Mediaboss Marketing

On Nov. 23, 2019, the Daily World Update website published an article positing that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had approved $4.8 million to be paid to the Clinton Foundation, a charity run by former President Bill and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, for impeachment consulting fees:

Nancy Pelosi Approves $4.8 Million In Impeachment Consulting Fees To Clinton Foundation

As if the impeachment of President Trump werent already silly enough, reports from our DC insiders indicate that theres one organization raking in a ton of cash from the operation: The Clinton Foundation. In department memos not released to the public, Nancy Pelosi is said to have more or less agreed to the consulting fees to the fake charity in the amount of nearly $5 million, because they have specific knowledge of this area.

This item was not a factual recounting of real-life events. The article originated with a website that describes its output as being humorous or satirical in nature, as follows:

Everything on this website is fiction. It is not a lie and it is not fake news because it is not real. If you believe that it is real, you should have your head examined. Any similarities between this sites pure fantasy and actual people, places, and events are purely coincidental and all images should be considered altered and satirical. See above if youre still having an issue with that satire thing.

The article was a play on impeachment proceedings then underway against President Donald Trump, as well as the fact that former President Clinton had been impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives in 1998. Trump was similarly impeached by the House on Dec. 18, 2019.

For background, here is why we sometimes write about satire/humor.

Excerpt from:
Did Pelosi Approve $4.8 Million in 'Impeachment Consulting Fees' to the Clinton Foundation? - Snopes.com

More specifically, do those Democratswho voted for Donald Trump, or the Green Partys Jill Stein, in 2016 wish now they had voted for Clinton?

The answer to this question is no doubt at the heart of persistent rumors that former Secretary of State and 2008/2016 also-ran Hillary Clinton is considering jumping into the race for the Democratic nomination once again.

Clinton has beendropping hints for weeks, albeit possibly in an effort to sell more of her recently published book Gutsy Women. But a new poll published this week shows thatHillary Clinton would be leading the Democratic field, if she were in it.

Clinton herself has more than a few reasons to consider a rematch against Donald Trump, not least of which is the way her stunning defeat still so obviously rankles.

Clinton has blamed her loss on everything from Russian interference- evengoing so far as to call Jill Stein a Russian asset -- to the Electoral College -- pointing out that she actually won by popular vote.

Her detractors, of which there have been no shortage in the Democratic Party since Clintons crushing defeat at the hands of a political non-entity like Donald Trump, arent as reticent on the subject of Clintons deficiencies.

They are quick to point out several campaign mistakes that helped doom her hopes at achieving the White House.

One such mistake that bears repeating was Clintons disastrous decision to classify potential Trump voters as a basket of deplorables. This statement would go on to haunt Clinton throughout the campaign and beyond.

Clinton critics are also eager to point out, in answer to her grousing about the Electoral College, that she should have run a smarter race.

It is certainly possible that had the Clinton campaign spent less time convincing voters who were already convinced in Blue states and more time convincing working-class voters on the fence in the Rust Belt, Hillary Clinton might be President today.

Then again, she might not be.

Because in addition to voting Democrats who broke ranks in 2016 to express their dissatisfaction with the Democratic Party and/or the status quo by rage-voting for Donald Trump, many Democratic voters stayed home in 2016.

Some did so out of disappointment over Bernie Sanders failing to cinch the nomination. Many Berners felt the DNC unfairly rigged its selection process to favor of its chosen nominee -- Hillary Clinton.

Other Democrats sat out the last election and failed to support the partys chosen nominee of Hillary Clinton for other reasons, many having to do with Clinton herself.Long before #MeToo dragged serial predators like Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby and Jeffery Epstein kicking and screaming out into the open, there was Bill Clinton.

The former President was problematic long before problematic became a buzzword. As agent provocateur, Pulitzer Prize winner, and son of a famous predator himself, Ronan Farrow has pointed out recently;there are credible accusations of rape against Bill Clinton.

Farrow also pointed out that Bill Clintons reputation was long overdue for reexamination.

And indeed, perhaps former President Clintons most infamous sexual exploitation and conquest played out in the public sphere. There is no question that Clintons inappropriate sexual relationship with a young White House intern crossed the line of mere impropriety into exploitation and abuse.

It is certainly possible that Bill Clinton has become too radioactive in the post-#MeToo era to be of any help at all to Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail. He would likely prove a hinderance as questions about his infidelities and misconduct with other women have long plagued Hillary Clinton.

In fact, it is the role Hilary Clinton herself played in helping keep Bill Clintons numerous accusers silent that would likely haunt her the most in a knock-down, drag out campaign fight against Donald Trump.

It is possible that, in the balance, the shortcomings of Hillary Clinton will prove inadequate to dissuade her from running. Among the many temptations to run for president again, thecurrent state of the Democratic field of Presidential contenders must be the greatest.

People have real questions about Joe Biden, and his son Hunters business dealings in the Ukraine and elsewhere are only the tip of the iceberg. Underneath questions of Isnt there anyone else? are the real concerns of voting Democrats.

Like former President Barack Obama, theyworry that Joe Biden simply isnt up to this challenge; theyworry that Biden will embarrass himself.

Mayor Pete Buttigieg has his eye on the middle ground soon to be vacated by Joe Biden, but Buttigiegs campaign has more than a few problems of its own.Pete Buttigieg is no Barack Obama. His support in the African American community is virtually non-existent and a series of sloppy mistakes havent made inroads look any more likely.

Worse still,Buttigieg plans to tax the Middle Class. Which, especially considering therecent economic upsurge most American Middle Class families are experiencing, is likely to be a deal-breaker.

The cool kids of the Democratic Partyhave completely turned on Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who apparently is still too much a Republican at heart for their tastes. The Democratic Socialists of America may be in full-throated support of Sen. Bernie Sanders, but in addition to suffering some recent serious health problems, the Sanders campaign is now a presidential campaign in name only.

Democratic mandarin and former President Barack Obama, massive Democratic coalition builder that he is, hasnt endorsed any presidential candidate currently in the race. Not his former Vice President Joe Biden, not even his protege Deval Patrick.

But Obama has come out swingingagainstsomeone. One person, in particular:Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Obama haspromised to actively campaign against Sanders, and considering the strength and level of support enjoyed by Barack Obama in the African American community, this is a death knell to any Democratic campaign.

All this must look very appealing to Hilary Clinton, who must see the upheaval as proof positive that she could enter the race on top and unite the warring factions.

Because meanwhile, impeachment is helping Donald Trump, and helping him where it hurts Democrats most.

Things are looking up for President Trump.

In thecrucial battleground states Democrats desperately need to carry in 2020, impeachment pollingshows it is support for the President,not support for Democratic efforts to remove him, that is gaining ground with voters.

Impeachment is also hitting Democrats where it counts: At the bank.

The Trump campaign is raising campaign cash hand over fist and has been since the moment House Democrats announced their latest impeachment gambit. Worse still, the Trump campaign isusingthat money to strategically run ads against Democrats in swing districts specifically condemning Democratic impeachment efforts.

This one-two punch may be all it takes to not only put Donald Trump back in the White House in 2020, but also cost House Speaker Nancy Pelosi her majority in the House.

That is a scenario Democrats must prevent at any cost.

Even if that means giving Hillary Clinton another shot at defeating Donald Trump in 2020.

(contributing writer, Brooke Bell)

(Munr Kazmir is a contributing writer on Medium. Contributing writer is Brooke Bell.) Photo:Gage Skidmore. Prepped for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

Continue reading here:
The One That Got Away - Will Hillary Run? - City Watch

File Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is pictured. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

Judicial Watch plans to attend a hearing in federal court, which will decide the direction of their Hillary Clinton discovery plan. On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth will consider whether Judicial Watch will be allowed to question Hillary Clinton and her top aides under oath about Benghazi as well as her emails.

The government watchdog group will also be asking the courts permission to subpoena Google in order to gain access to the private account allegedly used by Clinton and her aides. The president of Judicial Watch, Tom Fitton, claims they are pursuing newly discovered evidence in the case.

Judicial Watch hopes the hearing will allow the conservative activist group to uncover substantial information concerning Clintons deleted emails and mishandled procedures.

Read more:
Judicial Watch to attend hearing in federal court amid ongoing discovery into Hillary Clinton email scandal - One America News Network

News Item "Daily Voice" featured Pace University in "Vanessa Williams Will Join Hillary, Chelsea Clinton in Westchester Appearance" 12/19/2019

"Daily Voice" featured Pace University in "Vanessa Williams Will Join Hillary, Chelsea Clinton in Westchester Appearance"

Former Miss America Vanessa Williams will join Hillary and Chelsea Clinton at Pace University in Pleasantville as they wrap up their book tour for the year.

The Clintons have been making the rounds, publicizing about The Book of Gutsy Women: Favorite Stories of Courage and Resilience, which looks at the lives of women in history who have made a difference, ranging from social activists and political figures to writers and Olympians.

For their final stop on the tour, the Clintons will be joined by Westchester resident Williams and Pace University President Marvin Krislov at Pace University on Wednesday, Dec. 18.

Doors for the sold-out event will open at 6 p.m. at the Ann and Alfred Goldstein Health, Fitness and Recreation Center on Bedford Road in Pleasantville.

Hillary Clinton and Williams are both residents of the Town of New Castle residents - Clinton in the hamlet of Chappaqua and Williams in the hamlet of Millwood.

Read the full Daily Voice article.

View original post here:
"Daily Voice" featured Pace University in "Vanessa Williams Will Join Hillary, Chelsea Clinton in Westchester Appearance" - Pace...

Turnout in Minnesotas smallest counties averaged only 69 percent, compared to statewide turnout of about 75 percent.

As the presidents re-election campaign looks toward 2020, its hoping to win Minnesota and a handful of swing states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania that could decide the election. One strategy it plans to employ is one not typically used by presidential hopefuls: focusing on the smaller counties most campaigns overlook.

The plan was outlined by Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, campaign manager Brad Parscale and others last week, according to Axios.

Tiny counties traditionally overlooked by candidates helped deliver Trump his 2016 victories in states like Wisconsin (where the smallest 48 counties = 22% of the statewide vote) and Pennsylvania (where the smallest 45 counties = 20% of the statewide vote), the outlet reported.

In 2016, Hillary Clinton won Minnesota, albeit narrowly, by running up votes in the Twin Cities metro. Can Trump win Minnesota in 2020 by doing the reverse?

To understand this strategy, it helps to take a quick look at vote counts by Minnesota region.

12 percent of votes statewide in the 2016 presidential race came from the Twin Cities Minneapolis and St. Paul. Trump struggled there.

44 percent came from the Twin Cities suburbs, here defined as the seven-county Twin Cities metro area minus Minneapolis and St. Paul. Hillary Clinton won in the suburbs by a more narrow margin, but 2018 election results and more recent polls suggest Trump isnt all that popular in the burbs.

Another 44 percent came from Greater Minnesota, defined here as the 80 counties outside the metro area. Trump won by a significant margin there.

Votes for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump by Minnesota region, 2016

Source: Minnesota Secretary of State

If you were the Trump campaign looking to win over Minnesotans, where would you try to pick up votes?

Probably Greater Minnesota. While there arent a lot of votes in many of the counties outside the metro area relative to the Twin Cities, there is a lot of room for improvement in voter turnout in those counties, said Eric Ostermeier, a research fellow at the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs and the author of Smart Politics.

Axios reported the Trump campaign is looking to increase turnout in counties that comprised about 20 percent of the population in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

Ostermeier applied that metric to Minnesota, looking at the smallest counties that make up about a fifth of our states population. There are 61 of them, ranging from Traverse County (pop: 3,308) to McLeod (population 35,873).

Trump carried 58 of those 61 counties, but their turnout averaged only 69 percent, compared to statewide turnout of about 75 percent, Ostermeier said.

Compare that to the seven-county Twin Cities area, where most counties went for Clinton and turnout was above 75 percent.

There is, I think, greater room for improvement in voter turnout in Trump counties versus Clinton counties, Ostermeier said.

Its conceivable that turnout in smaller, low-turnout counties could inch up as far as 70 to 75 percent enough to potentially deliver a victory to Trump. Less likely is for voter turnout in metro-area counties to increase to 85 or 90 percent.

There are a few factors that could stymie the strategy. First, some people who voted for Trump in 2016 may not do so again.

The flipping of votes from Republican to Democratic nominee X could ultimately be a bigger factor than any potential increase we see in voter turnout, Ostermeier said.

Second, the Democrats could nominate someone more popular than Hillary Clinton. In one sense, that wouldnt be hard. Clinton was uniquely unpopular in Greater Minnesota, receiving only about 35 percent of votes in the region (Al Franken got 39 percent in 2008).

But voters in Greater Minnesota have historically favored moderate Democrats, as their votes for Amy Klobuchar and Tim Walz would suggest. Its possible the average Greater Minnesota voter wont be interested in a party they perceive as moving to the left or a candidate that is further left.

The center of the Democratic Party has moved further to the left than in 2016, so that could nullify any personal appeal (a Democratic candidate) may have among those voters just because of a greater turnoff to the Democratic party overall, Ostermeier said.

Another factor is new voters who have turned 18 since the 2016 election. A large share of young people who vote will likely vote for the Democratic nominee. But the open question is how many of them will actually vote (historically, not all that many).

Even if the Trump campaign can mobilize older voters who didnt turn out in 2016 to get out and vote next year, it might not overcome the young voter influx in 2020, Ostermeier said.

As to whether the small counties strategy is worth pursuing, Ostermeier says hes not sure.

If it is successful in driving turnout in those counties, I dont think it can overcome the other factors and flip the state for the Republicans, he said.

But the Trump campaign is bullish on its odds for victory in Minnesota.

The RNC and Trump Campaign have invested over $350 million to develop a sophisticated data operation to identify voters in key states such as Minnesota and Wisconsin. As a result, we have a huge advantage over the Democrats and will help elect Republicans up and down the ballot, Trump Victory spokesperson Samantha Cotten said in an emailed statement.

Read more:
Can Trump win Minnesota by increasing turnout in small counties? - MinnPost