CLOSET MUSLIM, SERVANT TO MUSLIM DICTATORS Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire peddled to get Obama into Harvard. JACK CASHILL
SCRATCH THE SURFACE OF BARACK OBAMA IS A PRO-MUSLIM, ANTI-AMERICAN, ANTI-CHRISTIAN, ANTI-JEWISH DICTATOR IN THE MAKING FOR GLOBALIST BANKSTERS AND BILLIONAIRES.
“Professor Paul Kengor has extensively
researched the Chicago communists whose
progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett,
and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly
Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have
many of the key players who put Obama into
power.”
When Obama found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future electability), he chose out of the near 1,000 available options to him in Chicago a church whose pastor was an outspoken anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist. For the next 20 years, Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the pews of that swine and devour the filth he shoveled out from the trough at his altar.
Barack Obama's legacy is nothing if not consequential. In his decades as "community organizer" among Chicago's poorest, most desperate neighborhoods, he did nothing other than perpetuate complete dependence on Big Brother. His Affordable Care Act, and its accompanying criminal penalties for not engaging in commerce, scythed a mile-wide berth into the already frayed concept of a citizenry living free from government coercion. More ominously, Obama was able to entwine his instinctive Marxism with a vision for America's path forward in a way his predecessors had been unable to.
The singular cunning of Obama was his success in realigning the "victim" hierarchy almost completely from class to race. Free citizens in a market society can climb or descend the social ladder, but race remains a constant throughout. Race is our most recognizable difference, no matter its superficial nature. In the deepest recesses of our prejudices, race is pure tribalism. And in the darkest hours of human history, at our most trying moments, and during our most vicious wars, people of all tribes have taken refuge not within their class, but within their race or ethnicity. The examples of Nazi Germany, of Bosnia, of Rwanda, and of the Armenians in Turkey are but a few examples of the horrors lifelong friends and neighbors of the same class can inflict on one another in the name of racial identity politics.
This isn't to say Marxism hasn't been peddled before under the guise of racial identity grievance. Indeed, Lenin himself was able to provoke satellite regions like Ukraine and Kazakhstan to revolt from czarist Russia in the name of ethnic separatism. In the United States, it has been tried repeatedly since the 1960s. But as our nation's first (half) black president, Obama was able sow division with absolute authority, and with minimal criticism by a political class that either openly supported his aims or was petrified of soliciting unsubstantiated accusations of racism.
And sow division he did, with every chance he got.
When Obama found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future electability), he chose out of the near 1,000 available options to him in Chicago a church whose pastor was an outspoken anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist. For the next 20 years, Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the pews of that swine and devour the filth he shoveled out from the trough at his altar. When asked to justify his close association with this shameless bigot, Obama shrugged off such concerns, comparing Wright to "an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with." Obama distanced himself from Wright only when it started affecting his poll numbers.
When armed Black Panthers were caught threatening voters outside a Philadelphia polling station in 2008, the Department of Justice under the Bush administration charged (and convicted) them with violations of the Voting Rights Act. Once in office, Obama had political appointees in the DOJ dismiss the charges.
When Cambridge Police (both white and black, not that it should matter) arrested his black friend Henry Gates for disorderly conduct, Obama, after admitting that he didn't know all the facts, stated that the police "acted stupidly."
After Trayvon Martin was shot by Afro-Peruvian (AKA "white Hispanic") George Zimmerman, Obama intoned, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." This implies that Martin was shot because he was black, and not because he was repeatedly pummeling Zimmerman's head into the pavement. Even Eric Holder's investigation concluded otherwise.
After black nationalist Xavier Micah Johnson opened fire and murdered five Dallas police officers in 2016 (as they protected a Black Lives Matter march), Obama gave a eulogy at their funeral. The eulogy itself stands as perhaps one of the most despicable moments of the Obama presidency. He used the podium to equate the murder of the Dallas police officers with the recent shootings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile (both of which were investigated and found justifiable, and neither man was "unfairly targeted" because he was black, as Obama asserted).
It was a speech as deft as it was cynical. Reading through the text, one realizes more clearly the manipulation taking place that, when spoken, is less detectable. He subtly but unmistakably steers the speech from a tribute to the murdered officers to a damning indictment of our alleged systemic racism, coupled with a defense of the paranoid style of the Black Lives Matter movement. By the end of the speech, Obama had skillfully twisted the events to the point where theoretical, faceless white racism was to blame for the actual, documented racism of Xavier Johnson.
One wonders if, had he attended Sterling's funeral, he would have lectured the audience about murdered police.
At this point, I must interject a side note regarding the aforementioned shootings. Philando Castile was shot in a horrible case of mistaken identity. He closely matched the description of a suspect from a recent armed robbery, and the officer thought he was reaching for a gun he admitted to having. Alton Sterling (who had a long arrest record that included battery, burglary, and weapons charges) was shot because he was physically fighting with police, despite being tasered several times. Police shot him when he reached for the loaded .38 caliber revolver in his pants. His shooting was completely warranted, and Baton Rouge is a safer place without him. Neither the tragic shooting of Castile nor the justified shooting of Sterling can in any reasonable way be attributed to racism, nor can they be remotely likened to the premeditated slaughter of the five Dallas officers. But such are the dots that Obama connected to hustle his race narrative.
Obama is notoriously thin-skinned to criticism, or to the suggestion that someone, somewhere, might be smarter than he. This is the guy who claimed, with a straight face, that he was a better speechwriter than his speechwriters, more knowledgeable about policy than his policy directors, and a better political director than his political director. Still, one assumes he was adroit enough to recognize that objections to his policies, or questions of their constitutionality, were not the default reactions of repressed racism. If he had thought they were, he would have said so. On a fundamental level, Obama understands that America is not the systemically racist cesspool he allowed it to be portrayed as under his watch. Yet he was Machiavellian enough to let this yarn spin itself for the purpose of political advantage.
Obama also understood the political pitfalls inherent in hiding behind the race card in efforts to deflect policy debates he could not win. So he did one better. He let his media sycophants do it for him. For the duration of his presidency and beyond, these shrieking curs claw the flesh off their faces at the slightest hint of criticism of Obama, his policies, or his style of governance. I am unaware of a single instance in which he publicly censured his groupies for their utter lack of nuance.
Therein lies the biggest tragedy of Obama's legacy. As a biracial president, he had a foot in both black and white America. He was uniquely positioned to use this to the advantage of the entire country, to serve as a bridge of healing and progress between races who have butted heads for far too long. Instead, for eight continuous years, he chose to do the exact opposite. He entrenched identity politics as deeply as he could, ripping open wounds in the process, and divided this great nation perhaps past the point of no return. He did this to spread a thoroughly debunked ideology, the achievability of which his ego will never allow him to admit he was mistaken about.
In a 2008 speech in which Obama attempted to justify Jeremiah Wright's irrational hatred, he said, "At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician's own failings." Never before has a poker player so inadvertently revealed his own hand. When Obama spoke those words, he was no doubt doing what he does best: thinking of himself.
Corruption blinders of the media and other Democrats
Most journalists and Democrats didn’t express any concerns when:
VP Biden threatened (promised) Ukraine that he would cut off a billion dollars in aid to them if they didn't fire the prosecutor investigating a company his son was involved with.
Hunter Biden got paid $50,000 a month as a board member of a corrupt Ukrainian gas company when he had no expertise on the product of the company.
Obama promised the very dangerous Russia and Putin that he would be flexible if he was reelected (somehow no one at FBI or elsewhere was ever concerned that Russia may have tried to influence the 2012 election to elect the flexible president.)
Hillary, Obama and many others violated the nation's security laws by using her non-government computer.
Obama gave kickbacks to union supporters when he violated the nation's bankruptcy law with the bailout of GM.
Obama used taxpayer dollars to reward political supporters like at Solyndra.
Hillary, through her family and foundation, got huge amounts of speech money and donations from foreign countries. Russia, for example, got Uranium for their generosity. (If there is any doubt about whether they were kickbacks, that should have disappeared when the donations dried up and speech fees dropped or dried up when she no longer could return favors)
Obama shipped over $1 billion in taxpayer money in unmarked bills, to Iran tyrants, who still pledge death to America, to get a deal.
Obama dictatorially stopped a years’ long investigation into a billion dollar a year drug running ring by terrorists to appease Iranian tyrants because he was more concerned about his legacy than the safety, health and lives of the American people.
Hillary and the DNC paying over $10 billion to buy a fake dossier from a foreign national to destroy Trump. It appears they didn't think they could beat him based on the truth or their policy proposals.
Obama and his administration, including the FBI, Justice Department, the intelligence agencies and the State Department, using the fake dossier as a source for FISA warrants and to infiltrate the Trump campaign with informants. (they obviously didn't believe their record or policies would win the votes). Instead of the media and other Democrats caring about this pure corruption they have participated in perpetuating the lies about Russian collusion for over three years.
The Obama Administration, at the Justice Department, EPA and CFPB using taxpayer money for political purposes and political supporters by creating slush funds from money confiscated from businesses that they pretended would go to victims.
If the media and Democrats want to investigate anything, how about a possible corrupt payback from Netflix to Obama? Obama gave the very wealthy Netlfix, Google and others huge financial benefits with net neutrality and Netflix gave the Obama's a huge contract even though they had no video production expertise or experience. It is similar to paying Biden's son huge amounts of money with no expertise.
But now when President Trump may have said something to a foreign leader about investigating corruption by Biden's son, that is supposed to be an impeachable offense. Shouldn't a President want political corruption by politicians to be investigated? Shouldn't the media and other Democrats be more concerned about the corruption itself than the phone call?
From this story, it appears that the media and other Democrats believe that every phone call that Trump makes to a foreign leader should become public knowledge if any bureaucrat makes a whistle blower report when they disagree with something the president does. That would certainly be cumbersome, and foreign leaders would no longer want to have discussions if every discussion could be made public.
Elizabeth Warren says she wants to get rid of corruption but not once have I heard her complain about the massive corruption during the Obama years or at her precious CFPB, so she really doesn't care.
Isn't it odd that no bureaucrats seemed to care about the corruption of Obama/Biden? It shows why we need to drain the swamp.
Judicial Watch: Only Crimes in Russia Scandal Are from ‘Obama Gang’
FOR EIGHT YEARS BARACK OBAMA AND ERIC HOLDER SABOTAGED HOMELAND SECURITY TO EASE MORE MEXICANS OVER OUR BORDERS AND INTO OUR JOBS AND VOTING BOOTHS.
OBAMA NEEDED THESE ILLEGALS TO FINISH OFF THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS, WHAT WAS LEFT OF THEM AFTER OBAMA'S CRONY BANKSTERS' PLUNDER.
“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington Times
If Obama was a fully recruited agent of Moscow, tasked with giving Russia a significant military advantage over the United States, and economically weakening and socially dividing the nation, how would he have conducted his presidency (or his post-presidency) any differently? TREVOR LOUDON
*
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.
Democrats Allow Communists to Infiltrate Their Party Across the Nation
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
*
“Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.”
*
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
BARACK OBAMA: Was he America’s first closet Communist president?
Obama choose Communists and Marxists for the highest, most powerful positions in our land, including his closest political advisors, and his head of the CIA. These facts are not in dispute. Most are openly admitted by the people in question, as necessary damage control. Our press chooses not to report them.
Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.
WAS THE RUSSIAN HOAX ONLY OBAMA’S ATTEMPT TO PUT ASIDE TRUMP FOR AN OBAMA THIRD TERM FOR LIFE???
“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)”
These people were engaged in a massive political conspiracy. The Democrats made a decision from the outset—beginning with the election campaign of the favored candidate of Wall Street and the CIA, Hillary Clinton—that they would not oppose Trump on his anti-working-class social policy or his authoritarian hostility to democratic rights and promotion of anti-immigrant racism, but on issues of imperialist foreign policy.
*
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
Barack Obama’s plot for a third term for life
A Muslim dictatorship like his crony paymasters, the 9-11 invading Saudis who have financed him for decades.
“Obama has the totalitarian impulse. After all, he went around saying he didn't have Constitutional authority to legalize the illegals, and then he tried anyway. The courts stopped him.”
What was Obama’s motive? Simple, he knew if he did that for Hillary, he’d own the next President of the United States, and could blackmail her with the truth till the end of time. It literally would have given him a 3rd and 4th term.
“Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.” Kavanaugh’s Accuser Max Stier Is Former Clinton Lawyer, Obama Donor
Amy Sussman/Getty Images
5:42
Max Stier, the man behind a new sexual misconduct allegation against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, was not only a former classmate of Kavanaugh’s at Yale but also a foe during the Bill Clinton impeachment trial.
Stier, 53, served on the team defending Clinton, while Kavanaugh served on Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr’s team that was investigating Clinton. As Yale Daily News put it:
In 1994, Kavanaugh joined the legal team, led by Kenneth Starr, that was looking into President Bill Clinton’s real estate dealings as part of the Whitewater investigation. Later that decade, Kavanaugh co-wrote the Starr Report, which established broad grounds for Clinton’s impeachment.
Those proceedings pitted Kavanaugh against a former Yale classmate, Max Stier ’87, a fellow member of Stiles College who was one of several attorneys representing Clinton during the investigation.
The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway noted in a piece that during those proceedings Stier had “worked closely with David Kendall,” who would later defend Hillary Clinton against allegations of illegally handling classified information.
Stier once worked for a Republican congressman decades ago — Rep. Jim Leach (R-IA) in 1982, but he would later donate to Democrats. He donated $250 to the Democratic National Committee in 2000 while he worked at Housing and Urban Development, and then donated about $1,000 to former President Barack Obama in 2007 and 2008, according to the Federal Election Commission website.
In 2004, Stier, then divorced, married then-assistant U.S. attorney Florence Yu Pan, according to a New York Times wedding announcement. The wedding took place in Washington, D.C.
That same year, a person by the name of “Florence Pan” in Washington, D.C., donated $500 to John Kerry’s campaign for president.
Pan was later nominated by President Obama to be a federal judge for the Washington, D.C., U.S. District Court in April 2016, but the nomination expired before the Senate could vote on it. She is currently an associate judge on the D.C. Superior Court.
Stier currently is the CEO and president of the Parternship for Public Service, a non-partisan organization that advocates for federal employees. He has been frequently interviewed by national news outlets on the issue of government service.
Since President Trump’s tenure, Stier has been careful not to criticize Trump, although he has in several interviews disparaged the notion of the “Deep State” and defended federal employees as hardworking public servants.
Stier’s allegation against Kavanaugh became public in a New York Times piece that ran on Saturday, as an adaptation of a newly-published book on the now-Supreme Court justice. The piece said:
A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly.
The Times later added to its piece: “We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier; the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the episode.”
Former Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said Monday during a floor speech that Stier never told his committee, which was overseeing Kavanaugh’s confirmation and handling the investigation into him, about his allegation, according to the Hill.
“That person, Mr. Stier, didn’t reach out or provide information to the committee majority. … My office never received anything from Mr. Stier or his unnamed friends,” Grassley said.
“Had my staff received substantive allegations or had he approached me or my staff, we would have attempted to take a statement and interview him,” he added.
Stier reportedly had contacted a Democrat senator on the Senate Judiciary Committee — Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) — with his allegation. Coons later would reportedly send a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray asking that he follow up with Stier, copying Grassley and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
Grassley slammed the New York Times during his speech, asking, “Who will watch the watchmen?”
“This week’s report includes some embarrassing, irresponsible missteps,” he added. “This is not an allegation. It’s barely a third-hand rumor.”
One of the authors of the book and the Times piece said Stier did not speak to them for the book. Asked why, co-author Robin Pogrebin said, “My sense is that he feels as if he did his duty, which was he brought the information that he had to the Senate — to senators and to the FBI.
“He made them all very aware that he had this experience that he had witnessed firsthand in a dorm room during his freshman year at Yale. What they did with that information was up to them. It never materialized and became part of the process. Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed and he was done. His work had been done. He had done his part. And he had no interest in revisiting it.”
The judge found these releases, together with the publication of Clinton’s secret speeches to Wall Street banks, in which she pledged to be their representative, were “matters of the highest public concern.” They “allowed the American electorate to look behind the curtain of one of the two major political parties in the United States during a presidential election.”
“Clinton also failed to mention how he and Hillary cashed in after his presidential tenure to make themselves multimillionaires, in part by taking tens of millions in speaking fees from Wall Street bankers.”
SWAMP EMPRESS HILLARY CLINTON
Leaked Julian Assange Message:
Hillary Is A ‘Well Connected, Sadistic, Sociopath’
"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now." ---- Patricia McCarthy - AMERICANTHINKER.com
Clinton Foundation Put On Watch List Of Suspicious ‘Charities’
"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now." ---- Patricia McCarthy - AMERICANTHINKER.com
Media silent on dismissal of DNC
suit against Julian Assange
A federal court ruling last Tuesday dismissing a Democratic National Committee (DNC) civil suit against Julian Assange “with prejudice” was a devastating indictment of the US ruling elite’s campaign to destroy the WikiLeaks founder. It exposed as a fraud the entire “Russiagate” conspiracy theory peddled by the Democratic Party, the corporate media and the intelligence agencies for the past three years.
The decision, by Judge John Koeltl of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, rejected the smears that Assange “colluded” with Russia. It upheld his status as a journalist and publisher and dismissed claims that WikiLeaks’ 2016 publication of leaked emails from the DNC was “illegal.”
Despite the significance of the ruling, and its clear newsworthiness, it has been subjected to an almost complete blackout by the entire media in the US and internationally.
The universal silence on the court decision—extending from the New York Times (which buried a six-paragraph report on the ruling on page 25) and the Washington Post, to “alternative” outlets such as the Intercept, the television evening news programs and the publications of the pseudo-left—can be described only as a coordinated political conspiracy.
Its aim is to suppress any discussion of the court’s exposure of the slanders used to malign and isolate Assange, and to justify the unprecedented international pursuit of him over WikiLeaks’ exposure of US war crimes, surveillance operations and diplomatic conspiracies.
The New York Times, the Washington Post and other corporate outlets have relentlessly smeared Assange as a “Russian agent” and depicted him as the linchpin of a conspiracy hatched in Moscow to deprive Democratic Party candidate Hillary Clinton of the presidency in the 2016 US elections.
Now that their claims have been subjected to judicial review and exposed as a tissue of lies and fabrications, they have adopted a policy of radio silence. There is no question that if the court ruling had been in favour of the DNC, it would have been greeted with banner headlines and wall-to-wall coverage.
The response exposes these publications as state propagandists and active participants in the campaign by the Democratic Party, the Trump administration and the entire ruling elite to condemn Assange for the rest of his life to an American prison for the “crime” of publishing the truth.
The editors and senior writers at these outlets, such as New York Timeseditorial page editor James Bennet, are in constant contact with the CIA and other intelligence agencies. Behind the scenes, they work out an editorial line that will advance the interests of the Wall Street banks and the military-intelligence apparatus. At the same time, they decide what news and information they will hide from the American and world population.
The efforts by the mainstream news outlets to bury the ruling presents a clear example of the type of media manipulation that has led millions of people to seek alternative sources of news on the internet, of which WikiLeaks is itself an example.
Judge Koeltl’s decision made plain the anti-democratic and dictatorial logic of the DNC case against Assange. He warned: “If WikiLeaks could be held liable for publishing documents concerning the DNC’s political, financial and voter-engagement strategies simply because the DNC labels them ‘secret’ and trade secrets, then so could any newspaper or other media outlet.” This, he stated, would “override the First Amendment” protection to freedom of the press mandated by the US Constitution.
Koeltl’s finding was an absolute vindication of Assange and WikiLeaks’ 2016 publications exposing the attempts by the DNC to rig the Democratic Party primaries against self-declared “democratic socialist” Bernie Sanders in favour of Hillary Clinton.
The judge found these releases, together with the publication of Clinton’s secret speeches to Wall Street banks, in which she pledged to be their representative, were “matters of the highest public concern.” They “allowed the American electorate to look behind the curtain of one of the two major political parties in the United States during a presidential election.”
Koeltl, moreover, found there was no evidence to justify the DNC’s assertion that WikiLeaks had colluded with the Russian state to obtain the material. Assange and WikiLeaks have always maintained that the documents were not provided to them by the Putin regime.
The ruling demonstrated the flagrant illegality of the US vendetta against Assange. The slander that he was operating as a “Russian agent” to “interfere” in US politics was used by the American government and its intelligence agencies to pressure the Ecuadorian regime to sever Assange’s internet access in 2016, and again in 2018. It served as a central pretext for its illegal termination in April of his political asylum in the embassy building.
The judgment was also an implicit exposure of the lawlessness of the attempts by the Trump administration, with the full support of the Democrats, to extradite Assange from Britain, so that he can be prosecuted on 18 US charges, including 17 espionage counts, carrying a maximum sentence of 175 years’ imprisonment.
The Trump administration and the Justice Department are claiming that it was illegal for WikiLeaks and Assange to publish US army war logs from Iraq and Afghanistan, hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables and other documents exposing US war crimes and intrigues, provided by the courageous whistleblower Chelsea Manning.
Koeltl’s ruling, however, reasserted the fundamental democratic principle that WikiLeaks had a right to publish the 2016 DNC documents, even if they had been obtained by the Russian government, or any other entity, illegally.
The clear implication is that even if Manning’s decision to leak US military and diplomatic documents was a violation of the law, WikiLeaks’ publication of them was not. The publication of both the 2010 and the 2016 leaks was constitutionally protected journalistic activity.
Koeltl further undermined the claims of the Trump administration, the Democrats and the media that Assange is a “hacker,” undeserving of First Amendment protections. The judge repeatedly referred to Assange as a “journalist” and WikiLeaks as a “publisher.”
In other words, the attempt to extradite Assange to the US and prosecute him is a frontal assault on the US Constitution and press freedom. In its disregard for domestic and international law, it can be described only as an extraordinary rendition operation, similar to the kidnappings and torture operations conducted by the CIA.
The hostile response to Koeltl’s ruling on the part of the entire political and media establishment, in the US and internationally, demonstrates that this conspiracy will not be defeated by plaintive appeals to the governments, political parties and media corporations that have spearheaded the assault on Assange’s legal and democratic rights.
All of them are using the persecution of Assange as a test case for the imposition of ever-more authoritarian measures, aimed at suppressing mounting popular hostility to war, social inequality and an assault on democratic rights.
What is required is the development of a mass movement from below, to mobilise the immense social and political power of the working class internationally to secure Assange’s liberty and to defend all democratic rights.
GEORGE SOROS AND THE CLINTON GLOBALIST AGENDA FOR BANKSTERS AND WIDE OPEN BORDERS
*
NEW YORK — Demand Justice, an organization founded by former members of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and associated with a “social welfare organization” financed by billionaire activist George S oros, is raising money for an eventual court fight against what the group describes as President Trump’s proposed “racist, unnecessary wall.”
“Obama would declare himself president for life with S oros really running the show, as he did for the entire Obama presidency.”
*
“Hillary was always small potatoes, a placeholder as it were. Her health was always suspect. And do you think the plotters would have let a doofus like Tim Kaine take office in the event that Hillary became disabled?”
“There is no controlling Bill Clinton. He does whatever he wants and runs up incredible expenses with foundation funds,” states a separate interview memo attached to the submission.
“Bill Clinton mixes and matches his personal business with that of the foundation. Many people within the foundation have tried to caution him about this but he does not listen, and there really is no talking to him,” the memo added.
CLINTON MAFIA AND THEIR BANKSTERS AT GOLDMAN SACHS
WHO IS TIGHTER WITH THE PLUNDERING BANKSTERS? CLINTON, OBAMA or TRUMP?
The Clinton White House famously abolished the Glass–Steagall legislation, which separated commercial and investment banking. The move was a boon for Wall Street firms and led to major bank mergers that
some analysts say helped contribute to the
2008 financial crisis.
Bill and Hillary Clinton raked in massive speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, with CNN documenting a total of at least $7.7 million in paid speeches to big financial firms, including Goldman Sachs and UBS. Hillary Clinton made $675,000 from speeches to Goldman Sachs specifically, and her husband secured more than $1,550,000 from Goldman speeches. In 2005 alone, Bill Clinton collected over $500,000 from three Goldman Sachs events.
Hillary Clinton is simply the epitome of the rabid self – a whirlpool of selfishness, greed, and malignance.
It may well be true that Donald Trump has made his greatest contribution to the nation before even taking office: the political destruction of Hillary Clinton and her infinitely corrupt machine. J.R. Dunn
"Hillary will do anything to distract you from her reckless record and the damage to the Democratic Party and the America she and The Obama's have created."
THE FINAL DAYS OF HILLARY CLINTON: MISTRESS of the SWAMP, GLOBAL BRIBES SUCKER and LOOTER OF THE POOR
“If the Constitution did not forbid cruel and unusual punishment, the sentence I would like to see imposed would place both Bill and Hillary Clinton in the same 8-by-12 cell.” ROBERT ARVAY – AMERICAN THINKER com
“The couple parlayed lives supposedly spent in “public service” into admission into the upper stratosphere of American wealth, with incomes in the top 0.1 percent bracket. The source of this vast wealth was a political machine that might well be dubbed “Clinton, Inc.” This consists essentially of a seedy money-laundering operation to ensure big business support for the Clintons’ political ambitions as well as their personal fortunes. The basic components of the operation are lavishly paid speeches to Wall Street and Fortune 500 audiences, corporate campaign contributions, and donations to the ostensibly philanthropic Clinton Foundation.”
IT WAS BILL CLINTON WHO UNLEASHED WALL STREET’S BIGGEST CRIMINAL BANKSTERS…. And haven’t they sucked up the banksters’ gratuities since?
Only Barack Obama has serviced banksters more than Hillary and Billary!
“Clinton also failed to mention how he and Hillary cashed in after his presidential tenure to make themselves multimillionaires, in part by taking tens of millions in speaking fees from Wall Street bankers.”
FOLLOWING THE CRIMES OF BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON BECOMES AMERICA’S ROAD TO REVOLUTION
Transcripts released by WikiLeaks of Clinton speeches to Wall Street bankers, for which she received six-figure paychecks, show her praising the recommendations of the 2010 Simpson- Bowles deficit-reduction commission, which called for sweeping cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid; the elimination of 200,000 federal jobs; a tax on employees’
Judicial Watch: Only Crimes in Russia Scandal Are from ‘Obama Gang’
FOR EIGHT YEARS BARACK OBAMA AND ERIC HOLDER SABOTAGED HOMELAND SECURITY TO EASE MORE MEXICANS OVER OUR BORDERS AND INTO OUR JOBS AND VOTING BOOTHS.
OBAMA NEEDED THESE ILLEGALS TO FINISH OFF THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS, WHAT WAS LEFT OF THEM AFTER OBAMA'S CRONY BANKSTERS' PLUNDER.
“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington Times
If Obama was a fully recruited agent of Moscow, tasked with giving Russia a significant military advantage over the United States, and economically weakening and socially dividing the nation, how would he have conducted his presidency (or his post-presidency) any differently? TREVOR LOUDON
*
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.
Democrats Allow Communists to Infiltrate Their Party Across the Nation
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
*
“Professor Paul Kengor has extensively
researched the Chicago communists whose
progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett,
and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly
Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have
many of the key players who put Obama into
power.”
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.
The Democrat Left is the Party of Racism, Divisiveness, and Balkanization
A quote misattributed to Joseph Goebbels says, "Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty." The Democrat Left has, however, put this advice into practice by accusing Republicans in general, President Trump in particular, and "deplorables" as a whole, of its own racist, anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, ageist, and otherwise divisive and Balkanizing practices.
The Democrat Left calls Donald Trump a racist and white nationalist as if these were statements of fact, but it can offer no objective evidence in the form of hate speech against anybody's race or ethnicity — the very kind of hate speech in which the Left itself deals wholesale on an almost routine basis.
New Jersey Democrats: "Jew Down" is not Anti-Semitic
New Jersey Democrat Kathy McBride used the phrase "Jew down" while fellow Democrat Robin Vaughn dismissed this phrase as an ordinary verb rather than an anti-Semitic slur. I wonder how these two African-Americans would feel if somebody similarly excused the N-word because it means literally "black" and nothing more. Nobody would buy that excuse, and the African-American registry not only describes the Latin origin of the N-word but also cites "Jew him down" as an example of "explicit group devaluations." Vaughn deserves credit for apologizing subsequently, but the bottom line is that a total of three Democrats, including George Muschal, behaved at first as though there is nothing wrong with the phrase "Jew down."
Do Jews Make Matzos from the Blood of Murdered Palestinians?
We will have to look to Christine Olivo, a Democrat running for Congress in Florida's 24th District, for the answer. Olivo tweeted on September 16, "Everyone thinks that if you side with the Palestinians then you're anti-Semitic. WTF! We can't turn a blind eye to the suffering that they're enduring at the hands of people that have endured great suffering themselves. THEIR HOUSES ARE BEING BULLDOZED WITH THEM IN IT! #Godhelpus." The tweet may have been taken down, but I saw it when it was online, and it is still in Google cache as of September 20.
Yes, Christine, if you side with the Hamas-governed Palestinians, then you are siding with terrorists, the same way that anybody who supported Nazi-governed Germany was a Nazi sympathizer.
Women's march board member Zahra Billoo has gone even farther than Olivo by stating that "Israel is an apartheid, racist state, which engages in terrorism against Palestinians." This is yet another deployment of Joseph Goebbels's purported advice because Hamas is the terrorist organization that also discriminates against Jews, Christians, and peaceful Muslims.
If people are inclined to dismiss Billoo as an aberration who does not represent the Democratic Left, we can add the Democratic Left's counterpart in the United Kingdom. Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has depicted Hamas and Hezb'allah, the organization behind the murder of 241 U.S. Marines and other service personnel in Lebanon, as "his friends." At what point will American voters, and British voters as well, perform a clean sweep of tacit and even open promoters of terrorist organizations? Friends don't let friends vote Labor in the U.K., or Democrat Left in the U.S.
The DemLeft's Divisive Racial Identity Politics
Squad member Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) said, "We don't need any more brown faces that don't want to be a brown voice. We don't need any more black faces that don't want to be a black voice." Racial identity politics are racist by definition. Squad member Ilhan Omar added, "This is not going to be the country of white people," thus again appealing to racial divisiveness. The Congressional Black Caucus proclaims hilariously that it wants to "root out racism" when an entity like a Black Caucus is racist by definition; a Congressional White Caucus would almost certainly come with sheets, hoods, and burning crosses. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was in fact opposed by the equivalent of a "White Caucus" with a genuine (former) Ku Klux Klansman filibustering for roughly 14 hours.
The Democratic Left, meanwhile, consorts openly with Al Sharpton, who has used some very interesting words for white people in general ("white interloper" during the 1995 Freddy's Fashion Mart incident), Jews in particular ("diamond merchants"), Asians ("Chinamen"), LGBT people ("punk faggot" and "Greek homos"), police officers ("pigs"), and even black people he dislikes (the N-word). Louis Farrakhan, while less popular with the Democratic Left, is still welcomed by some elements while he equates Jews with termites and depicts white people as "potential humans" who have yet to evolve.
These extreme views are not limited to controversial figures like Sharpton and Farrakhan. Maxine Waters encouraged her followers to harass members of the Trump administration: "And if you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." That sounds a lot like what night-riding Ku Klux Klansmen once did to black people who moved into white neighborhoods.
The Democrat Left Lines Up with Terrorists
Squad member Rashida Tlaib tweeted (link available 8/9/19), "When will the world stop dehumanizing our Palestinian people who just want to be free?" Tlaib also argued "that Palestinians are not responsible for terrorism or vitriol, even as she has lambasted the president's use of words and called Israel a white-supremacist nation." Tlaib leaves us to suppose that all the bombings, knife attacks, vehicular attacks, arson attacks, and rocket attacks on Israel perpetrate themselves, or perhaps bogeymen or indeed anybody but Tlaib's Palestinian people are responsible. Her fellow Squad member Ilhan Omar tweeted, "Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel" while adding, "It's all about the Benjamins ($100 bills), baby" — an obvious reference to Jews and money.
The Democrat Left Defines Senior Citizens and Christians as the Enemy
The Democratic Left has also (2018) depicted Trump-supporting Christians and a Christian-owned business as trash. A "Knock the Vote" ad from 2018 demonized senior citizens, with one older woman saying, "Climate change? That's a you problem. I'll be dead soon." Will the next step involve Sandmen from Logan's Run, with Democratic Donkeys on their uniforms, reducing Social Security and Medicare expenses by terminating senior citizens? Prominent Democrats have also fomented racial division by calling for reparations for slavery to be paid by people who never owned slaves to people who never were slaves.
The intellectually and morally bankrupt Democratic Left, therefore, has nothing to offer our country but hatred of Jews, hatred of Christians, hatred of senior citizens, class warfare, divisive racial identity politics, tacit support for foreign terrorist organizations, and overall Balkanization of the United States. Everybody who believes in American values, American unity, and American ideals needs to repudiate this agenda at the ballot box in 2020.
SCRATCH THE SURFACE OF BARACK OBAMA IS A PRO-MUSLIM, ANTI-AMERICAN, ANTI-CHRISTIAN, ANTI-JEWISH DICTATOR IN THE MAKING FOR GLOBALIST BANKSTERS AND BILLIONAIRES.
“Professor Paul Kengor has extensively
researched the Chicago communists whose
progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett,
and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly
Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have
many of the key players who put Obama into
power.”
When Obama found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future electability), he chose out of the near 1,000 available options to him in Chicago a church whose pastor was an outspoken anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist. For the next 20 years, Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the pews of that swine and devour the filth he shoveled out from the trough at his altar.
Barack Obama's legacy is nothing if not consequential. In his decades as "community organizer" among Chicago's poorest, most desperate neighborhoods, he did nothing other than perpetuate complete dependence on Big Brother. His Affordable Care Act, and its accompanying criminal penalties for not engaging in commerce, scythed a mile-wide berth into the already frayed concept of a citizenry living free from government coercion. More ominously, Obama was able to entwine his instinctive Marxism with a vision for America's path forward in a way his predecessors had been unable to.
The singular cunning of Obama was his success in realigning the "victim" hierarchy almost completely from class to race. Free citizens in a market society can climb or descend the social ladder, but race remains a constant throughout. Race is our most recognizable difference, no matter its superficial nature. In the deepest recesses of our prejudices, race is pure tribalism. And in the darkest hours of human history, at our most trying moments, and during our most vicious wars, people of all tribes have taken refuge not within their class, but within their race or ethnicity. The examples of Nazi Germany, of Bosnia, of Rwanda, and of the Armenians in Turkey are but a few examples of the horrors lifelong friends and neighbors of the same class can inflict on one another in the name of racial identity politics.
This isn't to say Marxism hasn't been peddled before under the guise of racial identity grievance. Indeed, Lenin himself was able to provoke satellite regions like Ukraine and Kazakhstan to revolt from czarist Russia in the name of ethnic separatism. In the United States, it has been tried repeatedly since the 1960s. But as our nation's first (half) black president, Obama was able sow division with absolute authority, and with minimal criticism by a political class that either openly supported his aims or was petrified of soliciting unsubstantiated accusations of racism.
And sow division he did, with every chance he got.
When Obama found religion (or feigned the motions of doing so for future electability), he chose out of the near 1,000 available options to him in Chicago a church whose pastor was an outspoken anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist. For the next 20 years, Obama and Michelle chose to sit in the pews of that swine and devour the filth he shoveled out from the trough at his altar. When asked to justify his close association with this shameless bigot, Obama shrugged off such concerns, comparing Wright to "an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with." Obama distanced himself from Wright only when it started affecting his poll numbers.
When armed Black Panthers were caught threatening voters outside a Philadelphia polling station in 2008, the Department of Justice under the Bush administration charged (and convicted) them with violations of the Voting Rights Act. Once in office, Obama had political appointees in the DOJ dismiss the charges.
When Cambridge Police (both white and black, not that it should matter) arrested his black friend Henry Gates for disorderly conduct, Obama, after admitting that he didn't know all the facts, stated that the police "acted stupidly."
After Trayvon Martin was shot by Afro-Peruvian (AKA "white Hispanic") George Zimmerman, Obama intoned, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." This implies that Martin was shot because he was black, and not because he was repeatedly pummeling Zimmerman's head into the pavement. Even Eric Holder's investigation concluded otherwise.
After black nationalist Xavier Micah Johnson opened fire and murdered five Dallas police officers in 2016 (as they protected a Black Lives Matter march), Obama gave a eulogy at their funeral. The eulogy itself stands as perhaps one of the most despicable moments of the Obama presidency. He used the podium to equate the murder of the Dallas police officers with the recent shootings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile (both of which were investigated and found justifiable, and neither man was "unfairly targeted" because he was black, as Obama asserted).
It was a speech as deft as it was cynical. Reading through the text, one realizes more clearly the manipulation taking place that, when spoken, is less detectable. He subtly but unmistakably steers the speech from a tribute to the murdered officers to a damning indictment of our alleged systemic racism, coupled with a defense of the paranoid style of the Black Lives Matter movement. By the end of the speech, Obama had skillfully twisted the events to the point where theoretical, faceless white racism was to blame for the actual, documented racism of Xavier Johnson.
One wonders if, had he attended Sterling's funeral, he would have lectured the audience about murdered police.
At this point, I must interject a side note regarding the aforementioned shootings. Philando Castile was shot in a horrible case of mistaken identity. He closely matched the description of a suspect from a recent armed robbery, and the officer thought he was reaching for a gun he admitted to having. Alton Sterling (who had a long arrest record that included battery, burglary, and weapons charges) was shot because he was physically fighting with police, despite being tasered several times. Police shot him when he reached for the loaded .38 caliber revolver in his pants. His shooting was completely warranted, and Baton Rouge is a safer place without him. Neither the tragic shooting of Castile nor the justified shooting of Sterling can in any reasonable way be attributed to racism, nor can they be remotely likened to the premeditated slaughter of the five Dallas officers. But such are the dots that Obama connected to hustle his race narrative.
Obama is notoriously thin-skinned to criticism, or to the suggestion that someone, somewhere, might be smarter than he. This is the guy who claimed, with a straight face, that he was a better speechwriter than his speechwriters, more knowledgeable about policy than his policy directors, and a better political director than his political director. Still, one assumes he was adroit enough to recognize that objections to his policies, or questions of their constitutionality, were not the default reactions of repressed racism. If he had thought they were, he would have said so. On a fundamental level, Obama understands that America is not the systemically racist cesspool he allowed it to be portrayed as under his watch. Yet he was Machiavellian enough to let this yarn spin itself for the purpose of political advantage.
Obama also understood the political pitfalls inherent in hiding behind the race card in efforts to deflect policy debates he could not win. So he did one better. He let his media sycophants do it for him. For the duration of his presidency and beyond, these shrieking curs claw the flesh off their faces at the slightest hint of criticism of Obama, his policies, or his style of governance. I am unaware of a single instance in which he publicly censured his groupies for their utter lack of nuance.
Therein lies the biggest tragedy of Obama's legacy. As a biracial president, he had a foot in both black and white America. He was uniquely positioned to use this to the advantage of the entire country, to serve as a bridge of healing and progress between races who have butted heads for far too long. Instead, for eight continuous years, he chose to do the exact opposite. He entrenched identity politics as deeply as he could, ripping open wounds in the process, and divided this great nation perhaps past the point of no return. He did this to spread a thoroughly debunked ideology, the achievability of which his ego will never allow him to admit he was mistaken about.
In a 2008 speech in which Obama attempted to justify Jeremiah Wright's irrational hatred, he said, "At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician's own failings." Never before has a poker player so inadvertently revealed his own hand. When Obama spoke those words, he was no doubt doing what he does best: thinking of himself.
Corruption blinders of the media and other Democrats
Most journalists and Democrats didn’t express any concerns when:
VP Biden threatened (promised) Ukraine that he would cut off a billion dollars in aid to them if they didn't fire the prosecutor investigating a company his son was involved with.
Hunter Biden got paid $50,000 a month as a board member of a corrupt Ukrainian gas company when he had no expertise on the product of the company.
Obama promised the very dangerous Russia and Putin that he would be flexible if he was reelected (somehow no one at FBI or elsewhere was ever concerned that Russia may have tried to influence the 2012 election to elect the flexible president.)
Hillary, Obama and many others violated the nation's security laws by using her non-government computer.
Obama gave kickbacks to union supporters when he violated the nation's bankruptcy law with the bailout of GM.
Obama used taxpayer dollars to reward political supporters like at Solyndra.
Hillary, through her family and foundation, got huge amounts of speech money and donations from foreign countries. Russia, for example, got Uranium for their generosity. (If there is any doubt about whether they were kickbacks, that should have disappeared when the donations dried up and speech fees dropped or dried up when she no longer could return favors)
Obama shipped over $1 billion in taxpayer money in unmarked bills, to Iran tyrants, who still pledge death to America, to get a deal.
Obama dictatorially stopped a years’ long investigation into a billion dollar a year drug running ring by terrorists to appease Iranian tyrants because he was more concerned about his legacy than the safety, health and lives of the American people.
Hillary and the DNC paying over $10 billion to buy a fake dossier from a foreign national to destroy Trump. It appears they didn't think they could beat him based on the truth or their policy proposals.
Obama and his administration, including the FBI, Justice Department, the intelligence agencies and the State Department, using the fake dossier as a source for FISA warrants and to infiltrate the Trump campaign with informants. (they obviously didn't believe their record or policies would win the votes). Instead of the media and other Democrats caring about this pure corruption they have participated in perpetuating the lies about Russian collusion for over three years.
The Obama Administration, at the Justice Department, EPA and CFPB using taxpayer money for political purposes and political supporters by creating slush funds from money confiscated from businesses that they pretended would go to victims.
If the media and Democrats want to investigate anything, how about a possible corrupt payback from Netflix to Obama? Obama gave the very wealthy Netlfix, Google and others huge financial benefits with net neutrality and Netflix gave the Obama's a huge contract even though they had no video production expertise or experience. It is similar to paying Biden's son huge amounts of money with no expertise.
But now when President Trump may have said something to a foreign leader about investigating corruption by Biden's son, that is supposed to be an impeachable offense. Shouldn't a President want political corruption by politicians to be investigated? Shouldn't the media and other Democrats be more concerned about the corruption itself than the phone call?
From this story, it appears that the media and other Democrats believe that every phone call that Trump makes to a foreign leader should become public knowledge if any bureaucrat makes a whistle blower report when they disagree with something the president does. That would certainly be cumbersome, and foreign leaders would no longer want to have discussions if every discussion could be made public.
Elizabeth Warren says she wants to get rid of corruption but not once have I heard her complain about the massive corruption during the Obama years or at her precious CFPB, so she really doesn't care.
Isn't it odd that no bureaucrats seemed to care about the corruption of Obama/Biden? It shows why we need to drain the swamp.
Judicial Watch: Only Crimes in Russia Scandal Are from ‘Obama Gang’
FOR EIGHT YEARS BARACK OBAMA AND ERIC HOLDER SABOTAGED HOMELAND SECURITY TO EASE MORE MEXICANS OVER OUR BORDERS AND INTO OUR JOBS AND VOTING BOOTHS.
OBAMA NEEDED THESE ILLEGALS TO FINISH OFF THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS, WHAT WAS LEFT OF THEM AFTER OBAMA'S CRONY BANKSTERS' PLUNDER.
“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington Times
If Obama was a fully recruited agent of Moscow, tasked with giving Russia a significant military advantage over the United States, and economically weakening and socially dividing the nation, how would he have conducted his presidency (or his post-presidency) any differently? TREVOR LOUDON
*
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.
Democrats Allow Communists to Infiltrate Their Party Across the Nation
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
*
“Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.”
*
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
BARACK OBAMA: Was he America’s first closet Communist president?
Obama choose Communists and Marxists for the highest, most powerful positions in our land, including his closest political advisors, and his head of the CIA. These facts are not in dispute. Most are openly admitted by the people in question, as necessary damage control. Our press chooses not to report them.
Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.
WAS THE RUSSIAN HOAX ONLY OBAMA’S ATTEMPT TO PUT ASIDE TRUMP FOR AN OBAMA THIRD TERM FOR LIFE???
“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)”
These people were engaged in a massive political conspiracy. The Democrats made a decision from the outset—beginning with the election campaign of the favored candidate of Wall Street and the CIA, Hillary Clinton—that they would not oppose Trump on his anti-working-class social policy or his authoritarian hostility to democratic rights and promotion of anti-immigrant racism, but on issues of imperialist foreign policy.
*
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
Barack Obama’s plot for a third term for life
A Muslim dictatorship like his crony paymasters, the 9-11 invading Saudis who have financed him for decades.
“Obama has the totalitarian impulse. After all, he went around saying he didn't have Constitutional authority to legalize the illegals, and then he tried anyway. The courts stopped him.”
What was Obama’s motive? Simple, he knew if he did that for Hillary, he’d own the next President of the United States, and could blackmail her with the truth till the end of time. It literally would have given him a 3rd and 4th term.
“Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.” Kavanaugh’s Accuser Max Stier Is Former Clinton Lawyer, Obama Donor
Amy Sussman/Getty Images
5:42
Max Stier, the man behind a new sexual misconduct allegation against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, was not only a former classmate of Kavanaugh’s at Yale but also a foe during the Bill Clinton impeachment trial.
Stier, 53, served on the team defending Clinton, while Kavanaugh served on Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr’s team that was investigating Clinton. As Yale Daily News put it:
In 1994, Kavanaugh joined the legal team, led by Kenneth Starr, that was looking into President Bill Clinton’s real estate dealings as part of the Whitewater investigation. Later that decade, Kavanaugh co-wrote the Starr Report, which established broad grounds for Clinton’s impeachment.
Those proceedings pitted Kavanaugh against a former Yale classmate, Max Stier ’87, a fellow member of Stiles College who was one of several attorneys representing Clinton during the investigation.
The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway noted in a piece that during those proceedings Stier had “worked closely with David Kendall,” who would later defend Hillary Clinton against allegations of illegally handling classified information.
Stier once worked for a Republican congressman decades ago — Rep. Jim Leach (R-IA) in 1982, but he would later donate to Democrats. He donated $250 to the Democratic National Committee in 2000 while he worked at Housing and Urban Development, and then donated about $1,000 to former President Barack Obama in 2007 and 2008, according to the Federal Election Commission website.
In 2004, Stier, then divorced, married then-assistant U.S. attorney Florence Yu Pan, according to a New York Times wedding announcement. The wedding took place in Washington, D.C.
That same year, a person by the name of “Florence Pan” in Washington, D.C., donated $500 to John Kerry’s campaign for president.
Pan was later nominated by President Obama to be a federal judge for the Washington, D.C., U.S. District Court in April 2016, but the nomination expired before the Senate could vote on it. She is currently an associate judge on the D.C. Superior Court.
Stier currently is the CEO and president of the Parternship for Public Service, a non-partisan organization that advocates for federal employees. He has been frequently interviewed by national news outlets on the issue of government service.
Since President Trump’s tenure, Stier has been careful not to criticize Trump, although he has in several interviews disparaged the notion of the “Deep State” and defended federal employees as hardworking public servants.
Stier’s allegation against Kavanaugh became public in a New York Times piece that ran on Saturday, as an adaptation of a newly-published book on the now-Supreme Court justice. The piece said:
A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly.
The Times later added to its piece: “We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier; the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the episode.”
Former Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said Monday during a floor speech that Stier never told his committee, which was overseeing Kavanaugh’s confirmation and handling the investigation into him, about his allegation, according to the Hill.
“That person, Mr. Stier, didn’t reach out or provide information to the committee majority. … My office never received anything from Mr. Stier or his unnamed friends,” Grassley said.
“Had my staff received substantive allegations or had he approached me or my staff, we would have attempted to take a statement and interview him,” he added.
Stier reportedly had contacted a Democrat senator on the Senate Judiciary Committee — Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) — with his allegation. Coons later would reportedly send a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray asking that he follow up with Stier, copying Grassley and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
Grassley slammed the New York Times during his speech, asking, “Who will watch the watchmen?”
“This week’s report includes some embarrassing, irresponsible missteps,” he added. “This is not an allegation. It’s barely a third-hand rumor.”
One of the authors of the book and the Times piece said Stier did not speak to them for the book. Asked why, co-author Robin Pogrebin said, “My sense is that he feels as if he did his duty, which was he brought the information that he had to the Senate — to senators and to the FBI.
“He made them all very aware that he had this experience that he had witnessed firsthand in a dorm room during his freshman year at Yale. What they did with that information was up to them. It never materialized and became part of the process. Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed and he was done. His work had been done. He had done his part. And he had no interest in revisiting it.”
The judge found these releases, together with the publication of Clinton’s secret speeches to Wall Street banks, in which she pledged to be their representative, were “matters of the highest public concern.” They “allowed the American electorate to look behind the curtain of one of the two major political parties in the United States during a presidential election.”
“Clinton also failed to mention how he and Hillary cashed in after his presidential tenure to make themselves multimillionaires, in part by taking tens of millions in speaking fees from Wall Street bankers.”
SWAMP EMPRESS HILLARY CLINTON
Leaked Julian Assange Message:
Hillary Is A ‘Well Connected, Sadistic, Sociopath’
"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now." ---- Patricia McCarthy - AMERICANTHINKER.com
Clinton Foundation Put On Watch List Of Suspicious ‘Charities’
"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now." ---- Patricia McCarthy - AMERICANTHINKER.com
Media silent on dismissal of DNC
suit against Julian Assange
A federal court ruling last Tuesday dismissing a Democratic National Committee (DNC) civil suit against Julian Assange “with prejudice” was a devastating indictment of the US ruling elite’s campaign to destroy the WikiLeaks founder. It exposed as a fraud the entire “Russiagate” conspiracy theory peddled by the Democratic Party, the corporate media and the intelligence agencies for the past three years.
The decision, by Judge John Koeltl of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, rejected the smears that Assange “colluded” with Russia. It upheld his status as a journalist and publisher and dismissed claims that WikiLeaks’ 2016 publication of leaked emails from the DNC was “illegal.”
Despite the significance of the ruling, and its clear newsworthiness, it has been subjected to an almost complete blackout by the entire media in the US and internationally.
The universal silence on the court decision—extending from the New York Times (which buried a six-paragraph report on the ruling on page 25) and the Washington Post, to “alternative” outlets such as the Intercept, the television evening news programs and the publications of the pseudo-left—can be described only as a coordinated political conspiracy.
Its aim is to suppress any discussion of the court’s exposure of the slanders used to malign and isolate Assange, and to justify the unprecedented international pursuit of him over WikiLeaks’ exposure of US war crimes, surveillance operations and diplomatic conspiracies.
The New York Times, the Washington Post and other corporate outlets have relentlessly smeared Assange as a “Russian agent” and depicted him as the linchpin of a conspiracy hatched in Moscow to deprive Democratic Party candidate Hillary Clinton of the presidency in the 2016 US elections.
Now that their claims have been subjected to judicial review and exposed as a tissue of lies and fabrications, they have adopted a policy of radio silence. There is no question that if the court ruling had been in favour of the DNC, it would have been greeted with banner headlines and wall-to-wall coverage.
The response exposes these publications as state propagandists and active participants in the campaign by the Democratic Party, the Trump administration and the entire ruling elite to condemn Assange for the rest of his life to an American prison for the “crime” of publishing the truth.
The editors and senior writers at these outlets, such as New York Timeseditorial page editor James Bennet, are in constant contact with the CIA and other intelligence agencies. Behind the scenes, they work out an editorial line that will advance the interests of the Wall Street banks and the military-intelligence apparatus. At the same time, they decide what news and information they will hide from the American and world population.
The efforts by the mainstream news outlets to bury the ruling presents a clear example of the type of media manipulation that has led millions of people to seek alternative sources of news on the internet, of which WikiLeaks is itself an example.
Judge Koeltl’s decision made plain the anti-democratic and dictatorial logic of the DNC case against Assange. He warned: “If WikiLeaks could be held liable for publishing documents concerning the DNC’s political, financial and voter-engagement strategies simply because the DNC labels them ‘secret’ and trade secrets, then so could any newspaper or other media outlet.” This, he stated, would “override the First Amendment” protection to freedom of the press mandated by the US Constitution.
Koeltl’s finding was an absolute vindication of Assange and WikiLeaks’ 2016 publications exposing the attempts by the DNC to rig the Democratic Party primaries against self-declared “democratic socialist” Bernie Sanders in favour of Hillary Clinton.
The judge found these releases, together with the publication of Clinton’s secret speeches to Wall Street banks, in which she pledged to be their representative, were “matters of the highest public concern.” They “allowed the American electorate to look behind the curtain of one of the two major political parties in the United States during a presidential election.”
Koeltl, moreover, found there was no evidence to justify the DNC’s assertion that WikiLeaks had colluded with the Russian state to obtain the material. Assange and WikiLeaks have always maintained that the documents were not provided to them by the Putin regime.
The ruling demonstrated the flagrant illegality of the US vendetta against Assange. The slander that he was operating as a “Russian agent” to “interfere” in US politics was used by the American government and its intelligence agencies to pressure the Ecuadorian regime to sever Assange’s internet access in 2016, and again in 2018. It served as a central pretext for its illegal termination in April of his political asylum in the embassy building.
The judgment was also an implicit exposure of the lawlessness of the attempts by the Trump administration, with the full support of the Democrats, to extradite Assange from Britain, so that he can be prosecuted on 18 US charges, including 17 espionage counts, carrying a maximum sentence of 175 years’ imprisonment.
The Trump administration and the Justice Department are claiming that it was illegal for WikiLeaks and Assange to publish US army war logs from Iraq and Afghanistan, hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables and other documents exposing US war crimes and intrigues, provided by the courageous whistleblower Chelsea Manning.
Koeltl’s ruling, however, reasserted the fundamental democratic principle that WikiLeaks had a right to publish the 2016 DNC documents, even if they had been obtained by the Russian government, or any other entity, illegally.
The clear implication is that even if Manning’s decision to leak US military and diplomatic documents was a violation of the law, WikiLeaks’ publication of them was not. The publication of both the 2010 and the 2016 leaks was constitutionally protected journalistic activity.
Koeltl further undermined the claims of the Trump administration, the Democrats and the media that Assange is a “hacker,” undeserving of First Amendment protections. The judge repeatedly referred to Assange as a “journalist” and WikiLeaks as a “publisher.”
In other words, the attempt to extradite Assange to the US and prosecute him is a frontal assault on the US Constitution and press freedom. In its disregard for domestic and international law, it can be described only as an extraordinary rendition operation, similar to the kidnappings and torture operations conducted by the CIA.
The hostile response to Koeltl’s ruling on the part of the entire political and media establishment, in the US and internationally, demonstrates that this conspiracy will not be defeated by plaintive appeals to the governments, political parties and media corporations that have spearheaded the assault on Assange’s legal and democratic rights.
All of them are using the persecution of Assange as a test case for the imposition of ever-more authoritarian measures, aimed at suppressing mounting popular hostility to war, social inequality and an assault on democratic rights.
What is required is the development of a mass movement from below, to mobilise the immense social and political power of the working class internationally to secure Assange’s liberty and to defend all democratic rights.
GEORGE SOROS AND THE CLINTON GLOBALIST AGENDA FOR BANKSTERS AND WIDE OPEN BORDERS
*
NEW YORK — Demand Justice, an organization founded by former members of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and associated with a “social welfare organization” financed by billionaire activist George S oros, is raising money for an eventual court fight against what the group describes as President Trump’s proposed “racist, unnecessary wall.”
“Obama would declare himself president for life with S oros really running the show, as he did for the entire Obama presidency.”
*
“Hillary was always small potatoes, a placeholder as it were. Her health was always suspect. And do you think the plotters would have let a doofus like Tim Kaine take office in the event that Hillary became disabled?”
“There is no controlling Bill Clinton. He does whatever he wants and runs up incredible expenses with foundation funds,” states a separate interview memo attached to the submission.
“Bill Clinton mixes and matches his personal business with that of the foundation. Many people within the foundation have tried to caution him about this but he does not listen, and there really is no talking to him,” the memo added.
CLINTON MAFIA AND THEIR BANKSTERS AT GOLDMAN SACHS
WHO IS TIGHTER WITH THE PLUNDERING BANKSTERS? CLINTON, OBAMA or TRUMP?
The Clinton White House famously abolished the Glass–Steagall legislation, which separated commercial and investment banking. The move was a boon for Wall Street firms and led to major bank mergers that
some analysts say helped contribute to the
2008 financial crisis.
Bill and Hillary Clinton raked in massive speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, with CNN documenting a total of at least $7.7 million in paid speeches to big financial firms, including Goldman Sachs and UBS. Hillary Clinton made $675,000 from speeches to Goldman Sachs specifically, and her husband secured more than $1,550,000 from Goldman speeches. In 2005 alone, Bill Clinton collected over $500,000 from three Goldman Sachs events.
Hillary Clinton is simply the epitome of the rabid self – a whirlpool of selfishness, greed, and malignance.
It may well be true that Donald Trump has made his greatest contribution to the nation before even taking office: the political destruction of Hillary Clinton and her infinitely corrupt machine. J.R. Dunn
"Hillary will do anything to distract you from her reckless record and the damage to the Democratic Party and the America she and The Obama's have created."
THE FINAL DAYS OF HILLARY CLINTON: MISTRESS of the SWAMP, GLOBAL BRIBES SUCKER and LOOTER OF THE POOR
“If the Constitution did not forbid cruel and unusual punishment, the sentence I would like to see imposed would place both Bill and Hillary Clinton in the same 8-by-12 cell.” ROBERT ARVAY – AMERICAN THINKER com
“The couple parlayed lives supposedly spent in “public service” into admission into the upper stratosphere of American wealth, with incomes in the top 0.1 percent bracket. The source of this vast wealth was a political machine that might well be dubbed “Clinton, Inc.” This consists essentially of a seedy money-laundering operation to ensure big business support for the Clintons’ political ambitions as well as their personal fortunes. The basic components of the operation are lavishly paid speeches to Wall Street and Fortune 500 audiences, corporate campaign contributions, and donations to the ostensibly philanthropic Clinton Foundation.”
IT WAS BILL CLINTON WHO UNLEASHED WALL STREET’S BIGGEST CRIMINAL BANKSTERS…. And haven’t they sucked up the banksters’ gratuities since?
Only Barack Obama has serviced banksters more than Hillary and Billary!
“Clinton also failed to mention how he and Hillary cashed in after his presidential tenure to make themselves multimillionaires, in part by taking tens of millions in speaking fees from Wall Street bankers.”
FOLLOWING THE CRIMES OF BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON BECOMES AMERICA’S ROAD TO REVOLUTION
Transcripts released by WikiLeaks of Clinton speeches to Wall Street bankers, for which she received six-figure paychecks, show her praising the recommendations of the 2010 Simpson- Bowles deficit-reduction commission, which called for sweeping cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid; the elimination of 200,000 federal jobs; a tax on employees’
Judicial Watch: Only Crimes in Russia Scandal Are from ‘Obama Gang’
FOR EIGHT YEARS BARACK OBAMA AND ERIC HOLDER SABOTAGED HOMELAND SECURITY TO EASE MORE MEXICANS OVER OUR BORDERS AND INTO OUR JOBS AND VOTING BOOTHS.
OBAMA NEEDED THESE ILLEGALS TO FINISH OFF THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS, WHAT WAS LEFT OF THEM AFTER OBAMA'S CRONY BANKSTERS' PLUNDER.
“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.” Washington Times
If Obama was a fully recruited agent of Moscow, tasked with giving Russia a significant military advantage over the United States, and economically weakening and socially dividing the nation, how would he have conducted his presidency (or his post-presidency) any differently? TREVOR LOUDON
*
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.
Democrats Allow Communists to Infiltrate Their Party Across the Nation
“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
*
“Professor Paul Kengor has extensively
researched the Chicago communists whose
progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett,
and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly
Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have
many of the key players who put Obama into
power.”
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.
The Democrat Left is the Party of Racism, Divisiveness, and Balkanization
A quote misattributed to Joseph Goebbels says, "Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty." The Democrat Left has, however, put this advice into practice by accusing Republicans in general, President Trump in particular, and "deplorables" as a whole, of its own racist, anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, ageist, and otherwise divisive and Balkanizing practices.
The Democrat Left calls Donald Trump a racist and white nationalist as if these were statements of fact, but it can offer no objective evidence in the form of hate speech against anybody's race or ethnicity — the very kind of hate speech in which the Left itself deals wholesale on an almost routine basis.
New Jersey Democrats: "Jew Down" is not Anti-Semitic
New Jersey Democrat Kathy McBride used the phrase "Jew down" while fellow Democrat Robin Vaughn dismissed this phrase as an ordinary verb rather than an anti-Semitic slur. I wonder how these two African-Americans would feel if somebody similarly excused the N-word because it means literally "black" and nothing more. Nobody would buy that excuse, and the African-American registry not only describes the Latin origin of the N-word but also cites "Jew him down" as an example of "explicit group devaluations." Vaughn deserves credit for apologizing subsequently, but the bottom line is that a total of three Democrats, including George Muschal, behaved at first as though there is nothing wrong with the phrase "Jew down."
Do Jews Make Matzos from the Blood of Murdered Palestinians?
We will have to look to Christine Olivo, a Democrat running for Congress in Florida's 24th District, for the answer. Olivo tweeted on September 16, "Everyone thinks that if you side with the Palestinians then you're anti-Semitic. WTF! We can't turn a blind eye to the suffering that they're enduring at the hands of people that have endured great suffering themselves. THEIR HOUSES ARE BEING BULLDOZED WITH THEM IN IT! #Godhelpus." The tweet may have been taken down, but I saw it when it was online, and it is still in Google cache as of September 20.
Yes, Christine, if you side with the Hamas-governed Palestinians, then you are siding with terrorists, the same way that anybody who supported Nazi-governed Germany was a Nazi sympathizer.
Women's march board member Zahra Billoo has gone even farther than Olivo by stating that "Israel is an apartheid, racist state, which engages in terrorism against Palestinians." This is yet another deployment of Joseph Goebbels's purported advice because Hamas is the terrorist organization that also discriminates against Jews, Christians, and peaceful Muslims.
If people are inclined to dismiss Billoo as an aberration who does not represent the Democratic Left, we can add the Democratic Left's counterpart in the United Kingdom. Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has depicted Hamas and Hezb'allah, the organization behind the murder of 241 U.S. Marines and other service personnel in Lebanon, as "his friends." At what point will American voters, and British voters as well, perform a clean sweep of tacit and even open promoters of terrorist organizations? Friends don't let friends vote Labor in the U.K., or Democrat Left in the U.S.
The DemLeft's Divisive Racial Identity Politics
Squad member Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) said, "We don't need any more brown faces that don't want to be a brown voice. We don't need any more black faces that don't want to be a black voice." Racial identity politics are racist by definition. Squad member Ilhan Omar added, "This is not going to be the country of white people," thus again appealing to racial divisiveness. The Congressional Black Caucus proclaims hilariously that it wants to "root out racism" when an entity like a Black Caucus is racist by definition; a Congressional White Caucus would almost certainly come with sheets, hoods, and burning crosses. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was in fact opposed by the equivalent of a "White Caucus" with a genuine (former) Ku Klux Klansman filibustering for roughly 14 hours.
The Democratic Left, meanwhile, consorts openly with Al Sharpton, who has used some very interesting words for white people in general ("white interloper" during the 1995 Freddy's Fashion Mart incident), Jews in particular ("diamond merchants"), Asians ("Chinamen"), LGBT people ("punk faggot" and "Greek homos"), police officers ("pigs"), and even black people he dislikes (the N-word). Louis Farrakhan, while less popular with the Democratic Left, is still welcomed by some elements while he equates Jews with termites and depicts white people as "potential humans" who have yet to evolve.
These extreme views are not limited to controversial figures like Sharpton and Farrakhan. Maxine Waters encouraged her followers to harass members of the Trump administration: "And if you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." That sounds a lot like what night-riding Ku Klux Klansmen once did to black people who moved into white neighborhoods.
The Democrat Left Lines Up with Terrorists
Squad member Rashida Tlaib tweeted (link available 8/9/19), "When will the world stop dehumanizing our Palestinian people who just want to be free?" Tlaib also argued "that Palestinians are not responsible for terrorism or vitriol, even as she has lambasted the president's use of words and called Israel a white-supremacist nation." Tlaib leaves us to suppose that all the bombings, knife attacks, vehicular attacks, arson attacks, and rocket attacks on Israel perpetrate themselves, or perhaps bogeymen or indeed anybody but Tlaib's Palestinian people are responsible. Her fellow Squad member Ilhan Omar tweeted, "Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel" while adding, "It's all about the Benjamins ($100 bills), baby" — an obvious reference to Jews and money.
The Democrat Left Defines Senior Citizens and Christians as the Enemy
The Democratic Left has also (2018) depicted Trump-supporting Christians and a Christian-owned business as trash. A "Knock the Vote" ad from 2018 demonized senior citizens, with one older woman saying, "Climate change? That's a you problem. I'll be dead soon." Will the next step involve Sandmen from Logan's Run, with Democratic Donkeys on their uniforms, reducing Social Security and Medicare expenses by terminating senior citizens? Prominent Democrats have also fomented racial division by calling for reparations for slavery to be paid by people who never owned slaves to people who never were slaves.
The intellectually and morally bankrupt Democratic Left, therefore, has nothing to offer our country but hatred of Jews, hatred of Christians, hatred of senior citizens, class warfare, divisive racial identity politics, tacit support for foreign terrorist organizations, and overall Balkanization of the United States. Everybody who believes in American values, American unity, and American ideals needs to repudiate this agenda at the ballot box in 2020.
