Home | About | Donate

Greenpeace, Sanders Hold Ground Against Clinton in Fossil Fuel Feud


#1

Greenpeace, Sanders Hold Ground Against Clinton in Fossil Fuel Feud

Nadia Prupis, staff writer

Environmental group Greenpeace has responded to Hillary Clinton's frustrated interaction with a climate activist on Thursday, when the former secretary of state said she was "sick of" the Bernie Sanders campaign claiming she has taken fossil fuel money to fund her presidential campaign.


#3

...and it will be sustained and increase in power after Nov. 2016, no matter, what the outcome of that election is.


#4

The Red Queen is starting to lose it - literally! The problem with a pattern of lies rather than truth is that lies always catch-up to you!
The momentum for Sanders is palpable - the old Dem coalition of the brainwashed is crumbling - seeing the truth - as a new wave demands access and end to corrupt business as usual DNC - DLC politics!
Sanders represents a new direction - Hillary represents big-money and power 1% politics - her remaining supporters cling to the mirage of that fast-fading past.........Feel The Bern!


#6

Last evening I was surfing the tube and stopped briefly at MSNBC, Chris Hayes was pontificating about something or other, a background screen had a graphic with the words "Plot To Get Hillary." Hillary's apologists like Rachel and Hayes can't face reality so they make up imaginary plots to get Hillary, a person who they treat as President Elect Clinton. Have they no shame? ( I did not stay tuned to Hayes for more than about 30 seconds, so what the plot against Hillary entails, I don't have a clue.)


#7

Nailed it. Without the effects of decades of propaganda, the Clinton campaign would never have even had any wheels to fall off.


#8

Hillary is one huge ego-trip seems to me. Her campaign has been "it's my turn now", from the beginning. So, as things go worse and worse for her, there will be some bad days, and things will get said that are best not said. If you think about it, all the people on the pirate ship turnout to be pirates. (And, we have to amazed that we have two leading candidates arguing about who took money from the fossil fuel interests. Can this be reality? Can you not see how strange this is. Good strange.) The DC crowd, everyone there, needs to pay a initiation fee to get in, and that pretty much involves signing onto things as they are. Change can never come from those at the center. The people there only worry about things like getting a bigger office, or a new copying machine. Indeed, they seldom can even comprehend "new stuff", since all things are as they are. It takes a Bernie-like person, someone who lives on the fringe, with one foot clearly in the swamp we all know and love, DC, and the other bound to the people whom he serves. We are so fortunate to have someone running who actually might do something worth while!


#11

Hillary Clinton is a pathological liar, and will do anything to suck up to her fossil-fuel corporation donors. Let's just call her Cruella DeVille.


#12

Yes a farce, but not a farce if we will not allow ourselves to be brainwashed by the dog and pony show that is not an election but a selection for the sheeple!


#13

I have given up on watching anything other than sports shows on TV a year or two ago. I get my news from a number of sources on the web. None of them are completely unbiased, but every one of them is more genuine than what we find from Fox to CNN


#14

"I do not have—I have money from people who work for fossil fuel companies,": Clearly HRC wrote the book on misleading and "misspeaking". She also has taken a page from her "I never had sex with that woman" hubby.


#15

I am wondering if that private meeting with Michelle Alexander , Bernie and others in NYC is about this movement building come what may.


#16

Old Dutch, you're so full of crap that you can't float. My gang is all at the center -- moderate progressives -- and we don't give a damn about "a bigger office, a new copying machine" or other little things that help get the job done every day. We can't comprehend "new stuff?" Hell, we create it on a regular basis. Remember that the nucleus is the bed rock of the being, the group, the society, the nation, the race, the species, etc. It ain't the flicking little electrons on the outer edge of the atom, looking for a chance to jump to another atom and desert or sell out the stable component that gave them life.


#18

What I see is the monied interests behind the Clinton campaign are in full panic mode.

This was supposed to be a slam dunk but the power of social media and means other than the mainstream media to mobilize sanders supporters have taken them by surprise.

The mainstream media recognizes that its own control over the process is also under threat. If Hilary fails the MSM fails.


#19

Golestan: I agree. Haven't watch CNN or MSNBC for over a month now. Whenever my husband turns that junk on, I put on my headphone and listen to music. I also have decided to get my news from alternate sources, on the web. Also no longer that establishment/centrist, phoney liberal blog, Huffington Post. That one is garbage as well...very biased towards Hillary huff Post usually put positive articles of Bernie way, way down where you usually won't see them. No wonder: I learned Huff. Post is owned now by VERIZON.


#22

Plus, the assertion is explicitly not that Clinton's campaign "received direct contributions from any corporation."

The assertion is explicitly that lobbyists associated with the industry bundled contributions to Clintonite super-PACs.

It's an inside out smear: Clinton asserts that Sanders asserted something about Clinton, and the media reports as if Sanders said that about Clinton.


#23

nice to see someone reads Jack Vance


#24

Thanks, right back at ya cmunky! Ever since the early '60's. Jacks craft is second to none!


#25

I am curious to see the list of Clinton/ energy companies super PACs which would prove your assertion.

I agree with Krugman, Sanders and his supporters have to grow up and figure out whether they are in the Democratic Party or not . These suggestions and innuendo are helping only one side - Republicans.


#26

An exhaustive list of Clinton's fossil fuel donors and amount raised from each is detailed in the article below:

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaign-updates/hillary-clintons-connection-oil-gas-industry/

It also shows how many corporate dems have oil and gas lobbyist family members. Also the real reason for political interference in Ukrainian, Mexican, and other governments (opening up countries for US oil and gas company exploitation and or control).

Please read the list with numerous sources cited by Greenpeace. So no, Bernie and his campaign have NOT lied about this. BTW, Obama swore off lobbyist money in 2008, just to avoid these problems.

Oh, and according to climate experts, we should not exploit ANY new sources of fossil fuels or we'll burn this planet up. Kinda high stakes, but hey she's collected $4.5 mil from them so far. Think it's worth it?


#27

If you throw a sink full of statements it is usually a list of bad ones. I am sure Clinton is not the greenest of the candidates, but listing individual persons who happen to work for oil and gas as oil and gas industry is akin of a conspiracy theory . If you add distant relatives I am sure you can triple the contribution totals , yet this is more of an FBI charge of mafia collusion.

On top of that listing Ukraine which does not have oil nor gas is just silly.