By suing Wikileaks. the DNC has shown how desperate they are to blame everyone but themselves

By   /   April 23, 2018  /   9 Comments

TDB recommends Voyager - Unlimited internet @home as fast as you can get

Opponents of Trump like to point to the Russian interference in the election to explain Trump winning, but I think blaming Russia for ‘hacking’ the US Election is deeply counter productive.

The DNC are suing Wikileaks, Russia and Trump for conspiring to disrupt the 2016 election…

The Democratic Party on Friday sued President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, the Russian government and the Wikileaks group, claiming a broad illegal conspiracy to help Trump win the 2016 election.

The multimillion-dollar lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court says that “In the Trump campaign, Russia found a willing and active partner in this effort” to mount “a brazen attack on American Democracy,” which included Russian infiltration of the Democratic Party computer network.

The Trump campaign, according to the lawsuit, “gleefully welcomed Russia’s help.”

Opponents of Trump like to point to the Russian interference in the election to explain Trump winning, but I think blaming Russia for ‘hacking’ the US Election is deeply counter productive.

Firstly, it’s just outrageous that the American’s who have committed coups, electoral fraud and mass deceptions on 81 other nations over the years are in any position to lecture or complain about interfering in other peoples elections.

Secondly, it allows the Democrats off the hook. Instead of acknowledging they ran a terrible candidate and fielded neoliberal policies that hurt the very workers they had simply assumed would vote for them, the Democrats can avoid scrutiny of their own rigged primary process, the manner in which Bernie Sanders was unfairly treated and their hollow policies by blaming it all on Russia.

Newsflash to the Democrats – Trump didn’t win because of Russia, he won because you failed to appreciate how your embrace of neoliberal globalisation hurt the very voters you needed the most.

One estimate puts the budget of Russian interference in the election via social media advertising at $250 000. With all due respect for American Democracy, if you can influence an election with a mere $250 000, you have way bigger problems than Putin.

We can scream racist and sexist as much as we like at Trump voters, but when Trump wooed Union families, women and the working poor in such huge numbers, something else needs to be examined as the reason this malignant tumour of a human being has been forced upon us all.

The free market globalisation that the Democrats embraced has robbed the domestic working classes of their dignity and economic ability to survive. Bernie Sanders understood this which is why he would have been able to woo those voters Trump needed back to the Democrats and beat Trump, but the vile corruption within the Democrats (who played to the elites within the Party) robbed Sanders of his nomination in a rigged system set up to prevent a populist left winger ever winning the candidacy.

By putting the Identity Politics of being the first Woman to win the Presidency over the economic needs of the poor, the Democrats handed the election to a snake oil merchant like Trump.

Refusing to acknowledge failed economic policy and corruption within the Democrats in allowing Trump to win makes the chances of him winning again more likely, not less likely.

By suing Wikileaks. the DNC has shown how desperate they are to blame everyone but themselves for losing.

Their rigged identity politics nominee selection process

Their neoliberal anti worker economic policy & their own failed candidate.

Wikileaks wasn’t the enemy, DNC hubris was.


Want to support this work? Donate today
Follow us on Twitter & Facebook


  1. WILD KATIPO says:

    … ” Their rigged identity politics nominee selection process

    Their neoliberal anti worker economic policy & their own failed candidate”…


    The above in a nutshell.

    And actually , those who pushed the Clinton bandwagon were not even nationalists. They were globalists. And neo liberalism is just an extension and a tool for globalization. That’s all it ever was. Those people were never interested in the peoples welfare , they were interested in building and maintaining a global network of power.

    People have wised up since the 1980’s.

    We’ve seen the destruction of economy’s and how its always the working poor that pay the price. We’ve seen the dilapidated social services, we’ve seen the colossal hypocrisy of those in power with their obscene wealth while people are homeless and starving…

    Did they really think people would come back for more of the same ?!!?

    And it doesn’t matter what party is if its Left or Right or any other permutation,… people don’t want anymore of it.

    People are not interested in divisive identity politics, – they’re interested in jobs and job security , putting food on the table , saving for their retirement, putting their children through affordable education , being able to comfortably afford a mortgage , being able to afford a well deserved holiday , and still having a bank account after it…

    Where do these neo liberal lizards get off in thinking people are going to accept their evil little neo liberal ideology just so that only they can enjoy a life while the rest have to slave to support these leeches?

    And that’s why the American people voted Trump.

    They’ve had a gutsful of the lies of the neo liberals.

    • Strypey says:

      I’ve been wondering recently, if the 2016 race for US President had been between Sarah Palin and Bernie Sanders, would the identitarians still have been telling us to vote for a neo-liberal warmonger, just for the empty symbolism of finally having a President without a penis? I agree it’s disgraceful that women haven’t been roughly 50% of all US Presidents so far, just as it’s disgraceful that black people haven’t been roughly 10-15% of all Presidents, and that Hispanics and Latinos haven’t been President roughly 20% of the time. But you don’t fix that by cheerleading right-wing women, black people, or hispanic/ latinos over much more left-wing candidates, even if they do happen to be old white men (which they can’t help, they were born that way …)

  2. im right says:

    You gotta wonder when the DNC head honcho’s finally say to Hillary ‘enough is enough’ and tell her to stop with the endless book tours and media interviews, she is doing the DNC no favours and, I suspect, Trump gains out of the endless finger pointing Hillary is doing. Her latest gaff being that the women who didn’t vote for her were being influenced/told by their male relatives (husbands/sons etc), she still cannot believe that all women didn’t vote for her and is basically attacking and making up reasons they didn’t.

    • Siobhan says:

      With Perez, Pelosi and Schumer in charge that is never going to happen.

      They are what they are and have no intention to change. Or even save themselves by giving the Progressive Democrats more air than they really have to.
      Nor, it would seem, do they possess the good sense to try and hide their faults and terrible agenda.
      Which is, I guess, something we can be thankful for.

  3. Nick J says:

    To use Wildes analogy on Fox hunting, “the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable”…

    If this gets to Court the DNC will have to furnish some evidence. To date apart from conjecture this has been scarcer than hens teeth.

  4. garibaldi says:

    The Dems seem to have learnt nothing and are staring at another defeat if they put up Clinton or a clone. Are they incapable of the radical changes they need to make to defeat the Repugs? It certainly looks like it.

  5. Strypey says:

    This Weird Al style parody could have been written specifically for this piece of news:

  6. savenz says:

    Agree 100% – the Democrats are out of touch – if they had made a deal with Sanders they would be the President. They were too arrogant to do that and lost the election.

    In NZ Labour and Greens did a deal and that’s why they are in power. You have to collaborate if you are on the margins of power, not gamble away that you will get enough votes to win – nobody likes those that gamble and can’t share power and ideas in parliament, in particular they are out of touch!

  7. Olwyn says:

    At the moment, the left, as personified by Corbyn and Sanders, is making a bid for legitimacy as much as for office. Under Neoliberalism, Thatcherism, The Washington Consensus, or whatever you want to call it, the delegitimisation of the left has been a measure of their success. Hence Thatcher’s counting Tony Blair as a victory – so long as the parliamentary left agreed to play by the new rules, the core gains of her revolution would go politically unchallenged. Up until 2008 that kept them constrained but not devoid of purpose. There were still significant socially liberal wins to be had, and it was still possible to see these wins as if they were in some way continuous with economic wins, as a bit of economic wiggle room still remained.

    But since 2008 and the imposition of targeted austerity, that option has become exhausted. With much of social liberalism now an accepted part of the status quo, and very little room for challenging austerity while at the same time remaining insiders, the adaptive left is left with very little to offer. They also lack allies, apart from certain sections of the middle class who are cut from the same cloth as themselves, and are less numerous than their noise-level suggests. The US Democrats prefer to blame anyone but themselves for this state of affairs, and rather than try to rebuild a viable constituency, prefer to pitch for a new gig, drumming up support for foreign regime-change wars, on socially liberal v authoritarian grounds. Anything to retain roles within the establishment, and avoid finding themselves out in the cold with a left whose core struggle is against delegitimisation.

Authorised by Martyn Bradbury, The Editor, TheDailyBlog,