Witness: Bernie didn't actually say woman couldn't win in 2020

Witness confirms Sanders side of "Woman can't win" story

Let's get 'he said,' 'she said,' debacle out of the way for good. My earlier post on this today half explains some of what was actually going on, but a later report sheds even more light. Bernie said this...

“It is ludicrous to believe that at the same meeting where Elizabeth Warren told me she was going to run for president, I would tell her that a woman couldn’t win.”

Everyone is aware of the honesty of Senator Sanders, but, then, neither does Elizabeth Warren lie. So, this was the statement from witnesses...

"Two people with knowledge of the conversation at the 2018 dinner at Warren’s home told The Washington Post that Warren brought up the issue by asking Sanders whether he believed a woman could win. One of the people with knowledge of the conversation said Sanders did not say a woman couldn’t win but rather that Trump would use nefarious tactics against the Democratic nominee.

The Bern continued...

“What I did say that night was that Donald Trump is a sexist, a racist and a liar who would weaponize whatever he could.” Do I believe a woman can win in 2020? Of course! After all Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by 3 million votes in 2016.”

Let's finally put this to bed!   READ MORE... 

What about Sanders/Warren confrontation AFTER debate

Media mysteriously quiet about Sanders/Warren post debate confrontation

I saw it, my wife saw it, the audience of CNN saw it, and the network commentators following the debate played it over and over with the question of just what was happening. In a post-debate Tom Steyer interview he said he didn't hear what they were saying, obviously questionable considering his positioning above. The most dramatic part is Warren rejecting Sanders' handshake and Bernie's exit from the affair. Here's the video...

CNN cuts off the video just before Sanders waves off Warren and walks away. Not sure what their reasoning was on this because it clearly shows the Bern is irked about something. Reasoning: The 'he said,' 'she said' part is up for grabs as to who really said what. And in both cases neither Sanders nor Warren is given to lying. One thing is clear, what you don't see on the video is an unhappy Bernie Sanders quickly turning away leaving the conversation with Warren.   

READ MORE...

Bernie Sanders v. Elizabeth Warren

He said...She said...There is much to explain in Tuesday night's debate

Bernie Sanders

Elizabeth Warren's campaign has accused Bernie Sanders' campaign of sending volunteers out door-to-door trashing her. Bernie, of course, said he had nothing to do with it and apparently the cause was some over-zealous volunteers. We are talking about in Des Moines, where the Iowa Caucuses will be held on February 3, and a Democratic debate was held last night. More on that later today. The script in question "described Warren's appeal as limited to the highly educated and financially well off."

Bernie's press aids never denied that the document existed and the candidate commented...

“We have hundreds of employees. Elizabeth Warren has hundreds of employees. And people sometimes say things that they shouldn’t.”

First of all, is the statement in the realm of being accurate. If there is any accuracy to it, Warren's campaign may be pushing the envelope. She has been dropping in national polls of late. One page actually "included attacks on the electability of Warren, as well as Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg." If Bernie is playing tough now against his own people, it will hopefully prepare him to deal with Donald Trump in the coming election.

And then, there is a meeting that occurred around a year ago when Warren accuses of Sanders saying a woman couldn't win the election in 2020. My immediate thought is why it is just now coming to light now. Bernie denies saying it but Warren says there were witnesses. Here's Bernie's actual statement...

"It is ludicrous to believe that at the same meeting where Elizabeth Warren told me she was going to run for president, I would tell her that a woman couldn't win.”

Tuesday night in Des Moines was probably very interesting.   READ MORE... 

Public Citizen files complaint against Moscow Mitch McConnell

Public Citizen thinks Senate head Mitch McConnell makes a mockery of impeachment trial

Moscow Mitch McConnell

Not that Moscow Mitch cares, simply because he has seen his reputation smeared about as much as Donald Trump, with him, as well, it doesn't sink in. He must know how reprehensible he is because it is necessary to come out from under his rock each day to go to the Senate. Well now Public Citizen has seen fit to recognize his exploits, filing a complaint...

"accusing the powerful Republican of betraying his oath of office by signaling overt bias in favor of President Donald Trump even before his looming impeachment trial begins."

The accusation is that, rather than "coordinating with the White House" in the trial, McConnell should exercise his oath of impartiality, as specified by the office he holds. Here is a statement by Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen...

“This is not about whether McConnell has views on Trump’s guilt or whether he has reached a conclusion based on the available evidence. It’s about whether he will design a process that aims to render impartial justice. He has made clear he has no intention of doing so.”

The corruption of the Republican Party, all the way to the top, has made it clear that the left will not be able to deal with the 2020 election as you would with an honorable opponent. Not to lower ourselves to the depths the GOP has stooped to, but most certainly to not give the other side one inch when it comes to trust. Republicans have solidly proved they are not capable of playing in anything but a fixed arena. We won't join them, we'll just watch every move they make and react accordingly.   READ MORE...

Speaker Nancy Pelosi in impeachment standoff

Pelosi shows Moscow Mitch for the lowlife he is

Speaker Pelosi - Moscow Mitch

It's hard to tell right now what the slimeball head of the U.S. Senate will do but you can bet that it will be a show of Republican power and as underhanded as McConnell can make it. The man is in a class with Donald Trump, no morals, no ethics, no decency. And that is what Pelosi accomplished by holding the Articles of Impeachment until this week. She made it perfectly clear that Moscow Mitch doesn't give a shit about this country, just himself and the Party.

RawStory reports that...

"By holding the articles and forcing McConnell to do what he was going to do — run the trial his way — Pelosi gives Democrats a scapegoat for their eventual failure to remove Trump. They can blame McConnell’s allegedly unfair and prejudicial rules for the debacle rather than their own failure to bring even a small portion of the non-Democratic electorate behind them."

Not the result that we would all like but just more proof that Republicans can never win without stacking the deck.   READ MORE...

Mike Bloomberg, real billionaire, could sink Trump

Mike Bloomberg wants Donald Trump out of the White House, willing to do something

Mike Bloomberg

I wasn't sure whether to take Mike Bloomberg's candidacy for president seriously, until now. But it is clear that he is hell-bent in removing Donald Trump from office and spend a good part of his fortune to maintain a platform on which to pursue his determination. Right now he is in fifth place behind Biden, Sanders, Warren and Buttigieg. With Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren at each others throats, Biden forever faltering and Buttigieg's lack of experience, who knows.

Here is RawStory's headline: "Mike Bloomberg’s plan is to bait Trump into self-destruction — even if he isn’t the nominee." T-rump has already given Bloomberg a nickname, “Mini Mike Bloomberg, ”which indicates to me the former New York Mayor makes him uncomfortable. Here's the current scenario...

"Bloomberg’s strategy of getting under Trump’s skin to strengthen Democrats was on full display this week, as he rolled out a massive ad buy attacking Trump for threatening protections for pre-existing conditions — a wedge issue that drove many conservative voters to support Democrats in 2018."

It was in Trump's reply following this that he used the new nickname. This was Bloomberg's response tweet...

"Glad to see you're watching our ads, @realDonaldTrump. I know management isn't your strong suit, so perhaps you don't know your Justice Department supports a suit that would undermine protections for pre-existing conditions. Now that you know, why not ask them to drop the suit?"

We're all waiting for Trump's answer.   READ MORE... 

This move shows how low Trump can stoop

Trump initiated Soleimani death as a buffet to impeachment trial

Now we know. It was obvious that T-rump had no good reason to assassinate Iranian Maj. General Qassem Soleimani, and in many cases the political pundits figured the devious maniac in the White House did have his reasons. Turns out he signed off on taking out Soleimani seven months ago but didn't give the go-ahead until the impeachment began to heat up. As a matter of fact, many believe this just adds up to more reason for impeachment.

And now the Oval Office lunatic and "Attorney General William Barr say that whether the threat was immediate or not, the president had the right to act." And there's more...

"Trump said in a tweet Monday that the question of whether or not the strike was imminent 'really didn't matter,'"

He said...they said...

"Critics on Capitol Hill, who have questioned the strategy behind the strike and the decision not to notify Congress, say whether or not Soleimani posed an imminent threat is crucial."

RawStory makes this chilling statement assessing the fact that Trump did wait seven months, then ordering Soleimani's assassination...

"It is reasonable, therefore, to suggest Trump ordered a man’s death for political reasons, not for national-security reasons (there aren’t any). I suggest he tried creating an image of himself as a war president too important to remove from office. I suggest Soleimani’s assassination is just one more way Trump has abused his power, and hence affirmed his indictment."

The Senate must indict Donald Trump and remove him from office.

READ MORE...