There was no violence in Nevada convention. I was there 8 hours – Nina Turner


RT America | May 18, 2016

Senator Bernie Sanders issued a stinging rebuke to the Democratic Party’s leadership for criticizing his supporters’ protests at the Nevada convention last weekend, saying it had used its power “to prevent a fair and transparent process from taking place.” The mainstream media has used the word “violence” to describe some political angst vented by Bernie backers that night. However, not everybody agrees with that assessment, as Nina Turner, national surrogate for the Bernie Sanders campaign, tells RT America’s Ed Schultz.

Find RT America in your area:
Or watch us online:


Who Is Slanting Our Presidential Debates?

DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. (photo: Lynne Sladky/AP)
DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. (photo: Lynne Sladky/AP)


Ronnie Dugger | Reader Supported News | February 7, 2016

iving candidates for President of the United States, including the seated president when seeking re-election, one minute or a minute and a half to answer questions from reporters on national TV is not a debate.

Standing up in a row a political party’s candidates for President for a reporter to single out any one of them to answer any question that reporter selects and words is not a debate.

A reporter or his or her network or newspaper deciding who among a party’s, say, three candidates for President goes onstage on national TV alone first, second, and last is not a debate.

A news organization or a political party deciding which confirmed candidates for President can or cannot take part in an official “debate” on the people’s publicly-owned airways is an unconstitutional misuse of our publicly-owned airways.

Read more

Why Did the DNC Let the Bernie-Hillary Tech Story Leak?

Senator Bernie Sanders with Secretary Clinton. (photo: Mandel Ngan/Getty)
Senator Bernie Sanders with Secretary Clinton. (photo: Mandel Ngan/Getty)


Charles Pierce | Esquire | Reader Supported News | December 18, 2015

A better question: Would it have leaked if the roles were reversed?


k, now, everyone, listen to me carefully. Take a deep breath. Keep your hands in plain sight, and take two steps away from the Intertoobz.

The breach occurred after a software problem at the technology company NGP VAN, which gives campaigns access to the voter data. The problem inadvertently made proprietary voter data of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign visible to others, according to party committee officials. The Sanders campaign said that it had fired a staff member who breached Mrs. Clinton’s data. But according to three people with direct knowledge of the breach, there were four user accounts associated with the Sanders campaign that ran searches while the security of Mrs. Clinton’s data was compromised.

Let us stipulate a few things. First, the DNC, under the barely perceptible leadership of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, has greased the skids for Hillary Rodham Clinton. (A debate on the Saturday night before Christmas, when half the country’s on an airplane going to visit the other half? Please.) Second, yes, it’s true, if the situation were reversed, and it was the Clinton campaign that had breached the Sanders campaign’s data, The New York Times would be screaming bloody murder and talking about a “culture” of slicker, and where’s there’s smoke etc. etc. Third, it’s true that, if I wanted to throw the Democratic primary campaign into a little chaos to distract attention from the fact that Tuesday night’s Republican debate more closely resembled a casting call by Roger DeBris, this is exactly the kind of story I would want to have out there. And, last, it’s true that, if I wanted to distract from the fact that Sanders on Thursday was endorsed by the Communication Workers of America, and by Democracy For America, this also would be exactly the kind of story I would want out there. So, all your paranoid speculations are as well-founded as paranoid speculations can be.

Read more

May the 2016 Elections Be Full of Angry Women Politicians

Hillary Clinton. (photo: Reuters)
Hillary Clinton. (photo: Reuters)

Jessica Valenti | The Guardian UK | Reader Supported News | March 4, 2015

f there’s one word that women in politics are accustomed to, it’s ‘angry’. Throughout history – from American suffragists to those in office today – women’s strong feelings about politics have long been treated like PMS, not passion. Even when women are legitimately, justifiably angry – and let’s be honest, female politicians have plenty to be pissed about – that anger is seen as a weakness.

But times are changing and, at the EMILY’s List conference on Tuesday, it seemed as if long-brewing and well-justified anger was ready to come out – emboldened, perhaps, by an increasingly feminist-friendly culture that is not likely to take sexist swipes laying down in 2016.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chair of the Democratic National Committee, told the audience Tuesday morning that “haters will still hate”, but that she’s looking forward to “kicking ass and taking names in 2016”. Former governor of Michigan Jennifer Granholm told a Dr Seuss style limerick that took hilarious but pointed swipes at Jeb Bush, Scott Walker and the GOP “clown car” of potential presidential candidates. And on a panel of “rising stars” – all local officials, all women of color -Boston city councilor Ayanna Pressley discussed her dismay that she can’t express her legitimate anger because of racist stereotypes.

Read more