Tuesday, April 30, 2019
Monday, April 29, 2019
Russian Collusion Is Not Over, AG Barr is Temporary, A Democratic President, Ukraine, Canadian, EU and Australian Elections, Military Complex and Oil, War with Iran, Venezuela Interference
Out with the old, and in with the new. Now with the Russia hoax fading, we turn the page to see how US President Trump will govern going forward, without Mueller floating around, and a new AG Barr ready to turn the tables. Will Bolton and Pompeo lead Trump into war with Iran? Will Venezuela regime change be shelved for a later date? Election results in Ukraine and Spain bring with them big changes. Right around the corner, we have elections in Australia, the EU Parliament, and Canada...what can we expect? Will Brexit and the Yellow Vests carry into the summer? What will happen to Julian Assange?
First off the Mueller will not go away anytime soon. Congress has still got to go through it. He still has the New York District Court to deal with. It was not Russian collusion, but a Russian Jewish Mafia collusion. AG Barr will be out in 2021.
Bolton and Pompeo run Trump, Bolton lives on war, and most likely has a money tree to the military complex and big oil, with Saudi ties. Pompeo being part of the Evangelical Lobby too. Venezuela, as well as Iran, is about oil. They have to move quickly to these wars because the American people will elect a Democrat in 2020. Trump will collect his benefits after the presidency, so he has nothing to worry about.
Brexit will die, and Neo-Liberal and Neo-Conservative globalism will continue.
I will say though, Venezuela does need to be opened up for the people and the flow of oil needs to continue without it being nationalized, As for Iran, it is an extremist government, also that government needs to be liberalized to western free democracy. Understand that with China, the tariffs are only being used to hurt the Chinese economy and its expansion, but all of this could backfire. So goes the geopolitics.
As far as the elections go, the trends are globalization returning but in a Neo-Liberal since. There is a twist though. In Australia, he will continue its conservative ways, but the Asian population is growing there and will change the political landscape in times to come. The EU Nationalist parties will continue the trend but is the UK is any sign to what is happening to Brexit and the return to their globalist way, again, Neo-Liberal ways, so for the EU too. Canada will stay Liberal.
First off the Mueller will not go away anytime soon. Congress has still got to go through it. He still has the New York District Court to deal with. It was not Russian collusion, but a Russian Jewish Mafia collusion. AG Barr will be out in 2021.
Bolton and Pompeo run Trump, Bolton lives on war, and most likely has a money tree to the military complex and big oil, with Saudi ties. Pompeo being part of the Evangelical Lobby too. Venezuela, as well as Iran, is about oil. They have to move quickly to these wars because the American people will elect a Democrat in 2020. Trump will collect his benefits after the presidency, so he has nothing to worry about.
Brexit will die, and Neo-Liberal and Neo-Conservative globalism will continue.
I will say though, Venezuela does need to be opened up for the people and the flow of oil needs to continue without it being nationalized, As for Iran, it is an extremist government, also that government needs to be liberalized to western free democracy. Understand that with China, the tariffs are only being used to hurt the Chinese economy and its expansion, but all of this could backfire. So goes the geopolitics.
As far as the elections go, the trends are globalization returning but in a Neo-Liberal since. There is a twist though. In Australia, he will continue its conservative ways, but the Asian population is growing there and will change the political landscape in times to come. The EU Nationalist parties will continue the trend but is the UK is any sign to what is happening to Brexit and the return to their globalist way, again, Neo-Liberal ways, so for the EU too. Canada will stay Liberal.
Your Career, Life, Personnel Journey, Toxic, Money Draining, Dramatized, Fanatical and Extrem People
Your career of choice plays a big role in determining your overall well-being. Not only does your profession have a massive influence on the potential money you make, but it also impacts your stress, work-life balance, happiness, and feeling of accomplishment and retirement. Invest as you go and stay away from toxic money draining dramatized, fanatical and extreme people who will try to sidetrack you from your journey
A career is not guaranteed, nor any relationship in the fast pace world we live in. The stress you endure will have to be maintained by you, even if it means shaking things up, moving on and salvaging what you can. Work smart and hard and you will have all the money you need to move faster, or spend time with your relationship and family, move slower and have less, depends on you, for it is your journey.
One cannot control another human being, for they will only get resistance, for the other will get tired of the manipulation of one trying to mold another in which the other wants them to be. Eventually, they will leave.
Religion, when it becomes for one but not the other will interfere to with the relationship when it becomes the priority over it and the lifestyle and independence of the other is interfered with.
Your friends, social media, religion, school, the geographical area in which they live will greatly influence them more than you, just be a part and let it flow, you cannot control it, the days of the family farms are over.
Sunday, April 28, 2019
Saturday, April 27, 2019
Friday, April 26, 2019
Thursday, April 25, 2019
Wednesday, April 24, 2019
Personally, I don't feel that any of the current candidates on the left will cut the mustard for the Democrat Party. I also know that the establishment and the globalists don't want to count on having to steal the election - especially since that didn't work to well the last time. So what's their plan and what do they have up their sleeve? Or do they even know? Is there the possibility that a fairly unknown will rise to the top, much like Obama did? If they can find someone who has a little known background and not a lot of political dirt or experience, they might be able to engage in a pretty good fight. However, I tend to think if that happens, somewhere around midway in the debates with Trump, major dirt will surface and end any chances of this newcomer from ever being the President. So why do I think that? Because the establishment only knows and works with people who live in the dirt. And nowadays, there's way too many people who investigate and whistle blow for any real dirt to ever stay hidden.
PEACE
Tuesday, April 23, 2019
Feminizing World National Security
Ivanka Trump was speaking at the 2019 Women Entrepreneurs Finance Initiative (WeFi) in Côte d’Ivoire, hosted by the World Bank Group.
She traveled with a U.S. delegation including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE), Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) +wife, Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE), Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), USAID rep Mark Green, FCC officials, and National Security Council officials.
Opened in French, said she was there to promote gender equality by 2020 and the 1st ever "all of of government approach" to women's economic empowerment in the developing world, 50 million women by 2025. She spoke about a National Security Presidential Memorandum President Trump signed in 2017, along with the "The Women Peace and Security Act" which mandated that women be involved with all national security peace negotiations. Passed by GOP Congress, but
Link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-c...
CFR Report on it:
"The participation of women and civil society groups in a peace negotiation makes the resulting agreement 64 percent less [Quoting UNWomen.org] likely to fail and 35 percent more [Quoting InclusiveSecurity.org] likely to last at least fifteen years. Research shows that higher levels of gender equality are associated with a lower propensity for conflict, both between and within states. And data from countries around the world demonstrate that women’s inclusion in peacekeeping units, police forces, and the security sector improves accountability and decreases abuses against civilians"
Link: https://www.cfr.org/blog/three-things...
According to the Center For Family & Human Rights (C-Fam) the National Security Council is coordinating the implementation guidance for this to the Departments for Defense, State, Homeland Security and the U.S. Agency for International Development. The bill passed the GOP Congress only after Democrats agreed to drop references to the Obama-era plan. The law’s Republican champion, outgoing House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, sent a letter to Secretary of State Pompeo earlier this year explaining that Congress expects a new strategy and not a repeat of the Obama document.
C-Fam claims some career staff members are seeking to make Trump’s strategy resemble the broader international feminist agenda. The agenda, also called “The Hillary Doctrine” for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, was reflected in the Obama plan which included such things as abortion and transgender training at the nation’s war colleges. During its tenure on the UNSC, the Obama administration sponsored new WPS resolutions focused on sexual violence rather than women’s participation and empowerment. While some feminists are leery of casting women primarily as victims, the focus buttresses a broader feminist claim to an international right to abortion for women raped in conflict and humanitarian settings. The emphasis on sexual violence also underpins an effort to transform the agenda toward an LGBT focus.
Monday, April 22, 2019
Wike-Gate: Julian AssFramed by the People Who Supported Him
Wiki-Gate: Julian Assange Was Framed by the People Who Supported Him
Julian Assange’s arrest (after almost seven years in the Ecuadorian Embassy) constitutes a hideous and illegal act. He is imprisoned in Britain’s Belmarsh maximum security prison, pending his extradition to the United States.
Statements by US prosecutors suggest that Assange would not be charged under the 1917 Espionage Act. What is contemplated are accusations of conspiring “to commit unlawful computer intrusion based on his alleged agreement to try to help Ms. Manning break an encoded portion of passcode that would have permitted her to log on to a classified military network under another user’s identity.” (NYT, April 11, 2019).
The charges can, of course, be changed and shifted around. Bolton-Pompeo will no doubt play a role. In a 2017 statement when he was CIA Director Mike Pompeo “referred to WikiLeaks as a “non-state hostile intelligence service,” which needed to be eradicated.”
Assange is relentlessly accused by the corporate media of treason, acting on behalf of the Kremlin. An indictment invoking the 1917 Espionage Act remains a distinct possibility with a view to overriding The First Amendment of the US Constitution which guarantees Freedom of Expression.
Assange constitutes a new Russia-Gate media narrative? His arrest coincides with the release of the redacted version of the Mueller report.
Prepare for Wiki-Gate: a long and drawn-out legal procedure which will be the object of extensive media coverage with a view to ultimately misleading the public.
The unspoken objective of Assange’s indictment is to create a legal precedent which will enable Washington and its allies to arrest independent and anti-war journalists indiscriminately.
What is at stake, –revealed by Wikileaks– is that politicians in high office are the architects of war crimes. To protect them and sustain their legitimacy, they require the suppression of freedom of expression, which in turn requires “the criminalization of justice”.
Ironically, from the very outset (over a period of more than 12 years) there has never been a concerted effort on the part of Washington (and its national security intelligence apparatus) to suppress the release of classified US government information or to close down the Wikileaks project. In fact, quite the opposite.
Why?
Because the carefully selected and redacted Wikileaks quotes by the mainstream media have been used to provide legitimacy to US “foreign policy” as well as obfuscate (through omission) many of the crimes committed by US intelligence and the Pentagon.
Wikileaks and the Mainstream Media
It is important to note that Julian Assange from the outset was supported by the mainstream media, which was involved in releasing selected and redacted versions of the leaks. And despite Assange’s arrest and imprisonment, Wikileaks continues to release compromising US diplomatic cables, the latest of which (reported by McClatchy, April 17, 2019) pertains to “evidence that US troops executed at least 10 Iraqi civilians” including a 5-month-old infant.
At the outset of the Wikileaks project, the mainstream media including the New York Times, The Guardian and the Economist praised Julian Assange. The British elites supported him. Assange became a personality. It was a vast Public Relations campaign. It was a money-making undertaking for the corporate media.
In 2008 The Economist (which is partly owned by the Rothschild family) granted Assange The New Media Award.
About-turn? The shift in the Mainstream Media Narrative.
Today, ironically these same corporate media which praised Assange are now accusing him (without a shred of evidence) of being involved in acts of conspiracy on behalf of the Kremlin. According to John Pilger:
“The Guardian has since published a series of falsehoods about Assange, not least a discredited claim that a group of Russians and Trump’s man, Paul Manafort, had visited Assange in the [Ecuadorian] embassy. The meetings never happened; it was fake.”
Assange has been the object of an all-out smear campaign by those who supported him.
The Economist which granted him the New Media Award in 2008 intimates that Assange is an enemy agent responsible for “information anarchy … culminating in the destabilization of American democracy”.
Others think it a long-overdue reckoning with justice for a man who had unleashed information anarchy upon the West, culminating in the destabilisation of American democracy. Is Mr Assange a heroic journalist, reckless activist or even an enemy agent? (The Economist, April 12,2019, emphasis added)
The smear operation is ongoing:
Screenshot Economist headline, April 17, 2019
Starting in early 2017, coinciding with RussiaGate, Assange is depicted as a “Putin Stooge” working for the Kremlin, Why?
In 2016, some of Mr. Assange’s former American sympathizers turned sharply against him after he made WikiLeaks into an enthusiastic instrument of Russia’s intervention in the American presidential election, doling out hacked Democratic emails to maximize their political effect, campaigning against Hillary Clinton on Twitter and promoting a false cover story about the source of the leaks. (NYT, April 2019, emphasis added)
And then The Guardian, (April 20) with which Assange actively collaborated goes into a high-gear smear operation and character assassination: “cheap journalism” by the Guardian (read an excerpt below):
Was Julian Assange Framed by the People Who Supported Him?
The latest from the New York Times April 15, 2019, which previously collaborated with Assange, describes him as a threat to National Security, working on behalf of the Russians.
Flashback to 2010:
WikiLeaks published a series of controversial intelligence leaks including some 400,000 classified Iraq war documents, covering events from 2004 to 2009 (See Tom Burghardt, The WikiLeaks Release: U.S. Complicity and Cover-Up of Iraq Torture Exposed, Global Research, October 24, 2010).
These revelations contained in the Wikileaks Iraq War Logs provided “further evidence of the Pentagon’s role in the systematic torture of Iraqi citizens by the U.S.-installed post-Saddam regime.” (Ibid).
The Role of the Frontline Club. Assange’s Social Entourage
While Assange was committed (through the release of leaked government documents) to revealing the “unspoken truth” of corruption and war crimes, many of the people (and journalists) who “supported him” are large “Establishment”: Upon his release from bail in December 2010 (Swedish extradition order over allegations of sexual offenses) Henry Vaughan Lockhart Smith, a friend of Assange, a former British Grenadier Guards captain and a member of the British aristocracy came to his rescue. Assange was provided refuge at Vaughan Smith’s Ellingham Manor in Norfolk.
Vaughn Lockhart Smith is the founder of the London based Frontline Club (which is supported by George Soros’ Open Society Institute). In 2010, the Frontline Club served as the de facto U.K “headquarters” for Julian Assange.
Vaughan Smith is a journalist aligned with the mainstream media. He had collaborated with NATO, acted as an embedded reporter and cameraman in various US-NATO war theaters including Afghanistan and Kosovo. In 1998 he worked as a video journalist in Kosovo in a production entitled The Valley, which consisted in “documenting” alleged Serbian atrocities against Kosovar Albanians. The video production was carried out with the support of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA).
Upon Assange’s arrest on April 10, 2019, Vaughn Smith, while acknowledging his disagreements with Assange, nonetheless expressed his unbending support and concern for Assange:
Smith said that while he didn’t agree that everything Assange released should have been released, he did think the Wikileaks founder “triggered a discussion about transparency that is incredibly important.”“I support Julian because I think his rights as an individual reflect on us, his fellow citizens,” he told Tremonti.“I think how we treat somebody who we may not agree with, that tells us truths that we may not wish to know … is a great comment on us.” (CBC, April 10, 2019)
The Role of the Corporate Media: The Central Role of the New York Times
The New York Times, the Guardian, Der Spiegel and El Pais (Spain) were directly involved in the editing, redacting and selection of leaked documents.
In the case of the New York Times, coordinated by Washington Bureau Chief David Sanger, the redacted versions were undertaken in consultation with the US State Department.
Even before the Wikileaks project got off the ground, the mainstream media was implicated. A role was defined and agreed upon for the corporate media not only in the release, but also in the selection and editing of the leaks. The “professional media”, to use Julian Assange’s words in an interview with The Economist, had been collaborating with the Wikileaks project from the outset.
Moreover, key journalists with links to the US foreign policy-national security intelligence establishment have worked closely with Wikileaks, in the distribution and dissemination of the leaked documents.
In a bitter irony, The New York Times, which has consistently promoted media disinformation was accused in 2010 of conspiracy. For what? For revealing the truth? Or for manipulating the truth? In the words of Senator Joseph L. Lieberman:
“I certainly believe that WikiLleaks has violated the Espionage Act, but then what about the news organizations — including The Times — that accepted it and distributed it?” Mr. Lieberman said, adding: “To me, The New York Times has committed at least an act of bad citizenship, and whether they have committed a crime, I think that bears a very intensive inquiry by the Justice Department.” (WikiLeaks Prosecution Studied by Justice Department – NYTimes.com, December 7, 2010)
This “redacting” role of The New York Times was candidly acknowledged by David E Sanger, Chief Washington correspondent of the NYT:
“[W]e went through [the cables] so carefully to try to redact material that we thought could be damaging to individuals or undercut ongoing operations. And we even took the very unusual step of showing the 100 cables or so that we were writing from to the U.S. government and asking them if they had additional redactions to suggest.” (See PBS Interview; The Redacting and Selection of Wikileaks documents by the Corporate Media, PBS interview on “Fresh Air” with Terry Gross: December 8, 2010, emphasis added).
Yet Sanger also said later in the interview:
“It is the responsibility of American journalism, back to the founding of this country, to get out and try to grapple with the hardest issues of the day and to do it independently of the government.” (ibid, emphasis added)
“Do it independently of the government” while at the same time “asking them [the US government] if they had additional redactions to suggest”?
David E. Sanger is not a model-independent journalist. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Aspen Institute’s Strategy Group which regroups the likes of Madeleine K. Albright, Condoleeza Rice, former Defense Secretary William Perry, former CIA head John Deutch, among other prominent establishment figures.
It is worth noting that several American journalists, members of the Council on Foreign Relations had interviewed Wikileaks, including Time Magazine’s Richard Stengel (November 30, 2010) and The New Yorker’s Raffi Khatchadurian. (WikiLeaks and Julian Paul Assange: The New Yorker, June 11, 2007)
Historically, The New York Times has served the interests of the Rockefeller family in the context of a longstanding relationship. In turn, the Rockefellers have an important stake as shareholders of several US corporate media.
Concluding Remarks
Who are the criminals?
Those who leak secret government documents which provide irrefutable evidence of extensive crimes against humanity or the politicians in high office who ordered the killings and atrocities.
What is unfolding is not only “the criminalization of the State”, the judicial system is also criminalized with a view to upholding the legitimacy of the war criminals in high office.
And the corporate media through omission, half-truths, and outright lies upholds war as a peace-making endeavor (see below)
Amy Klobuchar and Her Platform
Amy Klobuchar
Candidate Status: RunningThe Minnesota senator launched her presidential bid in a Minneapolis blizzard in February. Klobuchar’s unruffled persona stands in contrast to Trump’s bluster and bravado, winning her plaudits from conservatives including Washington Post columnist George Will and Republican senators Lindsey Graham and Susan Collins. Klobuchar, 58, raised more than $5 million in the first quarter and will benefit from a near-home-field advantage in neighboring Iowa, which holds the first-in-the-nation caucus. But she headed first to another state: “We’re starting in Wisconsin because, as you remember, there wasn’t a lot of campaigning in Wisconsin in 2016,” she said — throwing shade at the 2016 Clinton campaign. “With me, that changes.”Signature Policy: Known for playing small-ball, Klobuchar has emphasized her record of enacting practical laws that have reduced the backlog of rape kits and banned lead in toys. Unwilling to promise the moon on health care or tuition breaks, Klobuchar has gone all-in on statehood for Washington, D.C., promising it would be part of her first-100-days agenda.
Cory Booker and His Platform
Cory Booker
Candidate Status: Running
The former super-mayor of Newark, 49, still lives there when he’s not in Washington. Booker is running on a values-heavy message of love and unity and calling for “a revival of civic grace.” Booker has one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate, and he’s distinguished himself by centering his agenda on federal marijuana legalization and criminal justice reform. But Booker’s outward liberalism has been undercut at times by problematic connections to Wall Street, a vote that boosted Big Pharma, and his support of charter schools. He vowed to not accept corporate PAC or lobbyist donations and announced raising more than $5 million in the opening months of his campaign.
Signature Policy: Baby bonds. Booker would target the wealth gap in America by seeding “American Opportunity Accounts” for children that would allow kids from the poorest families to enter adulthood with a nest egg of up to $46,000 to invest in education, home ownership or retirement.
The former super-mayor of Newark, 49, still lives there when he’s not in Washington. Booker is running on a values-heavy message of love and unity and calling for “a revival of civic grace.” Booker has one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate, and he’s distinguished himself by centering his agenda on federal marijuana legalization and criminal justice reform. But Booker’s outward liberalism has been undercut at times by problematic connections to Wall Street, a vote that boosted Big Pharma, and his support of charter schools. He vowed to not accept corporate PAC or lobbyist donations and announced raising more than $5 million in the opening months of his campaign.
Signature Policy: Baby bonds. Booker would target the wealth gap in America by seeding “American Opportunity Accounts” for children that would allow kids from the poorest families to enter adulthood with a nest egg of up to $46,000 to invest in education, home ownership or retirement.
Joe Biden and His Platform
Joe Biden
Candidate Status: Undeclared
Biden still leads most early polls of the 2020 Democratic field, but the 76-year-old former VP seems intent on torpedoing his likely campaign before it begins. After Lucy Flores, a Democratic candidate for Nevada lieutenant governor in 2014, accused him of inappropriately kissing her head before an event, Biden issued a non-apology apology pledging to “be more mindful and respectful of people’s personal space.” Later that week, however, he was back to cracking jokes about his habit of touching people in public. “I just want you to know: I had permission to hug Lonnie,” he riffed after hugging a union boss at labor convention. His recent run of form has only fed into the perception that Biden is out of the step with the politics of the moment.
Signature Policy: Biden has peerless foreign policy credentials: “I’m the most qualified person in the country to be president,” he’s said.
Biden still leads most early polls of the 2020 Democratic field, but the 76-year-old former VP seems intent on torpedoing his likely campaign before it begins. After Lucy Flores, a Democratic candidate for Nevada lieutenant governor in 2014, accused him of inappropriately kissing her head before an event, Biden issued a non-apology apology pledging to “be more mindful and respectful of people’s personal space.” Later that week, however, he was back to cracking jokes about his habit of touching people in public. “I just want you to know: I had permission to hug Lonnie,” he riffed after hugging a union boss at labor convention. His recent run of form has only fed into the perception that Biden is out of the step with the politics of the moment.
Signature Policy: Biden has peerless foreign policy credentials: “I’m the most qualified person in the country to be president,” he’s said.
Sunday, April 21, 2019
Beto O'Rourke Platform
Beto O’Rourke
Candidate Status: RunningAfter early ambivalence about joining the 2020 field, Beto O’Rourke felt certain by mid-March he was “just born to be in it.” The former congressman, 46, cannonballed into the Democratic primary with a Vanity Fair profile (cover portrait courtesy of Annie Leibovitz) and an Iowa road-trip intended, no doubt, to evoke his star-making 2018 run for Senate in Texas, in which he nearly toppled Texas mega-villain Sen. Ted Cruz. That campaign built a nationwide grassroots machine that Beto fired up after declaring his bid on March 14th. Undeterred by early stumbles and surprising revelations about O’Rourke’s past in a hacktivist collective, donors have responded by staking his campaign with $9.4 million, on the strength of 280,000 contributions.
Signature Policy: O’Rourke, until this year a representative for El Paso, has centered on immigration reform, based on “respect and dignity.”
Signature Policy: O’Rourke, until this year a representative for El Paso, has centered on immigration reform, based on “respect and dignity.”
Elizabeth Warren Platform
Elizabeth Warren
Candidate Status: RunningWarren continues to outpace her competitors on policy, most recently laying out an affordable housing plan. The Massachusetts senator is targeting voters who seek progressive purity from their 2020 champion. But unlike Democratic Socialist Sanders, the 69-year-old Warren is a capitalist at heart, having spent a career trying to make the system work for working people. Before becoming a senator, Warren launched the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. And in March, she unveiled a plan to use antitrust authority to break up Big Tech. Warren has raised $6 million from 135,000 donors. Signature Policy: Warren wants to address American inequality with a wealth tax, imposed annually on “ultra-millionaires,” to pay for benefits, including universal free or low-cost childcare, for “yacht-less Americans.” Fortunes greater than $50 million would be taxed at 2 percent. Billionaires would pay 3 percent. The proposal has greater than 60 percent support and would raise $2.75 trillion over 10 years.
Signature Apology: Warren has apologized for conflating “family stories” about Cherokee heritage with native identity. “I am sorry,” Warren said, “for furthering confusion on tribal sovereignty and tribal citizenship and harm that resulted.”
Previous Ranking: 5
Signature Apology: Warren has apologized for conflating “family stories” about Cherokee heritage with native identity. “I am sorry,” Warren said, “for furthering confusion on tribal sovereignty and tribal citizenship and harm that resulted.”
Previous Ranking: 5
Kamala Harris Platform
Kamala Harris
Candidate Status: Running
Harris — the 54-year-old senator and former prosecutor — continues to show star power on the trail, packing houses from South Carolina to New Hampshire. The Californian stands astride the tectonic plates of the Democratic Party — an establishment politician who has adopted a platform responsive to the passion of the grassroots, including a Green New Deal and marijuana legalization. Her fundraising in the first quarter reflects success in sustaining this tricky balance: Harris raised $12 million from nearly 140,000 donors. Black women are the heart of the Democratic Party, and seeing themselves reflected in the Howard University-educated Harris (born to Jamaican and Tamil Indian parents) could boost her prospects, particularly if Stacey Abrams decides against a bid.
Signature Policy: Her LIFT Act would pay out up to $500 a month for working-class families. Harris says this “tax cut” will be paid for by ending Trump’s “giveaways to big corporations and the top one percent.”
Signature Apology: Harris has accepted accountability for missteps as California’s attorney general: “The bottom line is the buck stops with me, and I take full responsibility for what my office did.”
Harris — the 54-year-old senator and former prosecutor — continues to show star power on the trail, packing houses from South Carolina to New Hampshire. The Californian stands astride the tectonic plates of the Democratic Party — an establishment politician who has adopted a platform responsive to the passion of the grassroots, including a Green New Deal and marijuana legalization. Her fundraising in the first quarter reflects success in sustaining this tricky balance: Harris raised $12 million from nearly 140,000 donors. Black women are the heart of the Democratic Party, and seeing themselves reflected in the Howard University-educated Harris (born to Jamaican and Tamil Indian parents) could boost her prospects, particularly if Stacey Abrams decides against a bid.
Signature Policy: Her LIFT Act would pay out up to $500 a month for working-class families. Harris says this “tax cut” will be paid for by ending Trump’s “giveaways to big corporations and the top one percent.”
Signature Apology: Harris has accepted accountability for missteps as California’s attorney general: “The bottom line is the buck stops with me, and I take full responsibility for what my office did.”
Bernie Sanders PLatform
Candidate Status: Running
Sanders holds the lead thanks to a potent combination of people-power and cash, raising $18 million from more than 500,000 donors in the opening weeks of his campaign. The Democratic Socialist does not have the left lane to himself in 2020 — many candidates have embraced his once-distinctive proposals. But Sanders is seen as an uncompromising champion of proposals like Medicare for All. The 77-year-old has made appealing changes for 2020: He has jettisoned his consultants and put people of color at the fore of his campaign. And he finally released his tax returns.
Signature Policy: Sanders’ 2016 campaign set the table for 2020. He gets full credit for mainstreaming a $15 minimum wage and tuition-free college. Sanders recently introduced the “For the 99.8% Act” — which would sharply increase the estate tax, including imposing a 77 percent tax on estates in excess of $1 billion, raising an estimated $315 billion over a decade. Signature Apology: Sanders apologized to former female staffers for a 2016 campaign marred by pay disparities and allegations of sexual harassment by male staffers, promising to “do better” moving forward.
Sanders holds the lead thanks to a potent combination of people-power and cash, raising $18 million from more than 500,000 donors in the opening weeks of his campaign. The Democratic Socialist does not have the left lane to himself in 2020 — many candidates have embraced his once-distinctive proposals. But Sanders is seen as an uncompromising champion of proposals like Medicare for All. The 77-year-old has made appealing changes for 2020: He has jettisoned his consultants and put people of color at the fore of his campaign. And he finally released his tax returns.
Signature Policy: Sanders’ 2016 campaign set the table for 2020. He gets full credit for mainstreaming a $15 minimum wage and tuition-free college. Sanders recently introduced the “For the 99.8% Act” — which would sharply increase the estate tax, including imposing a 77 percent tax on estates in excess of $1 billion, raising an estimated $315 billion over a decade. Signature Apology: Sanders apologized to former female staffers for a 2016 campaign marred by pay disparities and allegations of sexual harassment by male staffers, promising to “do better” moving forward.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)