Connect with us

Latest

News

America

Democrats CALL OUT crazy Maxine Waters

California Rep. Maxine Waters’ INSANE rhetoric gets body-check on craziness from Senate’s Schumer and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

1,770 Views

The Democrats are calling for civility in the matter of the latest immigration enforcement flap. However, this is not without calculated motives.

The Los Angeles Times reported that several prominent Democrats, ranging from former Obama chief adviser David Axelrod (also a Clinton-era assistant) to no less than Senator Chuck Schumer and Representative Nancy Pelosi, are urging Democrat constituents and voters to walk back the extremely vitriolic calls to personal harassment given by California Representative Maxine Waters, as reported here.

Further, the mainstream press has been all over this matter, and they seem to be using the power of their media presence to incite unrest.

Grabien News reported the following:

The media may love some Americans, but certainly not Trump voters. How else to explain the increasing frequency with which Republicans, and Trump voters specifically, are described on air as racist, Nazis, and undeserving of common courtesy (such as eating a dinner without being harassed)?

During the most recent controversy over family separation at the border, CNN and MSNBC have become a platform such hyperbolic attacks. And while these criticisms often come from guests on these programs, an anchor has yet to step in to try and temper the rhetoric.

MSNBC’s Donny Deutsch said Trump supporters are the “bad guy” in America and are akin to Nazis.

“If we are working towards November, we can no longer say Trump’s the bad guy,” Deutsch said during a recent appearance on Morning Joe. “If you vote for Trump, you’re the bad guy. If you vote for Trump, you are ripping children from parents’ arms.”

He continued: “If you vote for Trump, then you, the voter, you, not Donald Trump, are standing at the border, like Nazis going, ‘You here, you here.’ I think we now have to flip it and it’s a given, the evilness of Donald Trump. But if you vote, you can no longer separate yourself. You can’t say, ‘Well, he’s okay, but…’ And I think that gymnastics and that jiu-jitsu has to happen.”

When news hit that some elderly Americans inadvertently shared a Facebook meme originally created in Russia, CNN tracked down one such senior citizen and harangued her on national TV. CNN likewise threatened to “dox” or publish the address, of another Trump supporter who had created a meme mocking CNN.

“All” Trump supporters are racist, CNN contributor Michaela Angela Davis, recently said: “Tens of millions of people voted for him after he showed his cards for years.” When the anchor, John Berman, asked her to clarify if she’s calling all Trump voters racist, she replied, “Yes, yes.” Labeling almost half the country bigoted did not earn her a rebuke from the hosts or other panelist.

Filmmaker and frequent MSNBC guest Michael Moore went further, likening Trump voters to accomplices to rape. “If you hold down the woman while the rapist is raping her, and you didn’t rape her — are you a rapist?”

“Anybody who enables, anybody who votes for and supports a racist is a racist,” Moore added. “You are culpable, white America, I’m sorry.”

However, this seems to be beginning to backfire.

While Laura Loomer, the journalist who got this video made, could be said to be overly pressuring Rep. Waters, it is also noteworthy that the Congresswoman refused to even try to answer her question with any reasonable language for the cameras. Her repeated requests to “meet privately” appeared to be dodging the question “Where can a conservative eat at a restaurant in DC?”

The backlash has started, and while the mainstream media is not reporting its intensity very broadly, they are reporting that some key Democrats are concerned about the response and its effects on the upcoming November midterms.

The Los Angeles Times piece details some of this concern:

The recent public shaming of Trump administration officials in restaurants has triggered an internal debate among Democrats over how far they should go in confronting the president and his policies.

But on Monday, several Democrats warned that such actions could backfire by eliciting sympathy for Trump officials, rallying Republicans to the polls in midterms or leading to similar protests against liberals by Trump supporters.

We see such an example of backlash in the video above. The LA Times continues:

The Democrats’ debate is not unlike the one raging over whether to openly call for the impeachment of Trump, something party leaders like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi say is not appropriate at this time, especially as Democrats are trying to regain control of the House.

Pelosi urged caution Monday about expanding the protests against Trump Cabinet members beyond official events. Linking to an article about Waters’ comments, Pelosi took to Twitter to urge civility.

“Trump’s daily lack of civility has provoked responses that are predictable but unacceptable. As we go forward, we must conduct elections in a way that achieves unity from sea to shining sea,” she said.

Other high-profile Democrats, like former Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod, called it counter-productive.

“Disgusted with this admin’s policies? Organize, donate, volunteer, VOTE! Rousting Cabinet members from restaurants is an empty and, ultimately, counter-productive gesture that won’t change a thing,” he said in a tweet.

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer of New York went even further on the Senate floor Monday, saying that copying the president’s abusive tactics isn’t the answer.

“No one should call for the harassment of political opponents. That’s not right. That’s not American,” he said. “The president’s tactics and behavior should never be emulated. It should be repudiated by organized, well informed and passionate advocacy.”

The Democrats quoted here have mostly tried to act as though they are taking the high road in terms of civility, but as usual the motive is not at all about actual policy change. In this, President Trump seems to be about the only voice or actor actually trying to change this policy for the benefit of American sovereignty.

As with all things Trump, there is enormous churn and loud, rude resistance. And at most, the calls for civility are just for the purpose of gaining political power, and not for the purpose of solving a very old and very out of control situation.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
7 Comments

7
Leave a Reply

avatar
7 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
7 Comment authors
Gano1Aidi Deductiontibetan cowboyLe RuseWeAreYourGods ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Gano1
Guest
Gano1

I thought James Brown was dead!.

Aidi Deduction
Guest
Aidi Deduction

“We go by the majority vote, and if the majority are insane, the sane must go to the hospital.” Horace Mann

tibetan cowboy
Guest
tibetan cowboy

Schumer and Pelosi are war criminals, earning their paychecks by cashing in on international terrorism. I think it’s not only good to harrass and humiliate every GOP and make their lives unbearable and frightful, but, seems it’s past time for revolutionary war, the only solution to the fascist regime’s worldwide genocide. Street demonstrations only further enrage the military state anyhow so take it to the limit now, and beyond.

Le Ruse
Guest
Le Ruse

Humm ???
No comments needed …comment image
comment image
comment imagecomment image

WeAreYourGods ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ
Guest
WeAreYourGods ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

There’s nothing good about basic discrimination. As a person of color, I know what that looks like but there’s little effective difference when a person is asked to leave a restaurant based solely on where they work, as opposed to being asked to leave based on how they look. The fake left, actually Republicans masquerading as Democrats, have been acting like GOPers from the “birther” days for over a year now. We need some adults in the room.

Red Pilled ThoughtCrimes
Guest
Red Pilled ThoughtCrimes

video unavailable?

IllyaK
Guest
IllyaK

Insane hairhat hoodrat monkey crackhead welfare queen.

Latest

This Man’s Incredible Story Proves Why Due Process Matters In The Kavanaugh Case

Accused of rape by a fellow student, Brian Banks accepted a plea deal and went to prison on his 18th birthday. Years later he was exonerated.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by James Miller of The Political Insider:


Somewhere between the creation of the Magna Carta and now, leftists have forgotten why due process matters; and in some cases, such as that of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, they choose to outright ignore the judicial and civil rights put in place by the U.S. Constitution.

In this age of social media justice mobs, the accused are often convicted in the court of (liberal) public opinion long before any substantial evidence emerges to warrant an investigation or trial. This is certainly true for Kavanaugh. His accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, cannot recall the date of the alleged assault and has no supporting witnesses, yet law professors are ready to ruin his entire life and career. Not because they genuinely believe he’s guilty, but because he’s a pro-life Trump nominee for the Supreme Court.

It goes without saying: to “sink Kavanaugh even if” Ford’s allegation is untrue is unethical, unconstitutional, and undemocratic. He has a right to due process, and before liberals sharpen their pitchforks any further they would do well to remember what happened to Brian Banks.

In the summer of 2002, Banks was a highly recruited 16-year-old linebacker at Polytechnic High School in California with plans to play football on a full scholarship to the University of Southern California. However, those plans were destroyed when Banks’s classmate, Wanetta Gibson, claimed that Banks had dragged her into a stairway at their high school and raped her.

Gibson’s claim was false, but it was Banks’s word against hers. Banks had two options: go to trial and risk spending 41 years-to-life in prison, or take a plea deal that included five years in prison, five years probation, and registering as a sex offender. Banks accepted the plea deal under the counsel of his lawyer, who told him that he stood no chance at trial because the all-white jury would “automatically assume” he was guilty because he was a “big, black teenager.”

Gibson and her mother subsequently sued the Long Beach Unified School District and won a $1.5 million settlement. It wasn’t until nearly a decade later, long after Banks’s promising football career had already been tanked, that Gibson admitted she’d fabricated the entire story.

Following Gibson’s confession, Banks was exonerated with the help of the California Innocence Project. Hopeful to get his life back on track, he played for Las Vegas Locomotives of the now-defunct United Football League in 2012 and signed with the Atlanta Falcons in 2013. But while Banks finally received justice, he will never get back the years or the prospective pro football career that Gibson selfishly stole from him.

Banks’ story is timely, and it serves as a powerful warning to anyone too eager to condemn those accused of sexual assault. In fact, a film about Banks’s ordeal, Brian Banks, is set to premiere at the Los Angeles Film Festival next week.

Perhaps all the #MeToo Hollywood elites and their liberal friends should attend the screening – and keep Kavanaugh in their minds as they watch.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Clinton-Yeltsin docs shine a light on why Deep State hates Putin (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 114.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

Bill Clinton and America ruled over Russia and Boris Yeltsin during the 1990s. Yeltsin showed little love for Russia and more interest in keeping power, and pleasing the oligarchs around him.

Then came Vladimir Putin, and everything changed.

Nearly 600 pages of memos and transcripts, documenting personal exchanges and telephone conversations between Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin, were made public by the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Arkansas.

Dating from January 1993 to December 1999, the documents provide a historical account of a time when US relations with Russia were at their best, as Russia was at its weakest.

On September 8, 1999, weeks after promoting the head of the Russia’s top intelligence agency to the post of prime minister, Russian President Boris Yeltsin took a phone call from U.S. President Bill Clinton.

The new prime minister was unknown, rising to the top of the Federal Security Service only a year earlier.

Yeltsin wanted to reassure Clinton that Vladimir Putin was a “solid man.”

Yeltsin told Clinton….

“I would like to tell you about him so you will know what kind of man he is.”

“I found out he is a solid man who is kept well abreast of various subjects under his purview. At the same time, he is thorough and strong, very sociable. And he can easily have good relations and contact with people who are his partners. I am sure you will find him to be a highly qualified partner.”

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the nearly 600 pages of transcripts documenting the calls and personal conversations between then U.S. President Bill Clinton and Russian President Boris Yeltsin, released last month. A strong Clinton and a very weak Yeltsin underscore a warm and friendly relationship between the U.S. and Russia.

Then Vladimir Putin came along and decided to lift Russia out of the abyss, and things changed.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel

Here are five must-read Clinton-Yeltsin exchanges from with the 600 pages released by the Clinton Library.

Via RT

Clinton sends ‘his people’ to get Yeltsin elected

Amid unceasing allegations of nefarious Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election, the Clinton-Yeltsin exchanges reveal how the US government threw its full weight behind Boris – in Russian parliamentary elections as well as for the 1996 reelection campaign, which he approached with 1-digit ratings.

For example, a transcript from 1993 details how Clinton offered to help Yeltsin in upcoming parliamentary elections by selectively using US foreign aid to shore up support for the Russian leader’s political allies.

“What is the prevailing attitude among the regional leaders? Can we do something through our aid package to send support out to the regions?” a concerned Clinton asked.

Yeltsin liked the idea, replying that “this kind of regional support would be very useful.” Clinton then promised to have “his people” follow up on the plan.

In another exchange, Yeltsin asks his US counterpart for a bit of financial help ahead of the 1996 presidential election: “Bill, for my election campaign, I urgently need for Russia a loan of $2.5 billion,” he said. Yeltsin added that he needed the money in order to pay pensions and government wages – obligations which, if left unfulfilled, would have likely led to his political ruin. Yeltsin also asks Clinton if he could “use his influence” to increase the size of an IMF loan to assist him during his re-election campaign.

Yeltsin questions NATO expansion

The future of NATO was still an open question in the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union, and conversations between Clinton and Yeltsin provide an illuminating backdrop to the current state of the curiously offensive ‘defensive alliance’ (spoiler alert: it expanded right up to Russia’s border).

In 1995, Yeltsin told Clinton that NATO expansion would lead to “humiliation” for Russia, noting that many Russians were fearful of the possibility that the alliance could encircle their country.

“It’s a new form of encirclement if the one surviving Cold War bloc expands right up to the borders of Russia. Many Russians have a sense of fear. What do you want to achieve with this if Russia is your partner? They ask. I ask it too: Why do you want to do this?” Yeltsin asked Clinton.

As the documents show, Yeltsin insisted that Russia had “no claims on other countries,” adding that it was “unacceptable” that the US was conducting naval drills near Crimea.

“It is as if we were training people in Cuba. How would you feel?” Yeltsin asked. The Russian leader then proposed a “gentleman’s agreement” that no former Soviet republics would join NATO.

Clinton refused the offer, saying: “I can’t make the specific commitment you are asking for. It would violate the whole spirit of NATO. I’ve always tried to build you up and never undermine you.”

NATO bombing of Yugoslavia turns Russia against the West

Although Clinton and Yeltsin enjoyed friendly relations, NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia tempered Moscow’s enthusiastic partnership with the West.

“Our people will certainly from now have a bad attitude with regard to America and with NATO,” the Russian president told Clinton in March 1999. “I remember how difficult it was for me to try and turn the heads of our people, the heads of the politicians towards the West, towards the United States, but I succeeded in doing that, and now to lose all that.”

Yeltsin urged Clinton to renounce the strikes, for the sake of “our relationship” and “peace in Europe.”

“It is not known who will come after us and it is not known what will be the road of future developments in strategic nuclear weapons,” Yeltsin reminded his US counterpart.

But Clinton wouldn’t cede ground.

“Milosevic is still a communist dictator and he would like to destroy the alliance that Russia has built up with the US and Europe and essentially destroy the whole movement of your region toward democracy and go back to ethnic alliances. We cannot allow him to dictate our future,” Clinton told Yeltsin.

Yeltsin asks US to ‘give Europe to Russia’

One exchange that has been making the rounds on Twitter appears to show Yeltsin requesting that Europe be “given” to Russia during a meeting in Istanbul in 1999. However, it’s not quite what it seems.

“I ask you one thing,” Yeltsin says, addressing Clinton. “Just give Europe to Russia. The US is not in Europe. Europe should be in the business of Europeans.”

However, the request is slightly less sinister than it sounds when put into context: The two leaders were discussing missile defense, and Yeltsin was arguing that Russia – not the US – would be a more suitable guarantor of Europe’s security.

“We have the power in Russia to protect all of Europe, including those with missiles,” Yeltsin told Clinton.

Clinton on Putin: ‘He’s very smart’

Perhaps one of the most interesting exchanges takes place when Yeltsin announces to Clinton his successor, Vladimir Putin.

In a conversation with Clinton from September 1999, Yeltsin describes Putin as “a solid man,” adding: “I am sure you will find him to be a highly qualified partner.”

A month later, Clinton asks Yeltsin who will win the Russian presidential election.

“Putin, of course. He will be the successor to Boris Yeltsin. He’s a democrat, and he knows the West.”

“He’s very smart,” Clinton remarks.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

New Satellite Images Reveal Aftermath Of Israeli Strikes On Syria; Putin Accepts Offer to Probe Downed Jet

The images reveal the extent of destruction in the port city of Latakia, as well as the aftermath of a prior strike on Damascus International Airport.

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


An Israeli satellite imaging company has released satellite photographs that reveal the extent of Monday night’s attack on multiple locations inside Syria.

ImageSat International released them as part of an intelligence report on a series of Israeli air strikes which lasted for over an hour and resulted in Syrian missile defense accidentally downing a Russian surveillance plane that had 15 personnel on board.

The images reveal the extent of destruction on one location struck early in attack in the port city of Latakia, as well as the aftermath of a prior strike on Damascus International Airport. On Tuesday Israel owned up to carrying out the attack in a rare admission.

Syrian official SANA news agency reported ten people injured in the attacks carried out of military targets near three major cities in Syria’s north.

The Times of Israel, which first reported the release of the new satellite images, underscores the rarity of Israeli strikes happening that far north and along the coast, dangerously near Russian positions:

The attack near Latakia was especially unusual because the port city is located near a Russian military base, the Khmeimim Air Force base. The base is home to Russian jet planes and an S-400 aerial defense system. According to Arab media reports, Israel has rarely struck that area since the Russians arrived there.

The Russian S-400 system was reportedly active during the attack, but it’s difficult to confirm or assess the extent to which Russian missiles responded during the strikes.

Three of the released satellite images show what’s described as an “ammunition warehouse” that appears to have been completely destroyed.

The IDF has stated their airstrikes targeted a Syrian army facility “from which weapons-manufacturing systems were supposed to be transferred to Iran and Hezbollah.” This statement came after the IDF expressed “sorrow” for the deaths of Russian airmen, but also said responsibility lies with the “Assad regime.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also phoned Russian President Vladimir Putin to express regret over the incident while offering to send his air force chief to Russia with a detailed report — something which Putin agreed to.

According to Russia’s RT News, “Major-General Amikam Norkin will arrive in Moscow on Thursday, and will present the situation report on the incident, including the findings of the IDF inquiry regarding the event and the pre-mission information the Israeli military was so reluctant to share in advance.”

Russia’s Defense Ministry condemned the “provocative actions by Israel as hostile” and said Russia reserves “the right to an adequate response” while Putin has described the downing of the Il-20 recon plane as likely the result of a “chain of tragic accidental circumstances” and downplayed the idea of a deliberate provocation, in contradiction of the initial statement issued by his own defense ministry.

Pro-government Syrians have reportedly expressed frustration this week that Russia hasn’t done more to respond militarily to Israeli aggression; however, it appears Putin may be sidestepping yet another trap as it’s looking increasingly likely that Israel’s aims are precisely geared toward provoking a response in order to allow its western allies to join a broader attack on Damascus that could result in regime change.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending