One Cannot Vote Democrat....

[PoliticalChic]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

 

[Mac1958]

 

[MordechaiGoodbud]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

I can not vote Republican without being allied with Russia.

 

[Rustic]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

There is a reason why Socialism has failed every time it’s been tried… It’s fucked up

 

[Moonglow]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

Says the fake American.

 

[MordechaiGoodbud]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

There is a reason why Socialism has failed every time it’s been tried… It’s fucked up

Socialism hasn't failed in the U.S., western Europe, Scandinavia, Canada, and Australia.

 

[Moonglow]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

There is a reason why Socialism has failed every time it’s been tried… It’s fucked up

Capitalistic countries fail also, in fact, every system used has failed at one time or another. But the only system you know of is socialism..I am not surprised, how is the echo chamber these days?

 

[PoliticalChic]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

I can not vote Republican without being allied with Russia.

Let's see if I can educate you, you dunce:

1. There is zero evidence that of any collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.


There are scads of evidence of collusion between the media and the DNC, and there is this:

The only folks with a close relationship with the Russians are Democrats.

The names Clinton and Podesta come to mind.


2. "52% Say Clintons Should Be Part of Russia Probe"

52% Say Clintons Should Be Part of Russia Probe - Rasmussen Reports™



Here's why:

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

The first Republican President



And this:

3. "Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal


...the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.


....major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.


Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.


Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons,...."

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/...s-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html



And


4. "Both Hillary Clinton And John Podesta Made Millions From Russia & Putin"

Both Hillary Clinton And John Podesta Made Millions From Russia & Putin » Liberty Alliance


And


5. "EXCLUSIVE: Dem Super-Lobbyist Podesta Got $170K to End US Sanctions On Russian Bank"

EXCLUSIVE: Dem Super-Lobbyist Podesta Got $170K to End US Sanctions On Russian Bank



6. News anchor highlights all of the known links to Russia





-------------------------------------------------------------


Democrat collusion???



7. "Claire McCaskill Used Undisclosed Foundation to Pay for Dinner at Russian Ambassador’s House


Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill (Mo.) used a personal foundation to pay for a dinner she attended at Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak's Washington, D.C., residence. The senator had failed to disclose her role in the foundation until earlier this month.



McCaskill came under fire this March after she told the Washington Post she never had a "call or meeting" with Kislyak even though she had publicly announced both a call and meeting with him. This week, CNN reportedthat McCaskill also attended a black-tie reception at Kislyak's D.C. residence in November 2015.



McCaskill's attendance at the dinner was accompanied by an $873 payment to the American-Russian Cultural Cooperation Foundation, where Kislyak serves on its board of directors as honorary chairman."


Claire McCaskill Used Undisclosed Foundation to Pay for Dinner at Russian Ambassador's House




8. Podesta Group retroactively files more DOJ disclosures for pro-Putin work


...the powerful Washington lobbying firm run by Clinton ally Tony Podesta filed a document admitting its work for the pro-Russia European Centre for a Modern Ukraine may have principally benefited a foreign government. New disclosures revealed dozens of previously unreported interactions the firm made with influential government offices, including Hillary Clinton's State Department and the office of former Vice President Joe Biden, while lobbying on behalf of the center. Embattled ex-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort failed to disclose his extensive lobbying efforts on behalf of the center at the time as well.


How do you say 'whoops' in Russian? Podesta Group retroactively files more DOJ disclosures for pro-Putin work




9. And we now know.....

..

a. The Russians paid $145 million to the Clinton Crime Family, and in return appropriated a large portion of our uranium.
They have energy....so it in to be used for weapons......
Against whom?
Us.


b. Bill was slipped $500,000 to give a fake speech.
See a. above.

c. " Former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta exits after ... a company that received $35 million from the Russian government..."
http://nypost.com/2017/07/05/uncovering-the-russia-ties-of-hillarys-campaign-chief/

d. "WASHINGTON — Tony Podesta and the Podesta Group are now the subjects of a federal investigation being led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller,...violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act, known as FARA."
Mueller now investigating Democratic lobbyist Tony Podesta
Russian spies influencing the Obama/Clinton administration via bribes.

e. In 11 months of thorough investigations, there has not been a smidgen of evidence of any connections of Trump to the Russians.


10. Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee who has been leading a congressional investigation into President Trump's alleged ties to Russia, had extensive contact last year with a lobbyist for a Russian oligarch who was offering Warner access to former British spy and dossier author Christopher Steele, according to text messages obtained exclusively by Fox News.

Throughout the text exchanges, Warner seemed particularly intent on connecting directly with Steele without anyone else on the Senate Intelligence Committee being in the loop -- at least initially. In one text to the lobbyist, Warner wrote that he would "rather not have a paper trail" of his messages. Democratic Sen. Mark Warner texted with Russian oligarch lobbyist in effort to contact dossier author Christopher Steele


11. Adam Schiff is the head Democrat on the Intelligence Committee
Remember....if not for double standards, the Democrats would have no standards at all....
The Dems are claiming that the Trump folks colluded with a foreign power to collect damaging material about a political adversary....
And remember: to know what the Left is guilty of, just watch what they blame the other side of doing.

Schiff orchestrated a plan to get naked and 'kompromat' pictures of Trump, from the Ukrainians!
The problem is.....the 'Ukrainians' who contacted him were comedians who exposed Schiff and the Democrats for what they are.

"Adam Schiff sent his staff to try and collect 'classified materials for the FBI' after Russian pranksters told him Putin has NAKED blackmail pictures of Trump

Adam Schiff spoofed with Russian claim of nude Trump pic | Daily Mail Online




12.“Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee who has been leading a congressional investigation into President Trump's alleged ties to Russia, had xtensive contact last year with a lobbyist for a Russian oligarch who was offering Warner access to former British spy and dossier author Christopher Steele, according to text messages…

From Democrat Warner:
"We have so much to discuss u need to be careful but we can help our country," Warner texted the lobbyist, Adam Waldman, on March 22, 2017.

"I'm in," Waldman, whose firm has ties to Hillary Clinton, texted back to Warner.



Secrecy seemed very important to Warner …

"Throughout the text exchanges, Warner seemed particularly intent on connecting directly with Steele without anyone else on the Senate Intelligence Committee being in the loop -- at least initially. In one text to the lobbyist, Warner wrote that he would "rather not have a paper trail" of his messages.” Democratic Sen. Mark Warner texted with Russian oligarch lobbyist in effort to contact dossier author Christopher Steele



“ Secrecy seemed very important to Warner …”
"...would rather not have a paper trail...."



“,,,an honest person would ask themselves how’d they react if that was a text message between Donald Trump, Jr., and some fixer paid for by Sergei Lavrov in which he sought a meeting with someone and didn’t want a paper trail.”
Why Did Mark Warner Try to Secretly Meet With Trump Dossier Author and a Blacklisted Russian Oligarch?



13. The ONLY ones with any collusion with Russia are Democrats.

The Democrats colluded, collaborated, conspired with Moscow, the Kremlin, Putin.....to sink the Trump candidacy.

And the Kremlin was happy to do so: they wanted the candidate that they had a history of bribing, to be President.


The only group that we know has colluded with, conspired with, contracted with, been bribed by, paid the Russians, the Kremlin, Moscow....


...are Democrats.

 

[Moonglow]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

There is a reason why Socialism has failed every time it’s been tried… It’s fucked up

Socialism hasn't failed in the U.S., western Europe, Scandinavia, Canada, and Australia.

Still works in China also and that place is the most favorite for US businessmen.. Funny how that works isn't it? The plebs hate socialism and corporations embrace it.. Oh well, propaganda must be spread to foster hate in the wrong direction.

 

[Moonglow]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

I can not vote Republican without being allied with Russia.

Let's see if I can educate you, you dunce:

1. There is zero evidence that of any collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.


There are scads of evidence of collusion between the media and the DNC, and there is this:

The only folks with a close relationship with the Russians are Democrats.

The names Clinton and Podesta come to mind.


2. "52% Say Clintons Should Be Part of Russia Probe"

52% Say Clintons Should Be Part of Russia Probe - Rasmussen Reports™



Here's why:

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

The first Republican President



And this:

3. "Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal


...the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.


....major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.


Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.


Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons,...."

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/...s-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html



And


4. "Both Hillary Clinton And John Podesta Made Millions From Russia & Putin"

Both Hillary Clinton And John Podesta Made Millions From Russia & Putin » Liberty Alliance


And


5. "EXCLUSIVE: Dem Super-Lobbyist Podesta Got $170K to End US Sanctions On Russian Bank"

EXCLUSIVE: Dem Super-Lobbyist Podesta Got $170K to End US Sanctions On Russian Bank



6. News anchor highlights all of the known links to Russia





-------------------------------------------------------------


Democrat collusion???



7. "Claire McCaskill Used Undisclosed Foundation to Pay for Dinner at Russian Ambassador’s House


Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill (Mo.) used a personal foundation to pay for a dinner she attended at Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak's Washington, D.C., residence. The senator had failed to disclose her role in the foundation until earlier this month.



McCaskill came under fire this March after she told the Washington Post she never had a "call or meeting" with Kislyak even though she had publicly announced both a call and meeting with him. This week, CNN reportedthat McCaskill also attended a black-tie reception at Kislyak's D.C. residence in November 2015.



McCaskill's attendance at the dinner was accompanied by an $873 payment to the American-Russian Cultural Cooperation Foundation, where Kislyak serves on its board of directors as honorary chairman."


Claire McCaskill Used Undisclosed Foundation to Pay for Dinner at Russian Ambassador's House




8. Podesta Group retroactively files more DOJ disclosures for pro-Putin work


...the powerful Washington lobbying firm run by Clinton ally Tony Podesta filed a document admitting its work for the pro-Russia European Centre for a Modern Ukraine may have principally benefited a foreign government. New disclosures revealed dozens of previously unreported interactions the firm made with influential government offices, including Hillary Clinton's State Department and the office of former Vice President Joe Biden, while lobbying on behalf of the center. Embattled ex-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort failed to disclose his extensive lobbying efforts on behalf of the center at the time as well.


How do you say 'whoops' in Russian? Podesta Group retroactively files more DOJ disclosures for pro-Putin work




9. And we now know.....

..

a. The Russians paid $145 million to the Clinton Crime Family, and in return appropriated a large portion of our uranium.
They have energy....so it in to be used for weapons......
Against whom?
Us.


b. Bill was slipped $500,000 to give a fake speech.
See a. above.

c. " Former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta exits after ... a company that received $35 million from the Russian government..."
http://nypost.com/2017/07/05/uncovering-the-russia-ties-of-hillarys-campaign-chief/

d. "WASHINGTON — Tony Podesta and the Podesta Group are now the subjects of a federal investigation being led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller,...violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act, known as FARA."
Mueller now investigating Democratic lobbyist Tony Podesta
Russian spies influencing the Obama/Clinton administration via bribes.

e. In 11 months of thorough investigations, there has not been a smidgen of evidence of any connections of Trump to the Russians.


10. Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee who has been leading a congressional investigation into President Trump's alleged ties to Russia, had extensive contact last year with a lobbyist for a Russian oligarch who was offering Warner access to former British spy and dossier author Christopher Steele, according to text messages obtained exclusively by Fox News.

Throughout the text exchanges, Warner seemed particularly intent on connecting directly with Steele without anyone else on the Senate Intelligence Committee being in the loop -- at least initially. In one text to the lobbyist, Warner wrote that he would "rather not have a paper trail" of his messages. Democratic Sen. Mark Warner texted with Russian oligarch lobbyist in effort to contact dossier author Christopher Steele


11. Adam Schiff is the head Democrat on the Intelligence Committee
Remember....if not for double standards, the Democrats would have no standards at all....
The Dems are claiming that the Trump folks colluded with a foreign power to collect damaging material about a political adversary....
And remember: to know what the Left is guilty of, just watch what they blame the other side of doing.

Schiff orchestrated a plan to get naked and 'kompromat' pictures of Trump, from the Ukrainians!
The problem is.....the 'Ukrainians' who contacted him were comedians who exposed Schiff and the Democrats for what they are.

"Adam Schiff sent his staff to try and collect 'classified materials for the FBI' after Russian pranksters told him Putin has NAKED blackmail pictures of Trump

Adam Schiff spoofed with Russian claim of nude Trump pic | Daily Mail Online




12.“Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee who has been leading a congressional investigation into President Trump's alleged ties to Russia, had xtensive contact last year with a lobbyist for a Russian oligarch who was offering Warner access to former British spy and dossier author Christopher Steele, according to text messages…

From Democrat Warner:
"We have so much to discuss u need to be careful but we can help our country," Warner texted the lobbyist, Adam Waldman, on March 22, 2017.

"I'm in," Waldman, whose firm has ties to Hillary Clinton, texted back to Warner.



Secrecy seemed very important to Warner …

"Throughout the text exchanges, Warner seemed particularly intent on connecting directly with Steele without anyone else on the Senate Intelligence Committee being in the loop -- at least initially. In one text to the lobbyist, Warner wrote that he would "rather not have a paper trail" of his messages.” Democratic Sen. Mark Warner texted with Russian oligarch lobbyist in effort to contact dossier author Christopher Steele



“ Secrecy seemed very important to Warner …”
"...would rather not have a paper trail...."



“,,,an honest person would ask themselves how’d they react if that was a text message between Donald Trump, Jr., and some fixer paid for by Sergei Lavrov in which he sought a meeting with someone and didn’t want a paper trail.”
Why Did Mark Warner Try to Secretly Meet With Trump Dossier Author and a Blacklisted Russian Oligarch?



13. The ONLY ones with any collusion with Russia are Democrats.

The Democrats colluded, collaborated, conspired with Moscow, the Kremlin, Putin.....to sink the Trump candidacy.

And the Kremlin was happy to do so: they wanted the candidate that they had a history of bribing, to be President.


The only group that we know has colluded with, conspired with, contracted with, been bribed by, paid the Russians, the Kremlin, Moscow....


...are Democrats.

That's not what the guilty pleas claim but you play that skin flute...

 

[PoliticalChic]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

There is a reason why Socialism has failed every time it’s been tried… It’s fucked up

 

[Moonglow]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

I can not vote Republican without being allied with Russia.

Let's see if I can educate you, you dunce:

1. There is zero evidence that of any collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.


There are scads of evidence of collusion between the media and the DNC, and there is this:

The only folks with a close relationship with the Russians are Democrats.

The names Clinton and Podesta come to mind.


2. "52% Say Clintons Should Be Part of Russia Probe"

52% Say Clintons Should Be Part of Russia Probe - Rasmussen Reports™



Here's why:

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

The first Republican President



And this:

3. "Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal


...the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.


....major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.


Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.


Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons,...."

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/...s-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html



And


4. "Both Hillary Clinton And John Podesta Made Millions From Russia & Putin"

Both Hillary Clinton And John Podesta Made Millions From Russia & Putin » Liberty Alliance


And


5. "EXCLUSIVE: Dem Super-Lobbyist Podesta Got $170K to End US Sanctions On Russian Bank"

EXCLUSIVE: Dem Super-Lobbyist Podesta Got $170K to End US Sanctions On Russian Bank



6. News anchor highlights all of the known links to Russia





-------------------------------------------------------------


Democrat collusion???



7. "Claire McCaskill Used Undisclosed Foundation to Pay for Dinner at Russian Ambassador’s House


Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill (Mo.) used a personal foundation to pay for a dinner she attended at Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak's Washington, D.C., residence. The senator had failed to disclose her role in the foundation until earlier this month.



McCaskill came under fire this March after she told the Washington Post she never had a "call or meeting" with Kislyak even though she had publicly announced both a call and meeting with him. This week, CNN reportedthat McCaskill also attended a black-tie reception at Kislyak's D.C. residence in November 2015.



McCaskill's attendance at the dinner was accompanied by an $873 payment to the American-Russian Cultural Cooperation Foundation, where Kislyak serves on its board of directors as honorary chairman."


Claire McCaskill Used Undisclosed Foundation to Pay for Dinner at Russian Ambassador's House




8. Podesta Group retroactively files more DOJ disclosures for pro-Putin work


...the powerful Washington lobbying firm run by Clinton ally Tony Podesta filed a document admitting its work for the pro-Russia European Centre for a Modern Ukraine may have principally benefited a foreign government. New disclosures revealed dozens of previously unreported interactions the firm made with influential government offices, including Hillary Clinton's State Department and the office of former Vice President Joe Biden, while lobbying on behalf of the center. Embattled ex-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort failed to disclose his extensive lobbying efforts on behalf of the center at the time as well.


How do you say 'whoops' in Russian? Podesta Group retroactively files more DOJ disclosures for pro-Putin work




9. And we now know.....

..

a. The Russians paid $145 million to the Clinton Crime Family, and in return appropriated a large portion of our uranium.
They have energy....so it in to be used for weapons......
Against whom?
Us.


b. Bill was slipped $500,000 to give a fake speech.
See a. above.

c. " Former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta exits after ... a company that received $35 million from the Russian government..."
http://nypost.com/2017/07/05/uncovering-the-russia-ties-of-hillarys-campaign-chief/

d. "WASHINGTON — Tony Podesta and the Podesta Group are now the subjects of a federal investigation being led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller,...violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act, known as FARA."
Mueller now investigating Democratic lobbyist Tony Podesta
Russian spies influencing the Obama/Clinton administration via bribes.

e. In 11 months of thorough investigations, there has not been a smidgen of evidence of any connections of Trump to the Russians.


10. Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee who has been leading a congressional investigation into President Trump's alleged ties to Russia, had extensive contact last year with a lobbyist for a Russian oligarch who was offering Warner access to former British spy and dossier author Christopher Steele, according to text messages obtained exclusively by Fox News.

Throughout the text exchanges, Warner seemed particularly intent on connecting directly with Steele without anyone else on the Senate Intelligence Committee being in the loop -- at least initially. In one text to the lobbyist, Warner wrote that he would "rather not have a paper trail" of his messages. Democratic Sen. Mark Warner texted with Russian oligarch lobbyist in effort to contact dossier author Christopher Steele


11. Adam Schiff is the head Democrat on the Intelligence Committee
Remember....if not for double standards, the Democrats would have no standards at all....
The Dems are claiming that the Trump folks colluded with a foreign power to collect damaging material about a political adversary....
And remember: to know what the Left is guilty of, just watch what they blame the other side of doing.

Schiff orchestrated a plan to get naked and 'kompromat' pictures of Trump, from the Ukrainians!
The problem is.....the 'Ukrainians' who contacted him were comedians who exposed Schiff and the Democrats for what they are.

"Adam Schiff sent his staff to try and collect 'classified materials for the FBI' after Russian pranksters told him Putin has NAKED blackmail pictures of Trump

Adam Schiff spoofed with Russian claim of nude Trump pic | Daily Mail Online




12.“Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee who has been leading a congressional investigation into President Trump's alleged ties to Russia, had xtensive contact last year with a lobbyist for a Russian oligarch who was offering Warner access to former British spy and dossier author Christopher Steele, according to text messages…

From Democrat Warner:
"We have so much to discuss u need to be careful but we can help our country," Warner texted the lobbyist, Adam Waldman, on March 22, 2017.

"I'm in," Waldman, whose firm has ties to Hillary Clinton, texted back to Warner.



Secrecy seemed very important to Warner …

"Throughout the text exchanges, Warner seemed particularly intent on connecting directly with Steele without anyone else on the Senate Intelligence Committee being in the loop -- at least initially. In one text to the lobbyist, Warner wrote that he would "rather not have a paper trail" of his messages.” Democratic Sen. Mark Warner texted with Russian oligarch lobbyist in effort to contact dossier author Christopher Steele



“ Secrecy seemed very important to Warner …”
"...would rather not have a paper trail...."



“,,,an honest person would ask themselves how’d they react if that was a text message between Donald Trump, Jr., and some fixer paid for by Sergei Lavrov in which he sought a meeting with someone and didn’t want a paper trail.”
Why Did Mark Warner Try to Secretly Meet With Trump Dossier Author and a Blacklisted Russian Oligarch?



13. The ONLY ones with any collusion with Russia are Democrats.

The Democrats colluded, collaborated, conspired with Moscow, the Kremlin, Putin.....to sink the Trump candidacy.

And the Kremlin was happy to do so: they wanted the candidate that they had a history of bribing, to be President.


The only group that we know has colluded with, conspired with, contracted with, been bribed by, paid the Russians, the Kremlin, Moscow....


...are Democrats.

If there was zero colussion then why are four members of the Trump team having guilty put on their records?

 

[PoliticalChic]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

There is a reason why Socialism has failed every time it’s been tried… It’s fucked up

Socialism hasn't failed in the U.S., western Europe, Scandinavia, Canada, and Australia.

Wrong again, dunce.

"The Economist: The Nordic countries are reinventing their model of capitalism, says Adrian Wooldridge
Feb 2nd 2013 |From the print edition

1. THIRTY YEARS AGO Margaret Thatcher turned Britain into the world’s leading centre of “thinking the unthinkable”. Today that distinction has passed to Sweden….Sweden has reduced public spending as a proportion of GDP from 67% in 1993 to 49% today…. It has also cut the top marginal tax rate by 27 percentage points since 1983, to 57%, and scrapped a mare’s nest of taxes on property, gifts, wealth and inheritance. This year it is cutting the corporate-tax rate from 26.3% to 22%.
2. Sweden has also donned the golden straitjacket of fiscal orthodoxy with its pledge to produce a fiscal surplus over the economic cycle. Its public debt fell from 70% of GDP in 1993 to 37% in 2010, and its budget moved from an 11% deficit to a surplus of 0.3% over the same period.
3. Most daringly, it has introduced a universal system of school vouchers and invited private schools to compete with public ones. Private companies also vie with each other to provide state-funded health services and care for the elderly….Sweden is pioneering “a new conservative model”…
4. …Sweden’s quiet revolution has brought about a dramatic change in its economic performance. The two decades from 1970 were a period of decline: the country was demoted from being the world’s fourth-richest in 1970 to 14th-richest in 1993, …The two decades from 1990 were a period of recovery: GDP growth between 1993 and 2010 averaged 2.7% a year and productivity 2.1% a year, compared with 1.9% and 1% respectively for the main 15 EU countries.
5. For most of the 20th century Sweden prided itself on offering what Marquis Childs called, in his 1936 book of that title, a “Middle Way” between capitalism and socialism…As the decades rolled by, the middle way veered left. The government kept growing: public spending as a share of GDP nearly doubled from 1960 to 1980 and peaked at 67% in 1993.
   1. Taxes kept rising. The Social Democrats (who ruled Sweden for 44 uninterrupted years from 1932 to 1976 and for 21 out of the 24 years from 1982 to 2006) kept squeezing business. “The era of neo-capitalism is drawing to an end,” said Olof Palme, the party’s leader, in 1974. “It is some kind of socialism that is the key to the future.”
6. The other Nordic countries have been moving in the same direction,… Denmark has one of the most liberal labour markets in Europe. It also allows parents to send children to private schools at public expense and make up the difference in cost with their own money. Finland is harnessing the skills of venture capitalists and angel investors to promote innovation and entrepreneurship.
7. But the new Nordic model begins with the individual rather than the state. It begins with fiscal responsibility rather than pump-priming: all four Nordic countries have AAA ratings and debt loads significantly below the euro-zone average. It begins with choice and competition rather than paternalism and planning.
   1. The leftward lurch has been reversed: rather than extending the state into the market, the Nordics are extending the market into the state.
8. “The welfare state we have is excellent in most ways,” says Gunnar Viby Mogensen, a Danish historian. “We only have this little problem. We can’t afford it.”
9. ….they have reached the future first. They are grappling with problems that other countries too will have to deal with in due course, such as what to do when you reach the limits of big government and how to organise society when almost all women work.
10. … the new Nordic model is proving strikingly successful. The Nordics dominate indices of competitiveness as well as of well-being. Their high scores in both types of league table mark a big change since the 1980s when welfare took precedence over competitiveness.”

Northern lights

 

[Some Guy]

I think PoliticalChic's threads should start with "TL;DR Warning:"

 

[PoliticalChic]

I think PoliticalChic's threads should start with "TL;DR Warning:"

How about this: those who shun learning, avoid this thread....

Would that keep you away?

 

[dudmuck]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

1) I'm guessing nordic countries are failing. Denmark best country for business.

2) Who is waging war on first amendment?

3) Trump is already early-stage Mussolini

 

[PoliticalChic]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

1) I'm guessing nordic countries are failing. Denmark best country for business.

2) Who is waging war on first amendment?

3) Trump is already early-stage Mussolini

What a truly stupid post.

You must vote Democrat, huh?

 

[PoliticalChic]

4. One can rarely recognize Fascism by a face….


"In her 1993 article "Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography After R.A.V," for the University of Chicago Law Review, Kagan writes:

"I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."

In a 1996 paper, "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine," Kagan argued it may be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
That paper asserted First Amendment doctrine is comprised of "motives and ... actions infested with them" and she goes so far as to claim that "First Amendment law is best understood and most readily explained as a kind of motive-hunting."

Kagan's name was also on a brief, United States V. Stevens, dug up by the Washington Examiner, stating: "Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs."
If the government doesn't like what you say, Elena Kagan believes it is the duty of courts to tell you to shut up. If some pantywaist is offended by what you say, Elena Kagan believes your words can be "disappeared".
WyBlog -- Elena Kagan's America: some speech can be "disappeared"

Elena Kagan Radical anti-gun nut?

Brandenburg v. Ohio - Wikipedia



Guess who put this enemy of free speech on the Supreme Court.

 

[dudmuck]

…and be considered an American.


1. I base that on a number of things, such as these views becoming Democrat mainstream:

"Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!

...a message to the Democratic Establishment that the base of the party is moving decidedly more towards “Democratic socialism.” The only problem is that it seems nobody can get any specific answers on what this new “Democratic Socialism” actually is and how it differs from plain, run of the mill, failed socialism. Not even liberals can decide.

Abolish profit

Abolish prisons

Abolish cash bail

Abolish borders"
Meet the New Democratic Socialists, Same as the Old Democratic Socialists!


This is what you stand for when you vote Democrat.




2. But most important is the Democrat/Liberal anti-American war on free speech.

“Free speech as we’ve been chronicling here at LI for ages has come under heightened attack in recent years, particularly on our nation’s college campuses. We’ve seen poll after poll in which large swaths of young Americans (mostly, but not exclusively, leftists) believe that speech should be more restricted.

We’ve heard politicians argue that “hate speech” is not protected by the First Amendment, and we’ve seen Yale students organize a petition to repeal the First Amendment. We’ve heard that words are “violent,” and we’ve heard that “offensive,” “triggering,” and “hurtful” speech—speech someone in ear-shot hears and feels offended, triggered, or hurt by—should be unceremoniously restricted or even banned.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?





3. We've been warned:

“Fascism may be so gradual in the United States that most voters will not be aware of its existence. The true Fascist leaders will not be present imitators of German Fuhrer and Italian condottieri, prancing in silver shirts. They will be judicious, black-frocked gentlemen; graduates of the best universities; disciples of Nicholas Murray Butler and Walter Lippmann.”
The 7-0-1 | National Review

1) I'm guessing nordic countries are failing. Denmark best country for business.

2) Who is waging war on first amendment?

3) Trump is already early-stage Mussolini

What a truly stupid post.

You must vote Democrat, huh?

You cant backup your posts? Only insults?

 

[Some Guy]

I think PoliticalChic's threads should start with "TL;DR Warning:"

How about this: those who shun learning, avoid this thread....

Would that keep you away?

You're just a talking points machine. Not much to learn there. You need to go beyond partisan ideology to actually learn something. Like how both parties are helping to drive the American bus into a lake.