A largely underreported story over the past year is how the Republican Party is flush with cash through successful fundraising efforts. Meanwhile, the Democrats are virtually bankrupt as funds have barely trickled in.

That financial shortfall was already posing a significant issue for Democrats as they head into the 2018 midterm elections, but failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton may have just made it worse for them. According to the Intercept, Federal Election Commission filings revealed that the Democrat Party apparatus has been compelled to pay roughly $2 million for access to Hillary Clinton's email lists of donors and voters from the 2016 election.

Clinton's group, Onward Together, received $1.65 million from the Democratic National Committee for the valuable donor and voter information that was compiled by the Hillary for America campaign in 2016.

It also appears that the group charged the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee $700,000 for access to the same information.

This is not illegal, as the lists are considered her property, but it still has some Democrats unhappy.

Consider that former President Barack Obama's Organizing for Action "gifted" a similar email list to the party in the years following the 2012 election, even as those lists were considered more valuable than Clinton's.

However, even Obama's "gift" of the email lists left some Dems unhappy as they viewed OFA as a "parallel" organization to the DNC and DCCC that had siphoned off donors and support the party otherwise might have received.

Of course we know how well the Democrat Party did during Obama's tenure in office, losing more than 1,000 elected seats on the local, state and federal level.

That left the party in ruins, and Clinton's massive loss in 2016 only made matters worse.

[show_poll poll_id=106]

Now that the party is broke and getting walloped by GOP fundraising, Clinton's demand that they pay for her voter info is akin to a parasite sucking their host dry ... and that couldn't happen to a more deserving group of people.

Following the revelations of past sexual misconduct against anchor Matt Lauer and reporter Mark Halperin, NBC News has been in some trouble with the #MeToo movement.

That trouble just grew exponentially as one of the network's biggest stars of all time, long-time news anchor Tom Brokaw, was just accused of his own sexual misconduct by a former co-worker, according to Variety.

That would be former NBC correspondent turned Fox News host Linda Vester, who has alleged in multiple interviews with Variety that Brokaw twice attempted to kiss her against her will.

She also alleged that he had once grabbed her inappropriately in a conference room and had showed up uninvited at her hotel room to attempt to coerce her into a sexual affair.

One another occasion, he had showed up at a restaurant where she was with friends and invited himself back to her apartment.

There were also countless messages Brokaw sent to her of a flirtatious nature that she tried to ignore but occasionally felt compelled to reply to.

Those allegations were corroborated by two friends who were informed of what had happened at the time, as well as Vester's own contemporaneous journal entries documenting the incidents.

For his part, Brokaw denied ever making any sort of "romantic overtures" toward Vester, according to a statement from NBC.

Furthermore, it was noted that no similar allegations of sexual misconduct have ever been lodged against Brokaw in the past.

But Vester revealed that she had refrained from complaining about Brokaw's actions at the time due to fear that her career would be ruined.

[show_poll poll_id=93]

She is also hopeful that her coming forward now will help change the culture at NBC that prevents other women from coming forward with similar allegations against popular and protected stars.

Hopefully, Vester's bravery in coming forward will indeed spur more women to come forward to expose the mistreatment they have received at the hands of hypocritical liberal media figures who like to chastise others for the sins they themselves have committed.

It has become increasingly obvious over the years that the major tech companies that hold a near monopoly over cyberspace also tend to have a decidedly left-wing bias.

Fox News host Tucker Carlson recently addressed this disconcerting reality on his program while discussing the contents of an internal memo he had obtained from Google-owned YouTube.

That April 2017 memo severely undercut the protestations of YouTube against accusations that they have been censoring conservative speech on their purportedly open and unbiased platform.

Instead, it revealed the use of "totally subjective" guidelines for the censoring of videos that appeared to be designed with "maximum political intent."

Carlton pointed to the conservative PragerU series of educational videos as an example of YouTube's censorship and noted how one of their videos challenging the liberal mantra that all police officers are racist was deemed "inflammatory" and demonetized.

Watch here:

That means the publisher could no longer earn revenue through ads and views, regardless of the number of views they received.

As blatant as moves like that are, Carlson noted that YouTube was smart enough to not just scrub their platform of all non-liberal views they don't find agreeable, as that would be far too obvious.

Rather, they tend to quietly place such videos in what is known as a "limited state," a sort of purgatory-type limbo where demonetized videos remain published on the platform but are suppressed and hidden from search results.

That makes them extraordinarily hard for viewers to find, which would be akin to The New York Times being kept off newsstands or the publishers going unpaid for their work.

The memo also revealed that YouTube's criteria for censoring videos was substantially based on vague and undefined terms like "controversial religious or supremacist content," "highly controversial, inflammatory content" or "demeaning language toward protected groups" -- incredibly subjective terms that have different meanings depending upon one's ideological outlook.

[show_poll poll_id=68]

Carlson lamented the fact that the Republican-controlled Congress appeared to be doing nothing about this even as YouTube was "working to undermine sacred American rights."

"They have too much power and are a threat to this country," Carlson warned, and added, "It is time to complain while we still can."