The Secretary of State of New Hampshire is named Bill Gardner. Chances are good that you have never heard of him. Gardner, however, may be about to make a move that puts him into the center of the 2016 presidential election. As of today, Gardner is still saying that he is unlikely to let Bernie Sanders run in the Democrat primary because Sanders is an independent in Vermont. The DNC had no problem putting Sanders into their debate. The other states have no problem letting Bernie appear on the ballot as a Democrat. Somehow, though, in New Hampshire where Sanders has led in most of the polls over Hillary Clinton, this low level official has a problem letting Bernie run. What a coincidence!
So here's the question: is this a ploy by the Clinton's to get rid of Hillary's remaining competitor? It's certainly the type of move Hillary and her people would like. She gets rid of Sanders and she has no fingerprints on the hit put out on the Vermont senator. Will we hear in a year or two that Bill Gardner has left state government to take a job with the Clinton Foundation at $250,000 per year? Will we find that the Clinton Global Initiative is suddenly hiring Gardner's wife to run anti-poverty programs in New Hampshire? You know the programs that give out $120,000 while running up "administrative" costs of $880,000. (That's roughly the portion of Clinton Foundation expenditures that go to actual charity compared to salary and other "administration".)
Nothing that Hillary and her people do could surprise me at this point. Nevertheless, if Gardner bars Sanders from the New Hampshire ballot, there better be a major firestorm in response. It would be the lowest of the low when it comes to American politics.
Look, I don't like Bernie Sanders. I don't like his positions on the issues. I particularly don't like Socialism which he espouses. Bernie Sanders, however, is entitled to run for president without some local functionary preventing a fair contest.
So here's the question: is this a ploy by the Clinton's to get rid of Hillary's remaining competitor? It's certainly the type of move Hillary and her people would like. She gets rid of Sanders and she has no fingerprints on the hit put out on the Vermont senator. Will we hear in a year or two that Bill Gardner has left state government to take a job with the Clinton Foundation at $250,000 per year? Will we find that the Clinton Global Initiative is suddenly hiring Gardner's wife to run anti-poverty programs in New Hampshire? You know the programs that give out $120,000 while running up "administrative" costs of $880,000. (That's roughly the portion of Clinton Foundation expenditures that go to actual charity compared to salary and other "administration".)
Nothing that Hillary and her people do could surprise me at this point. Nevertheless, if Gardner bars Sanders from the New Hampshire ballot, there better be a major firestorm in response. It would be the lowest of the low when it comes to American politics.
Look, I don't like Bernie Sanders. I don't like his positions on the issues. I particularly don't like Socialism which he espouses. Bernie Sanders, however, is entitled to run for president without some local functionary preventing a fair contest.
No comments:
Post a Comment