- Tonight's Forecast Inside the Golden Globes: Lots of Snow with a Chance of Trump Tears
The entire star-studded audience at the Golden Globes practically cried in unison, after Meryl Streep took to the mic to lament over an incident that happened last year regarding what she thought was Donald Trump mocking a disabled reporter.
The rift was with NY Times reporter Serge Kovaleski, who said Trump was lying about witnessing Muslims celebrating in New Jersey after 9/11 — which later proved out to be true. Without delving into old news, Trump said he wasn’t making fun of Serge’s physical disabilities, but instead mocking a reporter who was flustered.
I have no idea who this reporter, Serge Kovalski [sic], is, what he looks like or his level of intelligence. I don’t know if he is J.J. Watt or Muhammad Ali in his prime or somebody of less athletic or physical ability. Despite having one of the all-time great memories, I certainly do not remember him.
I merely mimicked what I thought would be a flustered reporter trying to get out of a statement he made long ago. If Mr. Kovaleski is handicapped, I would not know because I do not know what he looks like. If I did know, I would definitely not say anything about his appearance.
In light of all the horseshit taking place in the world, the fact that the United States is engaged in armed conflicts in 8 different countries and is led by a man who has literally destroyed the middle east, relations with Russia, and has divided this country along matters of race, gender and orientation more than any person in the history of the country, as well as compiling more debt than all of the previous Presidents combined, Meryl Streep decided that Trump mocking a reporter was the most important thing to talk about during her 5 minute speech at the Golden Globes tonight.
Once icy cold, floating through the air with glee, the snow flakes have hit the ground now and have melted.Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com
- Yuan Is Crashing (Again)
The volatility in the Chinese currency has gone from the sublime to the ridiculous. After exploding 21 handles stronger in the biggest PBOC-engineered short-squeeze in history – erasing the entire post-election sell-off – offshore Yuan is now collapsing once again, down 350 pips tonight (and over 10 big figures from Thursday's highs). While interbank rates have calmed down, the rush to exit the currency has not…
The last two days are the biggest drop in offshore Yuan since Aug 2015's devaluation… as PBOC weakens its fix by the most sine June 2016.
Pushing historical volatility to its highest since the Aug 2015 devaluation…
For some context, this level of volatility is over 10 standard deviations away from the pre-Aug 2015 norms.
Notably the moves accelerate afterPBOC Advisor Fan Gang told Bloomberg TV…
- *PBOC WANTS TO SEE FX RESERVES REDUCE SMOOTHLY, GRADUALLY: FAN
- *CHINA POLICY MAKERS NOT LIKELY GO FURTHER ON OUTFLOW CURBS: FAN
- *YUAN OVERVALUED IN PAST 3-4 YEARS AGAINST DOLLAR: FAN
- *CHINA POLICY MAKERS NOT LIKELY TO DROP INTERVENTION: FAN
- *USE OF YUAN HAS INCREASED DESPITE RECENT DEPRECIATION: FAN
- *CHINA NEEDS LESS FX RESERVE AFTER YUAN'S INCLUSION IN SDR: FAN
Which was followed by the state-run Global Times newspaper says in an English-language editorial, saying that the Chinese people will demand its government to “take revenge” if Donald Trump reneges on the one-China policy after becoming U.S. President.
- US Aristocracy Panics That Maybe Trump Is Serious
Submitted by Eric Zuesse via Strategic-Culture.org,
On January 2nd, the U.S. Republican Party’s Wall Street Journal headlined «Tensions Within GOP Rise Over How to Handle Russia», and reported that the policy toward Russia by the incoming Republican President Donald Trump is being opposed not only by Democrats in the U.S. Congress, but also by some Republicans, and perhaps even by enough Republicans to jeopardize confirmation of his nominee for U.S. Secretary of State, as well as some nominees for other crucial diplomatic and military positions.
A key insightful passage in that news-report was: «‘What you are seeing on Russia within the Republican Party is in some ways more a symptom of realignment across the board within American political parties,’ said Matthew Rojansky, director of the Washington-based Kennan Institute. ‘This speaks to something very critical that’s going on in our political system right now.’»
Trump is being significantly opposed by both Parties regarding his foreign policies, even though his domestic policies are being opposed on a far more partisan basis, by Democrats, and have a higher chance of congressional passage than his international initiatives do, because of the almost-solid support for his domestic policies on the part of Republican members of Congress — and because Republicans control both the Senate and the House.
The «realignment across the board within American political parties» is actually a realignment only in the field of foreign policy — not at all in domestic policy. What used to be «Republican foreign policy» ever since the time of Richard Nixon, has been called «neoconservatism» — referring to a hard line against communism and then against Russia and any country that’s friendly toward Russia — but the incoming Republican President Trump campaigned consistently against neoconservatism, and now Democrats are almost solidly neocons, while some Republicans are actually joining the Republican President in condemning neocons.
Whereas Trump is generally called «conservative» on his domestic policy statements, he could possibly turn out to be more of a «progressive» than his Democratic Party predecessor, President Barack Obama, was, regarding foreign affairs. And this terrifies the U.S. aristocracy in both of the political Parties, because the U.S. aristocracy — both its Republicans and its Democrats — has been solidly neoconservative: they are virtually united, on this, against Trump.
The U.S. aristocracy control not only the major American corporations, but all influential ‘news’ media, and their respective ‘news’media; and their shared fear and loathing for incoming U.S. President Donald Trump is clear, even though he himself is one of them. Nobody knows what will happen to the U.S. government under his stewardship, but the fear amongst almost all of the other aristocrats is that maybe Trump hasn’t only been pretending to want a ‘populist’ government — they fear that he might really have such revolutionary intentions. They are consequently afraid: might it really be the case that a revolution — especially one transforming America’s foreign policies, which are the policies that are of the greatest interest to aristocrats (more even than domestic policies are) — will be led by a member of their own class? Is the ruling class — the thousand or so of them in the U.S. — perhaps now splitting, in a way that is far more meaningful than the merely superficial (rhetorical) distinctions that still remain between America’s two major political Parties, the Republicans and the Democrats?
The old ideological political alliances within the United States have now utterly broken down, and the reason is that in recent decades, both the right and the left had been controlled behind the scenes, by America’s billionaires and centi-millionaires, who are virtually unanimous on some policy-issues (so that the U.S. has a one-party government on these matters), with no significant ideological dissent amongst the U.S. aristocracy on those key issues, especially about continuing the old ideological Cold War against communism, switched now into a purely nationalistic and increasingly hot war against Russia, as allegedly an evil and imperialistic nation in ways that the United States itself is supposedly not (but actually is even more so than Russia or any other nation in the world, and widely recognized as such, except inside the United States itself, where the aristocracy’s ‘news’ media hide this ugly nationalistic fact about the land they control — the fact of America’s being the world’s most aggressive nation).
America’s super-rich have no objection against the government that they control conquering others, like the Iraq-invasion in 2003, and the U.S. coup overthrowing and replacing the democratically elected and Moscow-friendly President of that country in 2014, and aiding jihadists in Syria to overthrow Syria’s pro-Russian secular government; and the phone-tapping of all Western leaders including Angela Merkel and generally practicing cyber-invasions everywhere in the world — but they and their agents allege that Russia is doing these things even worse than America is, and needs to be punished by the ‘virtuous’ U.S. government for (allegedly) doing what the U.S. actually does far more than any other nation in the world.
Though Trump has reversed himself on many things that threaten the U.S. aristocracy, such as by his saying he won’t, after all, prosecute Hillary Clinton for her crimes (which were never really investigated under Obama’s regime — and protecting the legal immunity of aristocrats is crucial to the aristocracy of both political Parties), Trump still hasn’t – now just days before entering the White House – reversed himself regarding his intention to improve relations with Russia.
Becoming even more hostile toward Russia is almost a unanimous goal of the U.S. aristocracy. They’re thus rebelling against him, in their ‘news’ media, and they won’t stop trying to cripple his Presidency unless and until he relents on this, turns around, and continues, ever-hotter than before, their (under Obama, increasing) ’Cold War’ against Russia: going beyond even what President Obama has been doing (coups, invasions, sanctions, etc.), aiming to replace the Russian government’s allies by the American government’s allies, and thus to isolate and weaken Russia, ultimately to take over Russia itself.
During the early years of the Cold War, America’s Republican Party and their ‘news’ media, especially insisted upon increasing the war against the Soviet Union; but, now, in the purely nationalistic war against Russia, it’s instead Democratic Party politicians and ‘news’ media, who are especially fervid to conquer Russia. Republican Party ‘news’ media, such as Fox ‘News’, are now considerably less hateful toward Russia, no longer obsessed against it, like the Democratic Party’s ‘news’ media have become — thereby switching political roles.
Consequently, too, for example, the Democratic Party’s Washington Post is doing everything they can to encourage U.S. conquest of Russia, such as by spreading fake ‘news’ stories against the few small independent Western newsmedia that are pointing out the lies (especially the ones against Russia) in such media-giants; and some of the Republican Party’s ‘news’media now are even doing in-depth actual news-reporting about the fraudulence of the Democratic Party’s ‘news’media, on these matters that are of such intense interest to America’s aristocrats.
Excellent examples of this phenomenon are provided by the various ‘news’media of the rightwing-populist Alex Jones, which featured, on New Year’s Day, the video «Dems Want War With Russia To Stop Trump», and an associated investigative news report from their Mikael Thalen, «Washington Post Stirs Fear After False Report of Power Grid Hack by Russia», exposing the WP’s lying propaganda for «War With Russia» — Democrats’ (and a few Republicans’) lies basically to promote unsubstantiated allegations by the Obama regime, that ‘Russian hacking’ is a danger both to American ‘democracy’, and to American national security.
That «War With Russia» video (at 5:00-) presents the futurist, Gerald Celente, discussing liberal Democrats who were saying, totally without evidence, such things as »Vermonters and all Americans should be both alarmed and outraged that one of the world’s leading thugs, Vladimir Putin, has been attempting to hack our electric grid, which we rely upon to support our quality of life, economy, health, and safety.» The infamous 1950s Republican, Joseph R. McCarthy, has thus non-ideologically returned from the grave, now, in the guise of liberal Democrats (or should that instead be ‘Democrats’?), as part of the U.S. aristocracy’s war to force the Republican President, Donald Trump, to join the tradition that the Republican President George Herbert Walker Bush established, on 24 February 1990, of treating Russia as being America’s enemy, no longer communism as being America’s enemy.
These people simply can’t draw enough of other people’s blood. Bram Stoker might be shocked that reality has thus produced ghouls who would make Stoker’s own legendary vampires seem like angels by comparison. Will Trump perform the role of Stoker’s hero, Abraham van Helsing here, or instead become just another of the vampires himself (which all of America’s major, and most of its minor, ‘news’media are demanding)?
- "Unequivocally Bad?" Gas Prices Soar Over 20% YoY – Most Since 2011
In December 2014, as gas prices had plunged over 20% YoY, Janet Yellen proclaimed "from the standpoint of the U.S… the decline we've seen in oil prices is likely to be, on net, a positive," and that narrative of slumping gas prices being "unequivocally good" for Americans was spewed everywhere across linear-thinking mainstream media. So we wonder, with gas prices up 22% year-over, the fastest spike since 2011, is that "unequivocally bad" for America?
Remember when Janet Yellen, and all the tenured economists in her circles said that plunging gas prices are great for the consumer?
The dramatic plunge in oil prices might be spooking some investors, but Janet Yellen isn't worried at all.
The Federal Reserve chief believes oil tumbling is like a tax cut for American consumers.
"From the standpoint of the U.S. and U.S. outlook, the decline we've seen in oil prices is likely to be, on net, a positive," said Yellen at a press conference on Wednesday.
"It's good for families, for households. It's putting more money in their pockets," she said.
"On balance, I would see these developments as a positive," she said.
Well, as we noted last week, as GasBuddy warned of "sticker-shock" – as motorists will shell out $52 billion more over the course of the year compared to 2016, we are about to find out just how bad for the consumer rising prices will be.
Retail gas prices surged again last week, with the average price for regular gasoline at U.S. pumps rising 11.97c to $2.3777/gal, according to Lundberg Survey.
This is a 20.6% year-over-year surge – the biggest since October 2011.
By Janet Yellen's logic, the 20-plus percent surge in gas prices means "less money in Americans' pockets" and as a final reminder, this is what happened to the US Macro-economic data, the last time gas prices surged at the current pace…
Trilby Lundberg, president of Lundberg Survey, explains there are two primary causes to rise in average retail price:
- "Retail gasoline has been catching up to earlier crude price rises”, and
- "More states added gasoline tax hikes and federal regulations reduced amount of sulfur in gasoline by two- thirds, both effective Jan. 1"
We wonder what Janet Yellen will have to say about this 'drag' on the consumer… or is it now an indication of the 'confidence' in the US economy?
- Ron Paul Sums Up Nobel-Peace-Prize-Winning President Obama In One Short Sentence
Following our discussion of the unprecedented bombing-fest that has been undertaken during President Obama's reign…
Seven years after being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples," despite having been in office for less than one year and having pretty much no actual, tangible foreign diplomacy accomplishments at the time, President Obama will depart the White House having dropped 26,171 bombs on foreign countries around the world in 2016, 3,027 more than 2015.
According to an analysis of Defense Department data from the Council on Foreign Relations, a non-partisan think tank, the majority of Obama's 2016 bombs were dropped on Syria and Iraq. Meanwhile, Afghanistan, a country President Obama vowed U.S. troops would evacuate completely by the end of his Presidency, was also bombed over 1,300 times, a 40% increase over 2015. Per McClatchy DC:
The U.S. dropped 79 percent of the anti-Islamic State group coalition bombs in Syria and Iraq, totaling 24,287. That figure, along with others analyzed by CFR, is likely lower than the actual number dropped because one airstrike can involved multiple bombs.
Obama did authorize a troop surge in Afghanistan — a conflict he pledged to end during his campaign — where the U.S. dropped 1,337 bombs in 2016. There are currently 8,400 U.S. troops left in the country, more than Obama initially wanted to keep there at the end of his term. The U.S. only dropped 947 bombs in Afghanistan in 2015.
The U.S. also dropped more bombs in Libya in 2016 than it did in 2015. Nearly 500 bombs were dropped in the North African country that has essentially been ungoverned since the fall of dictator Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. He was captured and killed during the Libyan Civil War, kicked off by the Arab Spring protests that also began the Syrian conflict.
Ron Paul opined on the farce via his Facebook page…
Barack Obama started with a Nobel Peace Prize and is ending his presidency with the Pentagon's Distinguished Public Service Medal.
Sounds about right for a president who bombed 7 nations and became the first in U.S. history to be at war every single day of his eight year administration.
Just remember America, as Obama signs 'The Ministry of Truth' act into reality, "War is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength."
- On Russian Hacking, The Only Narrative That Matters Is Truth
Authored by Davide Battistella,
Excuse me for wanting to point out the obvious, but sometimes the obvious gets very lost in the web of narratives spun by the master narrator inside the White House. Forgive me, but are we not losing the idea that the only narrative that really matters is that all of the information “LEAKED” was obtained through a simple fishing e-mail sent to John Podesta. See their own words here:
Somehow this has been converted into words like “HACKING” (ps it is not hacking when it involves your own ineptitude or stupidity) into “Russian actors”, “digital fingerprints” or any other slew of gobbledyspeak they can come up with for wanting desperately to hide a simple fact: the truth is in the e-mails.
Notice nobody is disputing the contents of the email leaks, they just want to complain about the fact that it was stolen by Russians, though if the passwords were freely given away it’s hard to call it hacking.
Just to be clear a hack is defined this way.
“Computer hacking refers to the practice of modifying or altering computer software and hardware to accomplish a goal that is considered to be outside of the creator’s original objective. Those individuals who engage in computer hacking activities are typically referred to as ‘hackers‘.”
That is completely different from entering an account to which a party freely gave away the password and downloading the data for say an “inbox”. So don’t confuse hacking with the granting of access through being ill informed.
The reason all of this becomes important is simple, it’s leading the world into potentially very dangerous conflict. This isn’t something that should be taken lightly and you have to go to the WHY? Why is it so important to divert people from the contents of the e-mails and point them instead to the way they were obtained. It’s for war mongering purposes.
The MSM is going right along with it too. Have we heard nearly as much about the theft and publication of Donald Trumps tax returns as published by the New York Times?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html
Who is investigating the “hostile actors” from within the IRS who might have illegally stolen, copied and provided documents to the New York Times who then did barley more that what Wikileaks did with the Podesta e-mails.
At least Wikileaks published a pristine, searchable archive, the kind you could search in your local public library. In a crowdsourcing age, it is incredible what can be uncovered in a shot amount of time.
But it is different now. Wikileaks expects “professional” journalists to do their jobs, pour through the information and uncover everything from the salacious, the banal and the illegal. Why did this not happen with the wikileaks, but it was all hands on deck to pour over illegally obtained tax returns of a private citizen. Perhaps MSM credibility is at the heart of the issue? Not sure.
People consume information differently now and have many outlets to weigh before forming an opinion and that is a narrative busting option.
There remains only one defense, attack the messenger, lie and divert attention. So you can’t dismiss the contents of the wikileaks, you can only call Assange a pedophile, place him under house arrest, tell the world that Russia did the following (and I am following your logic here “intelligence” community/narrative spinners)
- The Russians sent a phishing e-mail to John Podesta and he responded with his password.
- The Russians downloaded all the information in his inbox.
- The Russians found a third party who new Jullian Assange and arranged for that third party to deliver the contents of that archive to wikileaks.
- Wikileaks released the information day after day and about 120 million and Americans followed that story closely enough that based on that leak (and maybe the DNC one as well) decided that they could not vote democrat in the election.
- Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but lost the electoral college by losing key “shoe in” democratic stronghold manufacturing states where jobs have been lost, people are hurting and decided voted for change, not because of those reasons but because somehow Russia managed to release true information to the American public.
While all this was happening President Obama knew about it and told Putin to “cut it out” or you he would be in trouble after the election, after we try some recounts and after we try to intimate the electoral college, but before I leave office. Maybe I will throw in a fake story from the Washington post that Russia tried to hack the power grid on Christmas day in Vermont as well, just to get folks really fired up.
This entire transition process demonstrates a complete lack of class and childish behaviour by the outgoing administration. That is the only way to describe it. Sore losers who demostrate abolutely no class, no respect for process or really for the American people who democratically elected Donal Trump in a fair process.
Folks don’t get bamboozled, remember, your President told you this when the narrative suited him.
President Obama,
“One of the great things about America’s democracy is we have a vigorous, sometimes bitter political contest and when it’s done, historically, regardless of party, the person who loses the election congratulates the winner, who reaffirms our democracy and we move forward.
That’s how democracy survives because we recognize that there’s something more important than any individual campaign. And that is making sure that the integrity and trust in our institutions sustains itself.
Because democracy, by definition, works by consent, not by force. I have never seen, in my lifetime or in modern political history, any presidential candidate trying to discredit the elections and the election process before votes have even taken place.
It’s unprecedented. It happens to be based on no facts; every expert, regardless of political party, regardless of ideology, conservative or liberal, who has ever examined these issues in a serious way, will tell you that instances of significant voter fraud are not to be found, that — keep in mind, elections are run by state and local officials, which means that there are places like Florida, for example, where you’ve got a Republican governor, whose Republican appointees are going to running and monitoring a whole bunch of these election sites.”
That was on October 19th of 2016.
- Twitter Suspends Martin Shkreli for Trolling a Reporter
I haven’t seen any of Martin’s tweets ever since he blocked me for calling out his utter bullshit with Kalobios. Apparently, he’s been very busy stalking some liberal reporter on Twitter, goading and trolling her to the point that @Jack had to step in and put an end to the madness.
How is this allowed @jack pic.twitter.com/Wof8MlYHTL
— Lauren Duca (@laurenduca) January 8, 2017
Have a closer look at his homage to Lauren Duca.
Is Twitter a little fucking obsessed with controlling their community? Absolutely. Back in the old days I felt very comfortable telling people to ‘DIE IN A FUCKING RAGING FIRE’ or to ‘GET EATEN BY A HOMOSEXUAL GIRAFFE.’ But now, I rarely tell people to fuck off, for fears of being banned.
It’s sad, really.
Here is a DM Marty sent Lauren, which has given me some new found respect for the ‘pharma bro.’
Washpo tried to reach out for comment on the situation and was roundly rebuffed, basically told to fuck off.
And this from Huffington Post, reporting on the situation.
The Huffington Post attempted to reach Shkreli via an email address he had previously listed on his Twitter page; we received a response that read “lol suck a dick.”
Content originally generated at iBankCoin.com
- Democrats Use Trump-Rescued Ethics Office To Delay Trump Nominees
In an ironic twist, following president-elect Trump's urging to kill a bill that would have severely diminished Congress' Ethics Office power, The Hill reports that Democrats are calling on Senate Republicans to delay hearings for Trump's Cabinet picks, citing an incomplete ethics screening of several nominees.
As a reminder, House Republicans abruptly voted on Monday night to eliminate the independence of the Office of Congressional Ethics, the chamber’s nonpartisan ethics board which investigates lawmakers' alleged misconduct, largely stripping it of its power, leading to pushback from Democrats and government watchdog groups. House Republicans, meeting as a group Monday night, approved an amendment from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte that would place the office under the oversight of the lawmaker-run House Ethics Committee.
Trump responded…
With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 3, 2017
Which led House Republicans to hold an emergency meeting, resulting in… (via The Hill)
House Republicans at an emergency conference meeting on Tuesday withdrew a proposal to gut an ethics watchdog.
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) offered a motion to restore the current OCE rules, and that was accepted by the GOP conference.
The new Congress hadn't even formally gaveled in on before GOP leaders held an emergency conference meeting to discuss the blowback against the party's vote Monday evening to gut the chamber's independent ethics watchdog.
And so now, as The Hill reports, Democrats are using that rescued 'power' to try to delay confirmation of Trump's cabinet picks…
Early on Saturday, the director of the federal Office of Government Ethics, a watchdog agency that conducts ethics reviews of all Cabinet appointments, said that the plan to hold confirmation hearings before the ethics reviews are complete is "of great concern."
“As OGE’s director, the announced hearing schedule for several nominees who have not completed the ethics review process is of great concern to me,” Walter Shaub, Jr., said in a letter to Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).
“It is unprecedented and deeply worrisome to hold confirmation hearings on President-elect Donald Trump's nominees before basic ethics reviews are completed," Democratic National Committee (DNC) spokeswoman Adrienne Watson said in a statement.
"These rushed hearings must be delayed until the ethics reviews are finished, and if Trump and the GOP-led Senate fail to do so, the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that they are concerned about what will be exposed,” Watson added.
Schumer blasted the timing of the scheduled hearings, accusing Republican lawmakers of trying to "jam through" the nominees.
The GOP hoped to hold confirmation hearings on Tuesday and Wednesday as the party seeks to usher a smooth transition of power to the new administration. The nominees currently scheduled for the next week's hearings include former ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson, Trump's pick for secretary of State; Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), Trump's pick for attorney general; and Betsy DeVos, Trump's pick for Education secretary.
And as one would imagine Trump's team strongly disagrees with "head clown" Schumer's view of the hearings… (via The Hill)
Incoming White House chief of staff Reince Priebus said Sunday there's “no reason” to delay confirmation hearings for President-elect Donald Trump’s Cabinet nominees until their background checks are complete.
“No, they have to get moving. They have to move faster,” Priebus told "Fox News Sunday." “They have all the information. These are people that have been highly successful in their lives. They need to move quicker.
“The fact is there’s no reason,” he added. “It’s the first week of January, they have all the details that they need, they have all the information that they need, it’s no different from any other new administration coming in. The American people demand it. Change was voted for and change we will get.”
- Neera Tanden Reveals "Hillary Will Never Run For Elected Office Again"
"I felt a great disturbance in the farce, as if millions of snowflakes suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened…"
Just days after rumors emerged of Hillary Clinton potentially running for New York City mayor, Hillary Clinton confidante Neera Tanden told CNN that she doesn't expect Clinton to run for New York City mayor — or anything else, ever again.
"I think she's going to figure out ways to help kids and families. That's been what she's been focused on her whole life, and a lot of issues that are affecting them, over the next couple of years," Tanden told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union" Sunday.
"But I don't expect her to ever run for any elected office again," she said.
Tanden, a close Clinton ally and the head of the liberal think tank Center for American Progress, was shooting down reports of chatter in New York political circles that Clinton could run against incumbent Democratic Mayor Bill de Blasio.
"I don't expect her to run for this and I don't expect her to run for other office," Tanden said. "I think her job is to — what she's thinking about right now is how to help those kids and families as she has her whole life."
It appears our video anology of Clinton's strategy meeting was spot on…
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...