Democrats are not guaranteed recovery. Fake news, witch hunts and wishful thinking may not put Humpty Dumpty together again - at least not in the same way.
American citizens got more entertainment than a “reality” television show during the 2016 election campaign, but real life drama has not stopped since Donald Trump was elected President of the United States. Yet, primary impetus behind the never-ending political drama of the Never Trump overachievers are “Democratic” Party bosses and leaders who refuse to accept defeat. That can be a good quality in some cases, but when reaction to defeat turns into a frenetic form of public self-destruction it is time to take notice.
Refusing to accept loss on some levels is admirable, but when loss of a legitimate election turns to rejection of the results, and then into a ridiculous foray into a public charade fueling investigations of fabricated allegations, it begins to look like much more than a case of “sore-loserism.” Now, for those paying attention, it is becoming increasingly apparent that at the heart of the Russian hacking or “influence” in the 2016 elections, is the fabrications paid for by the “Democratic” National Committee.
No matter how well orchestrated a fabrication is, it will remain a fabrication, but as the light of truth penetrates the shadowy world of political intrigue, more bits and pieces of a fabrication show up. In the end, the ones who promulgate the fabrication or the lie, are the ones left with no one else to blame but themselves. In the case of the current Democrat core leadership, not many expect they would admit culpability.
Although this perspective would not emerge from the contemporary narrative spewed by the mainstream media outlets, the “Democratic” Party leadership seems to have splintered and fragmented during and after the 2016 elections. U.S. politics in general plunged into the bizarre after the outcome of the 2016 presidential race, and not only the leadership of the Democrats, but also Republican leadership has not apparently recovered. However, Democrat leaders appear more to be in self-destruct mode. The following is a list of evident self-destructive behaviors:
1) Self-destruction could be observed while one observed Hillary Clinton off stage (yet still on camera). It is not odd that celebrities show up in different realms of the internet when they do not believe a camera is still filming them. Lies and behavior that reflect a lack of integrity have a way of surfacing in a free society. But, despite concerns over Hillary’s physical or mental health, the front runner of the Democrats, predicted to win the 2016 presidential election, was unable to deliver. Although most major pollsters and mainstream media personalities (who are Democrats) predicted (or hoped) Hillary would prevail, she lost. An electoral shock of that magnitude had not occurred in the U.S. since Democrat Harry Truman won over New York Governor Thomas Dewey in 1948, when Republican Dewey appeared to have the election won. Predictions were so one-sided that Congress investigated the pollsters and news sources.
2) Ironically, the outcome of the election results indicates that even within the Party rank and file Democrats may not have truly believed they would “be stronger together” as Hillary’s slogan proclaimed. The popular Bernie Sanders, who captivated millions of young Democrat voters, must have been truly shocked when videos of Clinton campaign operatives masquerading as Bernie Sanders’ supporters attacked Trump’s supporters. Unless, they were actually Bernie Sanders’ supporters, it may have come as no surprise. But it shocked America.
3) The mainstream media may have suppressed surprises that would have embarrassed their candidate of choice because outlets did not provide much coverage of the work of the investigative, undercover journalist James O’Keefe’s and his Project Veritas. Nevertheless, a top “Democratic” operative featured in O’Keefe’s taped recordings was Robert Creamer, who resigned from his position after he was caught admitting to actively instigating violence during the opposition’s political rallies. One recalls that during the debates, Hillary Clinton did not refute the claims Trump made about the DNC initiating the violence at his campaign rallies.
4) Truly, “Stronger together” was a joke and wishful thinking on the part of the Hillary Clinton campaign machine. The appearance of a legitimate primary selection process based on voter choice was not much of a concern for either party in 2016, but “Super Delegates” in the “Democratic” Party stripped away the façade of democracy in the Party. It proved Bernie Sanders could have stayed home as the final outcome gave a strong dose of political reality to many millennials excited about participating in the “democratic” process. Apparently, the Party elite had already anointed Hillary, and for them the Party was apparently stronger without Bernie as the President.
It is what candidate Trump meant when he tried to warn the rest of Americans that the process itself was rigged because the GOP has their own issues. And, Clinton did not refute the claims Trump made about the primaries being rigged. While Trump may have cried, “wolf” too often, it does not negate the truth.
5) Interestingly, Bernie Sanders provided further verification of a Democrat splintering in a recent interview with the New York Times. He seemed to be complaining that “Democratic” groups “weren’t doing enough to support liberal congressional candidates in 2018.” He also enlightened readers by predicting that "Trump's agenda is dead if Democrats win back majority." Actually, some Democrat leaders may have hoped Bernie was dead by now. It is likely that Sanders was attempting to stoke the campaign spirit of fringe Democrat front groups. However, his astounding prophecy was not news to the GOP and Conservatives.
Support Canada Free Press
6) Actually, self-destructive tendencies within the “Democratic” Party surfaced during the election in peripheral areas, and demonstrated the truth that a “house divided against itself will not stand.” Who would have thought that Anthony Weiner would show more than his true colors via the ethernet? The beauty of modern wireless communication is that it helps to foster transparency for politicians--for better or for worse. In Weiner’s drama, it proved worse for Hillary Clinton.
7) Of course, the WikiLeaks revelations of the unprotected Clinton server made it even more worse. Open, unauthorized access to official government correspondence in an age of cyber warfare must have escaped the capability of the MSM to fathom the seriousness. If the DNC is now concerned about Russian hacking, how is a Hillary server not an object of concern by the same Party? The disconnect blatantly destroys credibility surrounding charades on Capitol Hill over Russian interference in the 2016 elections.The DNC is wasting time and money in a patchwork of propaganda that the MSM is promulgating to the public as reality.
MSM moguls have been covering for their candidate of choice, but their day of reckoning will come.
8) One has to admit that when James Comey got on the case, he created a great deal of worry for many politicians on both sides of the aisle. But, as he stumbled upon more than he seemed inclined to divulge about the Clinton machine, he was caught in a credibility gap. Americans who paid attention, took notice. But, he still appears as if a puppet on a string, and his recent book actually has him show up as a soldier of the Deep State who is struggling to nurture a badly bruised ego, and salvage personal credibility. But, observations of the crimes of the Deep State is another matter.
9) The recent lawsuit that chairman Tom Perez and other DNC leaders have filed against Russia, the Trump Campaign and Wikileaks, is a distraction from reality. Even top Democrats have labeled it such. A Chicago Tribune article, “The Democrats’ lawsuit isn't as nutty as it sounds,” quotes former President Obama’s adviser, David Axelrod, in labeling the DNC suit a “sideshow” that seems “spectacularly ill-timed” and helpful only to President Trump’s “strategy of portraying a sober and essential probe as a partisan vendetta.” But in reality, one sideshow does not offset another even though it provides the illusion of being “sober and essential.” Too many sideshows should cause Americans to seek a broader perspective in a view of the entire circus.
10) It is interesting that the Chicago Tribune article feebly makes the case that it is not that “nutty” because former DNC chairman Laurence O’Brien filed a similar suit in 1972 after the break-in to O’Brien’s office in the Watergate hotel complex. Two years later, he won the suit, ironically on the same day President Richard Nixon left office.” So, if the merit of the recent lawsuit is comparable to the Watergate history, it should be noted that the crimes of Watergate pale in comparison to the crimes of the Obama administration in their own spying on the opposition candidate. If citizens are unaware of the details of that period, additional homework is necessary.
11) Ironically, the same Chicago Tribune article reveals that the DNC is trying to rebuild, but is “cash-strapped,” as the “national DNC has fallen way behind its Republican counterpart in fundraising.” The article also points out that “DNC leaders have tried to repair divisions and hard feelings between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters... the DNC itself is getting sued by Sanders supporters alleging that the emails released by hackers show DNC employees conspiring to help Clinton win the nomination.” Hmmm.
12) Additionally, Democrats in Congress are using their offices as if they were conducting an Inquisition of Conservative groups and personalities, as is in the recent debacle with the interrogation of Diamond and Silk. However, the all powerful elected officials sometimes deal with more than they can handle.
Of course, numerous states do not depend entirely upon DNC national leadership, but it is obvious the core of the “Democrat” Party is still struggling to recover from 2016. There are no guarantees in politics -- just as there are no guarantees that anything rotten within the core could ever rejuvenate and return to its original state. Just as a person with a disease is not guaranteed true recovery, Democrats are not guaranteed recovery. Fake news, witch hunts and wishful thinking may not put Humpty Dumpty together again - at least not in the same way.
Dennis Jamison reinvented his life after working for a multi-billion dollar division of Johnson & Johnson for several years. Currently retired from West Valley College in California, where he taught for nearly 10 years, he now writes articles on history and American freedom for various online publications.
Formerly a contributor to the Communities at the Washington Times and Fairfax Free Citizen, his more current articles appear in Canada Free Press and Communities Digital News. During the 2016 presidential primaries, he was the leader of a network of writers, bloggers, and editors who promoted the candidacy of Dr. Ben Carson. Jamison founded “We the People” - Patriots, Pilgrims, Prophets Writers’ Network and the Citizen Sentinels Network. Both are volunteer groups for grassroots citizen-journalists and activists intent on promoting and preserving the inviolable God-given freedoms rooted in the founding documents.
Jamison also co-founded RedAmericaConsulting to identify, counsel, and support citizen-candidates, who may not have much campaign money, but whose beliefs and deeds reflect the role of public servants rather than power-hungry politicians.
American citizens got more entertainment than a “reality” television show during the 2016 election campaign, but real life drama has not stopped since Donald Trump was elected President of the United States. Yet, primary impetus behind the never-ending political drama of the Never Trump overachievers are “Democratic” Party bosses and leaders who refuse to accept defeat. That can be a good quality in some cases, but when reaction to defeat turns into a frenetic form of public self-destruction it is time to take notice.
Refusing to accept loss on some levels is admirable, but when loss of a legitimate election turns to rejection of the results, and then into a ridiculous foray into a public charade fueling investigations of fabricated allegations, it begins to look like much more than a case of “sore-loserism.” Now, for those paying attention, it is becoming increasingly apparent that at the heart of the Russian hacking or “influence” in the 2016 elections, is the fabrications paid for by the “Democratic” National Committee. 
