limited powers of imagination. For example, once I’d worked through all the relevant and publicly available information wrt WMD in Iraq, I was able to conclude a) Saddam had nothing that was a threat to us and b) there was no US threat rationale for attacking and invading the country. Could I say categorically that he didn’t have some old junk that could be a threat to neighboring countries? Of course not, but if he did, the inventory was old and therefore, not a new threat. Could I scoff at Wolfowitz’s claim that an invasion wouldn’t cost more than $20 million and be paid for by Iraq oil? Could and did. Once it was clear that Bush/Cheney had no exit strategy (three months in), cost estimates escalated from there.
If you want to criticize me for an objectively unfair criticism of either Clinton, I can handle that and might even agree with you and withdraw or amend my criticism. However, recognize that I don’t weight being wrong that creates harm as being equivalent to an apology offered long after the harm is done. Nor does getting it right on a bunch of small stuff equal getting it wrong a major issue.
No need even to pretend that any laws/rules apply –CNN. To answer why Jeb Bush’s campaign is drastically shifting its resources from the airwaves to the field, scrapping large advertising buys in early-voting states…
Jeb! is essentially claiming to have a stealth campaign that is not visible in the opinion polling. It’s possible for a candidate people are reluctant to vote for or to admit they are voting for.
Few North Carolina Democrats in 1972 wanted to admit that they were going to vote for Jesse Helms because the other guy was a Greek-American (and thus flunked the then-considered “white test”.)
Yes.
Rubio has crooked acquaintances. Probably some who are closer than “acquaintances.”
Allies.
Supporters.
Relatives.
Whatever.
My question…and it is a very sincere one, absolutely untainted by any sort of partisanship…is this:
Where are these kinds of stories about Trump?
About the Clintons…at least in today’s news.
A PermaGov skeptic wants to know.
AG
Some casino-mafia themed stories have appeared about Trump’s dealing (and Edelman’s as well, attacking the several candidates he’s backing).
All of the significant Clinton stories soon get swamped by fantasies from the right-wing swamp recycled from the 1990s. According to Paul Theroux in Deep South, Clinton’s associations from Hot Springs gambling and organized crime folks have never been properly examined. One thinks that likely that is because these folks moved on to supporting the current crop of Arkansas Republicans. And no one has done a thorough job on Bill Clinton’s mentor, William Fulbright, who likely has some interesting connections with US national security agencies. For Hillary Clinton, the place to start is after she arrives in New York. Her Rose Law firm and Wal-Mart era has pretty much been thoroughly gone over in the 1990s distraction.
And yes, I believe she was naive enough not to know in 1971 what danger she was in in researching segregation academies in Dothan, AL. She got lucky. The private school dodge of desegregation rulings still exists as does starving the public schools. What exactly did Marian Wright Edelman’s lawsuit finally accomplish?
The other part of Hillary Clinton’s background that has not yet been properly vetted is the network of people that she cultivated in the State Department who were old colleagues from Wellesley and elsewhere. The key person missing from focus is Arkansan Anne Woods Patterson, Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs and former Ambassador to Egypt, Pakistan, Colombia, and El Salvador and former Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforecement Affairs. And her husband, like Ambassador Joe Wilson’s wife, strangely lacks a public biography and is merely described as a “retired Foreign Service officer”. First formal relationship with the Clintons in the White House was a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Inter-American Affairs, which led to the Ambassadorship in Colombia.
I would like transparency about all of the relationships that the Presidential candidates bring to the table. What exactly are Ben and Jerry getting from Bernie Sanders?
Rated 4 if only for the following question in the context of the preceding paragraphs.
My first real belly laugh of 2016.
Thank you!!!
And…Happy New Year!!!
AG
Finally, after a decade, a belly laugh at something I wrote. Damn that was hard work, AG.
Happy New Year.
What exactly are Ben and Jerry getting from Bernie Sanders?
The taco beans,
man,
THE TACO BEANS …………..
the secret ingredient
in all their very good ice cream
Bernie smuggles them in
every Easter
from Canada
using reindeer,
while everyone else is watching the rab-bit.
His younger brother doesn’t need them
that time of year.
Well…you’re usually s SEEEEERIOUS…
AG
AG couldn’t resist, it was the first thought in my head reading your post.
Yes it is that twisted in there at times.
here am nitu saini owner of Chandigarhvipescort provide a best escort in Chandigarh here escort service will be open 24*7 days