Posted on Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - 05:20 am:

---

quote:

Media Polling Fully Exposed – About That NBC/WSJ Clinton +11 Point Poll
By Sundance, Oct. 22, 2016

Researchers and political analysts frequent CTH because we bring you hard, factual, and fully-cited research enabling you to make up your own mind about the headlines.

What you are about to read (and see) below is a fully-cited example of something we have discussed frequently, but withheld until today, so the oppositional forces cannot change strategies in their attempts to manipulate your mind.

It is now time to lay all media polling naked for you to grasp. Everything below is fully cited so you can fact-check it for yourself. However, we present this with a disclaimer: The entities exposed will industriously work to change their approach from this day forth.



You have probably seen the latest example of the media claiming a released presidential poll from NBC and The Wall Street Journal as an example of Hillary Clinton expanding to an 11 point lead in the weekend following the “controversial” leaked tape of Donald Trump.

The claim is complete and utter nonsense. Here’s the proof.

We begin with a Google search showing hundreds of media citations referencing the NBC/WSJ Poll:



And here’s the NBC link to the poll, and the NBC Link to the pdf of the poll, and the NBC Poll itself in a scribed pdf: [Note: Hot links provided in source article - FB]

Transparently the poll is manipulated with: a) a small sample (500); and b) the following ideological make-up:



By itself that ideological snapshot is silly. Nationally the party registration is roughly 27% (R), 32% (D), and 40% (I) – SEE HERE – [Note: Hot link provided in source article - FB] However, the polling sample is the least of the issues for this deconstruction.

Arguing about the construct or methodology of the poll is typically what most people do when they are refuting a media poll. That aspect alone is not the big story.

Look at the polling organization:



Hart Research Associates is headed up by Peter D Hart (founder), and Geoff Garin (President) – SEE HERE [Note: Hot link provided in source article - FB]

Now look at what role Geoff Garin, Heart Research Associate President, is currently occupying (link here): [Note: Hot link provided in source article - FB]



OK, so Mr. Geoff Garin, the President of Hart Research and Associates, is currently working as “a strategic adviser for Priorities USA in support of Hillary Clinton’s election“. Gee, I wonder why the media never tells us that part?

See the issue?

Wait, we’re not even close to finished. It gets better.

Let’s take a look at the recent financial connection between, Geoff Garin, Hart Research Associates and Hillary Clinton’s Priorities USA Super-PAC.

For that information we turn to FEC filings -HERE- [Note: Hot link provided in source article - FB]. What do they indicate?



On Page #118 of the September 2016 (most recent) [Note: Hot link provided in source article - FB] filing we find a payment for $178,500 (screen grab above)

On Page #92 of the same September 2016 (most recent) filing [Note: Hot link provided in source article - FB] , we find another payment for $42,000 (screen grab below):



- $220,500.00 in the month of September alone [Note: Emphasis in source article] paid by Hillary Clinton’s Priorities USA Super-PAC to Hart Research Associates.

- The President of Hart Research Associates, Geoff Garin, is working for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

- NBC (S Burke) and The WSJ (Murdoch) contact Geoff Garin (Hart Research Associates) for the post-debate poll data they will use on the day following the debate.

- Hart Research Associates provides a small national poll sample (500) result, with skewed party internals, showing Hillary Clinton +11 points.

Do you see now how “media polling” works, and why we advise to ignore it?

---

Posted on Wednesday, October 12, 2016 - 07:18 pm:

---

quote:

Two More Batch Email Releases From WikiLeaks Today
By Sundance, Oct. 12, 2016


EMAILID 6453 Media lapdog Brent Budowski writes to John Podesta: "am not going to raise this publicly, but one of HRC's opponents will soon charge that she is running an "imperial campaign." If it is the right opponent, Democrat or Republican, the charge will resonate." Yes. This supposed journalist is discussing strategy with the chairman of the Hillary Clinton campaign. Giving him information and warnings about things he learned from other sources most likely off the record. Extreme collusion between the media and Crooked's staff. But wait, there is more! He is asking permission from Podesta to write parts of an article: "BTW, I may doing an Elizabeth Warren column soon. If I write that my optimum scenario would be for Elizabeth to ultimately give a big endorsement to HRC and give the keynote speech at the Convention, totally off the record, would that give you a problem? It would be my personal opinion only, but if you have a problem with my suggesting this as my idea, I won't tell anyone and I won't include it, deferring to you" John Podesta responds to the email, and grants permission for the journalist to write the story as originally planned. https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6 453



EMAILID 5690 Remember how Clinton staff had moles on Elizabeth Warren's team? Seems they had one in Biden's camp as well. Someone who helped to destroy Biden in return for a position. Ron Klain writes to Podesta: "It's been a little hard for me to play such a role in the Biden demise - and I am definitely dead to them -- but I'm glad to be on Team HRC, and glad that she had a great debate last night. Thanks John." https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5690



EMAILID 5688 How to create a debate schedule most favorable to Hillary? How to rig the debate schedule and the rules to be most in her favor? This memo will explain. For example: "to eliminate the possibility of one on one debates; the most likely standard that would achieve this result is to allow any announced candidate who is: 1) a Democrat and, 2) who meets some threshold of viability (1 percent) in either a national or state specific (e.g. Iowa, NH) to participate." One on one debates would have been better for Bernie Sanders, so they wanted to avoid that at all costs. They also wanted to limit the number of debates, and start them late to minimize the impact of the debates. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5688



EMAILID 5479 John Podesta receives Hillary's tweets for approval a few days in advance of the tweets going online. Together with previous leaks, it looks like Hillary doesn't have much input into any of "her" tweets. They are put together by a group of staffers. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5479



EMAILID 5469 Huma reveals there is a "Friend of Hillary" list which is available for rental. Seems like some shady shit because even Huma wants to discuss off email: "We should be thoughtful about any group that wants to rent Friend of Hillary list now because there is interest. This is also probably best discussed off email." https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5469



EMAILID 5512 Email chain about Hillary being extremely weak on the topic of standing up to Wall Street. Not even her own campaign staff believes she is credible on Wall Street. Even though she told Wall St. to cut it out. "I believe we started out the campaign about 20 points behind Sanders in Iowa on the question of who would best stand up to Wall Street and that was when we were about 40 points ahead. If you want to make the question of the campaign, who will best stand up to Wall Street, Sanders is the answer and he'll give you $35 million reasons why." https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5512



EMAILID 5705 Someone, likely Neera Tanden writes to John Podesta. This is more than a little bit creepy : "I know you were probably kidding this morning about me in NH. I am aware of your dark sense of humor. But I should say that I would do whatever Hillary needs always. I owe her a lot. And I'm a loyal soldier. I think I might not be so useful because I overly focus on the lessons of the past but if there's something I should do to help campaign more I will do it. Let's hope it doesn't come to this and she wins Iowa." https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5705



EMAILID 6391 Lot of staffers discussing Select Committee on Benghazi subpoenas issued for Hillary Clinton emails. At the very least this proves that a ton of campaign staff was actively aware and discussing the subpoenas as early as Mar 4, 2015 . This is before Combetta from Platte River Networks used Bleach Bit to wipe out tens of thousands of emails. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6391



EMAILID 5423 Person who wrote the superdelegate rules advises Clinton Campaign how to create an illusion that Bernie people won something so they would work their asses off for Hillary. "So here's my idea. Bernie and his people have been bitching about super delegates and the huge percentage that have come out for Hillary. .. why not throw Bernie a bone and reduce the super delegates in the future to the original draft of members of the House and Senate, governors and big city mayors, eliminating the DNC members who are not State chairs or vice-Chairs... So if we "give" Bernie this in the Convention's rules committee, his people will think they've "won" something from the Party Establishment. And it functionally doesn't make any difference anyway. They win. We don't lose. Everyone is happy. " https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5423



EMAILID 5621 Pondering how to avoid the press because they always ask about the "foundation and emails" causing them to go off message. Long discussion about avoiding the press and whether to do it (they did it) Including : "Can we survive not answering questions from press at message events. Her dinkins speech and immigration message broke through because we didn't take questions. Her community banks message got lost because she answered questions about the foundation and emails." https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5621

---