AUGUST 3,
2016
Counterpunch.org
The release by Wikileaks of a trove of emails from
high-ranking Democratic Party officials has confirmed what many Americans –
both progressive and conservative – have suspected throughout this election
cycle: that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) actively conspired against
Bernie Sanders in an attempt to ensure the nomination for Hillary Clinton.
But it wasn’t simply party apparatchiks like the disgraced Debbie
Wasserman-Schultz, the recently resigned Chair of the DNC and
close ally of Clinton, but also their trusted cronies in the corporate media
who actively collaborated with DNC officials to ensure that nothing too
critical of Hillary would make it into the Mighty Wurlitzer of contemptibly
‘respectable’ journalism. Indeed, what the Wikileaks revelations expose
to the world is the fact that there’s nothing democratic about the Democratic
Party, or America’s alleged democracy in general.
More
specifically however, the question that really must be asked is: why Hillary
Clinton? What is it about this woman that unites nearly the entirety of
the political, financial, socio-cultural, and military establishment? Is
it really just hatred of Donald Trump? Or is there something more
insidious, something that makes Hillary the irresistible flame of belligerence
and exceptionalism to which the corporate-imperialist moths are slavishly
attracted?
From Conspiracy Theory to Conspiracy Fact
For months the sentinels of the liberal media fortress derided all
allegations of a DNC conspiracy against Bernie Sanders and the millions of
Americans who #FeelTheBern, caricaturing these accusations as no different from
the Illuminati-Freemason-Rothschild-Lizard People. Articles like Bernie Sanders Fans’ DNC ‘Collusion’ Conspiracy Theory is
Embarrassing Garbage and Can we please stop with the Bernie Sanders conspiracy
theories? were staples of the campaign once it became clear
that the Berners were a real political force, and that the Sanders campaign
could actually pose a threat to the establishment’s preferred proxy, Hillary
Clinton.
And
with each new article the level of condescension and derision seemed to
increase to the point where Sanders’ supporters had been transformed into the
embarrassingly clichéd tinfoil-hat wearers of Alex Jones land. But here
we are, just a few months later, and Hillary Clinton has knelt for her
coronation as Queen of the imperial castle. And in the midst of the
insufferable Hollywood endorsements, the amnesiac revisionism, and the
identitarian phantasmagoria, something amazing happened on the internet: the
conspiracy theories were proven true.
Indeed, the Wikileaks emails show direct interventions against Bernie by
the DNC. For instance, in late May, just three weeks before the
all-important California primary, a DNC staffer emailed DNC Communications Director, Luis
Miranda, pitching him a story about Bernie’s campaign being “a mess.”
Specifically, the staffer wrote, “Wondering if there’s a good Bernie narrative
for a story, which is that Bernie never ever had his act together, that his
campaign was a mess…It’s not a DNC conspiracy, it’s because they never had
their act together.”
What
is particularly damning about the email is not that Bernie’s campaign was
disorganized (entirely plausible), but rather that DNC staffers and
communications director were attempting to manufacture and propagate news
stories with that narrative, rather than acting as the impartial party
functionaries that they shrilly proclaim themselves to be. In fact,
corporate media outlets did indeed pick up parts of that narrative in the days
and weeks leading up to the California primary, specifically the fact that
Bernie’s campaign was poorly organized in terms of delegate education and other
issues.
Even more egregious is the email from
Communications Director Luis Miranda to a number of high-ranking DNC officials,
including Wasserman-Schultz, in which he notes that the DNC was able to
suppress key information from this New York Times article. Miranda was
pleased that he was “able to keep him from including more on the JVF [Joint
Victory Fund], it has a mention in there, but between us and a conversation he
had with Marc Elias he finally backed off from focusing too much on that.”
This information is quite damning as it’s clear that Miranda, the
spokesman for the DNC, deliberately attempted to shield Clinton from media
criticism over the highly dubious “joint fundraising venture” the Joint Victory
Fund, which is essentially a Hillary-DNC fundraising machine. While the
JVF gets a passing mention in the article, there is no substantive examination
of it, nor is there any context or comparison to the Bernie Sanders campaign
whose fundraising was almost entirely based on small, individual
contributions. In contrast, JVF included on its list of donors the Pritzker Group, Saban
Capital Group, and other major players in finance capital and industry.
Perhaps this information might have been valuable to the American public trying
to decide whether to support Bernie or Hillary.
Or how about the Politico reporter who agreed to allow the DNC to review
his article about Clinton’s fundraising before it was published? Does
this strike you as real journalism? In an April 30, 2016 email,
National Press Secretary and Deputy Communications Director Mark Paustenbach
wrote to his boss Luis Miranda noting that Politico reporter Kenneth Vogel
“gave me his story ahead of time/before it goes to his editors…Let me know if
you see anything that’s missing and I’ll push back.”
In a
sadly predictable, and grossly unethical, move, the DNC seems to have worked
out deals with major media outlets that allowed them to censor corporate media
stories about the Clinton campaign, or at the very least to slant them so as to
make Clinton look like something less than the Voldemort of Wall Street and
capital.
But it goes much further, and indeed gets even more unethical, than just
collusion between corporate media and the DNC. The emails also reveal
attempts to smear Sanders with quite literally any information that might
damage him in key primary states. For instance, this
email exchange between top DNC officials shows that they
intended to “get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. [sic] He
had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist.
This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist
peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.” Clearly,
in Kentucky and West Virginia, the DNC wanted to use Sanders’s religious
beliefs, or lack thereof, against him. Such tactics are, to put it
bluntly, reprehensible.
And of
course we could go on and on with dozens of other emails demonstrating the
level of collusion within the DNC, and with its media partners, to effectively
undermine the Sanders campaign while propping up Clinton. I guess those
arrogant pundits who derisively referred to the “embarrassing conspiracy
theories” have some ‘splaining to do.
Why, Exactly, Is Everyone #WithHer?
For
veterans of US politics, it should be relatively obvious why Hillary Clinton
has been the clear darling of the establishment from the beginning of the
race. And, considering the Democratic Party is a wholly owned subsidiary
of Wall Street and the financial elites in the US, it almost goes without
saying why the DNC would carry water for the Clinton campaign. Her record
really speaks for itself.
Hillary
Clinton is an unabashed warmonger, a woman who has demonstrated time and again
her willingness to bomb, invade, and destroy nations all over the globe.
From championing her husband’s criminal bombing of Serbia, to supporting George
W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq, to being the principal cheerleader for bombing and
destroying Libya and Syria, Hillary’s devotion to the military-industrial
complex and the mentality of the Cold War is beyond dispute.
While running for Senate in 2000, Clinton explicated her foreign policy
outlook when, according the New York Times, “She cited American
involvement in Bosnia and Kosovo as examples of foreign engagements she favored
on moral and strategic grounds.” And, according to Hillary biographer
Gail Sheehy, Clinton proudly proclaimed “I urged [Bill Clinton] to bomb [Serbia].”
One could be forgiven for thinking these are the smug, egomaniacal claims of a
sociopath; they are, but they’re also the words of America’s likely next
president.
But aside from simply delighting in the death and destruction she can
rain down upon weaker nations, Hillary is also the standard-bearer for finance
capital and Wall Street. Her connections to Goldman Sachs and nearly
every major bank make her statements about reining in Wall Street both
laughable and deeply infuriating; there’s only so much cynicism a country can
take. So, wealthy benefactors like George Soros, the Pritzker family,
Haim Saban, and many others fall over themselves to line up behind the First
Woman PresidentTM just as they did behind The First Black
PresidentTM.
And this point must not be understated. Identity politics is one
of the principal levers by which the Democratic Party keeps liberal America in
line. Never mind that The First Black PresidentTM expanded
AFRICOM, killed the single most important African leader, continued the
oppression and exploitation of millions of Africans all over the continent,
presided over the rapid expansion of drone assassinations, and so much worse;
forget all that, I mean, he’s black. Similarly, Hillary is able to translate
her gender into political currency, one that allows the Democratic Party to
continue the charade that it is a party for everyone.
And of
course, who could forget economic policy? Clinton represents the best of
what Wall Street has to offer. She is a devout neoliberal, the high
priestess of the Church of Free Trade. She and her husband presided over
the passage of NAFTA which has devastated millions of Mexican families while
gutting the American industrial base, all the while making superprofits for Big
Agribusiness, Big Retail, and big banks.
In
effect, Clinton is quite similar to Obama in that both have an insatiable
appetite for war and the economic orthodoxy of neoliberalism. As such,
both are the quintessential Democrats: political snake-charmers whose smiles
and warm embraces hide the coldness of their hearts, whose devotion to the
multicultural rainbow belies their deep hatred of the working class and poor.
And of
course, it is imperialism abroad and neoliberalism at home that makes an
establishment leader. It is a reckless disregard for the rights of
ordinary Americans, as well as those around the world, that makes one
“Presidential.” It is a deep sociopathy that truly demonstrates that a
politician is ready for the office. So, given that, it would seem that
America is indeed #ReadyForHillary.
Eric
Draitser is the founder of StopImperialism.org and
host of CounterPunch Radio. He is an independent
geopolitical analyst based in New York City. You can reach him at
ericdraitser@gmail.com.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario