A video exposing the extreme viewpoints of yet another staffer of the Bernie Sanders campaign has some questioning whether there is a growing issue inside the Vermont senator’s ranks.
A video released on Tuesday by Project Veritas reveals a man identified as Martin Weissgerber, a paid field organizer for the Sanders presidential campaign in South Carolina, fantasizing about sending Republicans to “reeducation camps” and Sanders dissolving the Senate and House of Representatives should he become president.
“Do we just cease — do we just dissolve the Senate, House of Representatives, the judicial branch, and have someone like Bernie Sanders and a cabinet of people make all the decisions on climate? I mean, I’m serious,” the staffer says when talking about how Sanders could tackle climate change as president.
He also says he wants Republicans like Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham sent to “reeducation camps.”
“What will help is when we send all the Republicans to the reeducation camps,” he says. “Can you imagine Mitch McConnell? Lindsey Graham?”
At another point in the hidden camera footage, the staffer says he’s prepared for a revolution that requires armed resistance and even calls to“guillotine the rich.” He did comment that Sanders does not share his views that are more far left.
With this being the second Sanders staffer to be caught on camera spouting extremist ideas — the first said “cities will burn” if Bernie loses and Trump is reelected — conservative pundits are questioning whether there is an issue within the ranks of the Vermont senator that he needs to address.
“Another Bernie Sanders staffer has been caught on camera saying he’d gladly use violence to take over our government and kill people for socialism. Let me guess, this isn’t ‘real socialism’ either…even though this is how it always turns out?” actress and outspoken conservative Mindy Robinson tweeted.
Reporter Andy Ngo took a look at the staffer’s social media pages and found that he lives what appears to be quite a luxurious lifestyle and is also a rapper on Soundcloud who goes by the name King Manic.
The staffer later did a total lockdown of his social media, including deleting his Twitter account.
Sanders and his campaign have not commented on any of the videos.
“Should you do that, tear it down? I don’t know, maybe the answer is yes”
JANUARY 22, 2020
As President Trump continues efforts to divert funding to build a new border wall, Democratic Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders said Monday that he would consider ‘tearing down’ the existing border barriers if he is elected.
Sanders reasoned that the current barrier on the US-Mexico border is ‘symbolic’.
He claimed that tearing the wall down “may be” the correct thing to do, adding “but you know it’s how much is it going to cost to tear it down?”
“Should you do that, tear it down? I don’t know, maybe the answer is yes.” Sanders said.
“That’s something you’re willing to consider? You’re willing to consider tearing down existing fencing between the U.S. and Mexico?” David Noriega further asked Sanders.
“Yeah, I’ll always look,” Sanders replied, adding “but again if it’s going to cost me billions of dollars to tear it down, I’d rather invest that maybe in the needs for child care in this country.”
“But it’s, you know, we can look at it.” he concluded.
David Knight details the new Hulu series painting a favorable picture of Hillary Clinton and exposes the vitriolic hate she has for Bernie Sanders and any other Democrat Party dissidents that would dare defy the establishment and interfere with her ambition.
Sanders’ comments came during a Vice News sponsored event (hence the whacked out questions).
Sanders also promised to put a stop to “99% of deportations”, even including for violent criminals.
At the same event, Joe Biden, the ‘moderate’ Democratic candidate, vowed to end all illegal immigration detention “across the board”:
Is it any wonder that the consensus among migrants is that Democrats are going to allow them to illegally flood into the US if they win the election?
Bernie and Biden’s comments came on the same day that thousands of migrants stormed a bridge over the Suchiate River from Guatemala to Mexico, attempting to move further north with a view to entering the US.
This is naked tyranny.
By Shane Trejo
In the wake of the Virginia gun rights rally on Monday, Democrats in the Capitol are not slowing down their push for tyranny. They are moving a bill through the legislature that would effectively criminalize dissent against Governor Blackface Northam and other state government officials.
House Bill 1627 was introduced by Delegate Jeffrey M. Bourne last week. The legislation “provides that certain crimes relating to threats and harassment may be prosecuted in the City of Richmond if the victim is the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia.”
Language in the bill explicitly criminalizes free speech, in what would constitute a blatant attack on the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.
“If any person, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, or harass any person, shall use a computer or computer network to communicate obscene, vulgar, profane, lewd, lascivious, or indecent language, or make any suggestion or proposal of an obscene nature, or threaten any illegal or immoral act, he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor,” the legislation reads.
The legislation makes it clear that the above provision applies directly to “the Governor, Governor-elect, Lieutenant Governor, Lieutenant Governor-elect, Attorney General, or Attorney General-elect, a member or employee of the General Assembly, a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, or a judge of the Court of Appeals of Virginia,” which means this legislation effectively criminalizes dissent against public officials.
Tina Freitas, wife of Republican Delegate Nick Freitas, called attention to this intolerable act in a Facebook post on Tuesday night.
“Wow on cue, now they are after the 1A! Dems are trying to set up special rules exclusive to the Elite ruling class, to protect themselves from criticism!” Freitas wrote.
“What is considered harassment? Is Governor Infanticide/KKK Hood trying to avoid being held accountable? Are we no longer allowed to demand justice for the alleged rape victims of LG Fairfax? This is some straight up communist censorship!” she added.
Virginia Democrats were not detracted by the gun rights rally on Monday in the slightest. They moved red flag laws through the legislature just a day later, and subsequently killed pro-gun bills that were introduced by Republicans.
“The governor and the leadership of the democrats have declared war on law-abiding citizens and gun owners and their votes today just confirmed that that’s where we’re going,” said Philip Van Cleave, President of Virginia Citizens Defense League.
Virginia patriots may have to continue organizing locally, with Sheriffs deputizing local patriots and constitutional militias being trained, as a bulwark against the treasonous usurpers leading the state legislature.
By Tyler Durden – 12/20/2019
The Democrats declared war this week. Not on President Donald Trump but on the United States and the Constitution.
What started as a coup to overturn the 2016 election has now morphed into a Civil War as Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Fran-feces) presided over the passage of a bill which creates a clear Constitutional Crisis.
And that means we have multiple factions vying for control of our government, the definition of a Civil War.
In passing these articles of impeachment against President Trump Congress has arrogated to itself powers it does not have.
The first article asserts a motive to Trump’s actions to invalidate his role as chief law enforcement officer for the country. It doesn’t matter if you like him or any President having this power, he does have it.
Read that first article and then apply it to a country other than Ukraine where Trump didn’t have ‘probable cause’ for investigation into corruption and malfeasance there.
That could be Abuse of Power.
But this happened in Ukraine where Trump clearly has probable cause.
The following is the scenario the first impeachment article is asserting as the basis for abuse of power, through ascribing political motives to the President:
One day President Trump wakes up and says, “Shit! Joe Biden’s leading me in the polls. I need to do something about this.”
So, Trump twirls his orange comb-over and calls up the Prime Minister of Armenia, a Russian ally, to whom we’ve pledged aid. Since it’s a Russian ally and Trump may have colluded with the Russians, they would be a good candidate to help him.
But Joe Biden has no history of diplomacy or oversight in Armenia as Vice-President. There’s no record of any contact of any kind with Biden in Armenia, for argument’s sake.
Trump then, during the phone call, shakes down the Armenian PM for that aid, explicitly saying he must create dirt on Joe Biden or he would withhold appropriated aid funds to the country.
Then, after getting caught, Trump tries to hide the record of the phone call by hiding behind Executive Privilege.
That would be Abuse of Power and an impeachable offense. It would be regrettable but indefensible that the odious jackals in Congress were right to impeach him. They would, actually, be defending the Constitution and fully within their rights.
But, that’s not what happened.
Biden was put in charge of Ukraine by President Obama. He had full discretion on policy towards Ukraine and was caught on tape bragging about doing exactly what the impeachment article is accusing Trump of doing. Shaking Ukraine down for favors in order to get $1 billion in aid.
Since the prosecutor who Biden had fired was investigating corruption into his son Hunter’s involvement with Ukrainian gas company Burisma, this admission is pretty damning, showing clear personal motive to use his office to stop investigation into his family.
This is Abuse of Power. This is subjecting U.S. foreign policy to the whims of an elected official, squelching an investigation into his personal family, using the office for personal gain.
So, when viewed through this lens the first impeachment article is a complete lie. Trump didn’t do the things asserted. The transcript of the phone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky proves that.
Trump made the phone call public immediately.
The phone call and Trump’s order to review the foreign aid were contemporaneous but not conditional. If you have a non-charitable view of the President it may raise some questions, but there was probable cause here.
Your opinions on Trump do not add up to High Crimes and Misdemeanors.
The implications of this impeachment article are, however, staggering.
It says explicitly that the U.S. president cannot discharge his duties as a law enforcement official if the person of interest is someone of the opposite party or a potential electoral opponent.
It says that probable cause is not a standard for investigation only political considerations.
That’s a clear violation of Congress’ role. Congress writes laws. The President executes them. If the Congress wants to assume law enforcement powers it should work to amend the Constitution.
This is a clear example of why impeachment is a political process not a legal one. But, if they are going to act this politically, at least they should put the veneer of legality on it. Even the equally odious Republicans who impeached Bill Clinton did that.
But in asserting this as an offence Congress seeks to place the Legislative Branch as superior to the Executive in matters of law enforcement and implementation.
That’s a clear violation of the separation of powers. It may suck that the guy holding the Office of the Presidency is someone you don’t like or not willing to turn a blind eye to corruption, but doing his job is not a ‘high crime or misdemeanor.’
The second article is even worse. Because asserts the power to subpoena members of the Executive branch under the impeachment inquiry into the first article. And since Congress has sole authority over impeachment, no judicial review of its subpoena power can be made.
This is fully unconstitutional since it subverts the power of the Judicial branch to settle disputes between the Executive and Legislative branches as established by the Constitution.
Pelosi and company are broadening the definition of ‘the sole power of impeachment’ to say that whatever Congress deems as worthy of an impeachment inquiry is therefore law and the other branches have no say in the matter.
This is patent nonsense and wholly tyrannical.
Rod Rosenstein and Andrew Weismann tried to use an equally broad interpretation of ‘obstruction of justice’ to include future harm to continue the special council’s investigation into Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia.OB
Moreover it renders the concept of judicial review as laid down in Marbury vs. Madison null and void. Congress cannot just make up laws and crimes out of whole cloth and then unilaterally declare them constitutional under the rubric of impeachment.
The Supreme Court has the right to strike down bills Congress passes as unconstitutional.
This drives a massive wedge through the separation of powers in a blatant power grab by Pelosi and the Democratic House majority to protect themselves from Trump’s investigations into their crimes surrounding events in Ukraine.
When viewed dispassionately, Obstruction of Congress is not a crime but rather a function of each of the other two branches of government. It’s no better when the President hides behind Executive Orders to legislate unconstitutionally.
And it’s even worse when the Supreme Court makes up laws from the bench rather than kick the ball back to Congress and start the process all over again.
That’s what the whole three co-equal branches of government is supposed to mean.
Now, in practice I don’t believe the three branches are equal, as the Judicial branch routinely oversteps its authority. But in this case if it does not step in immediately and defend itself from this Congress then the basic fabric of our government unravels overnight.
That the second impeachment article is directly dependent on the flawed (or non-existent) logic of the first impeachment article renders the whole thing simply laughable on the face of it.
I’m no legal scholar so when I can see how ridiculous these articles are then you know this has nothing to do with the law but everything to do with power.
And the reality is, as I discussed in my latest podcast, what this impeachment is really about is distracting and covering up the multiple layers of corruption in U.S. foreign and domestic policy stretching back decades. Many of the tendrils emanating from the events surrounding the FISA warrants improperly granted connect directly to the Clintons, Jeffrey Epstein, William Browder and the rape of Russia in the post-Soviet 90’s.
We’re talking an entire generation or more of U.S. officials and politicians implicated in some of the worst crimes of the past thirty years.
The stakes for these people are existential. This is why they are willing to risk a full-blown constitutional crisis and civil war to remove Trump from office.
They know he’s angry at them now. This is personal as well as philosophical. Trump is a patriot, a narcissist and a gangster. That’s a powerful combination of traits.
The polls are shifting his way on this as the average person knows this impeachment is pathetic. They are tired of the Democrats’ games the same way British voters are over the arguments against Brexit.
So the old adage about killing the king come to mind. If Pelosi et.al. miss here, the retribution from Trump will be biblical.
The damage to the society is too great to argue irrelevancies. No one outside of the Beltway Bubble and the Crazies of the Resistance cares about what Trump did here. It’s too arcane and most people are against giving a shithole like Ukraine taxpayer money in the first place.
The whole thing is a giant pile of loser turds steaming up the room and impeding getting any work done.
In the end We’ll know if Trump has his ducks in a row in how Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell plays his cards versus Pelosi. If McConnell pussy-foots around and gives Pelosi anything on how the trial in the Senate is conducted then the fix is in and Trump is done.
But, if McConnell shuts this down then what comes next will be a righteous smackdown of Trump’s political opponents that will make the phone call with Zelensky look like a routine call to Dominos’ for a double pepperoni.
Either way, this coup attempt by Pelosi is now open warfare. There will be casualties.
* * *
Group of imposters will never be able to communicate the message of truth to the American voter like Donald Trump
DECEMBER 20, 2019
The monotony and exhaustive burnout vomiting from the left reared its ugly head yet again to debate its proposed American Dream-killing legislation.
Guest post by Larry C. Johnson
Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report insists that Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks were created by Russia’s military intelligence organization, the GRU, as part of a Russian plot to meddle in the U.S. 2016 Presidential Election. But this is a lie.
Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks were created by Brennan’s CIA and this action by the CIA should be a target of U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation. Let me explain why.
Let us start with the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment aka ICA. Only three agencies of the 17 in the U.S. intelligence community contributed to and coordinated on the ICA–the FBI, the CIA and NSA. In the preamble to the ICA, you can read the following explanation about methodology:
When Intelligence Community analysts use words such as “we assess” or “we judge,” they are conveying an analytic assessment or judgment
To be clear, the phrase,“We assess”, is intel community jargon for “opinion”. If there was actual evidence or source material for a judgment the writer of the assessment would state, “According to a reliable source” or “knowledgeable source” or “documentary evidence.”
Pay close attention to what the analysts writing the ICA stated about the GRU and Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks:
We assess with high confidence that the GRU used the Guccifer 2.0 persona, DCLeaks.com, and WikiLeaks to release US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets.
- Guccifer 2.0, who claimed to be an independent Romanian hacker, made multiple contradictory statements and false claims about his likely Russian identity throughout the election. Press reporting suggests more than one person claiming to be Guccifer 2.0 interacted with journalists.
- Content that we assess was taken from e-mail accounts targeted by the GRU in March 2016 appeared on DCLeaks.com starting in June.
We assess with high confidence that the GRU relayed material it acquired from the DNC and senior Democratic officials to WikiLeaks. Moscow most likely chose WikiLeaks because of its self-proclaimed reputation for authenticity. Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries.
Not one piece of corroborating intelligence. It is all based on opinion and strong belief. There was no human source report or electronic intercept pointing to a relationship between the GRU and the two alleged creations of the GRU–Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com.
Now consider the spin that Robert Mueller put on this opinion in his report on possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. Mueller bluffs the unsuspecting reader into believing that it is a proven fact that Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks were Russian assets. But he is relying on a mere opinion from a handpicked group of intel analysts working under the direction of then CIA Director John Brennan.
Here’s Mueller’s take (I apologize for the lengthy quote but it is important that you read how the Mueller team presents this):
“The GRU began planning the releases at least as early as April 19, 2016, when Unit 26165 registered the domain dcleaks.com through a service that anonymized the registrant.137 Unit 26165 paid for the registration using a pool of bitcoin that it had mined.138 The dcleaks.com landing page pointed to different tranches of stolen documents, arranged by victim or subject matter. Other dcleaks.com pages contained indexes of the stolen emails that were being released (bearing the sender, recipient, and date of the email). To control access and the timing of releases, pages were sometimes password-protected for a period of time and later made unrestricted to the public.
Starting in June 2016, the GRU posted stolen documents onto the website dcleaks.com, including documents stolen from a number of individuals associated with the Clinton Campaign. These documents appeared to have originated from personal email accounts (in particular, Google and Microsoft accounts), rather than the DNC and DCCC computer networks. DCLeaks victims included an advisor to the Clinton Campaign, a former DNC employee and Clinton Campaign employee, and four other campaign volunteers.139 The GRU released through dcleaks.com thousands of documents, including personal identifying and financial information, internal correspondence related to the“Clinton Campaign and prior political jobs, and fundraising files and information.140
GRU officers operated a Facebook page under the DCLeaks moniker, which they primarily used to promote releases of materials.141 The Facebook page was administered through a small number of preexisting GRU-controlled Facebook accounts.142
GRU officers also used the DCLeaks Facebook account, the Twitter account @dcleaks__, and the email account firstname.lastname@example.org to communicate privately with reporters and other U.S. persons. GRU officers using the DCLeaks persona gave certain reporters early access to archives of leaked files by sending them links and passwords to pages on the dcleaks.com website that had not yet become public. For example, on July 14, 2016, GRU officers operating under the DCLeaks persona sent a link and password for a non-public DCLeaks webpage to a U.S. reporter via the Facebook account.143 Similarly, on September 14, 2016, GRU officers sent reporters Twitter direct messages from @dcleaks_, with a password to another non-public part of the dcleaks.com website.144
The dcleaks.com website remained operational and public until March 2017.”
On June 14, 2016, the DNC and its cyber-response team announced the breach of the DNC network and suspected theft of DNC documents. In the statements, the cyber-response team alleged that Russian state-sponsored actors (which they referred to as “Fancy Bear”) were responsible for the breach.145 Apparently in response to that announcement, on June 15, 2016, GRU officers using the persona Guccifer 2.0 created a WordPress blog. In the hours leading up to the launch of that WordPress blog, GRU officers logged into a Moscow-based server used and managed by Unit 74455 and searched for a number of specific words and phrases in English, including “some hundred sheets,” “illuminati,” and “worldwide known.” Approximately two hours after the last of those searches, Guccifer 2.0 published its first post, attributing the DNC server hack to a lone Romanian hacker and using several of the unique English words and phrases that the GRU officers had searched for that day.146
That same day, June 15, 2016, the GRU also used the Guccifer 2.0 WordPress blog to begin releasing to the public documents stolen from the DNC and DCCC computer networks.
The Guccifer 2.0 persona ultimately released thousands of documents stolen from the DNC and DCCC in a series of blog posts between June 15, 2016 and October 18, 2016.147 Released documents included opposition research performed by the DNC (including a memorandum analyzing potential criticisms of candidate Trump), internal policy documents (such as recommendations on how to address politically sensitive issues), analyses of specific congressional races, and fundraising documents. Releases were organized around thematic issues, such as specific states (e.g., Florida and Pennsylvania) that were perceived as competitive in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Beginning in late June 2016, the GRU also used the Guccifer 2.0 persona to release documents directly to reporters and other interested individuals. Specifically, on June 27, 2016, Guccifer 2.0 sent an email to the news outlet The Smoking Gun offering to provide “exclusive access to some leaked emails linked [to] Hillary Clinton’s staff.”148 The GRU later sent the reporter a password and link to a locked portion of the dcleaks.com website that contained an archive of emails stolen by Unit 26165 from a Clinton Campaign volunteer in March 2016.149 “That the Guccifer 2.0 persona provided reporters access to a restricted portion of the DCLeaks website tends to indicate that both personas were operated by the same or a closely-related group of people.150
The GRU continued its release efforts through Guccifer 2.0 into August 2016. For example, on August 15, 2016, the Guccifer 2.0 persona sent a candidate for the U.S. Congress documents related to the candidate’s opponent.151 On August 22, 2016, the Guccifer 2.0 persona transferred approximately 2.5 gigabytes of Florida-related data stolen from the DCCC to a U.S. blogger covering Florida politics.152 On August 22, 2016, the Guccifer 2.0 persona sent a U.S. reporter documents stolen from the DCCC pertaining to the Black Lives Matter movement.153”
Wow. Sounds pretty convincing. The documents referencing communications by DCLeaks or Guccifer 2.0 with Wikileaks are real. What is not true is that these entities were GRU assets.
US President Donald Trump has demanded that House Dems hand over impeachment to the Senate “immediately” so he can have a proper trial, while accusing them of stalling the proceedings.
Trump launched a fresh broadside at Democrats after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to say when she would turn over the articles of impeachment to the Senate, implying it might take a while.
Explaining her decision, Pelosi said that the documents would remain in the House until Democrats are satisfied with how the Republican-majority Senate will handle the trial. Trump argued that Democrats who have been rallying behind the impeachment cause since the beginning of his presidency should have no say in how the trial is managed by the GOP, since they themselves failed to ensure a fair process in the House.
“So after the Democrats gave me no Due Process in the House, no lawyers, no witnesses, no nothing, they now want to tell the Senate how to run their trial,” Trump tweeted, adding that he wants the trial to kick off as soon as possible.
Actually, they have zero proof of anything, they will never even show up. They want out. I want an immediate trial!
The House voted largely along party lines to pass two articles of impeachment on Wednesday evening, but while zero Republicans voted in favor of either article – “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress”– two Democrats voted against the first article and three against the second.
Trump argued that the lack of defectors among the GOP shows that “the Republicans have never been so united” while the lack of consensus among Democrats is yet another indicator that their case “is so bad that they don’t even want to go to trial!”
While Pelosi insists that her foot-dragging is all about ensuring the Republicans do not hijack the proceedings, speculation is rife that Democrats are hesitant to move forward with impeachment because its popularity sank among key groups of independent swing voters who can sway the outcome of the presidential election next year.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story
By Washington Free Beacon – 12/20/2019
When CNN loses their airport monopoly, no one will be watching these assclowns.