Hillary Clinton Hires Former Monsanto Lobbyist to Run Her Campaign

[L0oniX]

Last edited Thu May 21, 2015, 09:41 PM - Edit history (1)

Hillary Clinton recently announced that she will be appointing long-time Monsanto lobbyist Jerry Crawford as adviser to her “Ready for Hillary” super PAC.

Crawford has mostly worked with Democratic politicians in the past, but has also put his support behind Republican candidates as well. Anyone who was willing to support Monsanto’s goals would receive support from Crawford.

In the past, Crawford has worked with Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry and Bill Northey. Over the years, Crawford has been instrumental in fighting against small farmers in court and protecting Monsanto’s seed monopoly.

Just last week it was reported that Hillary Clinton is attempting to repolish her image and paint herself as a champion of the common people. She is planning to make “toppling the 1%” one of her primary campaign selling points, although she is obviously a part of the same ruling class that she is speaking against, and receives massive contributions from some of the most corrupt aristocratic organizations in the world.

more at links

http://www.nationofchange.org/2015/04/26/hillary-clinton-hires-former-monsanto-lobbyist-to-run-her-campaign/

FB: https://www.facebook.com/GMOFreeMinnesotaZone/posts/807377179350330

https://www.reddit.com/r/uspolitics/comments/2yqlyo/monsantolinked_jerry_crawford_doesnt_inspire_much/
Monsanto-linked Jerry Crawford doesn't inspire much hope: Hillary Clinton's Pick for Her Political Fixer in Iowa is a Classic Illustration of America's Political Corporate Insider Problem

http://nypost.com/2014/11/15/is-iowa-already-sick-of-hillary-clinton/
“I don’t know of any party regulars or activists who are really pushing anyone else,” says Jerry Crawford, who co-chaired Clinton’s 2008 campaign in Iowa and helps lead Ready for Hillary in the state.

Want to bet someone will be playing a game of Hot Potato?

[BootinUp]

1. Maybe this is a good decision? lol.

[RobertEarl]

50. Bad decision, Awful

Doesn't anyone in her campaign understand the people are fed up with corporate lobbyists? Well, the people are fed up but the corporations and their big bucks control of the government just keep on feasting and crapping dollars on their favorite politicians, eh?

Ready for Hillary? How about Round-up ready for Hillary?

[HooptieWagon]

60. Round-Up Ready Hillary?

...fitting. I like it.

[Purveyor]

109. Oh christ I just spewed beer over that one!!!

[rhett o rick]

164. Good one. nm

[Fairgo]

180. Well put!

Don't think it will make it into her campaign slogan rotation, but it is catchy.

[billhicks76]

56. Using Deception

To sneak the nomination

[sabrina 1]

143. Good for Bernie! Lol! Unbelievable, they are getting more and more blatant

about how the 'game is rigged' as Warren said.

This will definitely be something that will used against her.

They do underestimate the intelligence of the people.

Which is probably a good thing, for the people.

[BootinUp]

148. Yes, maybe this will turn the race

[IVoteDFL]

2. Drag every person you've ever met to the primary election

It's becoming increasingly difficult to support Hillary in any capacity. I'll probably still vote for her if I have to, but I really don't want to.

[leftofcool]

3. Your headline is wrong. He is not running her "campaign"

You should edit your headline to correct your mistake.

[L0oniX]

4. You should try Google sometime.

[leftofcool]

5. Typical and predictable

[okaawhatever]

85. You should try posting honest ops. This is bullshit. The quote:

Anyone who was willing to support Monsanto’s goals would receive support from Crawford.

Perhaps you should Google the Law of Agency. Nice try, though. I'll assume that if you're resorting to posting third rate blogs that are inherently dishonest Hillary is doing everything pretty well.

[rhett o rick]

169. But the bottom line is that H. Clinton has close ties to Monsanto. I assume you are ok with that??nm

[George II]

106. From the article YOU posted (although the headline is from the article, not your creation):

"Hillary Clinton has just appointed Jerry Crawford, a long-time Monsanto lobbyist, to be her advisor."

That's not running her campaign.

[rhett o rick]

165. Curious that you don't address the issue but pick at the wording of the post. nm

[George II]

173. The "issue" is the person chosen to run her campaign, which is false, he's not running her campaign.

[rhett o rick]

177. Clinton hires former Monsanto lobbyist. You are trying to deflect from the issue.

She has close ties to Monsanto.

[tritsofme]

8. To be fair, it isn't the OP's mistake, but the moron blogger who wrote it.

[Sheepshank]

161. yeah...as if the OP couldn't edit the title to have it read more honestly?

not buying the excuse.

This OP is way too busy trying to eviscerate HRC to worry about anything so trivial as actual facts and truth.

[rhett o rick]

167. Curious that you don't address the issue but pick at the wording of the post. nm

[Fairgo]

181. This response strategy is becoming increasingly common

It now competes with the seminal chestnut, "i know you are but what am I?" As the go-to response on political playgrounds everywhere.

[Sheepshank]

183. The first and opening sentence is a whopping lie, so I'm supposed to continue reading

And hope the rest of the info may or may not be honest? What a fucking waste of time.

[salib]

10. It is definitely not correct

However, it is how the article actually was titled.

Very misleading by the source.

[rhett o rick]

166. Curious that you don't address the issue but pick at the wording of the post. nm

[wyldwolf]

6. maybe in YOUR world

In the real world, an advisor to a PAC isn't running the campaign. LOL.

[darkangel218]

9. A former Monsanto lobyist as an ADVISOR is still pretty bad, imho.

It doesn't change anything.

[wyldwolf]

12. There is a WORLD of difference in being an advisor to a PAC and running a national campaign

It changes EVERYTHING.

[darkangel218]

14. He may have different duties, but hes still an ex MONSANTO lobbyist

It speaks volumes, either way.

[wyldwolf]

24. an adviser to a PAC has substantially less sway and power than a Presidential campaign manager.

To pretend there is any comparison is says something about those making the claim.

[IVoteDFL]

28. I wouldn't hire them to clean my toilet

The fact that she hired them at all is what is frustrating.

[darkangel218]

31. Frustrating but predictable.

[zeemike]

110. How do you know what sway and power he has?

You could not know that unless you were in the highest levels of the campaign.
There is no law that limits sway and power in any campaign.

[MrMickeysMom]

137. Here's an obvious sign of trouble...

Anyone from Monstanto advising your run for president…

[wyldwolf]

150. Says who?

[TheNutcracker]

20. Besides the super pacs are running the campaigns! They can raise all the money which = power.

[darkangel218]

21. +1

[sabrina 1]

144. Why would a Democratic candidate for the WH hire a Monsanto lobbyist in

ANY capacity? This will definitely hurt her badly together with her endorsement of that evil Corporation.

This shows the corrupting influence of money on our electoral system.

Once you take their bribes, they want something in return.

It is ludicrous to claim that they can still be 'liberal' on important issues, while taking billions in donations from them.

This campaign is going to be the first to make this a huge issue.

Bernie Sanders is refusing Corporate money which gives us a chance to put our votes where our complaining has been for so long.

Defeating Corporate Money is now possible, because we have a candidate who is giving us the chance to do it.

I wonder how Hillary would sound if she wasn't so beholden to those Corporations.

I cannot believe she is supportive of GMOs and thinks all we need is 'different language' to help get people to support theml.

She truly underestimates the intelligence of the voters she is hoping will get her elected.

Bernie Sanders supports the labeling of GMOs.

So sad, at one time I really admired Clinton, and fought hard for her against the far right.

[wyldwolf]

149. Have you ever thought many Democrats disagree with your summation?

I'll bet when you where in college you couldn't fathom why anyone would like any other music than the kind you loved.

[darkangel218]

7. Im not surprised at all. She never hid her support for GMOs

I totally expect she would do things like that. And if she becomes President, she will appoint the same type of people. No, I am not surprised at all.

[TheNutcracker]

16. Exactly! When I watched her Monsanto speech, I knew I could NEVER support her.

That's just another one of the many reasons that I support Senator Sanders.

[darkangel218]

19. Im right there with you.

And like you said, sadly, this is just one of the many reasons we can't support her. For me this is huge though. I despise GMOs and MONSANTO.

[wyldwolf]

11. oh, yeah! Nationofchange was the organization that stole a mailing list and spammed it for money

[L0oniX]

15. Yeah ....act like that is the only site saying the same thing.

[wyldwolf]

18. what other site believes an adviser to a PAC is the same thing as a national campaign manager?

[L0oniX]

29. "national"? Whatever.

[wyldwolf]

32. Is Hillary running a national campaign? Yes. LOL. 'whatever.'

[L0oniX]

34. Try reading the OP for a change.

[wyldwolf]

37. try posting accurate post titles and not defending the inaccurate ones.

[L0oniX]

43. It's an actual title pasted from the website. I didn't write it.

[wyldwolf]

49. One you knew was misleading when you posted it.

[L0oniX]

51. Miss Cleo must have told you that.

[wyldwolf]

52. you mean you don't know the difference between a PAC adviser and a campaign manager?

[L0oniX]

57. Continue to ask Miss Cleo.

[wyldwolf]

58. I just did. She said you don't know the difference. Sorry.

[L0oniX]

61. Maybe she can tell you what is actually said in the OP since all you see is a title from a website.

[wyldwolf]

63. A title you posted and without realizing what it said, I guess.

[L0oniX]

70. I don't have to modify a title from a website just to please you.

[wyldwolf]

111. No. No you don't. But the precedent you're setting allows for some interesting possibilities

[Trajan]

68. GET'M Wyldwolf ! ... He insulted your favorite candidate !

You know ... The 'call the PAC advisor a campaign manager' insult ? ...

RIP him a new one !

Don't let up! ... You can't let them get away with this insulting behavior ! ...

Who else is gonna protect her honor? ...



DU is getting more ridiculous by the day ...

[L0oniX]

72. LMFAO

[NRaleighLiberal]

76. +1.

[840high]

82. lol

[DemocratSinceBirth]

93. If this is a race to see who the King Of the Dozens is wyldwolf is doing a good job...

If this is a race to see who the King Of the Dozens is wyldwolf is doing a good job and if you factor in it's one against several wyldwolf is doing an admirable job...


If someone is naive enough to believe voters give a rat's ass about picayune shit like this I can convince them to buy my waste at $100.00 an ounce because there's gold in it and they can resell it for $1,000.00

[George II]

107. But he/she has to post the EXACT headline for the link.

[wyldwolf]

113. says who?

[George II]

119. Well, for "Latest Breaking News" it's a requirement, elsewhere it's an implied requirement...

I don't agree with the premise of the article he posted or the general premise of the OP, but to be fair, he/she would be bashed for changing the headline.

[wyldwolf]

121. you're half right

[orpupilofnature57]

38. ' Whatever ' she does is ok . No she having a Tea party, for who ?

[TheNutcracker]

17. Why is the blogger's title, or the source what's important here. It's a serious position

when 90% of American's want labeling, and Monsanto DOES NOT.

[L0oniX]

73. Apparently I am supposed to edit a title quote from a website before posting it.

[Sheepshank]

162. yeah...it';s not that hard to do..especially when it wrong.

just make you looke like you are pronmoting and rabidly protecting a lie simply because it serves a purpose to bash another Democrat.

Why anyone on DU would resort to such a thing when there are plenty of RW-ers that do this is.....well, never mind.

[rhett o rick]

168. Seems some here are trying to distract from the real issue. H. Clinton has close ties to Monsanto.

[Sheepshank]

184. The regurgitated, recurring RW blabber basing the latest outrage on association.

.......regardless of the nature of the association, the fact that one exists is cause for all sort of imagined and manufactured outrage. Frankly it's as weak as shit

[dflprincess]

127. Because it distracts from the real issue

which is Hillary is appointing Monsanto shills to important positions on PAC staff.

[Doctor_J]

13. like the president, she's dropped any pretense of populism

Her handlers have determined there is no threat from Bernie, so she will tack right from here on out.

[BrotherIvan]

22. She's got some room to go left because she has to

But it seriously is becoming weird. Why would she go populist when that is the one thing we all know she's NOT. Let Hillary be Hillary and run on her strengths. Which she certainly has, especially the in the women's rights and foreign policy experience. Acting like Elizabeth Warren while raising BILLIONS from corporations and the wealthy is just, well...bizarre.

[LiberalArkie]

71. Well that is how the preverbal wool is pulled over our heads.

Act like there will be change from the corp world of the wealthy elitists and you will get the D votes. It does not mean you have to play nice after you get elected. Monsanto guy will play real well will small farmers that are being forced to sell out to corp agra.

Know them with who they socialize with.

[TheKentuckian]

126. Who cares about or respects her foreign policy? She is an interventionist hawk and

a corporate globalist.

That "experience" is in an area where she is perhaps least trustworthy and most dangerous.

[BrotherIvan]

129. I'm just saying she has that on her resume more than any other candidate

She should run on it. Lying about her stances or refusing to give a clue about what her position is is a terrible idea. She always ranks lowest in trustworthiness so why not just run on your record? People know Hillary Clinton. Obama could run as a liberal because he didn't have much of a record. He blindsided Hillary and she wants to make damn sure that doesn't happen again so she is trying to sound like Elizabeth Warren. I don't think people will suddenly buy it.

[TeeYiYi]

23. An interesting...

...and likely accurate observation.

re: determined there is no threat from Bernie, so she will tack right from here on out.

TYY

[zeemike]

116. But it won't stop her from using the words.

Because she thinks all she has to do is use the words and we all will believe.
Give the Trojan horse a good coat of paint and we take it right in.

[BrotherIvan]

25. Will she appoint a Monsato lackey to head the FDA like Obama?

Magic eight ball says yes.

[TBF]

55. Probably promote the one she just hired to run her super PAC

I can't wait until Jamie Dimon is head of Treasury.

[BrotherIvan]

130. That is promised to Larry Summers

He couldn't get in last time and by god, he deserves it! Too bad he would think his boss is stupid.

[babylonsister]

26. Sigh. I wish people would attack rethugs instead of Dems. There's

so much to chat about.

[Maedhros]

33. SHE HIRED A MONSANTO LOBBYIST TO RUN HER CAMPAIGN.

I mean, really, some things are not such a big deal. But Monsanto is just about the most wretched corporation in the world.

You lie down with dogs...

[orpupilofnature57]

62. + 1000 !!!

[babylonsister]

65. FORMER. And EVERYONE hated Eric Holder because of his

prior connections. The level of 'the sky is falling' in here is ridiculous. See who the rethugs hire. I think the freaking premature outrage is premature and boring. And I regularly rail against Monsanto.

[ybbor]

125. And Eric Holder was great at prosecuting the war criminals...

Who held office prior to him.

I think your comparison is pretty weak. Holder did a few good things but we still have legitimate war criminals walking free because of his, read Obama's, justice department's refusal to prosecute. "We can't look at the past" when EVERY criminal case only looks at the past.

[Nay]

131. Yes, they did, and Eric Holder was as useless as tits on a bull. We didn't like Geithner

and all the other connected assholes, and a former Monsanto lobbyist who used to advise Republicans and is now advising Hillary's super PAC -- well, I reserve the right to hate this asshole, too.

[TheKentuckian]

132. and he sucked too. Corporate crooks got a softer touch than under Raygun and Poppy and war criminals

we're treated like patriots.

A lot of folks talk him up on Civil rights but I'm at a loss at what was accomplished on that front that is all Uber amazing either. Seems more like the reality has been more ground lost. Maybe without his efforts matters would be significantly worse but I'm not seeing work at another level from the average Democratic appointment to the post and most of the case I've found and that has been presented is more along the lines of praise and personal endorsement from different folks giving testimonials.

But granting that, he still sucks in the exact areas he was expected to suck on. Hard to really call people out on those concerns because you consider him laudable in different areas.

[babylonsister]

134. Oooh, flail away. Yea, he sucked.

So AG, but infinitely more!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Gonzales

[Maedhros]

145. That's the thing with the Corporate Revolving Door...

former Generals and Congressmen become lobbyists, former lobbyists join political staffs or even run for office, then after that runs it's course back to the lobbying and consulting.

There is no "former" to "corporatist."

[cali]

152. That is flat out false. Robby Mook runs her campaign

This is not about her campaign. Is it connected to her campaign? Yeah, but that doesn't make the claim any truer

[Maedhros]

157. You're right - I cribbed my wording from the OP.

S/b "She hired a Monstanto lobbyist to run her Super PAC."

[orpupilofnature57]

46. What possible good would that do ? You don't think Monsanto is noteworthy ?

babylonsister I respect every post I've ever read of yours, where do you stand on Bernie Sanders as a presidential canidate ?

[babylonsister]

67. Not a deal breaker given he's a former lobbyist.

And I love Bernie. I just hate these damned attacks on Dems. We seem to forget who the real enemy is, and how long a way we have to go.

[onecaliberal]

88. There is barely any daylight. Economic issues must be handled if this country

Is to survive and sorry but Hillary is on the same economic page as cons

[Logical]

96. So we should not complain about dems? Great idea! Then we can be like the GOP. nt

[babylonsister]

100. Ya got me. All 'we' can do is complain. Well,

the crap that comes from the rwnjs on a daily basis is mind-boggling. I sincerely shake my head daily at what I read.
So let's bitch about a woman who has a chance of winning this presidency and has more integrity in her pinky compared to anyone in the clown car.
Whatever trips your trigger.

[Logical]

115. Go to the Hillary forum, you would love it! nt

[babylonsister]

122. But I love Bernie more. I am all for our Dems, not bashing them. nt

[MoonchildCA]

99. Everyone here has virtually the same feelings towards republicans.

Though I'm sure there is not a lack of attacks toward them now, there will be plenty of time for even more come the general election. Right now, we are at the beginning of the primaries, it's only natural to debate the democratic primary candidates on a democratic board.

People here seem so sensitive about that. I'm not directing that at you in particular, just here in general.

[Doctor_J]

140. And I wish dems would stop acting like repukes

[harun]

155. She's a DINO, open season

[Thinkingabout]

27. If Bernie ask the lobbyists from the Oil, Energy and Tobacco industries to work for

His campaign he might get at least one.

[L0oniX]

30. LOL

[orpupilofnature57]

47. He wouldn't .

[Thinkingabout]

87. Okay then, it is his choice.

[orpupilofnature57]

35. And this is just one more reason the supposed " Witchhunt " but wait her

faithful will have a Bernie slur any old second .

[thesquanderer]

36. Lobbyists work for whoever pays them.

I'm not sure that his work for Monsanto has any bearing on what he might bring to the campaign.

[orpupilofnature57]

54. If I had to geuss, I'd say they'd use the same liquid logic to sell

a person just like they're product, scare tactics, skewed data, and the same alligence most misanthropes to " Whoever pays them " the most.

[Thinkingabout]

91. Appears he has worked political campaigns before.

[JEB]

136. Hilary will be the perfect lobbiest.

[WillyT]

39. Sounds About... RIGHT

[RufusTFirefly]

40. And in other news: Former Brawndo CEO named Clinton's chief of staff

Hillary!
"She's got electrolytes"

[FlatBaroque]

44. Victory night celebration

at FuttBuckers

[peace13]

41. Oh boy....

...that is all....

[FlatBaroque]

42. In this context, "toppling" means

a firm but gentle back rub.

[MaggieD]

45. Seems like some so called liberals....

Have lost their capacity to be honest. I used to think it was just republicans that were were so dishonest. It's sad that these kind of headlines that are so dishonest get written. Sadder still that DUers that are apparently fully aware they aren't true post them.

[L0oniX]

48. I expect to see attacks on liberals at DI but not here. Congrats.

[MaggieD]

64. So why are you posting them?

You KNOW the headline is not true.

[JeffHead]

53. The guy does have experience in spreading fertilizer

So she made a wise choice I'd say.

[Ed Suspicious]

59. Completely unconcerned with optics?

[Buns_of_Fire]

75. They can afford to be. Who sees the optics or connects the dots other than people at sites

like this? All most people see is an announcement that so-and-so has been named as some grand poobah of something-or-other, and if they think anything at all, they just think "that's nice." The MSM sure as hell isn't going to spend any time connecting any dots for them.

[KoKo]

66. Thanks...Disgusting as it is. "Truth Out."

[99Forever]

69. Sounds exactly like what I would expect from Hillary Clinton.

It IS who she is, afterall.

[Fuddnik]

74. And to think we doubted her populist credentials.

Another stage of Third Way tone deafness.

[RufusTFirefly]

77. And that's the RoundUp of the latest Clinton news. Now back to you, Ron.

[840high]

80. good one

[L0oniX]

81. Monsanto Hillary "RoundUp" ready. Perfect!

[RufusTFirefly]

104. I feel a yard sign coming on...

[L0oniX]

153. Yer bad ...very bad. LOL

[MrMickeysMom]

138. Brought to you by...

Agent Orange

[Ford_Prefect]

78. If it walks like a duck...

"When I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck." - James Whitcomb Riley

I believe in this instance that both Hillary Clinton and Jerry Crawford qualify as fowl of the aquatic variety, not to mention birds of a feather. We don't need more wild life in the White House. They will only offer us chicken feed at best.

[840high]

79. haha - she's concistent - screw us.

[Agnosticsherbet]

83. Robby Mook is Secretary of State Clinton's Campaign Manager

He never worked for Monsanto.

[NYC_SKP]

89. -------"Jerry Crawford as adviser to her “Ready for Hillary” super PAC"-------

Adviser, not manager.

[Agnosticsherbet]

95. He is an adviser to a SuperPac. So the title of the OP is 100% inaccurate.

[NYC_SKP]

108. Is "Ready For Hillary" working on some other campaign?

I think a Super PAC with your name on it is working for your election.

I could be wrong, I suppose.

[Agnosticsherbet]

139. The OP title says "run her campaign" not "working for a Superpac supporting her campaign."

So the title of this OP is 100% inaccurate.

I didn't say anything about the link to the New York Post, a Right Wing Republican source, but even they did not say what the title of the OP says.

[RufusTFirefly]

84. What's the big deal?! It could've been a lot worse

She might've hired a former member of Walmart's board instead.

[NYC_SKP]

86. From Alternet:

News & Politics
Hillary's Pick for Her Political Fixer in Iowa Is a Classic Illustration of America's Political Corporate Insider Problem
Monsanto-linked Jerry Crawford doesn't inspire much hope.
By Zaid Jilani / AlterNet
March 9, 2015

Monsanto's Man In Iowa

Before joining Clinton's campaign in 2008, Crawford served in a variety of high-profile political roles. In addition to a variety of local positions, he served as the Iowa chair for the presidential campaigns of Mike Dukakis, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry—each one the more conservative candidates in their Democratic presidential primaries.

So it was a natural fit for Crawford to sign up for the Hillary campaign. But after Clinton's 2008 loss, Crawford spent his days at Crawford Muaro, his law and lobbying firm. While there, he represented a variety of corporate clients, including Kraft and Altria (the parent company of Philip Morris USA). He also served as a lawyer for Jack DeCoster, a factory farm tycoon who infamously supplied eggs that led to a salmonella outbreak. His most prominent client, however, was Monsanto.

Monsanto, the agricultural and biotechnology corporation founded in Missouri, is known worldwide for its abuses against the environment and practices designed to crush farm competition. Iowa is a farming state, with agriculture making up a large share of its total economy.

The 2010 Agriculture Secretary election was particularly important for Monsanto; as one Iowa blogger noted, it holds “patents on most of the corn and soybeans grown in Iowa.” The company was also the subject of an antitrust investigation. The Democratic nominee for the spot, Francis Thicke, was a critic of Monsanto and a backer of antitrust actions against the big agricultural companies. Thus it wasn't long before Monsanto took aim at Thicke, allying itself to the Republican nominee and incumbent, Bill Northey.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillarys-pick-her-political-fixer-iowa-classic-illustration-americas-political

[Pastiche423]

117. Awesome find!

Thanks.

[diabeticman]

90. ....

Remember Hillary is a liberal Candidate who is going to really look out for the disappearing Middle class....."The consequences of every act are included in the act itself.” ( No? Too cruel?) "You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.” (hmmm, Wonder how Mr. Orwell would react to the way this country runs...)

[L0oniX]

92. "Hillary is a liberal Candidate" LMFAO

[Ford_Prefect]

102. If she looks hard enough she may even spot it disappearing in the distance. Oops, Too late!

Remember Hillary is a liberal Candidate who is going to really look out for the disappearing Middle class.

[djean111]

94. Who wants to bet we start being showered with "Why GMOs are GLORIOUS!!!!" threads, now? n/t

[L0oniX]

120. +1

[JTFrog]

97. You Better Believe It! n/t

[PowerToThePeople]

98. nice.

[LWolf]

103. Exactly.

[Unknown Beatle]

101. WTF happened to honesty?

Why lie what you really believe?

Hillary is trying to lie herself into the WH.

[MohRokTah]

105. I love your screen name. eom

[JohnnyRingo]

112. He's heading her Super PAC, not her campaign.

His job will be only to raise money, not influence Clinton's policy decisions or coordinate campaign logistics, and I have a feeling he's very good at what he does.

The anti-Hillary bent is revealed in the 2nd paragraph that hints that he works for anyone who backs Monsanto's political goals. It's obvious nothing is further from the truth. Just as when he was a lobbyist, he works for his own enrichment, not ideals.

Everyone knew this public propaganda would be coming in a Hillary Clinton run for the Oval Office, but I doubt anyone could predict it would come from the left, let alone in DU.

The cited article, and this post as well, is pure political tripe. I expect better here.

[dflprincess]

128. "His job will be only to raise money, not influence Clinton's policy decisions "

Seriously?

And what will he be telling all those people he's hitting up for "donations"?

[JohnnyRingo]

146. He'll be telling them what they want to hear.

That's what fund raisers, lobbyists, and televangelists do equally well.

Why anyone assumes such people are driven by personal ideology instead of a big paycheck for their special talents is beyond me. This is clearly a business move to me.

I don't care if people hate Hillary, but they'd be better off promoting their candidate's qualifications than resorting to opposition research against the others. I half expect to read a post about Benghazi any day in DU.

[m-lekktor]

133. yeah money raising has nothing to do with policy decisions.

[JohnnyRingo]

147. I don't even know what you're saying.

Since when do lobbyists or professional fund raisers commit to causes? They're in it for the fat paycheck.

Regardless the implications in the OP, this caliber fund raiser doesn't work pro bono for political favor. He's well compensated based on his prior record of success in amassing piles of cash, something any serious candidate will have to do for this election. Yes, even Bernie.

[uberblonde]

158. Ready for Hillary is dissolving.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ready-hillary-pac-winds-clinton-2016-revs-article-1.2175924

It's not even "her" PAC. It's a PAC that was urging her to run.

[AtomicKitten]

114. Correction: Satan was hired to rearrange her sock drawer.

[babylonsister]

123. Snarf! Yes, it is 'that' bad! nt

[AzDar]

118. Jesus wept.

[mckara]

124. Are the Clintons On Our Side?

Bill signs the repeal of Glass-Steagall, and now, this!

Fuck the Clintons and the DLC!

[Hekate]

135. Robby Mook. You don't really need to lie to get your point across. nt

[Iwillnevergiveup]

141. Coincidentally

I got a request from Emily's List today to fill out a survey. I didn't exactly follow directions.

Squawked a lot about electing Progressive Democratic women. Hillary and Patty Murray were on the list, of course.

Survey here: www.emilyslist.org/Survey2015

[hrmjustin]

142. Question for the Op. Is he an adviser or is he running the campaign?

[cali]

151. No she did NOT. Flat out false.

Your OP headline is thoroughly deceptive. Robby Mook is her Campaign Manager.

[L0oniX]

154. *

Following the rules of LBN for posts in GD is acceptable IMO if the title is exactly the title from the news source. If I were to modify it then people would criticize the website for its title and not read the article itself. There's already a lot that don't read the OP because of the title. The OP provides the correct information. I posted other links in the OP which assist in backing up the information on the website as to what the Iowa campaign position is

[Agschmid]

172. Shady.

Clearly it didn't get past most folks, good thing.

[MineralMan]

156. Advisers don't run campaigns, Loonix.

They advise campaigns. Every presidential campaign has dozens and dozens of advisers. Your thread title is inaccurate and simply incorrect. The quoted story doesn't support your title.

[Bobbie Jo]

163. I don't think he cares

He seems to have abandoned his thread.

Amazingly enough, the OP picked up 60 some odd co-signers. For some, that's just good enough.

Credibility just isn't what it used to be around here..,

SMH

[SidDithers]

159. The right hates Hillary. The fringe left hates Hillary...

and neither minds making shit up to attack her.



Sid

[rhett o rick]

170. And her supporters try to deflect from her issues. She has close ties to Monsanto. Is that a lie?

[Agschmid]

174. The two democratic candidates have what I consider similar stands on the issue.

Both support labeling on some level, both are not calling for the end of GMO altogether.

[rhett o rick]

175. I don't believe that is true and wonder why it's so important for some to try to equate Clinton

with Sen Sanders.

Sen Sanders is a very outspoken supporter of GMO labeling. I have yet to see any such stance from Clinton. I would love to see a link.

H. Clinton is a very outspoken supporter of Monsanto and GMO's but I haven't seen anything from Sen Sanders saying he supports GMO's.

This is another issue where Sen Sanders is working for the people and Clinton supports corporations like Monsanto.

[Agschmid]

176. I choose to compare them because they are the candidates running.

Sanders has not said he doesn't support GMO's only that he wants them labeled. I might be wrong but I don't see that as "not supporting" GMO's.

[rhett o rick]

178. My point is that they are not close on this important issue. nm

[Agschmid]

179. I don't see how they are that different.

They both appear to support labeling... And that seems to be it. Neither one calls for the end of GMO's...

If you have a source I am not able to google please by all means share it.

[rhett o rick]

182. I believe we agree that Sen Sanders is an outspoken about labeling food containing GMO's.

What we don't agree on is that Clinton also supports labeling. I can't find anything to support your claim. Maybe you can help me.
If not, then they aren't on the same page with labeling.

We agree that Clinton strongly supports Monsanto and GMO use in foods. What we don't agree on is that Sen Sanders also strongly or weakly supports the use of GMO's in food. Maybe you can help me there.
Again, if not, then they aren't on the same page with the use of GMO's.

As a general rule Sen Sanders supports the health of people while Clinton supports the health of Corporations (also people to the conservative mind)

[Sheepshank]

160. See...this is exactly what Bernie Supporters need to avoid.....

...spreading lies about other Democrats. How about you spend this much time and effort on actual true issues about the Right?

It didn't take too long for anyone to find some facts to your op "Hillary Clinton Hires Former Monsanto Lobbyist to Run Her Campaign"

Du seems to be the perfct place for manufacturing outrage, and of course you are right there in the thick of it http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026708734

[rhett o rick]

171. The truth is that H. Clinton has close ties to Monsanto. Correct? Isn't that the

bottom line?