Connect with us




Over the past 24 hours, a flurry of scandal has unfolded involving MSNBC contributor, Washington Post opinion columnist and prolific Clinton supporter Jonathan Capehart.

Writing an opinion piece for the Washington Post, Capehart sought to sling mud at Bernie Sanders — Swiftboat-style — in questioning Bernie Sanders’ past achievements in fighting for civil rights on behalf of African-American communities in the 1960s. (This, itself, isn’t even an original idea, as Capehart was simply jumping on the Establishment’s anti-Sander claims, which continue time after time to be disproved or found to be outright lies. (Here, here, here and here — in case you’d like some background reading.)

But that is not the central thesis of this story. Instead, let’s look a little more closely at Jonathan Capehart himself, and the flurry of lies and misdirections for which he is quickly becoming known.

Capehart, who currently offers his opinions to readers of the Washington Post and viewers on MSNBC, has spent the past five years in a long-term relationship with Nicholas Schmit IV, a long-term Clinton aide. Schmit has served in various capacities for the Clinton family and the US State Department under Clinton since 2004. You can see his full resume on LinkedIn, but we’ve summarized the key timeline of his career here.

2004 – 2007
Schmit graduated from The University of North Dakota in August 2004, and joined the Clinton Foundation, serving in various roles ending with Director of Finance, before leaving to work on Hillary Clinton’s 2008 Presidential campaign.

2007 – 2008
Schmit worked as the Travel Compliance Director for the Hillary Clinton for President campaign, before her primary defeat by now-President, then-Senator Barack Obama.

2008 – 2013?
Schmit returned to the Clinton Foundation as a consultant, before being tapped to join the Clinton-led State Department in various capacities. His last update on LinkedIn shows him moving into the role of Assistant Chief of Protocol for Diplomatic Partnerships at the State Department in February 2013, the same month that Clinton left the State Department.

Whether the last (or any) of the promotions were based on merit or simply Clinton politics as usual is unclear, but regardless, a clear pattern has emerged.

Flash forward to now. In the middle of a heated and contentious primary season that pits the Clinton-establishment against the sweeping change and progress that Sanders promises, and which Obama promised and failed to deliver in full.

If it feels like history is repeating itself, that may be because history is repeating itself, and Clinton is running the same campaign with which lost in 2008.

Instead of taking a neutral position on the matter to help further Clinton’s policy agenda and talk about how Clinton will move the country forward, Capehart has gone out of his way, time and again, to ensure that the Clintons are presented as the only reasonable choice for the Democratic party. The idea of “politics as usual” as a bad thing is clearly lost on him.

It’s clear that Clinton is the favorite of the Democratic party establishment — despite her arguments that being a woman somehow makes her a non-establishment outsider — when 38.0% of the popular vote translates into 50% of the delegates, thanks to the magic of “party rules”. (More about that here.) So it’s not surprising that Capehart may have a preference for Clinton, and it’s not his political positions that are at issue. He is welcome to support Clinton, Sanders, Trump, Bush, or Jill Stein*, should he choose.

The real issue, it would seem, is that despite the fact that Capehart and Schmit have a history of mixing their personal and professional lives, including Capehart attending official State Department events with Schmit, and that they share a home and life together, Capehart, never saw fit to disclose this conflict of interest, despite his years of work as a journalist blogger.

Instead of admitting his mistake and moving on, Capehart has doubled-down and attacked anyone who questions his “journalistic integrity” as an opinion writer, refusing to acknowledge that his story was factually inaccurate and has already been widely disproven:

Whether there’s really any direct connection to the Clinton campaign today remains to be seen and is up for question, but it should not be forgotten that Capehart’s long-term partner has the Clinton’s to thank for his career and that, by extension, the Clinton’s have helped pay for his Washington, DC duplexAnd knowing that, doesn’t it make the whole situation just seem a little slimy and tawdry?

* Disclosure: We love Jill Stein, but understand that she lacks the name recognition to win. (See, Jonathan, that’s how disclosure works.)

Continue Reading
  • Jack Oliver

    He’s lying and everyone knows it. This will just help Bernie Sanders win the nomination, and he will destroy anyone the GOP puts out there.

  • onestepforward

    I think you just killed your career bruh

  • jaspal singh

    This tool even sounds like Clinton (I’m a progressive who gets things done) when he says “I’m a reporter who reports.” Weak sauce, brah.

    • Jack Oliver

      It’s so obvious it’s scary. Anyone with an IQ above 100 should be able to see how fake he is.

    • david

      Brah? How intellectual, funny I still haven’t heard a sanders supporter answer why the Republican Party is helping him along with rove.

      • jaspal singh

        Cuz they’re out of touch with what’s happening and believe Hillary will win the nomination because she’s still ahead in the polls. Also, Clinton is such an EASY target! She’s flip-flopped on just about everything and rarely puts her money where her mouth is (still raising Wall street money LOL).

        The only guy who knows what’s happening is Trump (that’s why he’s ahead) and he regularly attacks Bernie, calling him a communist as well as other names. None of the other GOP tools can even touch Bernie since they all have their hands in the cookie jar that is USA’s rigged, billionaire-controlled economy!

        • david

          Are you joking SANDERS CHANGED PARTIES, talk about flip flop there’s non bigger, now after 25 yrs consistently voting for smart gun control he’s changing his mind, he’s anti war but votes for a trillion dollar fighter jet, he voted to weaken Wall Street over sight, then there’s this tidbit he’s a liar.

          • jaspal singh

            First of all, gtfo with the politifact link! Do you know what that crap is owned by? Oh right, that Florida media joke outlet which JUST endorsed Hillary. Even with that huge bias, they have Hillary ranked as SLIGHTLY more truthful than Bernie? LMFAO! Next time, link me a poll about perceived honesty by voters out there. Betcha can’t find one that doesn’t say Sanders by a country mile!

            Bernie switched parties? He’s RUNNING as a Democrat, but everyone knows he’s an independent at heart. Are you surprised the DNC is so pro-Hillary? Oh, and don’t even deny that because they just lifted Obama’s funding ban. Which candidate is raising funds through the DNC again? You know better than I do that Bernie is going back to being an independent senator if he doesn’t win the presidency!

          • amysterling

            Um, Politi”fact” is owned by Warren Buffett (I researched it myself). I haven’t seen a “fact” Politifact on any topic I’m knowledgeable about ever. But that is very similar to this article and situation. The “journalists” or “bloggers” should disclose their personal relationships or biases. That’s the point of this article. So Politi”fact” should say “Warren Buffett owns this column’s parent newspapers (Berkshire Hathaway). They own no other such newspapers but hey, they bought Politi”fact” 2 years ago and any vague pretense we had to covering anything other than what Mr. Buffett wants is fugeddaboudit. Sometimes I copy other people so to copy what you say “sounds like you’re a liar” and for sure blind and biased.

  • David Landry

    He sure gets worked up over what at the very worst (until it was proven it was really Sanders in the photo) was a potential simple mislabelled photo of a person who was dressed the same, wearing the same glasses, speaking at the same sit-in Sanders attended, lead, and spoke at … But, here’s what he thinks of Clinton not releasing the transcripts to her “gushy” Wall St. speeches (hint: “ridiculous and boring”.)

    Obvious shill is obvious.

    • Wanda

      Of all the crap that goes on in politics it’s hard to see how you can pick out one set of people to vilify. I haven’t heard anyone asking for Bush speech transcripts, I haven’t heard anyone asking for Colin Powell or Condi Rices emails. It just gets real sickening to hear the same stuff over and over. It’s your right to not like someone, it is also my right to say stay out of other people’s private lives. As far as I can tell you’re the only one complaining. Bernie is not Saint Bernie and Hillary is not Saint Hillary but it has gone way beyond the pale how she is bashed for everything she does.

      • That’s because Bush isn’t running for President, nor Rice or Powell. You obviously aren’t connecting the dots between her speeches for huge sums and the gifts she gave in return to those who paid for those speeches. Your false comparison between Bernie and Hillary notwithstanding Bernie is honest and trustworthy when Hillary clearly isn’t!

        • Wanda

          How about you give me proof of gifts and money you are talking about, and what was done illegally with it.Bernie is not necessarily all that squeak clean he just hasn’t been in the public eyes of someone watching everything he does and says. Bush charges thousands of dollars to speak to veterans groups, why is that not made into a daily discussion. I don’t care if he’s president now or not he was one of the most deceitful on we had in recent history. I’m just sick of all the BS that is heaped on one person and nothing is ever proven just innuendos.

          • Joe Shmoe

            The denialism and mental gymanistics of Hillary Clinton supporters is a sight to see, isn’t it?

            Sanders is WAAAY too nice to Clinton, for all of her lying and evasiveness. She says she suddenly changed her mind about her pet project, the TPP, and he takes her at her word.

            But if Clinton makes it to the general election Trump will tear her to shreds. He’s got a nose for bullshit and he’ll never hesitate to call it out. Clinton will LOSE to Trump, but Sanders can beat him.

          • coniinthegarden

            Seriously, wake up! Why do you think the civilization advances that other developed countries have had for decades, (some for 60 years!!!!) we keep hearing are IMPOSSIBLE in this country? Why our government’s decision disproportionately favor the super rich over the middle and working classes? Can you think of another reason but the collective influence of the huge amounts of money in politics?
            No one is picking on Hillary. Getting big money out of politics has been Sander’s theme throughout his political life. She is not unique, just the opposite. She is just like any other politician and therefore unlikely to secure dramatic improvements of standard of living and improved social mobility matching other developed countries. Just like her husband, who capitulated and implemented right wing policies (welfare “reform”, NAFTA, “tough on crime”, revoking Glass-Steagall), just like PBO, who was not able to reign in Wall Street, Hillary Clinton is too much part of the system.
            We are extremely lucky that Bernie is running, because he is uniquely positioned as an outsider, but who has long been rubbing shoulders with the establishment of both parties and KNOWS the system inside out. He is idealistic AND realistic, always ahead of his time AND pragmatic, wise AND sharp, and he is tough too. See his almost clairvoyant speeches in congress on You Tube! We are being given a once in a lifetime chance to elect a true leader. It’s not about Hillary, it’s about our future.
            I hope you’ll join us.

          • Joe Shmoe

            Well put. And this election can be seen as an election where the economic elites of the Democratic party sold out the next generation by supporting Clinton.

          • I don’t have any reason to give you proof of anything. Obviously you are one of the lotus blossom munching worshipers of all things Hillary. You are a true believer and just as fact adverse as any Trump of Bush Kool-aid swilling worshiper. This stuff is everywhere and yet you refuse to look. I could provide you with a hundred links and you wouldn’t read a one of them because you would rather hang onto your beliefs. I’ve already wasted too much time. I’d rather go beat my head against a brick wall. You have no idea just how easy it is to recognize someone who has spent a portion of their life feverishly working to avoid the merciless ravages of intelligence and have finally succeeded.

        • david

          Burned up old man has paid speeches, voted for trillion dollar warplanes the military doesn’t want ( isn’t he anti war?), votes consistently against gun control laws and talk states rights like Rand Paul. He’s not a super liberal you think he is but an opportunist. If he was really full of integrity he would’ve ran as an independent.

          • David, do you have any idea just how easy it is to recognize someone who was home schooled by middle school drop-outs? They don’t know how to present either a well reasoned and factual assertion or rebuttal. They just rearrange the priorities of some of their prejudices they learned by age 14 and then spew a lot of nonsense. Any explanation I would give to you would be beyond your intellectual ability to comprehend. Come back if you ever get that second IQ point.

          • Joe Shmoe

            Wow, David, you lie again. You really are shameless.

            Typical of Hillary supporters, and of Hillary herself, so “birds of a feather….”.

            If Sanders “votes consistently against gun control laws” then why did the NRA give him a D minus rating?

          • Joe Shmoe

            And you cannot possibly be so stupid as to REALLY THINK that running as an independent would give Sanders any chance in our political duopoly.

            In fact you would be SHITTING YOUR PANTS if Sanders ran as an independent, like Nader did. Or perhaps you would prefer that Sanders run in the general election this Fall as an independent? Would you appreciate his “integrity” for that?

          • Dan Colegate

            He’s not anti war. He’s just against being the world police. Going in and destabilizing an entire region which will haunt us for decades.

      • St Francis

        Thanks, Wanda…….

        • Duane

          For what? That was a whole pile of nothing … worthless comments and complaints.

  • MCarson

    What nobody is getting is how awful his manipulation of the widow is. He’s got her emoting about not wanting her husbands contributions forgotten, she’s saying she thinks she knows her husband better than someone who was in the room with him for a few hours, Capehart’s got the widow’s daughter looking at the photo, obviously not happy that it’s a big deal.
    The man had a photography department across the hall, and he digs up old school friends?
    That woman’s life will never be the same, and her memories of her husband will be coupled with the pain this pushback will cause her. Nobody wants to hurt her or her memory of him, but all the “It was Bernie” stuff can’t feel like anything but a slap.
    This isn’t a Hillary or Bernie fight, it’s a “how low can you go to try to smear Bernie?” fight. Widows and Orphans are usually off the menu, even for BernieBros.

    • joyce smith

      Sorry, what widow are you talking about? I’m confused, so please explain fully. Thanks!

      • MCarson

        Most of the emotional quotes are his former wife talking about him. He’s dead, she divorced him maybe 40 years ago. Even so, she’s obviously proud of him and the work he did. By using her to offset the original photographer he’s making people choose between arguing with a widow who only wants to remember her ex in a good way and supporting the photographer.
        Any newspaper photographer can authenticate a picture. He skipped them to get somebody emotionally vulnerable to support him. Now she’s in print, saying things that are obviously incorrect, when all she wanted to do was brag on a good guy.
        If somebody got my Mom to look like an idiot in the Post I’d deck him. The “I think I know my own husband better than someone taking pictures” broke my heart. I don’t have the nerve to say “no you don’t”, but that’s what Capehart has set her up for.
        Now we can be BernieBros and mean to widows & orphans.

        • coniinthegarden

          I don’t quit understand your reference to BernieBros. Except Capehart, who is being hurtful to Bruce’s ex-wife?

          • Amythist

            BernieBros is a smear. As far as I’ve seen, nobody’s been disrespectful about the wife. All anybody is saying is that the proof is in the pictures and they are irrefutable. It was a slimy move on Capehart’s part but no need to smear the people who want to correct the record. The truth is important, even if it disappoints someone.

        • Jack Oliver

          The wife is he married to for a couple years and then they divorced. It wasn’t a long marriage, and Capehart is playing off that of that perception to make his point, since the evidence obviously doesn’t.

    • Reno Berkeley

      She’s not his widow. They were only married for five years. They eloped when she was 19. So, they divorced when she was 24. But I agree with everything else you said. It can’t be easy for her now.

    • Amythist

      I was right there with you but you lost me when you said “even for BernieBros” which is an ugly way to smear Bernie’s voters. Yes, the ex-wife surely wishes that picture to be her husband but when you compare them to the others, it’s obvious it’s Bernie’s. It was disgraceful for him to take that road and to try to claim she couldn’t be mistaken about someone she divorced over 40 years ago.

      • Linda Woods Alexander

        It’s NOT Bernie…stop pulling the Forrest Gump and sticking any old horned-rimmed-glasses into a pic to try to prove something. Facts are…Bernie’s kept his ass glued to his chair in congress for over 2 decades…and NOT been out there in the trenches advocating anything for anyone!! He’s been yelling a lot. And doing nothing about it. HILLARY is the one out there getting INVOLVED in women and children rights…AA and Latino issues…and a multitude of issues occurring where people live!!! STAY IN YOUR SENATE SEAT NOW…LIKE YOU ALWAYS HAVE, BERNIE!!!

      • MCarson

        I didn’t mean that the way you took it. I also think the BernieBros thing is awful, it’s just a way to say that people who support him are stupid, mannerless gamer idiots. I’ll try to be more clear in the future.

        • Amythist

          I see. Thanks for clearing that up.

  • Bernard Marx

    You may wanna fix this: “If it feels like history is repeating itself, that may be because history is repeating itself, and Clinton is running the same campaign with which lost in 2016.”

  • St Francis

    Thank you, Jonathan… looks like the BernieBros are out in full force (Geesh, if Bernie wins the nomination, can you sustain this vs. DonaldsNads?)…….. my God, all the connected players at the U of Chicago are Bernie supporters, and are happy to call Bernie a civil rights activist, but if they say the pic isn’t of him, the pic isn’t of him

    • Guest51

      “Bernie Bros”? They are the same fabrication from the Clinton machine as were “Obama Boys”. Started by the exact same journalist. Jeez – The Clinton campaign & supporters pretend that things disappear on the net. They don’t.

    • coniinthegarden

      You obviously skipped the part where the photographer proved 100% that it WAS Bernie. People make mistakes. Obviously they looked alike and I don’t think that anyone identified the photograph as Bruce out of spite. But Capehart didn’t do his research, was acting like he was SURE Bernie campaign was cheating, and was VERY UNKIND. Why should we be kind now, when HE was proven wrong?

  • Felicia Brown

    So what? Hell nobody is complaining about Fox and how they promote everything Republican. Hell they call themselves a news outlet and they act as a propaganda arm for the Republican party. This is one man, the entire Fox network is bias and not neutral when it come to politics and not one person cried foul. If he supports Hilary so what ! News networks are not neutral when it comes to politics and the analysts are not. Look at Joe on the morning Joe show, he is bias as hell.

    • Jack Oliver

      The issues is that he should disclose that information, that his partner’s career is in thanks to the Clinton machine.

      • Joe Shmoe

        They should also disclose that contributor Jess McIntosh’s company, Emily’s List gave $700,000 to Hillary Clinton.

        • Jack Oliver

          It turns out that this dude’s partner donated over $3k to Hillary’s campaign.

    • Joe Shmoe

      The “entire” MSNBC network has been in the tank for corporatist Democrats since Keith Olbermann left. and then Cenk Uygur… and then Ratigan, and then Schultz. Instead they give us Obamabots like MHP, Dyson, and Sharpton, who thinks he can be a news analyst when he can’t even pronounce “Galileo” (…”Gu-LAY-oh”). And now its closet Hillary bots like McIntosh, Walsh, and Capeheart.

    • Joe Shmoe

      What do you mean “nobody is complaining about Fox”. Everyone knows Fox is bias, but we aren’t talking about Fox.

      Having individuals who are “bias” or represent one political viewpoint is fine, especially if the show acknowledges. It is a common practice. People tune into Morning Joe knowing that Joe is a conservative blowhard.

      BUT, someone like FakeHeart, who calls himself “a reporter” should not be advocating for one candidate over another, or smearing a candidate with false claims that he didn’t even investigate.

      If CapeHeart is a reporter than he sucks at it, AND is he dishonest and irresponsible. He should make a retraction and an apology – like any responsible reporter would do after a “mistake” like this.

  • Pingback: Oh, isn’t this just a cozy arrangement |()

  • Joe Shmoe

    Another reason to turn off MSNBC. Last week Capeheart adopted a lecturing tone and said that Sanders should declare that a picture of a U of C protest leader was not him. Then the photographer himself said it was Sanders.

    “A reporter who reports.”….biased bullshit!

    Capeheart owes the public a retraction and an apology for pretending to know what he is talking about, in order to undermine Sanders.

    • Andrew

      No kidding. And some actual after-the-fact disclosures, too. So everyone can what kind of “reporter” he really is.

  • david

    Yawn, seems he used facts, even in his columns which are typically a majority opinion pieces. Sucks but sanders is doa in November as the nominee and that’s only if he can get delegates to not revolt against him at the convention. Seriously someone please smack these sanders people with a history book on elections that failed. We need a winner, we need someone that’s liberal but hasn’t given the other side ammunition of being an idiot saying they are more liberal than Obama which has fueled massive turnouts for caucuses and the primary at 08 Dem levels while dems are showing up in lackluster numbers. Of those dems as a claimed party are going for Hillary, while sanders is garnering some dems but mainly independents and in nh crossover republicans trying to influence the process because from the kochs to Rove to the RNC they are begging for a sanders nominee.

    • coniinthegarden

      LOL, I guessed you missed the part where Hillary and her supporters have been busy for months trying to proving she is MORE liberal than Bernie.

      • david

        Guess you have been just reading headlines. Look at the congressional record, when both were there, they voted 97% of the time the same way, they cosponsered each other’s bills. She’s been consistently progressive amd a democrat while Bernie has been an independent who claimed to be a Dem to run for president. Progressives don’t vote against gun control, or for trillion dollar war planes the military doesn’t want. Don’t be a teabagger with a different label, read, learn, and not opinion hatchet jobs. But congressional records, read on Bernie his staff calls him Stalin because he’s unstable, look at npr on the media segment about how Bernie lies constantly.

        • Joe Shmoe

          Again you are lying or stupid, just like the candidate you are so impressed by.

          Progressives don’t back Republicans in wars that kill a million people.
          Progressives don’t support trade deals that impoverish the working class.
          Progressives don’t suck up to Wall Street and corporate contributors.

          And Clinton has called herself a “moderate”, which is NOT the same as a progressive.

        • Joe Shmoe

          Show me the link to NPR where they say “Bernie lies constantly”. I bet you don’t have any.

          • david

   One of many. In this he’s prove. Wrong I think this is the correct link to his complaining I don’t get media attention (he’s been on Sunday shows at least one if not two a week since sept) in this a reporter who’s followed him for yrs punches holes in that instead showing sanders has a history of complaining while having daily press conferences.

          • Joe Shmoe

            Another stupid “argument”. You really embarrass yourself between your lying and stupidity, all at the top of your pompous voice. I hope you’re at least getting paid by the Clintons from their hundred million dollars in corporate gold.

            Sanders does not have “daily press conferences”. That is a lie.

            But even IF he did, calling a press conference doesn’t get you any more “media attention” on prime time news than shouting from the street corner.

        • coniinthegarden

          Right , when losing an argument compare someone to a Tea Party member. ( I don’t call them teabaggers because I recognize that their movement arose from legitimate concerns). The fact you sail though here not mentioning the most important concerns of majority of Americans shows me that you are either very well off or working for such.
          So let’s see what actual points you are trying to make.
          1. Hillary and Bernie are so much alike they vote same way 97% of times. So what’s the problem?
          2. Oh, I see, they are very different, because she is consistently progressive and he is not. LOL. Hillary is not consistent on anything (maybe except how marriage is a sacred union of a man and a woman until she dropped it in 2010). But seriously – there are huge differences between Hillary and Bernie.
          He was an anti-segregation leader- she supported a pro-segregation Republican politician and remained Republican through college.
          He was an early supporter of gay rights. She took till 2010.
          He was always against engaging US in perpetual war in the Middle East. Hillary isn’t. She even admitted to Kissinger being her close friend and mentor! This alone totally disqualifies her.
          He voted against welfare reform, opposed the 1994 crime bill, is for legalizing marijuana – all progressive positions to the contrast with Hillary.
          You know what. I am going to sleep. I am somewhere half way through the list .Bernie Sanders is a progressive leader. Hillary is clinging to gun control to prove her progressive chops but only in 2008 she run to the right of Obama on guns .

    • Joe Shmoe

      If you want a “winner” who is “liberal” then you just disqualified Hillary Clinton.

      She would be the most conservative Democratic president in a hundred years.

      Meantime ALL your arguments about how Sanders can’t win the general election could also be said about a black man with an Arabic name who might have been born in Kenya.

      • david

        Considering sanders isn’t getting the votes Obama did, slams that argument down.
        Then there’s your complete willful ignorance of who Hillary is, she’s liberal, she just isn’t a teabagger like sanders who talks but can’t back up any of his ideas. His ideas won’t happen republicans certainly won’t vote for them and dems in high contest areas will not touch his plans with a ten foot pole it’d be a sure way to garuntee a republican strong hold on congress. Educate yourself with facts and leave the Fox News, Karl Rove, RNC, and republican troll bloggers and commentators blogs supporting sanders behind.

        • Joe Shmoe

          You are either lying or stupid. Obama got the youth vote and Sanders is creaming Hillary Clinton among younger voters.

          Not only that, but Hillary got the working class vote in 2008, and guess who is getting that vote now? Not Clinton. Check the demographics among NH voters.

          • david

            Sanders is getting the white youth vote. He has yet to get anywhere close to obamas numbers in 08. Not a lie a fact. I suggest instead of being obtuse you read up on it. Then we can all thank god for super delegates.

          • Joe Shmoe

            We’ve only had two primaries, so it’s a bit early to compare Sanders to Obama over the whole ’08 campaign, and Sanders support has only been increasing over the entire past 8 months, right up to this last week.

            That being said, Sanders is killing Clinton among all voters under 40, and he is beating her out on working class voters, which she won over Obama in ’08. With those voters he will not need as much of a support from African Americans, but their support is also growing quickly.

          • Joe Shmoe

            The more people learn about Sanders the more they like him. He has the best overall approval of ANY candidate in either primary.

            But everyone knows about Clinton, and she has much higher negatives across the board, such as on trust. A lot of people utterly despise her and will not vote for her no matter what. So she is not going to get any more popular, and her numbers can only stay flat or go down, as they already are.

        • Joe Shmoe

          Still waiting for your evidence that Karl Rove “planted” Sanders in this election. The more you delay the more you look like a bullshitter.

          I have been involved in a lot of debates on this election and you are about the most ignorant Clinton supporter I’ve ever seen. And you think you can just bluster your way around telling other people to get “the facts”.

          It’s really embarrassing to see Democrats with the level of ignorance and self-delusion of the dumbest Republicans.

  • Prehensile Wit

    I would have a lot more respect for the man if he had a shred of subtlety. He tweeted the original (inaccurate) report somewhere b/w 7 – 10 times. Next time try standing on the White House lawn waving a copy of Wild Weird News, dude.

  • Seattle_bound

    Cope and paste thie You Tub video next time you see lies, because “there is no liberal media” it’s all owned by The Establishment. Listen to this all the way through. The Young Turks (a Capitalist at that) to Bernie’s aid.

  • sallyhampton

    Capehart must be fired. This kind of misuse of his position as a journalist should not be tolerated. He has violated even the weakest standards of journalism. And it’s a dangerous precedent.

    • Joe Shmoe

      He won’t be fired. MSNBC always revs up the propaganda to support corporatist Democrats in an election year. Some of their pundits may seem more neutral, but the management wants corporatist Democorats, which is why real leftists on MSNBC are always driven out (Donahue, Olbermann, Uyger, Schultz…).

  • AllMightySavior
    • Jack Oliver

      Holy shit. This is insane.

  • Justice1111

    It is crazy how many folks in the public eye are getting their reputations seriously tarnished in the way’s they have chosen to support Clinton…. Matthews, Steinem, Albright and now this dude. We are in an era where everything is scrutinized. I guess folks better start thinking long and hard before they open their mouths to the public and think about what they are saying and doing because it seems they are getting themselves burnt by the Clinton machine.

    • Duane

      The ‘establishment’ No Longer are the ONLY ones with access to information. The internet, electronic communication media, has made it so that their lies, exaggerations, and propaganda can be ‘almost immediately’ be refuted with FACTS.
      The ‘establishment’ is No Longer The Only ‘VOICE’ Heard.

      Thus … the clinton machine keeps digging themselves a deeper and deeper hole.

    • Joe Shmoe

      It is “crazy”, but they are looking for the spoils of crony favors in the new Clinton administration. Are you ready for Debbie Wasserman Schultz as ambassador to the U.N.?

  • carrie

    Bernie supported = vicious uninformed paranoid and delusional. Period.

  • nowawake

    Hey johnathan you arent going to throw any fast balls by the left..We aren’t the tea potty.

  • Too busy to play

    Bernie is a dishonest and disgraceful politician who has shown himself to be as dirty as they come. He is a Karl Rove plant to take votes from Hillary. Wonder how much he is getting paid. LOTS!

    • Trace

      Well, I’m sure you feel better, thank you for that. Call us when the shuttle lands!

    • Doug Sanders

      Bill? Is that you?

    • Joe Shmoe

      Yeah, sure. Karl Rove “planted” Bernie Sanders in the Independent party decades ago, and made him talk all that progressive nonsense, year after year, just to stick it to Hillary Clinton in 2016.

      • Too busy to play

        Bernie has been an unknown and unproductive congressman for three decades. There is no chance in hell he could win the nomination or election: the Karl Rove conniving GOP picked the perfect sucker to get sucked into their scheme. Bernie was recently planted into the presidential process recently, it didn’t start decades ago. America is not going to vote for a 75 year old lazy, nonproductive nobody. Karl Rove picked the perfect foil.

        • Joe Shmoe

          And I don’t suppose you have any evidence that Bernie Sanders was “picked by Karl Rove”.

          It’s sad to see the combination of denialism, ignorance, and flat out lying that is so common among Hillary Clinton supporters. But then Hillary Clinton herself lies whenever it will serve her ambition, so her attraction to dishonest people is a natural fit.

        • Joe Shmoe

          Bernie is not a Congressman. He is a Senator. You might want to look up the difference.

  • Joe Shmoe

    Ever notice how many Clinton supporters are just as manipulative and dishonest as she is?

    There is a weird psychological attraction between dirty actors there – not just a political alliance.

  • Joe Shmoe

    It is sad and bizarre to see the combination of denialism, ignorance, and flat out lying that is so common among Hillary Clinton supporters. You would expect to find that among Tea Partiers, but not among Democrats.

    But then Hillary Clinton herself also lies whenever it will serve her ambition, and changes her position overnight, always “evolving” to be just what she thinks you want her to be.

    She regularly insults the voters’ intelligence, but amazingly, she has supporters who really do not care that she is a liar. They think that, SOMEHOW, a President Hillary will not be a liar, and will do all the right things for them. It is sad and a bad sign for our country when people on the left are so willfully ignorant.

  • Linda Woods Alexander

    This kind of crap is totally why I turned against Sanders corrupt campaign tactics and am a strong advocate AGAINST anything related to Bernie Sanders and his hair-brained ‘plans’ to destroy the Democratic Party and overthrow our government.

  • Devilstine

    He is desperately writing anything to paint HRC in a different light…and he failed miserably. He can thank her for the destruction of his career as well.

  • david
  • david
  • Bax Richards

    As long as Hillary Clinton is in politics Jonathan Capehart will have a job. After that he will no longer have a use.

  • Pingback: Clinton Being Held Accountable For Errors Hurting Bernie Sanders - Men's Trait()

  • Pingback: Salon Columnist Misleaders Readers About Bernie Sanders - Men's Trait()

  • nubwaxer

    sounds like a trump inspired right wing anti-gay hit piece. simple scandal mongering. let me remind you, because their actions are opposite of the personal liberty they claim to support.


Sweden’s Move To A 6 Hour Workday Should Make You Very Angry



Sunset in Stockholm, Sweden

What would you do with 6 extra hours of free time every week? That’s the question every full-time worker in Sweden is going to have to answer. After years of individual companies making the switch, the entire country is about to embark on an ambitious plan to maintain productivity while also eliminating 17% of the current workweek. Yes, the entire country.

Not only have Swedish workers just been given 312 hours of their lives back each year, but they have effectively been given a rather nice raise as well. In 2014, the average Swede took home about of €30,612 (the equivalent of $34,285) each year, or €2551 ($2857)  a month, which is about €589 ($660) a week. If we break that down over a 36 hour work week (less than the 47 hours the average American works full-time ), that equals €16.35 an hour. With the switch from a 36 hour workweek to a 30 hour workweek, the average take-home hourly wage just jumped to €19.63/hour, or a 20% increase.*

That would make me pretty happy, and I hope our CEO reads this and feels compelled to give all of us at Men’s Trait a 20% raise. We’re not holding our breath, however. Wages in the U.S. have been slightly better than stagnant for decades, and now we have to sit back and watch as an entire nation was just collectively given a raise that we could only dream of in the States.

In the United States, the average earner made $45,230 before taxes in 2014. More than the average Swede, right? Not necessarily. You might have noticed that the amount people in Sweden take home, on average, was €30,612 ($34,285), not what they earned. That’s the net, after tax amount. In the U.S., depending on a worker’s tax bracket, that amount would be at best $33,923, excluding any deductions and credits on their taxes. Depending on the exchange rate at any given moment, people in Sweden might take home more money than Americans. Or Americans might take home more. It’s very, very close.

But each country is different, and the cost of living in Sweden is higher than in the United States. Or, rather no, it isn’t. When we look at just after tax income, not accounting for fixed expenses, the average Swede has more buying power than the average American. Rent and utilities are significantly cheaper for people living in Sweden, making it slightly more affordable than the U.S. overall. Removing just utilities from the equation gives the advantage to Americans for having more buying power. Luxury activities, like eating at restaurants or going to the movies, are more expensive in Sweden than they are in the United States; that’s one financial advantage we have. But Swedes don’t do those things on the same scale that Americans do, so the premium prices affect them less than they would someone living in the States.

Okay, so I’ve rambled for over 500 words about how the Swedes just made a change to how much people work, and then delved into a bevy of numbers comparing the incomes and buying power of Americans and Swedes, only to come to the conclusion that there really isn’t that much difference between the two countries. Both are wealthy countries, with each celebrating a 7.2 OECD Better Life Index score that measures the quality of life for people around the globe, well above the average score of 6.0. So what’s the point?

Just remember, you could be living the American dream in Sweden, only by working at least 312 fewer hours each year. Oh, and the Swedes are guaranteed 25 paid vacation days and 16 paid holidays yearly, plus some paid maternity (56 weeks, or 13 months) and paternity leave (34 weeks), neither of which are guaranteed in the United States.** Now, with this new 6 hour workday, your typical Swedish worker will work 458 fewer hours every year than the average American (this even includes part-time workers)—that’s 19 full days.

Yes, you should be angry. People in Sweden are living the American dream better than we are.

Preston Hemmerich is the Content Manager for 301 Digital Media, overseeing,, and more. He enjoys covering food, politics, travel and writing sad attempts at humor.

*This figure does not account for hourly employees, only salaried employees. Some businesses have applied a wage increase to hourly employees to make up for lost hours, but that is not a country wide practice. In reality, this de facto raise disproportionately benefits higher income individuals working salaried jobs.
**Collectively, citizens of the U.S. get nowhere near 41 paid days off a year that Swedish citizens do.

Continue Reading


Can Mindfulness Meditation Reduce Police Brutality?



police brutality black lives matter hands up don't shoot sign protests

Let’s face it–America has an unfortunate history of police violence used to settle disputes. As of late, there’s been a strain amongst civilians and “The Boys in Blue” largely because of incidents of extreme brutality such as the in-transit death of Freddie Gray, Atlanta Hawks forward Thabo Sefolosha’s broken leg that derailed a stellar season and potential championship run, and the death of Eric Garner which further catalyzed the Black Lives Matter initiative. These incidents are not necessarily indicative behaviors of all officers of the law, but they do highlight a startling trend of over reaction and opting for physical intervention over patient analyzation and verbal reaction in non-life threatening scenarios.

With the recent trend, some people – like Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel, who is under fire for his department’s shooting of LaQuan McDonald –have called for more oversight of our nation’s police forces, while others have called for officers to don 24/7 video cameras to hold them more accountable of their actions. Both are more direct reactions to the problem of police brutality, and I’m certain other effective channels are being explored, but one slightly more “out of box,” conceptual approach could come in the form of optional mindfulness meditation training amongst police forces.

Mindfulness meditation and its concurrent learning practices are well regarded amongst most modern psychologists, though hard evidence of meditation’s benefits have only recently begun to be recorded. That being said, the benefits of mindfulness meditation are surprisingly applicable to overwrought, stressed police officers that could benefit from some sort of emotional release in lieu of unleashing physical abuse. Some empirical benefits of mindfulness mediation include

  • Decreased levels of the stress hormone cortisol, along with fatigue, and anxiety.
  • Sharpens focus of attention and suppresses acceptance of distracting information.
  • Less emotional reactivity, which is likely the key contributor to the instances of police brutality. If emotional reactivity can be curbed, the possibility of non-violent resolutions would hopefully be more likely.
  • More cognitive flexibility, another support parallel that would hopefully enable officers to be able to react intelligibly and logically, before resorting to physical force.

There are countless other qualitative benefits to mindfulness mediation that could prove highly beneficial to police officers across the country while making strides toward a more compassionate and deliberate police force. Mindfulness meditation has already made its way into certain portions of the American police force, as Hillsboro (OR) Police Department began its own mindfulness-training program in 2014, and has already seen substantial growth in the mental resiliency of the department’s officers. Started by Lt. Richard Goerling, the program is focused on Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR), which he hopes will help stifle the prevalence of cynicism amongst officers of the law.

Goerling believes that the trend of over-aggression by police is “largely driven by the suffering behind the badge,” things such as PTSD, depression, and personal ware that can negatively affect an officer’s performance on the job. Granted, mindfulness meditation training may not become the most popular method of bridling the trend of police brutality in America, but it is comforting to know that there are police forces that are receptive to the idea of a low cost, low effort method of accounting for one’s actions in order to continue to protect the greater good.

Continue Reading


Donald Trump as Seen by Google’s Deep Dream




Last Summer, Google unleashed Deep Dream, their neural network that takes pictures and tries to identify patterns and overwrite them, on an unsuspecting public. When you put an image into Deep Dream, what you get when it “wakes up” is often nightmarish. Dogs, birds, insects, pagodas are inserted at random places in the image, giving it a surreal and sometimes beautiful–if terrifying–aspect.

So, since this election season is already off-the-charts surreal, I thought to myself, “What would it look like if we ran some candidates through Deep Dream?” Well, now I know.  I started with Donald Trump, who is already deeply weird and unsettling. The results are spectacular.

Continue Reading