Michael Bennet (D-CO) Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Jacky Rosen (D-NV) Brian Schatz (D-HI) Bernie Sanders (I-VT) Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Ron Wyden (D-OR)
House (8% jewish, 600% US over-representation)
David Cicilline (D-RI) Stephen Cohen (D-TN) Susan Davis (D-CA) Ted Deutch (D-FL) Eliot Engel (D-NY) Lois Frankel (D-FL) Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) David Kutsoff (R-TN) Andy Levin (D-MI) Mike Levin (D-CA) Alan Lowenthal (D-CA) Nita Lowey (D-NY) Elaine Luria (D-VA) Jerry Nadler (D-NY) Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) Dean Phillips (D-MN) Jamie Raskin (D-MD) Max Rose (D-NY) Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) Adam Schiff (D-CA) Kim Schrier (D-WA) Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) Brad Sherman (D-CA) Brad Schneider (D-IL) Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) Susan Wild (D-PA) John Yarmuth (D-KY) Lee Zeldin (R-NY)
Supreme Court (33.3% jewish, 2,400% US over-representation):
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (D) Stephen Breyer (D) Elena Kagan (D)
Yet another example of former "intelligence" spooks being hired by organizations so they can be used against political opponents
"Erik Prince, the security contractor with close ties to the Trump administration, has in recent years helped recruit former American and British spies for secretive intelligence-gathering operations that included infiltrating Democratic congressional campaigns, labor organizations and other groups considered hostile to the Trump agenda, according to interviews and documents."
The DNC Convention will occur this year July 13th-16th primarily at the Fiserv Forum in Milwaukee, WI. Given patterns and events that I see occuring I'm compelled to more thoroughly spell out what I can see will unfold at the convention, and if you like happenings, you'll want to livestream it.
Before we get into 2020, lets have a brief recap of the prior events. In 2008, the Presidential Primary was hotly contested between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, Obama at the time had been a US Senator for barely 2 years, and a State Senator with only media adulation to his name prior to that. But the DNC saw the excitement that he generated among minorities, but also white people who would vote for "a clean-looking black guy". Unfortunately this was supposed to be Hillary's turn, having been the most involved First Lady in US history, as well as a Senator for 8 years at this point. The absolute dislike the two had for each other during the primary was palpable and evident everytime they were on stage with each other. The DNC leadership at the time managed rein them both in, giving the nomination to Obama on the condition that Hillary be named his Secretary of State, the position from which its easiest to springboard into the presidency. If you recall one of the old leaked emails, Citigroup chose the rest of his cabinet, which is likely why he met with them fewer times than any president in history.
Hillary diligently played her part as Secretary of State, all the while forcing out any not loyal to her from party leadership and making money on the side in quid pro quo deals largely involving Uranium One and the Haiti Relief Fund funneled into the Clinton Foundation. These scandals, combined with attack on the consulate in Benghazi, meant she needed to step out of the spotlight for a while, so she elected to (or was forced by Obama) to not stay on for the second term. 1/7
Hillary announced her campaign for the presidency in April of 2015, surprising absolutely no one least of all the DNC, who had to at least attempt to field other candidates for optics. This is where Bernie came in. Now I don't ascribe to the belief that an independant candidate, even one who caucused with the DNC the vast majority of the time, would be allowed to submit his candidacy with having made a deal first.
His job at first was wrangle the more progressive wing of the party that felt disaffected by the lack of change in the Obama administration, and did not by any means, have a favorable opinion of Hillary. Only the DNC had made a major miscalculation in the kind of support Bernie would gain, Bernie was likely surprised as well and decided to go rogue.
The shenanigans during the 2016 primary were legendary, with Bernie winning the popular vote in several states, but with Hillary gaining all of the unbound superdelegates. The primary reached a fever pitch during the Nevada Caucus, where the rules were changed the night before the final vote (at the state convention), so that whoever won the first vote (precinct vote) would be awarded the state's delegates for the national delegates. Note that Bernie won the second round. This caused commotion on the floor with lots of objections, which the DNC had thought of already by changing that rule so that all motions were subject to a voice vote decided by the chairwoman who naturally ruled all motions in favor of Hillary. The DNC then claimed the Sanders delegates became violent and ejected over 60, who still have not released the video evidence they claim they have. Read more about it here: medium.com/@desireebarlow/basic-step-by-step-of-what-went-down-b10e48bf6814
You can basically repeat this scenario for virtually every state, as Hillary had spent years placing her people in all of the relevant positions. Now for the 2016 DNC National Convention 2/7
By this time, it was evident to anyone paying attention that Bernie stood zero chance of gaining the nomination save some of his more dedicated supporters. Bernie held out through the Convention, reportedly until Obama intervened and urged him to surrender to Hillary. He gave that pathetic endorsement speech and over 1/3rd of the delegation walked out, which the DNC supposedly filled with paid crowds. With the help of the Superdelegates, Hillary won on the first round ballot and secured the nomination.
As an olive branch to the Bernie crowd, the DNC altered the Rules of the Convention for 2020. Probably the most impactful change was that superdelegates were gone, only the fine print states that superdelegates are only absent for the first round ballot. remember this as it will come into play later.
This didn't really satisfy the Berniebros, most of whom still fell in line for Hillary, but many stayed home and a minority even voted Trump out of spite. Its been speculated by many that the less than enthusiastic turnout from the progressive wing helped swing the vote toward Trump, but personally I'm skeptical of this. Everyone of course remembers the general election quite well, the outrageously misleading polls, lackluster crowds and how the media hid it, cutting away from field reporters if they mentioned anything negative of Hillary, the contempt with which late night hosts treated thier viewers with the pickle jar and the Podesta emails.
Podesta came out on election night at the Javitz Center, told the crowd they were going to continue this fight until it was done, and sent the crowd home as there was an event scheduled the next day. Although the real reason is likely because if they had announced the concession her supporters might have trashed the Javitz Center which the campaign would be liable for. At this point its quite typical for a losing candidate to ride off into the sunset and stay out sight forever. 3/7
He was helping out Project Veratis. You're leaving that part out.
Luis Perry
Post-Election
So typically a candidate will disappear after losing, only to be visited every few years by a random reporter in a "Where are they now?" story. Only that's not what has happened with Hillary, you'd be forgiven for not recalling exactly how many media appearances she's made, because they've been strategicly spaced out so she remains in the public consciousness but so much so as to be overbearing. According to her IMDB page, she's made almost 50 media appearances since January 2017, she visited an art exhibit of her emails in Venice, and has an upcoming docuseries exclusive to Hulu. The Hulu documentary is probably the most telling, from the trailer it appears to be have an incredibly high production value and they even drug out poor Bill to take some of the blame for her loss. Watch the trailer below and see for yourself. imdb.com/name/nm0166921/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1 wgno.com/news/hillary-clinton-reads-her-emails-at-venice-art-exhibit/ youtube.com/watch?v=ViAAwc0BtiE
It was my expectation after the election that Hillary would be more or less ejected from the party and her cronies with her. Only Tom Perez was nominated for the Party Chair, the same Tom Perez that worked as Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights under Janet Reno, Clinton appointee. The remainder of the upper echelon of DNC leadership are simliar establishment DNC types, forgoing any claim of some kind of progressive "takeover" of the party.
In fact, the only mutiny that was allowed was the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, where the progressive wing expressed frustration at the lack of minority representation on the committee. This was the sole concession at the national level, and a pointless one at that, as congressional candidates are most supported by their county and state parties. Effectively, the Bernie wing holds no institutional power in the party. 4/7
Campaigning for president starts early, with several candidates announcing in January and February 2019 culminating in over 25 candidates with several more expressing interest. This became absolutely overwhelming as 17 candidates took to the debate stage, each attempting to outdo each other in every progressive category.
These are our first clues as to what's going happen. First, during the second debate, every single candidate raised their hand for free healthcare for illegal immigrants. Even for an ardent progressive this is a fairly hard pill to swallow, its suicide in the general election for moderates democrats and independents alike. But why pledge such a radical proposal, especially when they will be running against one of the most vocally combative presidential candidates in recent history? The answer is to reign in the progressive wing of the party, to keep them interested in the process instead of checking out and ignoring it from there on out. How effective this strategy is, is up to you to decide.
Second, with so many candidates, its easy for one candidate to appeal to different states say, Bloomberg with New York, Biden in Iowa, Bernie in New Hampshire, and Warren elsewhere (or whatever the latest polling tells you). This in all likelihood will result in a failure to secure enough delegates for the Convention in July 2020.
Third, even though several candidates have dropped out a few more have jumped into the fray, namely Bloomberg and Steyer, both of whom have enormous bank accounts with which to fund thier campaign. If I've learned anything, its that billionaires are not allowed to succeed as billionaires unless they play ball with the relevant politcians and government agencies. Its my belief that both Steyer and Bloomberg were encouraged to run for the presidency as spoiler candidates. Not to win mind you, but to keep any one candidate from gaining too many delegates. 5/7
And finally we arrive at the critical juncture in the election process. Normally these are considered formalities, yet shenanigans have occurred at these in the past, the last curiously being in 1952 for both parties, a few decades prior, primary elections weren't really a thing so brokered conventions were actually quite common. These conventions will be instructive as delegates often made handshake deals in smokey backrooms to pledge their support for whoever was gaining momentum during voting.
>But Hillary is too late! She missed the filing deadlines! Incorrect. Those filing deadlines are merely to get the candidates name on primary ballots, not the general. The earliest states to conclude ballot submissions do so in late July, and at the descretion of individual State Secretaries of State. Every single state accounts for brokered conventions, and any deadline is subject to waivers from said secretaries, with the only hard deadline being the printing of ballots, all of which can be delayed as necessary.
>But she needs win a delegate on the first ballot! Again, incorrect. Call For the 2020 Democratic National Convention sets the basic rules for the convention, Article IX, Section C-7, paragraph e. states: >Eligible delegates may vote for the candidate of their choice whether or not the name of such candidate was placed in nomination. Any vote cast other than a vote for a presidential candidate meeting the requirements of Article VI of this Call and Rule 13.K. of the 2020 Delegate Selection Rules shall be considered a vote for “Present.” This means that after the first ballot all delegates can vote for anyone (Article VI requires that they be eligible, and a Democrat). A "majority" vote is all that's required to select a candidate, though how much of a majority isn't specified.
Side bonus: all rules are subject to change at any time, and the rules committee is staffed entirely by those same establishment DNC types. 6/7
So now that the idea of a Hillary Clinton nomnination theft is looking more plausible, how exactly would this go down?
Hillary can't afford to be seen anywhere near this, if she's obviously manipulating the voting then its over. This means a candidate can't be chosen even after several ballots, the longest running nomination process was in 1924 and it took over 100 ballots to conclude. I expect voting to go at least 5 or 6 ballots before she's named by a delegate, with leadership urging a previously not-in-contention unity candidate.
>But the delegates can pick whoever they want, who in the hell would pick Hillary? Good question, and the kind of people who would pick Hillary as a unity candidate are the exact kinds of ass kissers that are named as delegates for these kinds of things. Think mid-level state office holders, local politicians, and long time nobody party members whose contribution has been driving old people to the polls for 20 years. The kind of people who are incredibly susceptible to peer pressure or top-down pressure. Often, these people owe their current position or future acension to Hillary or her underlings.
If Hillary is smart, she won't be in town when during the Convention. She should be on vacation somewhere far away, only to be called in by a desperate party so she can save the day. If she throws her name out there, it won't work, the delegates have to think they selected her. She'll fly in immediately, converse privately with party leadership for a few hours and give her acceptance speech (that night or the following day, doesn't matter)
Boom, she has it again, and looks like a hero doing so.
Would this cause incalcuable harm to the DNC voter base? Probably, but most will fall in line I think. Would it be the most obviously manipulated nomination process in US history? Yes it would. Is it even plausible? Highly likely, I think.
Remember: All rules are subject to change by the rules committee!
As our constitutional republic faces the wrecking balls of the Left and is asked to endure as they smash away at every norm that has made this country great, many Republicans find themselves conveniently absent from the action. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), for example, sure does love himself a TV hit—and I have to tell you, his super-duper “enthusiasms” while on TV almost make me want to believe him when he says he is serious about being effective. But then another day goes by and it’s clear he lacks the stones actually to hold hearings and subpoena the corrupt cabal that has massively abused our surveillance state and law enforcement regime.
Richard Burr (R-N.C.)? Well, he’s been off in “la-la land” for quite some time. At some point, for decency’s sake, he should just give the title of chairman of Senate Intel to Mark Warner (D-Va.) so as actually to reflect reality. One would think confronting injustice and illegal behavior should be pretty standard, common sense sort of stuff. But then again, Swamp Creatures are hardly paragons of truth and justice. So let’s assume until things change that Graham and Burr have zero problem with what has happened over the last few years; heck, they might be implicated in what could be uncovered.
when you change the subject and wander off into irrelevance thats called a left turn
William Nguyen
He hired spooks to be used against political opponents. It does not matter if Project Veratis was involved or not. Using spooks against political opponents is pure cancer and what the spooks in the US IC have done against Trump is a perfect example why spooks are cancer
>florida will come around eventually >praise a bloodthirsty communist dictator >expect people who escaped that bloodthirsty communist dictator to vote for the guy that praised him
After the goddamn spooks in pic related shit on Trump presidency you niggers might finally understand why spooks being involved in politics is pure cancer
You either meet the enemies tactics or lose. The ibtelligence comminity has been interfering in American elections since its inception. Your pearl clutching over tactics and principles is Bill Kristol neoconservative brand losing.
It's not just that. Republicans still have the decency to do it outside of official channels, instead of politicizing the FBI as King Nigger did. Still, the nigger will not be punished. He is just a puppet of the Jews, anyways.
