Top House Dem Tenses Up, Refuses To Answer 3 Times If AOC Is Good For Party

The Daily Caller recently reported on a humorous conversation between the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairwoman and a CNN news anchor who was trying to get a straight answer about whether she felt that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was “good for the Democratic caucus.”

Although the chairwoman was asked the question 4 times, quite deliberately as a matter of fact, she refused to answer and simply gave safe political answers.

Could this signal trouble within the Democratic Party?

A top House Democrat repeatedly declined to say Sunday morning whether Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is good for the Democratic caucus.

A news anchor asked Illinois Rep. Cheri Bustos, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), four times on CNN whether Ocasio-Cortez was “good for the Democratic caucus.” She declined to give a “yes” or “no” answer each time.

Ocasio-Cortez is currently feuding with the DCCC over her refusal to pay $250,000 in fundraising dues to the committee, which aims to help Democrats in House races across the country.

It’s no surprise that AOC refuses to play by anyone’s rules but her own, but her current status within the Democratic Party seems shaky lately.

And why wouldn’t Bustos just answer the question?

Is she being pressured not to give her own opinions now?

You can see her question-dodging below:

“Is she good for the Democratic caucus in the House?” CNN host Victor Blackwell asked Bustos, who proceeded to dodge the question.

“She has a lot of followers. I have respect for her,” Bustos said.

“She brings a new voice to Congress,” she said, before Blackwell repeated the question. Once again, Bustos did not give a straight answer.

“Look, we’ve got members from all different spectrums. I respect her and she brings a new voice, and I think that’s always welcome,” Bustos said.

“It’s interesting, I have the chairwoman of the DCCC whose job it is to support incumbents and Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez is one. I’m asking you just a straightforward question: Is she good for the Democratic caucus in the House?” Blackwell asked again.

“Look, she brings a voice. We have members from all different spectrums of the Democratic Party,” Bustos said.

“Look, I come from a district that [President] Donald Trump won. My politics are somewhat different than hers, but she brings a voice that’s welcome,” she added. “And I have great appreciation for that.”

Blackwell said: “She raised more money in the third quarter of 2019 than any other Democrat in the House, including the speaker of the House. She has given, as she counts, $300,000 to other incumbents, including some in swing districts, and I’m asking the chairwoman of the DCCC if this member, who is right now in the top 10 of House members raising money, if she’s good for the caucus.”

“You can’t give me a straight ‘yes’ or ‘no’?” Blackwell pressed.

“Look, I have respect for all 235 of the Democrats in our caucus. She is bringing a new voice,” Bustos said, adding:

“The fact that she has raised unbelievable amounts of money and the fact that she just announced that she’s willing to help our candidates who need — who could benefit with that financial help — that’s welcome. And, look, you’re asking a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ question. I’m a former reporter, Victor, so I understand what you’re trying to get at.”

“I have respect for her, I welcome her into our delegation and I’m very happy that she’s willing to help our candidates,” Bustos said, concluding the interview without giving a straight answer to the question.

So why would Bustos be giving niceties to AOC at this point, especially given how vehemently she has attacked her in the past?

It was no secret when Bustos was going after AOC for attacking vulnerable democratic incumbents- her tactics were so strong, in fact, that she was praised for it.

From Politico:

We don’t have time for games, we don’t have time for hugs and kisses,” Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.), former chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said in an interview, praising Bustos for taking a hard line to protect the party’s incumbents ahead of a difficult 2020 campaign.

The episode underscores Bustos’ approach to the job as DCCC chairwoman amid an ideological clash that has defined the early months of the new Democratic majority. She is the first line of defense in Democrat’s battle to hold onto the House, tasked with protecting more than two dozen seats in districts won by President Donald Trump, including her own.

Her sometimes blunt attitude is a dramatic departure from previous DCCC Chairman Ben Ray Luján, who is known on Capitol Hill for being non-confrontational and eager to please.

So why is Bustos now giving “hugs and kisses” to AOC on CNN?

***EXCLUSIVE OFFER: Which of these 6 Trump products would you like for FREE?***

And is anybody actually buying it?

Source link


Mainstream Media Coverage Of Trump Is Now 93% Negative

With a booming economy and the lowest unemployment rate anyone has seen in our times, it may feel like President Trump never gets a break. 

Those feelings are well-founded, based on a new study from the Media Research Center:

In the first 100 days since House Democrats began their impeachment push on September 24, ABC, CBS and NBC have aggressively aided the effort. A Media Research Center analysis finds the Big Three evening newscasts have battered the President with 93% negative coverage and promoted impeachment at the expense of nearly all other Trump news.

At the same time, the broadcast networks donated at least 124 hours of wall-to-wall live coverage as they preempted regular programming in favor of House Democrat-led impeachment activities.

The Democrats are so relentless, the MRC found, that during the impeachment they had “kept up the same relentless negativity toward President Trump that they first displayed during the 2016 presidential campaign.”

It’s worse than you think.

Just take a look at the example they gave:

In the first 100 days since Pelosi announced the start of the House impeachment inquiry on September 24 (through January 1), ABC, CBS and NBC have generated a combined 849 minutes of evening news coverage about the subject.

For comparison, after Special Counsel Robert Mueller was named back on May 17, 2017, it took those same newscasts more than twice as long (until December 29 of that year, or 226 days) to register the same amount of airtime for the Russia investigation. In other words, the networks are spending more than twice as much airtime on the Ukraine probe as they did on the Russia probe.

The evening news resources being poured into the Ukraine/impeachment coverage, which alone accounts for nearly three-fourths (74.3%) of all of their Trump coverage, left little time for other topics. During these 100 days, there’s been paltry coverage of the President’s handling of North Korea (19 minutes) and immigration (17 minutes), both major topics in the past.

Unfortunately for the media, their Negative-Nancy routine has actually come back to haunt them.

This is because all of the negative coverage may be mortally wounding the democratic party’s only shot at a presidential contest:

Even though there seems to be essentially no chance that impeachment will actually remove Donald Trump from office, the publicity surrounding the House Democrats’ efforts has starved their party’s presidential candidates of mainstream media attention.

While the ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts spent 1,143 minutes covering President Trump, the top Democrat, former Vice President Joe Biden, received a mere 107 minutes of coverage — and most of that (78 minutes) consisted of references to the investigations of Biden and his son, Hunter, that the President talked about in his phone call with the President of Ukraine. Biden’s actual campaign was barely noted: Just 29 minutes, or about 1/40th of Trump’s total.

And it was even worse for all of the other democratic contenders:

Other top Democrats were just as invisible: Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg received 30 minutes of network attention as he entered the race in November. Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders each logged about 24 minutes of airtime (most of Sanders’ coverage was of his recovery from a heart attack in early October).

Pete Buttigieg, the now-former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, who vaulted to the top of the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire during the past 100 days, received a meager 7 minutes, 43 seconds of evening news coverage during this period, while Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar managed just 5 minutes of airtime.

Apart from “horse race” statements about each candidate’s standing in the race (not counted in our positive/negative spin score), there were too few evaluative statements of the Democratic candidates to report individual statistics.

It’s quite the tangled web that the liberal media is weaving, and fortunate that the President is immune to their tactics.

Sadly for Andrew Yang, his race has ended following an all out war that was unleashed by his followers due to the lack of coverage for his presidential run.

But how many democratic-candidate-casualties will there be?

***EXCLUSIVE OFFER: Which of these 6 Trump products would you like for FREE?***

And doesn’t this leave the president laughing all the way to the bank?

Source link


Disgusting Pelosi Dismisses Pro-Democracy Protests Against Iranian Regime

Democrats continue to take sides with America’s enemies against President Trump as long as it furthers their political agenda and Speaker Nancy Pelosi is leading the pack. 

In normal times, the mass demonstrations in Iran following the government’s admission that it shot down a passenger plane and killed 176 people who were aboard would have been backed by U.S. politicians of both parties.

But not in 2020 where despite their dishonest lip service to “democracy” Democrats have now proven to all that they would even stoop so low as to suck up to the ayatollahs by parroting their propaganda rather than give credit to Trump. 

URGENT POLL: Do you support Trump against Dem impeachment efforts?

On Sunday morning during her media damage control tour, Pelosi went on ABC’s “This Week” with Clinton lackey George Stephanopoulos and downplayed the protests against the tyrannical regime in Tehran. 

Via the ABC News transcript:

STEPHANOPOULOS: The question is how we get there. We’re seeing now demonstrations in the streets of Iran against the regime.

Do you support those protesters and would it be a good thing if they brought the regime down?

PELOSI: Well, the regime — the protesters are — are protesting, as I understand it, this brand of protesters, about the fact that that plane went down. And many students were on that plane. And these are largely students in the street.

I think the Iranians should have not had commercial flights going off when there was —

STEPHANOPOULOS: They’re calling out the regime for lying. They’re saying death to Khomeini as well.

PELOSI: Yes. Well, whatever it is.

But the fact is this, the — there were protesters in the streets before against the regime. After the taking out of Soleimani, there were protesters in the street, joined together, as you know, against us. That wasn’t good. Taking down this plane is a terrible, terrible tragedy. And they should be held accountable for letting commercial flights go at a time that was so, so dangerous.

But there are different reasons why people are in the street. Of course we would love to see the aspirations of the people of Iran realized with a better situation there, but escalating the situation — unless we’ve exhausted every other remedy —

Contrast that to President Trump who warned Tehran about killing or otherwise suppressing the protests which are clearly a response to the actions of the Islamic republic’s government and the downing of Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752.

The doomed airliner was hit by a missile while the Iranian military was launching strikes against U.S. troops in Iraq as retaliation for the airstrike that took out fiendish terrorist mastermind Qasem Soleimani, a man who Democrats including 2020 candidates have defended. 

Show Your Support For Israel With This FREE Commemorative Coin

It is truly a sad day in America when the leader of one of the nation’s two major political parties is so consumed by a toxic cocktail of senility, rage, hatred for the legitimately elected POTUS and a lust for power that she would side with a brutal regime that is now shooting the protesters like fish in a barrel.

Even worse is that the media is aiding and abetting Pelosi and her unhinged party in promoting talking points that appear to have been written by the Iranian ministry of propaganda. 

How much lower can Pelosi go?


Source link


ALLIANCE ENDS: Warren and Sanders Officially Turn On Eachother

After initially setting up an alliance for the 2020 Democratic primary elections, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have officially severed after Sanders has repeatedly attacked Warren throughout his 2020 campaign.

Warren is officially done with the alliance as she is now accusing Sanders of playing dirty for urging his supporters to “trash” her.

Claim Your FREE Trump 2020 Hat Today

Check out what the Daily Wire reports:

Sanders has been getting aggressive in Iowa, but most of his — and his supporters’ — criticism has been reserved for former Vice President Joe Biden, whom Sanders (and Warren) sees as his top opponent. As far as Warren is concerned, the career Vermont Senator has been on the offense but, according to Politico, the criticism has been rather mild, and nothing Warren hasn’t heard before.

A script, distributed to Sanders phone-bankers and door-knockers in Iowa claims Warren is the “candidate of the elite,” according to Politico and instructs volunteers to say that the “people who support her are highly-educated, more affluent people who are going to show up and vote Democratic no matter what.”

“I like Elizabeth Warren,” the script says, noting that the volunteer has the option of actually saying they “like” Warren, “In fact, she’s my second choice. But here’s my concern about her.”

The script goes on to suggest that Warren is, indeed, the candidate of the elite, but it doesn’t attack her on the merits of her platform, or even her appeal — it simply contends that, to beat President Donald Trump, the likely Democratic nominee will need to draw from non-traditional (and non-Democratic) voters, something Warren hasn’t shown the ability to do.

In Warren’s defense, though, Sanders hasn’t shown that ability, either. Polling of voters in battleground states, where the 2020 election will be fought, show only Biden drawing from Trump’s coalition of supporters, and even then, just barely. Warren comes close in states like Arizona and Nevada, where the Democratic population is growing, but is all but non-competitive among working-class voters in the Rust Belt and in midwestern states. Sanders lacks even further behind.

Warren has officially had enough considering she blasted Sanders while speaking to reporters in Iowa.

“I was disappointed to hear that Bernie is sending his volunteers out to trash me,” Warren said during a press conference. “Bernie knows me, and has known me for a long time, he knows who I am, where I come from, what I have worked on and fought for and the coalition and grassroots movement we’re trying to build.”

The Daily Wire continues:

Bernie Sanders quickly distanced himself from his campaign’s paperwork, calling Warren a friend, but Warren isn’t likely to forgive and forget, particularly given that poll numbers in Iowa — a state she desperately needs to win to make the case that she could be the 2020 Democratic presidential nominee — aren’t going her way. As Bernie Sanders gains, she loses, according to Politico, particularly among progressives — the only demographic Warren has catered to since entering the race.

“The consolidation of left-wing support is a remarkable turnaround for Sanders,” the outlet reports. “In September, the Working Families Party became the first major national progressive group to endorse a candidate when it picked Warren — despite siding with Sanders in 2016. Warren was surging at the time, and looked poised to overtake Sanders as the leader of the progressive movement and a frontrunner for the nomination … [N]ow it’s Sanders with the wind at his back.”

What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!

Source link


‘The View’ Hosts Blame Trump for Plane Crash in Iran

On Monday, far-left co-hosts of ‘The View,’ Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar blamed President Donald Trump for the Ukrianian 737 plane crash that was shot down by an Iranian missile.

The comments were made by the radical left hosts while far-left Democratic congressman Adam Schiff joined the show by video call.

The moment came when co-host Sunny Hostin began started by asking the California congressman about whether or not the decision to kill Iranian General Qasem Soleimani was justified.

“Look, I don’t think the evidence, the intelligence, justifies the targeted killing of a loathsome, and yes, blood thirsty person but justified the targeting killing of Soleimani if it was going to increase the risk to Americans,” Schiff replied.

“The risk I think to our personnel has gone up, not down, and I don’t think it was justified by the intelligence, at least not the intelligence that I’ve seen,” he added.

“That Ukrainian plane would still be alive,” Goldberg jumped in, clearly trying to pin the blame on President Trump.

“The people on that plane would still be alive today,” Behar added.

While the two crazed hosts firmly believe that the crashed plane is President Trump’s fault, US intelligence says different.

Claim Your FREE Trump 2020 Hat Today

Newsweek reports, “The Ukrainian flight that crashed just outside the Iranian capital of Tehran was struck by an anti-aircraft missile system, a Pentagon official, a senior U.S. intelligence official and an Iraqi intelligence official told Newsweek,” the outlet says.

“Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752, a Boeing 737–800 en route from Tehran Imam Khomeini International Airpot to Kyiv’s Boryspil International Airport, stopped transmitting data Tuesday just minutes after takeoff and not long after Iran launched missiles at military bases housing U.S. and allied forces in neighboring Iraq,” Newsweek added. “The aircraft is believed to have been struck by a Russia-built Tor-M1 surface-to-air missile system, known to NATO as Gauntlet, the three officials told Newsweek.”

Newsweek continues by citing the Pentagon and a U.S. senior intelligence official, saying, “One Pentagon and one U.S senior intelligence official told Newsweek that the Pentagon’s assessment is that the incident was accidental. Iran’s anti-aircraft were likely active following the country’s missile attack, which came in response to the U.S. killing last week of Revolutionary Guard Quds Force commander Major General Qassem Soleimani, sources said.”

Iran has even taken responsibility for the downed aircraft. Via Reuters, “Iran says its military shot down Ukrainian plane in ‘disastrous mistake'”:

Iran said on Saturday its military had mistakenly shot down a Ukrainian plane killing all 176 aboard, saying air defences were fired in error while on alert in the tense aftermath of Iranian missile strikes on U.S. targets in Iraq.

Iran had denied for days after Wednesday’s crash that it brought down the plane, although a top Revolutionary Guards commander said on Saturday that he had informed the authorities about the unintentional missile strike the same day it happened.

Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who until Saturday had kept silent about the crash, said information should be made public, while top officials and the military issued apologies.

But state television suggested revealing the truth about what happened might be used by “enemies of Iran”, usually a reference to the United States and Israel.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran deeply regrets this disastrous mistake,” Iranian President Hassan Rouhani wrote on Twitter, promising that those behind the incident would be prosecuted. “My thoughts and prayers go to all the mourning families.”

What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!

Source link


Sanders Told Warren in 2018 That a Woman Couldn’t Become President

The “progressive champion” better known as Socialist Bernie Sanders is coming under fire for misogynistic comments he allegedly made to Senator Elizabeth Warren back in 2018.

A new CNN report reveals that the two candidates met in 2018 to discuss their game plan for the 2020 election and how they would remain allies no matter how tight the race because. At the time, Sanders told Senator Warren that a woman couldn’t become president in 2020.

“The two agreed that if they ultimately faced each other as presidential candidates, they should remain civil and avoid attacking one another, so as not to hurt the progressive movement,” reports CNN. “They also discussed how to best take on President Donald Trump, and Warren laid out two main reasons she believed she would be a strong candidate: She could make a robust argument about the economy and earn broad support from female voters.”

“Sanders responded that he did not believe a woman could win,” the report also noted.

According to CNN, four sources have confirmed that Sanders had made these comments.

“That evening, Sanders expressed frustration at what he saw as a growing focus among Democrats on identity politics, according to one of the people familiar with the conversation,” the report added. “Warren told Sanders she disagreed with his assessment that a woman could not win, three of the four sources said.”

Sanders has denied making these comments, calling them “ludicrous” in a statement released to CNN.

“It is ludicrous to believe that at the same meeting where Elizabeth Warren told me she was going to run for president, I would tell her that a woman couldn’t win,” Sanders said. “It’s sad that, three weeks before the Iowa caucus and a year after that private conversation, staff who weren’t in the room are lying about what happened. What I did say that night was that Donald Trump is a sexist, a racist and a liar who would weaponize whatever he could. Do I believe a woman can win in 2020? Of course! After all, Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by 3 million votes in 2016.”

***The Best Looking Trump Beanie On The Planet – YOURS FREE***

Sanders decision to cite Clinton as someone who could beat President Trump is quite bizarre considering she lost in 2016.

The Daily Wire reports:

With the release of CNN’s report, it is now increasingly clear that the non-aggression pact between Warren and Sanders has begun to dissolve, with Warren’s campaign issuing the first salvo. Most recently, the Democratic Party establishment and other centrists have been warning the progressive that a Sanders nomination would severely hurt the party come the 2020 presidential election this November.

“You need a candidate with a message that can help us win swing voters in battleground states,” former Obama aide and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel said in a recent interview. “The degree of difficulty dramatically increases under a Bernie Sanders candidacy. It just gets a lot harder.”

What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!

Source link


Twitter Removes Video Of Prince Harry Trying To Get His Wife A Job At Disney

A new video has been uncovered showing Prince Harry bragging about his wife Meghan Markle’s voice over capabilities to Disney CEO Bob Iger.

The moment came during the Disney’s “Lion King” premier. The video shows Markle talking to Beyonce and Jay-Z while Prince Harry tried to get his wife a gig at Disney.

The moment was extremely awkward and for whatever reason got deleted by Twitter.

“You know she does voice-overs?” Harry brags to Iger, who replied with, “Oh really? Ah…”

“Did you know that?” Harry questioned.

Iger responded with, “I did not know that.”

Harry quickly turned into Markle’s agent as he pressed further.

“You seem surprised, but yeah, she’s really interested,” Harry says while laughing.

Out of politeness, Iger responds by saying, “Sure…we’d love to try.” 

See the deleted tweet below:

The extremely awkward moment comes as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced they will be removing themselves from the royal family.

On Monday, Queen Elizabeth II responded to their request.

“Today my family had very constructive discussions on the future of my grandson and his family,” she said in a statement. “My family and I are entirely supportive of Harry and Meghan’s desire to create a new life as a young family. Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working Members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family.”

“Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives,” the Queen’s statement continued. “It has therefore been agreed that there will be a period of transition in which the Sussexes will spend time in Canada and the UK. These are complex matters for my family to resolve, and there is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days.”

Check out what Fox News reported:

The queen says there are still issues to be resolved but she wants it done within days.

Elizabeth had called for a face-to-face meeting with Harry, 35, and other members of the royal family in order to iron out logistics of his and Markle’s decision to become “financially independent” of the crown.

The meetup marked the first time the queen and her grandson met following the shocking announcement on social media last week. It reflected the queen’s desire to contain the fallout from Harry and Meghan’s decision. A palace insider previously told Fox News some members of the royal family were not informed of the couple’s announcement before it was made to the world.

Harry’s father Prince Charles, as well as his older brother William, were reportedly in attendance at the monarch’s private Sandringham estate in eastern England. Markle, 38, is in Canada with the couple’s son Archie. She likely joined the meeting by phone.

What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!

Source link


Trump Zeros in on Bloomberg, Gives Him New Nickname

President Donald Trump took to Twitter on Monday to criticize billionaire businessman and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg, accusing him of false advertising.

“Mini Mike Bloomberg is spending a lot of money on False Advertising,” the President said while giving Bloomberg a new nickname. “I was the person who saved Pre-Existing Conditions in your Healthcare, you have it now, while at the same time winning the fight to rid you of the expensive, unfair and very unpopular Individual Mandate and, if Republicans win in court and take back the House of Representatives, your healthcare, that I have now brought to the best place in many years, will become the best ever, by far. I will always protect your Pre-Existing Conditions, the Dems will not!”

The false advertising that President Trump was accusing Bloomberg of was for his attacks on the President over his healthcare stance.

WATCH the ads below:

Check out what Breitbart reported:

Bloomberg is running the same tactics that helped Democrats successfully win the House of Representatives in 2018 — threatening that Republicans’ attempt to repeal Obamacare would remove healthcare coverage for preexisting conditions.

Republicans say, however, that if Obamacare were repealed, it would be replaced by a better plan that would still cover preexisting conditions.

President Trump claimed that he saved coverage for preexisting conditions while working to get rid of the individual mandate requiring all Americans to get health insurance or pay a fine.

The Senate’s attempt to pass a repeal of Obamacare blew up after late Sen. John McCain voted to prevent it from going to conference.

Trump has repeatedly pressed Republicans for a better healthcare plan but has so far promised a better plan if Republicans win big in 2020.

Obamacare itself faces a Supreme Court ruling on its constitutionality.

***Get Your Free USA 45 Hat While Supplies Last***

Bloomberg is trying anything and everything to gain support within the Democratic party. In a new campaign ad, Bloomberg featured Judith Sheindlin, more commonly known as TV’s  “Judge Judy.”

Bloomberg has had a hard time connecting with the middle class considering he is so disconnected from working America.

The Hill believes that Judge Judy’s endorsement can be a game changer. Check out what they reported:

Celebrity endorsements are a well-worn part of politics, of course, but they typically deliver less than candidates hope for: A quick rush of headlines, maybe, but most voters don’t ultimately make choices based on their favorite television characters.

Sheindlin could be different. 

That has a lot to do with her brand of television and how her massive audience — nearly ten million people a day — views her.

The 30-second commercial, titled “Judge Him,” shows Sheindlin sitting in what looks like judicial chambers, advocating for Bloomberg’s “steady leadership” in “very challenging times.” The setting and the atmosphere capitalize on what the former New York family court judge has spent nearly 25 television seasons building: credibility.

Audience studies conducted during my years as a CBS executive working with the “Judge Judy” show consistently ranked her as tough, fair, honest and direct — attributes any politician would die for. Her standing in our wider popular culture runs high: According to a 2013 poll, more Americans trust Judge Judy than any of the Supreme Court justices. A 2016 survey revealed 10 percent of college graduates believe she actually already serves on the highest court in the land.

What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!

Source link


Sanders Admits That Illegal Immigration Means Lower Wages for Americans

Socialist and open border advocate Bernie Sanders admitted in a recent interview that decriminalizing illegal immigration would lower the wages of hard working Americans. Despite this admission, Sanders supports decriminalizing illegal immigration anyways.

“In an interview for the New York Times’ editorial board, Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders spoke about a range of political issues affecting the U.S,” the Daily Caller reports. “The interview — which was released Monday — is part of the editorial board’s decision process for making an endorsement in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary. The board pressed the senator on a number of his positions — including immigration.”

Sanders was first asked if he still supports decriminalizing illegal immigration and was also asked about his previous comments where he admitted that this would lead to lower wages for American citizens.

“No, that’s what I said on the Lou Dobbs’ show 250 years ago, right?” Sanders said. “It gets repeated a little bit. But look, I think if you look at the proposal that we have, and I speak as the son of an immigrant. What we are going to do — you asked me what we do in the first hundred days. I’ll tell you what we do on Day 1.”

The Socialist revealed that he would immediately give DACA immigrants legal status and would also undo many of President Trump’s immigration policies.


“So, I think you’re raising an issue, though, that we don’t talk about a whole lot when we talk about immigration, and that is the exploitation of undocumented workers. If you don’t have any documentation, I could hire you for five bucks an hour and what recourse do you have?” Sanders said.

“But you don’t think that that exploitation results in lower wages for domestic workers?” NYT editorial board member Binyamin Appelbaum asked.

“Sure it does,” Sanders admitted. “Right now, we have people who are being exploited. If you’re undocumented, and you’re being paid five bucks an hour, why am I going to pay her $12 an hour?”

Check out what the Daily Caller had to say:

This answer led to confusion between Sanders and the editorial board, with Appelbaum pointing out that the senator seemed to be reiterating his past position that the exploitation of illegal immigrant labor leads to lower wages for American workers.

Sanders clarified that he was speaking about how worker exploitation leads to lower wages for everyone, suggesting that the issue was much bigger than just taking advantage of illegal immigrant labor

With the exit of former HUD Secretary Julian Castro earlier this month, Sanders is left as perhaps the most progressive candidate among the 2020 Democratic candidates on the subject of immigration.

The self-described Democratic socialist released his immigration platform in November, pledging to not only end deportations and decriminalize illegal immigration, but also calling for the break up Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Patrol. He also wants to accept 50,000 “climate migrants,” provide sweeping amnesty to illegal aliens who’ve committed low-level crimes, and provide a pathway to citizenship for the county’s estimated 11 million illegal aliens. 

However, before the onset of President Donald Trump’s administration, Sanders used to hold hawkish views of illegal immigration.

In a 2015 interview with Vox, Sanders referred to “open borders” as a “Koch brothers proposal,” adding that an open borders-level of immigration would lead to the erosion of the nation-state and “make everybody in America poorer.”

Sanders has clearly flip-flopped on this subject considering in 2007 during an interview he said: “I don’t know why we need millions of people to be coming into this country as guest workers who will work for lower wages than American workers and drive wages down even lower than they are now.”

What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!

Source link


Pelosi Accuses Mitch McConnell Of ‘Cover-Up’ As Impeachment Crawls Toward Senate

Now that her stalling tactics have backfired, Speaker Nancy Pelosi is touring the media to promote conspiracy theories about her bogus impeachment. 

On Sunday morning, Pelosi appeared on ABC’s “This Week” with longtime Clinton family stooge George Stephanopoulos where she launched the talking point of the week that Mitch McConnell is involved in a cover-up. 

URGENT POLL: Do you support Trump against Dem impeachment efforts?

The 79-year-old leader of the resistance can’t get over the fact that she is not in charge of the Senate and that McConnell outfoxed the self-proclaimed “master legislator” when he refused to budge over her attempts at extortion. 

According to Madame Speaker who struggled with her normal verbal tics and bizarre facial contortions:

“I’m telling you that he signed-on on Thursday, to a resolution, dismiss the case. Dismissing is a cover-up. Dismissing is a cover-up. If they want to go that route again, the senators who are thinking now about voting for witnesses or not, they will have to be accountable for not having a fair trial,” 

But what she neglected to mention is that in addition to McConnell’s refusal to allow her to influence a trail that it will follow the parameters established when Bill Clinton was impeached, something that Pelosi condemned at the time as being anti-democratic. 

Pelosi also continued to defend her refusal to send the articles of impeachment after the big pre-Christmas rush that had the Beltway establishment singing joy to the world despite the growing consensus that it was a monumental strategic blunder. 

Via The Hill:

ABC’s “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos asked the Speaker on Sunday if she had any “second thoughts” about withholding the articles from the upper chamber.  

“No, no, no,” Pelosi responded, adding that she thought the delay “produced a very positive result” in allowing more unredacted documents to surface and giving former national security adviser John Bolton the opportunity to agree to testify if subpoenaed.  

She said the withholding the articles helped with “more importantly, raising the profile of the fact that we need to have witnesses and documentation and if we don’t that it’s a cover up.”

EXCLUSIVE OFFER: Which of these 6 Trump products would you like for FREE?

After Pelosi was gone, and the ABC panel was chewing the fat, Rachel Bade of the Washington Post pointed out that the Speaker was engaging in spin over what was a ‘failed strategy’ with the delay. 

Pelosi has yet to officially transmit the articles and may not do so until she has had another several days to hit the late shows with their smarmy liberal hosts to gaslight Americans over her miscalculation. 

If it wasn’t for conspiracies, Democrats would have nothing at all. 

Source link