Image 01 Image 03

Bernie Sanders Meets the Clinton Smear Machine and He’s Furious

Bernie Sanders Meets the Clinton Smear Machine and He’s Furious

Clinton advocate David Brock is the prime suspect.

Bernie Sanders has done plenty of favors for Hillary in this election cycle but instead of having his good will returned, he’s coming up against the Clinton smear machine.

A rumor is circulating that Sanders supporters are planning to win the Iowa caucus by flooding it with college students from out of state. The rumor is nothing more than a delivery system for the smear which would give Clinton supporters an opportunity to taint a Sanders win in the state.

Chuck Ross reported at The Daily Caller:

Sanders Is Furious At David Brock, Hillary’s Loyal Servant And Spin Master

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders ripped into David Brock, the head of the pro-Hillary Clinton super PAC, Correct the Record, after being asked about rumors on Thursday that his campaign was planning to bus out-of-state students into Iowa to take part in Monday’s caucuses.

Sanders let his questioner, Bloomberg Politics editor Al Hunt, have it as well.

“The Clinton people say that they are, in places like Ames and Iowa City, that they are very worried that a number of out-of-state young people may try to show up to the caucus and they’re going to make a major effort to make sure that that’s not the case,” Hunt said to Sanders in an editorial meeting held Thursday.

The newsman smirked and shrugged as he asked the question, but provided no evidence suggesting that the inquiry was based on anything more than rumor.

“Really? Is that what they’re saying?” Sanders shot back, heatedly.

“Based on what did they say that? Based on David Brock’s long history of honesty and integrity? The man who tried to destroy Anita Hill? Is this where this is coming from?” the 74-year-old bellowed.

Here’s a video of the exchange described above:

Ace of Spades points out the irony of voter fraud being an issue here. Hillary Clinton has made her position on that quite clear.

This is from The Guardian last August:

Hillary Clinton: Republicans warning of election fraud are ‘fear-mongering’

Hillary Clinton on Thursday accused her Republican presidential rivals of “fear-mongering” over a “phantom epidemic of election fraud” as a ruse to justify imposing new barriers to voting that would harm the democratic process.

In some of the sharpest words the Democratic frontrunner has yet unleashed against the pack of Republican contenders for the White House – one of whom she may well face in the general election next year – she said most of the GOP field of 17 candidates would put up “new obstacles to voting. That’s wrong and it’s counter to American values.”

Clinton added: “They should stop fear-mongering about a phantom epidemic of election fraud and start explaining why they’re so scared of letting citizens have their say. What part of democracy are they afraid of?”

Classic Clinton. Say one thing while your operatives do another.

Let the caucusing begin.

UPDATE: Thanks for the shout out from Rush Limbaugh:

Featured image via YouTube.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


“Forget it, Bernie. It’s Chinatown…er…the Collective…”

Live with lies, die with lies, Collectivist.

No honor among thieves, nor Democrats. In other words, it’s business as usual for the liberals. They’re just mad that the other guy is stealing his vote-getting scheme and using it against him ~

    clafoutis in reply to nordic_prince. | January 29, 2016 at 12:11 pm

    ‘No honor among thieves, nor Democrats’ – nor Republicans.

    “In other words, it is business as usual for the liberals” and the GOPe, establishment class as a whole.

    One big, rich, power-mongering machine functioning as it always does . . . but a couple monkey wrenches thrown into the works are creating merry hell.

While I have no doubt the Clintons are being typically slimy in their tactics against Sanders, I have to say the photo that accompanies this post reminds me: are there *any* pictures of Sanders where he doesn’t look like a lunatic?

    JimMtnViewCaUSA in reply to Pagliaccio. | January 29, 2016 at 12:50 pm

    Maybe he just *is* a lunatic? Some descriptions from his “friends”.
    His family managed to send him to the University of Chicago. Despite a prestigious degree, however, Sanders failed to earn a living, even as an adult. It took him 40 years to collect his first steady paycheck — and it was a government check.

    “I never had any money my entire life,” Sanders told Vermont public TV in 1985, after settling into his first real job as mayor of Burlington. . . .

    Sanders took his first bride to live in a maple sugar shack with a dirt floor, and she soon left him. Penniless, he went on unemployment. Then he had a child out of wedlock. Desperate, he tried carpentry but could barely sink a nail. “He was a shi**y carpenter,”… Then he tried his hand freelancing for leftist rags, writing about “masturbation and rape” and other crudities for $50 a story. He drove around in a rusted-out, Bondo-covered VW bug with no working windshield wipers. Friends said he was “always poor” and his “electricity was turned off a lot.” They described him as a slob who kept a messy apartment

    userpen in reply to Pagliaccio. | January 29, 2016 at 1:28 pm

    “…are there *any* pictures of Sanders where he doesn’t look like a lunatic?”

    Yes, there was a picture of him when he was in 3rd grade but his mother destroyed it because she said he looked borderline lunatic.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Pagliaccio. | January 30, 2016 at 12:38 am

    About as many pictures as there are of Trump NOT shaking his finger in the air or NOT bellowing rather than talking.

      A box was recently found that reportedly had such a picture. But when opened it was found to be full of pictures of all the current candidates running for president and lo and behold every single picture showed them shaking their fingers in the air and bellowing rather than talking.

Mr. Bernie, is lying about busing students in to vote as bad as promising people free stuff you can’t afford to buy?

Messin’ with Sanders Claus will draw the ire of Rudolph the Red.

Remember that packing caucuses with out of staters and illegally diverting and threatening Hillsry supporters at caucuses is how Obama beat her the first time.

Sammy Finkelman | January 29, 2016 at 1:30 pm

David Brock, the head of the pro-Hillary Clinton super PAC, Correct the Record,

This Super-Pac, unlike all other SuperPacs is allowed to co-ordinate with the campaign. On Tuesday, Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton rapid-response operation, announced it was splitting off from its parent American Bridge and will work in coordination with the Clinton campaign as a stand-alone super PAC. The group’s move was first reported by the New York Times.
That befuddled many campaign finance experts, who noted that super PACs, by definition, are political committees that solely do independent expenditures, which cannot be coordinated with a candidate or political party. Several said the relationship between the campaign and the super PAC would test the legal limits.

But Correct the Record believes it can avoid the coordination ban by relying on a 2006 Federal Election Commission regulation that declared that content posted online for free, such as blogs, is off limits from regulation. The “Internet exemption” said that such free postings do not constitute campaign expenditures, allowing independent groups to consult with candidates about the content they post on their sites. By adopting the measure, the FEC limited its online jurisdiction to regulating paid political ads. Correct the Record is like legal insurrection, legally.

    Sammy Finkelman in reply to Sammy Finkelman. | January 29, 2016 at 1:59 pm

    That didn’t get formatted correctly.

    ” Correct the Record is like legalinsurrection, legally.” is my comment. The rest was from the Washington Post of ay 12, 2016.

    It may surprise people that “Correct the Record” is allowed to co-ordinate with a campaign.

Sammy Finkelman | January 29, 2016 at 2:08 pm

Based on David Brock’s long history of honesty and integrity? The man who tried to destroy Anita Hill? Is this where this is coming from?” the 74-year-old bellowed.

The story of David Broxk is alittle bit more compliacated.

David Brock originally accepted an assignment to investigate the Anita Hill leak. Instead of that, he wrote abook about Anuta Hill. It was probably mostly true, although I haven’t read it.

The thing is, I suspect the people who leaked Anita hill’s story were:

Bill and Hillary Clinton!

Anuita Hill had told this vague story of being sexually harassed and it was known among Yale Law School graduates. A round robin letter was signed urging her to go public.

Bill Clinton announced for president the day the aniuta Hill story became public.

In NOT reporting the source of the Anita Hill leak, David Brock was protecting Bill and/or Hillary Clinton. Some people testified that they were only ones told something by Aniuta Hill, but that was a lie.

nordic_prince | January 29, 2016 at 2:42 pm

Congrats, Professor, on getting mentioned on Rush’s show today!

Maybe the dems should demand voter ID. Hahahahahaha, just kidding.