Political pandering from Democratic 2020 hopefuls at first presidential debate was muy loco.



By Danielle Ryan
There is no good argument to be made that journalists should not be critical in their coverage of the Trump administration. After all, to hold the president to account, to inform the public on the consequences of his policy choices, “to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable” as that famous saying goes, is all in the job description. It’s just a pity they only decided to take the responsibility seriously when Trump took office.
Why should anyone believe that their showy displays of grief and horror are sincere now, given their silence during the Obama years, when many of the same policies causing outrage now were also in place then?
The same thing goes for the Democrats, who are eagerly attempting to cast themselves as the party of compassion. Joe Biden railed against Trump’s “deportation state” in the Miami Herald this week, despite having served as vice president under Obama, dubbed the ‘Deporter in Chief’ by immigrants rights activists.
The Obama administration deported more migrants than any previous administration, with children “moved to the head of the line” to be turfed out.
Two years before Trump appeared on the scene, in 2014, 445 people died attempting to cross an increasingly militarized border. Obama boasted in 2011 that the number of border patrol agents had more than doubled since 2004 — proud that he had continued the increases that had begun under the Bush administration.
The University of Arizona’s Binational Migration Institute explained in a 2013 report that “segmented border militarization”had resulted in “the redistribution of migratory flows into remote and dangerous areas such as southern Arizona.” Rights organizations spoke up about the “alarming rise of migrant deaths on US soil.”
It would be inaccurate to say that there was no coverage of the crisis while Obama was president. There was some bland, less-emotional coverage. There was also some in-depth reporting which captured the extent of the crisis — but there was no mass media mobilization against Obama himself. The facts and death tolls were not plastered across the cable news networks night and day. No one argued that Obama was shaming America.

A clip of a Trump administration lawyer arguing that migrant children did not need soap and toothpaste to be “safe and sanitary” went viral last week. It was jarring to listen to, but again, there was nothing new here — only the willingness of some to suddenly be moved to outrage.
A 2015 lawsuit described “inhumane” conditions in border detention facilities under Obama. Men, women and children, it said, were “packed into overcrowded and filthy holding cells with the lights glaring day and night.” They suffered “in brutally cold temperatures; deprived of beds, bedding, and sleep,” were denied adequate food, water and medical care, as well as “basic sanitation items” like soap, toilet paper and diapers. This all while the media treated Obama with kid gloves and liberals sang his praises.
There were no deaths of children in Customs and Border Protection custody under Obama — and there have been six under the Trump administration, so it is fair to argue, that with the implementation of some more extreme anti-asylum policies and perhaps an even greater lack of caring, Trump has taken an already dysfunctional, inhumane and under-funded system — and simply made it worse.

There is a case to be made that he has done this on purpose; to make the situation as unappealing as possible to those who might be tempted to make the treacherous and potentially fatal journey to and across the US’s southern border — but the reality is, however unappealing he tries to make it, for many, it will still be more appealing than the alternative.
The biggest elephant in the room, however, is not that the Obama administration was guilty of many of the same things as the current one. It’s that every single US administration for decades has been guilty of contributing to the creation of this crisis through an abominable imperialist foreign policy that has ravaged the very countries these migrants are coming from.
Democrats and Republicans have spent decades enthusiastically destabilizing Latin America under the guise of democracy promotion. In reality, they have stolen its wealth and resources, engineered military coups and installed dictators, funded and equipped death squads — and imposed deadly economic sanctions. Where are all the liberals crying about that? How could such inhumane policy have led to anything else?
It’s hardly the first time an image of a dead child has been used to serve a political agenda. Remember Omran Daqneesh, the five-year-old boy who became the face of Syria’s war after a photo of him, covered in ash and sitting shell-shocked in an ambulance, shot around the world?
Regime-change activists within the mainstream media commentariat had the audacity to use that image to call for more Western bombing — so, seeing some of the same crowd using the image of Valeria Martinez to frame Trump as uniquely evil in the history of the US presidency is no big surprise.

By Savanah Hernandez
Kounalakis says any Democrat will do a better job than President Trump and hopes that someone like Kamala Harris will bring some California style policies to the national stage.

By Alana Mastrangelo
“Many people watching at home have health insurance coverage through their employer,” asked NBC’s Lester Holt, “Who here would abolish their private health insurance in favor of a government-run plan? Just a show of hands.”
Sen. Warren and Mayor de Blasio raised their hands in response to Holt’s question, admitting that they would abolish private health insurance in favor of cradle to grave, government-run healthcare.
Warren and de Blasio, however, are likely not the only candidates on stage who agree with abolishing private health insurance, but rather, the only candidates bold enough to actually admit it.
The Green New Deal, for example, would ban private health insurance, including employer-provided insurance plans. The Green New Deal was endorsed by Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Representative Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX), two presidential candidates who shared the debate stage with Warren and de Blasio on Wednesday night.
Moreover, over 100 Democrats have endorsed “Medicare for All,” a proposal that would also effectively do away with private health insurance.
Another Democratic Presidential candidate, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) — although not present on Wednesday night — has also admitted to wanting to eliminate private health insurance to replace it with a single-payer, government-run “Medicare for All” program.
Less than 24 hours later, however, Harris seemed to have thought better of her statement, quickly walking back her call to abolish private health insurance, and later insisting that “Medicare for All” would not eliminate the entire private health insurance industry.
While it is apparent that not every 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate may be comfortable with confessing their views on private health insurance just yet, the fact that some are willing to openly endorse socialist policies is a cause for concern, and a testimony to the radical shift the Democratic Party has taken over recent years.
By Chris Menahan
Published on Jun 26, 2019
“All of you on stage support a women’s right to abortion. You all support some version of a government health-care option. Would your plan cover abortion, Mr. Secretary?” asked MSNBC debate moderator Lester Holt.
“Yes it would. I don’t believe only in reproductive freedom, I believe in reproductive justice. And what that means is just because a woman, or let’s also not forget someone in the trans community — a trans female — is poor, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t exercise that right to choose. So I absolutely would cover that right to have an abortion,” Castro said.
Published on Jun 27, 2019



JUNE 26, 2019
Carlson explained how as soon as Trump took the White House in 2016, Big Tech began plotting to “control the election outcome in 2020” by “using the excuse of “fake news” to control the public discourse.
The Fox News host chastised the previous Republican Congress for failing to act, as well as the White House which refused to use its control of the “vast regulatory apparatus” to intervene.
“They’ve sat motionless and doing nothing,” Carlson said of the Trump administration.
Tucker praised Senator Josh Hawley, who recently introduced a bill that would strip Big Tech companies of their legal immunity as platforms under Section 230 of the Communications Act, as “the only Republican who seems interested at all in keeping Big Tech in check.”
“Passing Hawley’s bill doesn’t seem to be a priority though, no one in Congress is talking about it,” said Carlson, adding this was a “big mistake”.
“Successful political parties look out for their supporters….and protect them from harm,” said Carlson, slamming Republicans for “sitting in a stupefied fog of libertarianism doing nothing while their ideas are suppressed and their supporters are silenced.”
“One day they’ll look up and find they have no supporters at all – who will be to blame for that? Only themselves,” he concluded.
As we reported earlier, the latest example of Big Tech election meddling is Reddit quarantining of ‘The Donald’ – a hugely popular forum with over 700,000 members that was credited with being the “most effective” at spreading memes during the last presidential election.