Natasha Cunty Korecki comes from the cesspool of Chicago Democrats. You may remember their corrupt Richard Daley.
Oh, I'm sorry. You're thinking of corrupt Richard M. Daley who was mayor from 1989 to 2011 (his marriage and his mayorship ended at the same time). No, no. Richard M. is corrupt, absolutely. But I was speaking of Richard J. Daley -- Richard M.'s father who was also corrupt and oversaw attacks on peaceful protesters and outraged the nation.
Chicago really should never appear in court because that city's politicians do not have clean hands.
So that's where POLITICO's Natasha made her name -- such as it is.
Today she shows up at POLITICO to trash Tara Reade. (No link to her garbage.)
Why?
Because Natasha is just so damn cunty.
Tara Reade's accused Joe Biden of rape.
Cunty Natasha writes an article that has nothing to do with rape. Not one damn bit to do with rape. She writes about problems Tara supposedly had.
These would be problems after the assault.
Now, again, I'm actually a psychologist. I actually deal with real issues like this day after day, year after year. Now since the start of the Iraq War, my practice has shifted to the point that unless a friend's referring a patient, all my patients are veterans. (It's all pro bono. I don't charge. I don't need the money and, goodness knows, our government hasn't been there to seriously address PTS or any other issues that veterans are having.) Even with just veterans, I do have patients who have been assaulted -- and that is men and that is women.
If Tara did everything Cunty Natasha says she did in that slanderous article, so what?
Does she not get that rape is traumatic? Does she not grasp that a survivor's life can be very messy as a result of the trauma?
Does Cunty Natasha think survivors lead perfect lives?
I don't what world that hideous whore is living in. But she's supposed to be a journalist and she writes a one-sided piece of crap attacking Tara.
I can hear Cunty Natasha insisting, "I tried to get comment from her."
I wouldn't have spoken to you either, BITCH.
You're Cunty Natasha. You're not fair and you're one-sided.
Show me where in your damn article you note that your source is a woman who's been bullying and mocking Tara online for weeks now.
It's not there. Cunty Natasha presents that woman as the voice of truth and as someone we should all aspire to be.
Cunty Natasha can't keep her hands out of Tara's underwear drawer but she doesn't tell the readers one damn thing about her source that would reveal to the readers that the source has a very public grudge against Tara and has been trashing her over and over since Tara came forward.
Natasha's a CUNT.
I don't use that term lightly. Search my archives and it's never popped up her before.
But, let me be clear, when you judge a rape victim by how her life does or doesn't fit your idea of perfection, you're a damn CUNT.
If what the evil woman is accusing Tara of is true, if Tara had money problems or emotional issues, guess damn what? That happens to victims of assault.
Don't write for a news outlet if you don't what the f**k you're talking about.
I am sick to death of seeing a woman who says she was raped be smeared and trashed. None of this has to do with assault.
More to the point, her alleged attacker, Joe Biden, is a known liar who had to drop out of his first race because he couldn't stop lying. He has continued to lie. Just this week, he was lying on GOOD MORNING AMERICA that he wasn't part of the unmasking.
None of this ever 'goes to character' for Joe Biden.
But we're going to attack the victim?
Oh, hell no.
Natasha's a CUNT and that's the worst word I can think of to use for her and others like her.
She wrote a one-sided article that presented all of this criticism of Tara Reade and she never told you (a) that trauma has upsetting after-effects which is why therapy is needed and (b) the women telling these tales about Tara hates Tara and has attacked her online for weeks, has ridiculed her, has mocked her. I'm not in the mood for Cunty Natasha.
There is a circle in hell for women like Cunty Natasha and she will be burn in the flames forever for what she has to done right now to every woman who has survived rape and didn't manage to lead a perfect life in the years after they were assaulted.
F**k you, Natasha and f**k POLITICO for employing you.
Go read Ava and C.I.'s excellent "Media: Pig Boys continue their war on women" and grasp that some "pig boys" are actually women -- like Natasha.
"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Friday, May 15, 2020. Joe Biden tells people not to vote for him
(again, he tells them this), an old bully uses THE NATION to attack a
Howie Hawkins supporter, and much more.
Sharon Delgado writes the editors of THE UNION to note:
Tara has accused Joe Biden of assault. Many of us find Tara credible. That number has only increased since she did her interview with Megyn Kelly which was posted on Megyn's YOUTUBE CHANNEL last Friday evening.
Though it has not yet been a full week (that'll be around 6:30 pm EST tonight), the interview already has over 851,000 streams on Megyn's channel alone. In addition, it has aired on many TV outlets -- in part and in full.
Joe has been on TV. On MORNING JOE, he insisted he didn't do anything -- as best he could recall. Then he repeated that when GOOD MORNING AMERICA tossed a minor question at him. On THE LAST WORD last night, he again issued a denial. As Christo Avialis explains below, a majority of voters believe Tara.
On THE LAST WORD, Joe offered a solution, "If they believe Tara Reade, they probably shouldn't vote for me." And while some will not vote for him because they believe Tara, others feel more can be done.
And many are also calling for an investigation. Unlike the editorial board of THE NEW YORK TIMES, most aren't calling for the DNC to conduct the investigation. Instead, many backing this avenue insist it should be an independent investigation.
Joe keeps insisting that Tara should be vetted but also insisting that vetting should not go on in his own papers stored at the University of Delaware. He's always hidin', that Joe Biden.
In other political news, Clintonite Peter Dreier brings his old man smell to THE NATION where he types:
Bhaskar Sunkara, editor of the provocative and popular socialist Jacobin magazine, tweeted last week that he intends to vote for Green Party presidential candidate Howie Hawkins in November. And yes, it matters. Jacobin has a considerable reach. It claims to have a paid print circulation of 50,000, while its website draws over 2 million visitors a month. Jacobin is particularly influential among young leftists, with more-radical-than-thou tendencies that reflect the idealism of recent recruits to left-wing ideas. It was near-messianic in its devotion to Bernie Sanders’s candidacy.
The danger here is obvious. It only takes a small number of votes in key swing states—Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, North Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire, Virginia, Iowa, and Florida—where the margin of victory could be a few thousand or a few hundred votes, to hand Donald Trump a victory, as we saw in 2016. In Wisconsin, Trump’s margin over Clinton was 22,748 votes, while Green Party candidate Jill Stein won 31,072 votes. In Michigan, Trump defeated Hillary Clinton by 10,704 votes, while Stein got 51,463 votes.
Who the hell cares you musty old man?
First, no one owns someone else's vote. If a candidate wants a vote, they need to campaign for it. If they're unable to reach the voter then a candidate has failed at their most important job: attracting voters.
Second, your vote is your vote and you are allowed to use it however you want. You can -- I always encourage this -- vote for anyone who speaks to you. You can also chose not to vote. You can vote some form of protest vote. And you can let someone bully you into voting for candidate X.
But it's your vote and how you choose to vote is your business.
Third, Bhaskar Sunara isn't a Democrat. How dare elderly Peter Dreier try to shame him into voting for Biden. This is a point that Dreier doesn't get from the nursing home of his mind, not everyone in this country is either a Democrat or a Republican. As Ann likes to point out, her parents are Greens, she was raised a Green. That's a hard reality for Peter Dreier to accept because he doesn't accept any events that happened after 1970.
Howie Hawkins is running for the Green Party's presidential nomination. He doesn't have the nomination yet. Dario Hunter is still in the race. But Ann will vote Green because she is a Green. Idiots like Dreier don't get that and think they can bully people like Ann into dropping their beliefs and their political party to vote for Joe Biden. That's nonsense. (In fairness, we should note that the disaster that was David Cobb's 2004 presidential campaign included Cobb urging voters not to vote for him if they lived in a 'swing' state.)
Bullies like Dreier need to be called out.
He has no business shaming anyone for their choice of who to vote for. If you want to go after politicians (Dreier only goes after Republican politicians), that's fine. But stop attacking We The People. And stop attacking democracy and freedom. That's what you do when you try to bully someone into voting your way.
It's a sign of just how weak a candidate Joe Biden is that his supporters have to resort to shaming and bullying to try to drum up support for their pathetic candidate.
Chris Hedges interviewed Howie Hawkins earlier this week.
I don't care who you vote for. I'm not here, this site doesn't exist, to order you how to vote. I do hope, however you vote or not vote, what you do is what you believe in. If you believe in the way you use your vote then it is never wasted.
You can visit JACOBIN and read their arguments. We've highlighted them before and will highlight them again. David Sirota is someone we highlighted a great deal. He is now working with JACOBIN and you can find his work there.
Site issue. We're not doing Tweets here -- not a post full of Tweets. If you use Google Chrome, it's not a problem. But I'm tired of the people who don't use it e-mailing the public account to complain. Martha and Shirley are the main ones working the public account and they have enough to do without having to explain that it is Twitter and their 'blue check' nonsense that causes a big black box on reposted Tweets if you're viewing this site through Firefox of something else.
In Iraq, the big news remains Mustafa Al-Kadhimi who became prime minister on May 7th. Abdulrahman Al-Rashed (ARAB NEWS) offers:
Al-Kadhimi’s most difficult tasks will be to save Iraq from Tehran, which wants to control its neighbor, and to steer his country away from the dangers resulting from the US-Iran conflict. This escalated after Washington revealed Tehran’s intention to cause political and security chaos in Baghdad. Soon after, the US assassinated Soleimani, Iran’s most prominent military leader, and several militia leaders, which was followed by an escalation of protests against the American military presence in Iraq. This was the highest level of confrontation on Iraqi soil.
Soon after Al-Kadhimi was confirmed as prime minister, the US government announced that, as an exception to its sanctions, it had given Iraq permission to buy oil from Iran. The move was designed to encourage the Iranians to curb their disruptive activities in Iraq.
However, Al-Kadhimi inherits the same problems that faced his predecessors, Haider Abadi and Adel Abdul Mahdi. Iran has infiltrated Iraq’s security, military and religious institutions. Sectarian and regional rifts have grown and corruption has increased. Government fiscal deficits have multiplied as a result of the collapse in oil prices and the recent street protests, which could return at any time.
The new prime minister needs to build public confidence in the government and secure the cooperation of parliament to meet the demands of demonstrators. He will also have to quickly control the militias and “restore prestige to the military and security institutions,” as he himself said on Tuesday.
At GULF NEWS, Osama al-Sharif notes:
The Atlantic Council had a discussion yesterday with Luay al-Khatteeb who, until the new prime minister formed his new cabinet, had been Iraq's Minister of Electricity.
We'll close with this short video from Amal Clooney.
The following sites updated:
Sharon Delgado writes the editors of THE UNION to note:
Since Tara Reade is local,
I need to say publicly here in my community, as a survivor of sexual
assault myself, that I support her right to speak out and abhor the way
she has been insulted, abused, and threatened.
Not
only are these attacks traumatic for her and for other survivors, they
have a chilling effect on anyone who might consider sharing similar
stories — about Joe Biden or anyone else.
People
who support a woman’s right to tell their stories must be careful not
to turn it into a partisan issue. I don’t want Donald Trump to win
reelection, but I also don’t want the Me Too Movement to lose ground.
The movement was finally challenging the centuries-old narrative that
women (and children) need to keep silence when sexually assaulted or be
subject to questions and comments that imply that they are lying, all to
cast doubt on their accusations and to protect the man.
Tara has accused Joe Biden of assault. Many of us find Tara credible. That number has only increased since she did her interview with Megyn Kelly which was posted on Megyn's YOUTUBE CHANNEL last Friday evening.
Though it has not yet been a full week (that'll be around 6:30 pm EST tonight), the interview already has over 851,000 streams on Megyn's channel alone. In addition, it has aired on many TV outlets -- in part and in full.
Joe has been on TV. On MORNING JOE, he insisted he didn't do anything -- as best he could recall. Then he repeated that when GOOD MORNING AMERICA tossed a minor question at him. On THE LAST WORD last night, he again issued a denial. As Christo Avialis explains below, a majority of voters believe Tara.
On THE LAST WORD, Joe offered a solution, "If they believe Tara Reade, they probably shouldn't vote for me." And while some will not vote for him because they believe Tara, others feel more can be done.
And many are also calling for an investigation. Unlike the editorial board of THE NEW YORK TIMES, most aren't calling for the DNC to conduct the investigation. Instead, many backing this avenue insist it should be an independent investigation.
Joe keeps insisting that Tara should be vetted but also insisting that vetting should not go on in his own papers stored at the University of Delaware. He's always hidin', that Joe Biden.
In other political news, Clintonite Peter Dreier brings his old man smell to THE NATION where he types:
Bhaskar Sunkara, editor of the provocative and popular socialist Jacobin magazine, tweeted last week that he intends to vote for Green Party presidential candidate Howie Hawkins in November. And yes, it matters. Jacobin has a considerable reach. It claims to have a paid print circulation of 50,000, while its website draws over 2 million visitors a month. Jacobin is particularly influential among young leftists, with more-radical-than-thou tendencies that reflect the idealism of recent recruits to left-wing ideas. It was near-messianic in its devotion to Bernie Sanders’s candidacy.
The danger here is obvious. It only takes a small number of votes in key swing states—Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, North Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire, Virginia, Iowa, and Florida—where the margin of victory could be a few thousand or a few hundred votes, to hand Donald Trump a victory, as we saw in 2016. In Wisconsin, Trump’s margin over Clinton was 22,748 votes, while Green Party candidate Jill Stein won 31,072 votes. In Michigan, Trump defeated Hillary Clinton by 10,704 votes, while Stein got 51,463 votes.
Who the hell cares you musty old man?
First, no one owns someone else's vote. If a candidate wants a vote, they need to campaign for it. If they're unable to reach the voter then a candidate has failed at their most important job: attracting voters.
Second, your vote is your vote and you are allowed to use it however you want. You can -- I always encourage this -- vote for anyone who speaks to you. You can also chose not to vote. You can vote some form of protest vote. And you can let someone bully you into voting for candidate X.
But it's your vote and how you choose to vote is your business.
Third, Bhaskar Sunara isn't a Democrat. How dare elderly Peter Dreier try to shame him into voting for Biden. This is a point that Dreier doesn't get from the nursing home of his mind, not everyone in this country is either a Democrat or a Republican. As Ann likes to point out, her parents are Greens, she was raised a Green. That's a hard reality for Peter Dreier to accept because he doesn't accept any events that happened after 1970.
Howie Hawkins is running for the Green Party's presidential nomination. He doesn't have the nomination yet. Dario Hunter is still in the race. But Ann will vote Green because she is a Green. Idiots like Dreier don't get that and think they can bully people like Ann into dropping their beliefs and their political party to vote for Joe Biden. That's nonsense. (In fairness, we should note that the disaster that was David Cobb's 2004 presidential campaign included Cobb urging voters not to vote for him if they lived in a 'swing' state.)
Bullies like Dreier need to be called out.
He has no business shaming anyone for their choice of who to vote for. If you want to go after politicians (Dreier only goes after Republican politicians), that's fine. But stop attacking We The People. And stop attacking democracy and freedom. That's what you do when you try to bully someone into voting your way.
It's a sign of just how weak a candidate Joe Biden is that his supporters have to resort to shaming and bullying to try to drum up support for their pathetic candidate.
Chris Hedges interviewed Howie Hawkins earlier this week.
I don't care who you vote for. I'm not here, this site doesn't exist, to order you how to vote. I do hope, however you vote or not vote, what you do is what you believe in. If you believe in the way you use your vote then it is never wasted.
You can visit JACOBIN and read their arguments. We've highlighted them before and will highlight them again. David Sirota is someone we highlighted a great deal. He is now working with JACOBIN and you can find his work there.
Site issue. We're not doing Tweets here -- not a post full of Tweets. If you use Google Chrome, it's not a problem. But I'm tired of the people who don't use it e-mailing the public account to complain. Martha and Shirley are the main ones working the public account and they have enough to do without having to explain that it is Twitter and their 'blue check' nonsense that causes a big black box on reposted Tweets if you're viewing this site through Firefox of something else.
In Iraq, the big news remains Mustafa Al-Kadhimi who became prime minister on May 7th. Abdulrahman Al-Rashed (ARAB NEWS) offers:
Al-Kadhimi’s most difficult tasks will be to save Iraq from Tehran, which wants to control its neighbor, and to steer his country away from the dangers resulting from the US-Iran conflict. This escalated after Washington revealed Tehran’s intention to cause political and security chaos in Baghdad. Soon after, the US assassinated Soleimani, Iran’s most prominent military leader, and several militia leaders, which was followed by an escalation of protests against the American military presence in Iraq. This was the highest level of confrontation on Iraqi soil.
Soon after Al-Kadhimi was confirmed as prime minister, the US government announced that, as an exception to its sanctions, it had given Iraq permission to buy oil from Iran. The move was designed to encourage the Iranians to curb their disruptive activities in Iraq.
However, Al-Kadhimi inherits the same problems that faced his predecessors, Haider Abadi and Adel Abdul Mahdi. Iran has infiltrated Iraq’s security, military and religious institutions. Sectarian and regional rifts have grown and corruption has increased. Government fiscal deficits have multiplied as a result of the collapse in oil prices and the recent street protests, which could return at any time.
The new prime minister needs to build public confidence in the government and secure the cooperation of parliament to meet the demands of demonstrators. He will also have to quickly control the militias and “restore prestige to the military and security institutions,” as he himself said on Tuesday.
At GULF NEWS, Osama al-Sharif notes:
Kadhimi, a former journalist and a fierce opponent of Saddam Hussein,
has never joined a political party and until his nomination held the
important job of head of the National Intelligence Service.
Most importantly his nomination was backed by both Washington and
Tehran; paving the way for breaking of the stalemate that derailed the
nomination of two ideologically opposed predecessors; Mohammed Tawfik
Alawi, a former communications minister, and Adnan Al-Zurfi, the
governor of Najaf.
[. . .]
[. . .]
But while Kadhimi was able to navigate his way through a divided
parliament — he picked mostly independents and technocrats as ministers
although he followed the same ethno-sectarian quota system shunned by
protesters — lawmakers had delayed approval of seven key portfolios,
including foreign affairs and oil. This could turn to be his Achilles
heel.
In his first address Kadhimi promised the Iraqi people to oversee
early elections, contain the spread of the coronavirus, pass an
“exceptional” budget law, stem out corruption, bringing armed groups
under the control of the state, and repatriate the displaced.
The Atlantic Council had a discussion yesterday with Luay al-Khatteeb who, until the new prime minister formed his new cabinet, had been Iraq's Minister of Electricity.
We'll close with this short video from Amal Clooney.
The following sites updated:
