I'm keeping this short to put a very simple idea into your head. Because of the way the Democratic Party voting calendar is structured this year, Clinton's largest lead will occur on March 15. After that, most of Sanders' strongest states will vote.

What this means is simple:

* Hillary Clinton will grow her lead until the March 15 states have voted.

* Bernie Sanders will erase that lead — partly or completely — after March 15.

* How much of Clinton's lead he will erase depends on your not buying what the media is selling — that the contest is over.

* In most scenarios where Sanders wins, he doesn't retake the lead until June 7, when five states including California cast their ballots.

March 15 is the Ides of March; a good way to remember the date. The message — gear up for a battle after the Ides of March, and don't let the establishment media tell you what to think. They won't be right until the last state has voted.

~snip~

Now the data. One of the best data-stitians I've come across is a diarist at Daily Kos named MattTX. Matt is very good, professionally good, at this stuff. In a long, carefully-reasoned diary, "How Bernie Sanders can win the Democratic nomination," he lays out six scenarios for the race, in five of which Bernie Sanders wins the nomination (the other is a current baseline with no momentum). He presents them in a parallel fashion, and each presentation differs only in changing a small set of assumptions. Once you understand how to read the first one, you can read the others easily.

~snip~

Bottom line — Super Tuesday is upon us, and what's bad for Sanders supporters on March 1 is going to look worse for a few weeks. Stay heartened. Whatever the result in March, this isn't over until June, after Sanders' best states have voted as well.


cont'

http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2016/03/clinton-will-build-her-biggest-lead-on.html

Poor Hillary! She's told so many lies her nose has grown enormous and it's so stuffed up she needs surgery to unblock it. Medics Elliot Crown and Marnie Halasa of the Pinocchio theater remove the gross contents: loads of Wall Street money, GMOs, poisons, guns, and lots more creepy , disgusting gunk that keep her from a breath of fresh air. Finally cleared out, we find free Bernie buttons for all. Wondrous street theater, original , educational and funny at the NYC Rally and March for Bernie Sanders, Union Square Park, Feb. 27, 2016.

PRESS RELEASE


More Dishonest Attacks from the Clinton Campaign



FEBRUARY 29, 2016


BOSTON – Hillary Clinton’s campaign is once again attacking Bernie Sanders’ record, purposefully leaving out the facts and misleading the American people. The latest misinformation campaign implies that Sen. Sanders only opposed the 2007 immigration reform bill because of his concerns about U.S. workers, even though he was fighting that same year to stop corporations from ruthlessly exploiting guest workers.

“It is shameful to see the fabrication of facts and reinventing of history,” Rep. Raúl Grijalva said. “Sen. Sanders is the only candidate in the Democratic presidential race with a detailed immigration plan and a strong, consistent record on immigration policy. This election will be defined by who has the best policy alternatives for the country, not cheap political attacks.”

Here is what Sanders said on the floor of the Senate on July 26, 2007:

“In addition, according to a recent report by the Southern Poverty Law Center entitled ‘Close to Slavery,’ H-2B workers are routinely cheated out of wages; forced to mortgage their futures to obtain low wage, temporary jobs; held virtually captive by employers or labor brokers who seize their documents; forced to live in squalid conditions; and denied medical benefits for on-the-job injuries. Let us not make it worse. Simply put, we must make sure that labor protections for American workers and for foreign workers who are temporarily working in our country – we must make sure these regulations are strengthened, not weakened. Over the long term, I will be introducing legislation to accomplish that goal. But in the interim, we must not take a major step backwards in terms of protecting both U.S. workers and guest workers from unscrupulous employers.”

The League of United Latin American Citizens, the largest and oldest Hispanic organization in the United States, criticized the Clinton campaign for its unfair attacks on Sanders’ vote on the 2007 immigration reform bill.

“I really think it’s unfair for Hillary to make an issue of that vote,” LULAC executive director Brent Wilkes told BuzzFeed News.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, “The H-2 guest worker program is inherently abusive and should not be expanded in the name of immigration reform.”

For a list of some of the groups opposed to the 2007 immigration reform bill see below.

* The League of United Latin American Citizens, the largest and oldest Hispanic organization in the United States: “LULAC cannot support a bill that will separate families and lead to the exploitation of immigrant workers,” said the then-executive director Brent Wilkes in a May 2007 statement.

* The Labor Council for Latin American Advancement: “Once Latinos learn of the many onerous provisions included in [this bill] as well as the phony ‘legalization’ program, support turns into opposition,” said Gabriela D. Lemus, the then-executive director in a June 20, 2007 statement.

* The Hispanic Federation: “Congress has a legislative responsibility to produce immigration reform that is both humane and pragmatic. Unfortunately, as it stands, this bill falls short of what our immigrant community and nation needs and expects,” said Lillian Rodriguez López, the then-president of this organization in a June 20, 2007 statement.

* The National Day Laborers Organizing Network: “The Senate should not accept a bill that will worsen the status quo. We need a bill that will benefit this and future generations,” said Pablo Alvarado, the then-president of the organization said in a June 20, 2007 statement.

* The American Immigration Lawyers Association said it “cannot support enactment of the Senate bill in its current form,” in a June 2007 statement.

The AFL-CIO, Teamsters, United Food and Commercial Workers, and other unions also opposed the 2007 immigration bill: “This bill is far from the kind of comprehensive immigration reform that would improve the status quo for either U.S.-born or immigrant workers or their families and, in fact, it is likely to make matters much worse,” said AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Richard L. Trumka.




https://berniesanders.com/press-release/more-dishonest-attacks-from-the-clinton-campaign/

Apple today scored a major legal victory in its battle against the FBI when a Magistrate Judge in New York rejected the U.S. Government’s request as part of a drug case to force the company to help it extract data from a locked iPhone. The ruling from U.S. Magistrate James Orenstein was issued as part of the criminal case against Jun Feng, who pleaded guilty in October to drug charges, and is a significant boost to Apple’s well-publicized campaign to resist the FBI’s similar efforts in the case of the San Bernardino killers.

In the case that gave rise to today’s ruling, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) had seized – but, even after consultation with the FBI, claimed it was unable to access – Feng’s iPhone 5. The DEA and FBI said they could not overcome security measures embedded in Apple’s operating system. The Government thus filed a motion seeking an order requiring “Apple to assist” the investigation “under the authority of the All Writs Act” (AWA) – the same 1789 law the FBI is invoking in the San Bernardino case – by “help[ing] the government bypass the passcode security.” Apple objected, noting that there were currently pending nine other cases in which the Government was seeking a similar order.

Judge Orenstein applied previous legal decisions interpreting the AWA and concluded that the law does not “justif[y] imposing on Apple the obligation to assist the government’s investigation against its will.” In a formulation extremely favorable to Apple, the Judge wrote that the key question raised by the Government’s request is whether the AWA allows a court “to compel Apple – a private party with no alleged involvement in Feng’s criminal activity – to perform work for the government against its will.”

The court ruled that the law permits no such result – both because relevant law contains limits on what companies like Apple are required to do, and because Congress never enacted any such obligations. Moreover, the Judge said of the Government’s arguments for how the AWA should be applied: “the implications of the government’s position are so far-reaching – both in terms of what it would allow today and what it implies about Congressional intent in 1789 – as to produce impermissibly absurd results.”


cont'

https://theintercept.com/2016/02/29/apple-wins-major-court-victory-in-its-battle-against-fbi-in-a-case-similar-to-san-bernardino/

Hillary Clinton has been looking into releasing her transcripts for paid speeches to Wall St. and other special interests for


23 DAYS - 22 HOURS - 56 MINUTES -..........


ANYDAY NOW,...........



IWILLLOOKINTOIT.COM

In the recent CNN Democratic Presidential Town Hall, Hillary Clinton continued to dodge calls to release transcripts of her private speeches to Goldman Sachs and other large Wall Street firms.

“Sure. If everybody does it—and that includes the Republicans,” Ms. Clinton replied. What she failed to acknowledge is that Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio haven’t given any recent private speeches—let alone to Wall Street—and Donald Trump’s only speeches have been to real estate firms and commercial shopping centers, which makes sense because he works in those industries. Ms. Clinton’s complaint that she is being unfairly targeted is merely a divergent tactic. The release of transcripts from paid speeches is being pushed on every presidential candidate—but it’s only Ms. Clinton who has something to release that could contradict the campaign platform she is running.

Ms. Clinton’s use of the Republicans as a shield from facing this issue is absurd, and she should be called out by the media for it. She was never a banker and never worked in the financial industry. What was delivered privately to the leaders of Wall Street firms reveals her true intentions regarding financial reform, because she spoke to them as a politician. The only candidates running on platforms to regulate and reform Wall Street are Ms. Clinton and Mr. Sanders. No voter—a Clinton supporter or otherwise—should take her word until the relationship between Ms. Clinton and Wall Street is transparent. Her refusal to release the transcripts is an impediment to democracy and contradicts her claims that she has been fighting against special interests her entire political career.

cont'

http://observer.com/2016/02/clinton-aligns-with-republicans-to-hide-wall-street-influences-in-speeches/