The State Department, who has been known for telling whoppers, lobbed a doozy last week. State Department lawyers now say that it will take about 75 years to release all of Hillary Clinton’s emails. Let me translate that for you… those emails implicate a whole bunch of people in corruption along with Clinton and we won’t release them until (a) all of you are long dead and (b) until the Democrats are in the clear. This, my friends, is political two-step bull crap.
The court filing took place last Wednesday. In that filing, it was noted that the records requested in two lawsuits by the Republican National Committee (which are about 450,000 pages worth), included communications from Clinton’s aides Cheryl Mills and Jacob Sullivan. They also included emails from State Department official Patrick Kennedy.
“Given the Department’s current [Freedom of Information Act] (FOIA) workload and the complexity of these documents, it can process about 500 pages a month, meaning it would take approximately 16-and-2/3 years to complete the review of the Mills documents, 33-and-1/3 years to finish the review of the Sullivan documents, and 25 years to wrap up the review of the Kennedy documents – or 75 years in total,” the lawyers wrote.
Now, that’s a whole new level of blatant hubris that even shocks me. And I’m politically jaded. The State Department is whining that FOIA requests have tripled since 2008. Gee, I wonder why? “In fiscal year 2015 alone we received approximately 22,000 FOIA requests,” State Department spokeswoman Elizabeth Trudeau said.
“The requests are also frequently more complex and seek larger volumes of documents, requiring significantly more time, resources, and interagency coordination. While we have increased staffing for our FOIA office, our available resources are still nonetheless constrained.”
Oh, freaking boo hoo! That’s your job and it doesn’t take anywhere nearly that long to release those documents. This is the DC shuffle and everyone knows it. They have absolutely made transparency a joke and corruption mainstream. That’s Hillary Clinton for you.
Thomas Pearce helped design the “Columbus was Lost” button, back in 1992:
It became a big fat hit among young anti-racist activists. It (and a companion tee-shirt) were designed and produced locally in Louisville, KY by Average Tom Pearce, a young American Indian Movement activist (who is still at it today, almost a quarter century later). Those buttons and shirts, along with the Columbus Discovered America—NOT tee-shirts designed by graphix ace ERK were mainstays on the Freedom Road and Progressive Student Network lit tables that year.
As a leader of the state Sierra Club affiliate Thomas Pearce has been an effective enemy of Kentucky’s vital coal industry. In 2011, he helped shut down a proposed coal terminal near the Ohio River in West Paducah.
“We turned out 200 people, and everyone was given signs that said NO in big letters,” says Sierra Club organizer Thomas Pearce.
“We’re organizing with area residents, who are circulating petitions,” says Pearce, who has helped create a new Beyond Coal team in the Sierra Club‘s Great Rivers Group.
Hillary Clinton just outright refused to say during an interview yesterday that owning a gun was a constitutionally protected right. I’m not surprised in the least, but she is certainly getting more and more brazen about it.
George Stephanopoulos asked her point blank concerning the issue: “Do you believe that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right, that it’s not linked to service in a militia?” She gave a very weaselly answer: “I think that for most of our history, there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice [Antonin] Scalia, and there was no argument until then that localities and states and the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulations,” Clinton responded. That is a flat out lie. The federal government does not have a right period in regards to constitutional amendments to impose regulations. That has never been true. The rights are granted to the people, not the government. Not only did she sidestep the question, she gave an even worse answer here. She is basing an outrageous answer on the fact that the federal government has gotten away with overreach forever and since they have, she feels that it is now the ‘right’ of the government to keep doing so. No… it is not. The government is granted certain powers that the people giveth and the people can taketh from them.
She added, “So I believe we can have common-sense gun safety measures consistent with the Second Amendment.” Not the way she means it and not mandated by the government. Common sense measures are those such as: don’t point the gun at things you don’t mean to shoot; keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot; be absolutely sure of your target and what’s behind it… and then there is Rule #1… all guns are always loaded.
Clinton’s lapdog Stephanopoulos wasn’t done though: “But that’s not what I asked,” Stephanopoulos interjected. “I said, do you believe that their conclusion that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right?” She didn’t answer once again, but notice the use of ‘if’: “If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulations, and what people have done with that decision is to take it as far as they possibly can and reject what has been our history from the very beginning of the republic, where some of the earliest laws that were passed were about firearms.” It is a constitutional right and it is not automatically subject to regulations. It does not say that in the Constitution. The Constitution restrains the government, it does not give them carte blanche to control our rights. Per the Constitution, the government is supposed to keep its damned hands to itself. Constitutionalists interpret the Second Amendment the way it was written and intended… not redefined to fit the agendas of politicians and the federal government. That’s called tyranny.
Hillary Clinton did suggest that gun owners do have a right, but then she claimed “the rest of the American public has a right to require certain kinds of regulatory, responsible actions to protect everyone else.” Again, no… they do not. There is no constitutional provision that says that. Clinton simply wants to do away with the Second Amendment altogether, or at the very least, redefine it progressively, so she can disarm America. It’s just that simple.
The Second Amendment states: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Hillary’s deflections aside, she chooses not to interpret the meaning of this amendment in the spirit it was meant because it does not fit her political views.
Here’s the full exchange between Clinton and Stephanopoulos:
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let’s talk about the Second Amendment. As you know, Donald Trump has also been out on the stump talking about the Second Amendment and saying you want to abolish the Second Amendment. I know you reject that. But I want to ask you a specific question: Do you believe that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right – that it’s not linked to service in a militia?
CLINTON: I think that for most of our history there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice (Antonin) Scalia. And there was no argument until then that localities and states and the federal government had a right – as we do with every amendment – to impose reasonable regulations. So I believe we can have common-sense gun safety measures consistent with the Second Amendment. And, in fact, what I have proposed is supported by 90 percent of the American people and more than 75 percent of responsible gun owners. So that is exactly what I think is constitutionally permissible and, once again, you have Donald Trump just making outright fabrications, accusing me of something that is absolutely untrue. But I’m going to continue to speak out for comprehensive background checks; closing the gun show loophole; closing the online loophole; closing the so-called Charleston loophole; reversing the bill that Sen. (Bernie) Sanders voted for and I voted against, giving immunity from liability to gun makers and sellers. I think all of that can and should be done, and it is, in my view, consistent with the Constitution.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And, and the Heller decision also says there can be some restrictions. But that’s not what I asked. I said, do you believe their conclusion that the right to bear arms is a constitutional right?
CLINTON: If it is a constitutional right, then it – like every other constitutional right – is subject to reasonable regulations. And what people have done with that decision is to take it as far as they possible can and reject what has been our history from the very beginning of the republic, where some of the earliest laws that were passed were about firearms. So I think it’s important to recognize that reasonable people can say, as I do, responsible gun owners have a right. I have no objection to that. But the rest of the American public has a right to require certain kinds of regulatory, responsible actions to protect everyone else.
Clinton also defended the idea of a gun tax, but stopped short of endorsing a proposal she first embraced in 1993. Stephanopoulos pressed her on the issue and she demure yet again: “I’m not going to commit to any specific proposal,” she deferred. “That was in the context of health care. When you have mass shootings, you not only have the terrible deaths, you have people who are injured.” Clinton claims the issue came up during a weekend meeting with survivors of the December 2015 terrorist massacre in San Bernardino, CA. “What they talked to me about was, where do they get the financial support to deal with both the physical and the emotional trauma?” she said. “There are real costs that people incur because of the terrible gun violence epidemic. And we have to deal with it. And I’m going to be looking for ways to deal with it.” “I’m not committed to anything other than what I’ve said in this campaign,” she added, “but I do want people to ask themselves, can’t we do better than to have 33,000 people killed every year by guns and many thousands more injured? And I think we can.” Translation… yes, she is all for a gun tax. A massive and crippling one – 25% to be specific.
In passionate Senate testimony on Sept. 30, 1993, Clinton endorsed a new national 25 percent retail sales tax on guns. Americans for Tax Reform has released footage of Clinton’s visceral facial expressions which shows her nodding fiercely as she endorses the gun tax and as gun owners and dealers are described as “purveyors of violence.”
Clinton’s gun tax endorsement came in response to a question from then-Senator Bill Bradley (D-N.J.), who lamented the “accessibility that guns have in the country today.” He said to Hillary:
There are 276,000 gun dealers in America. There are more gun dealers in America than there are gas stations. That, to me, is a remarkable number and I think it is directly related to the accessibility that guns have in the country today. And if we simply put a 25 percent sales tax on the sale of a gun and raise the dealer’s fees from $30-$75 to $2,500, we would raise $600 million. That would be a tax directly on the purveyors of violence in terms of the sales of the means of violence.
Clinton gave her strong endorsement of the tax, saying, “I am all for that.” She concluded by saying, “I am speaking personally, but I feel very strongly about that.”
Hillary Clinton is one of the most anti-constitutional politicians that has ever disgraced America. Her own words and actions prove it. You should probably listen to more of what she doesn’t say, than what she does say and pay attention to how she nuances her answers. Words matter… the Constitution matters more. The Founding Fathers would have despised Hillary Clinton and would have considered her an enemy of the Republic.
Ben Shapiro is wickedly smart and incredibly funny. Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro had Fox News host Leland Vittert laughing so hard he couldn’t remember what question he wanted to ask. It was epic. The whole conversation revolved around foreign policy and how Donald Trump would approach it vs. Hillary Clinton. Hilarity ensued.
Vittert asked Shapiro, “Who wins this fight?”:
Well, America loses. To call this election cycle a dumpster fire is far too cruel to dumpster fires, which at least destroy garbage rather than making them president. The problem here is that every attack that Hillary leverages against Trump on his lack of foreign policy knowledge, experience and basic common sense can be doubly true of her. He can basically reverse everything; she attacked him in that speech on his Russian policy; this is a lady who handed a reset button to the Russians and helped define a policy that handed Syrian control over to the Russians as well as Ukraine over to the Russians.
Every time she attacks Trump, with regard to, for example, his policy in the Middle East on ISIS, she helped create ISIS with her Iraq and Syria policy. When she says that he can’t be trusted with the nuclear button, first of all, her own husband apparently lost the nuclear football when he was President of the United States, according to Buzz Patterson. This is the same lady who set up a private server that made America’s national security secrets vulnerable, specifically for her own personal self-aggrandizement. The problem is that only Hillary can make Trump look like a legit candidate, and only Trump can make Hillary look like a legit candidate.
Then came the question that left them rolling in the aisles laughing… Vittert asked innocently, “Ben, I guess we can all keep dreaming that we are going to apply some substance and some real depth and probity to this discussion but it seems like it’s just not there; we have, to your point, a dumpster fire.”
Shapiro nailed it:
I think that what you’re looking at right now is Donald Trump is running to Hillary’s left on half of her foreign policy and she is in an uncomfortable position because the truth is that she was actually in some areas very hawkish and in some areas very dovish when she was Secretary of State. And now she is having to run to Trump’s right in a time when Bernie Sanders is running hard to her left. It puts her in a very difficult position on foreign policy, and he, no one expects him to even be mildly coherent on foreign policy; he’s so wildly all over the place; he’s throwing the kitchen sink at her.
As far as personality types, when you say there are two different types of personality, I think that’s kind to both of them; I think that Donald Trump has the personality of the drunk uncle who doesn’t drink and Hillary Clinton is more robotic than anybody in the history of presidential politics. You can almost hear the “beeps” and the boops” emanating from her mouth every time she talks.
Enjoy the video:
Sadly, in the end the lack of foreign policy competency isn’t funny and America loses. But Shapiro has an incredible wit and calls it like he sees it. Foreign policy may not dominate this election, but it should. It’s that serious and that deadly an issue.
Donald Trump is simply terrifying when it comes to our enemies and national security. What we need is a leader who will deal from a position of strength, not negotiate from a meeting room. Trump may be a businessman, but when dealing with the New Axis of Evil, we need a warrior, not a deal maker. We’ve had enough of that with Barack Obama.
Trump’s positions on our adversaries goes well beyond clueless and naive… I believe he wants the presidency because he’s on a power kick and it will enrich him immeasurably, while bailing him out of financial difficulties. It’s the ultimate get-rich scheme and so many have fallen for it. Hillary Clinton would be a deadly disaster on the national security front as she would carry forth what Obama has started… reducing our military might even more, while taking kick-backs from the likes of China, Russia and Middle Eastern players. Trump may be just as bad. He claims he will rebuild the military, but he is aligning himself with strongman Vladimir Putin. That is a recipe for war. Either Putin will play Trump for a fool, or Trump would throw in with him on global expansionism and dictatorial mandates. Either way draws the US into a war, one that we probably cannot win in our weakened state.
You can see indicators all over the place concerning what lies ahead with our enemies under a Trump presidency. It doesn’t take a Cassandra to tell you what is coming.
North Korea’s DPRK Todayhas endorsed Donald Trump as a “far-sighted” and a “wise politician.” “The president that US citizens must vote for is not that dull Hillary but Trump, who spoke of holding direct conversation with North Korea,” the editorial said. This propaganda outlet is a mouthpiece for Kim Jong-un, the insane tyrannical leader of the Hermit Kingdom.
The article, first reported by the website nknews.org, went on to praise the April foreign policy speech that Trump gave in Washington, DC, where he threatened to withdraw US forces from South Korea if the government didn’t pay the United States for defense. That’s protection money and something that the mafia would do, not the US. Trump has also said he would meet directly with Kim Jong-un.
“Who knew that the slogan ‘Yankee Go Home’ would come true like this?” the editorial quipped. The NoKos are thrilled at the prospect of Donald Trump being president. What does that tell you? They are a front for the Chinese. Under a Trump presidency, South Korea would be weakened tremendously, leaving them open to conquest by the North Koreans. The NoKos would also gain access to international markets and go mainstream, regardless of their record of human rights violations and terrorism. As National Review put it: “From the mouth of the man who may be America’s next president, North Korea has reason to believe that Trump offers something that 60 years of war-footing preparation and hundreds of billions of dollars could not: A dynastic throne for the Kim family in perpetual dominion over the Korean peninsula.”
Regardless of Trump saying he will get tough with the Chinese, in the end he would negotiate with them and give them pretty much everything they want. All the while, they will keep building their military up in the South China Sea; they will keep stealing our military secrets; they will keep deluging us with 10,000 cyber attacks a day; and they will keep preparing for war… a war that will wipe us out and take down the US given half a chance.
Then there’s Russia. Trump earned high praise in December from Russian President Vladimir Putin, who called the GOP front-runner “talented” and “very colorful.” Putin had said he believed Trump wanted to “move to a more solid, deeper level of relations” between the United States and Russia. “How can Russia not welcome that? We welcome that,” Putin told ABC News in December. Trump responded, saying he believed he would “get along fine” with Putin if elected.
Russian President Vladimir Putin had kind words for his “stablemate” Donald Trump during an annual end-of-the-year Q&A session in Moscow.
“[Donald Trump is] a really brilliant and talented person, without any doubt,” [Vladimir] Putin told reporters, according to a translation by Interfax. “It’s not our job to judge his qualities, that’s a job for American voters, but he’s the absolute leader in the presidential race.”
The GOP frontrunner has been blunt about his plans for defrosting U.S. relations with Russia should he be elected president.
“He says he wants to move on to a new, more substantial relationship, a deeper relationship with Russia, how can we not welcome that?” he said. “Of course we welcome that.”
Trump constantly states his admiration for Vladimir Putin and vice versa. It’s an ongoing bromance that should give Americans nightmares. Trump respects the way Putin controls the media there with an iron fist. I know he would love to do the same here. Putin’s strongman power is very alluring to Trump… he dreams of standing on a balcony somewhere with his arms spread wide and with adoring masses at his feet. These are the daydreams of aspiring emperors, tyrants, czars… that is the fantasy of Donald Trump. But with that type of power always comes subjugation. Leaders such as Putin and Trump lure the masses in with promises of nationalism, strength, prosperity and revenge. In the end, what they deliver is repression, poverty, slavery and death.
More from Tom Rogan at The National Review:
Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, is equally fond of Mr. Trump. In part, that’s because Trump frequently states his admiration of the Russian leader. And while some might say there is an almost sexual quality to Trump’s praise, it’s clear also that Donald is enamored by Vladimir. Again, it’s not hard to see why, for Putin represents Trump’s ideal of a leader. While Trump is infuriated by our free press, he sees Putin turn critics into corpses, then use them to deter future scrutiny. While Trump is disgusted by claims he’s an idiot, he sees Putin respond to similar descriptions by humiliating the West. While Trump wants to build a wall, he sees Putin building a half-mercantilist/half–Iron Curtain system of Russian imperialism. While Trump is astounded by those who reject his personality cult, he sees Putin broadcast global messages from his own mind’s eye.
Trump thinks the weak are losers. He’s willing to negotiate away what he considers weak, small and insignificant allies in favor of an alliance with a strong leader such as Putin. Trump is the very definition of a useful idiot and the communists would never let that go to waste. Through the arrogance and narcissism of Trump, Putin looks to control the US for his purposes and plans globally. If you thought Barack Obama was flexible, you ain’t seen nothing yet.
Iran, who is in league with both China and Russia, is also negotiable according to Trump.
“If we have to wait until the next president is sworn in to revisit this nuclear weapons agreement, then the next president better be someone who knows how to negotiate,” Trump wrote in an editorial published on the USA Today website.
“When I am elected president, I will renegotiate with Iran — right after I enable the immediate release of our American prisoners and ask Congress to impose new sanctions that stop Iran from having the ability to sponsor terrorism around the world,” the GOP frontrunner continued. “In fact, if I am elected, I am sure the prisoners will be released before my taking office.”
Notice how Trump says ‘negotiate’ and does not address negating the Iran deal. He intends to honor it. Negotiating with those who intend to use and destroy you does not work. They will lie and say whatever as they ready their military to take you out. What we need is a leader like Reagan, who built up the military and then spoke with our enemies, making it clear that if they stepped out of bounds, not only were we prepared to take them on, we would actually do it. Trump has no clue what the military or war entails.
Under a Trump presidency, those such as Pakistan and Middle Eastern countries would feel they have a free pass on terrorism and could ‘negotiate’ just about anything with Trump. Money would flow and lies would be told. Trump talks tough on ISIS, but he has no idea how to go about a conflict with them and how to win it. He claims he will have the most brilliant military minds around him, but so far, there are very few. In fact, the most knowledgeable in the military don’t want anything to do with Trump because they see the catastrophe that is looming. He has no concrete plans or policies. They simply don’t know what he will do and they find that even more worrisome than knowing what Hillary would do.
I believe that Trump will win the presidency. If he does, we are electing a megalomaniac and a pathological liar. We are ushering in a man who has been embroiled in 3500 lawsuits over the last 30 years. He’s a man who could not pass a security background check if his life depended on it – not that he would ever allow it. He has flip-flopped and changed his stance on virtually every issue countless times. Now he calls it ‘moderation’. He is a man who is a womanizer, a thug and akin to South American dictators. He is a man who doesn’t understand the Constitution or our military in the least. What he does understand is power, wealth and control. He excels at propaganda and reality politics. We are in a new cold war with the New Axis of Evil – Russia, China and Iran and Trump doesn’t understand the threat we face at all. Trump will negotiate us right into a world wide conflict… one in which he has no clue how to fight, much less win. It’s the Donald Trump show and I fear we are all about to get fired.
Well, that didn’t take long. SiriusXM is leading the charge in vigilante censorship by suspending Glenn Beck over a segment he had with Brad Thor. Beck is being purged and silenced for what a guest said on his show. Neither Brad Thor nor Glenn Beck called for the assassination of Donald Trump. For accurately likening Trump to a South American-style dictator and for positing a scenario where ‘if’ Trump violated the Constitution, it would justify removal from office, Trump’s acolytes are branding that a death threat. It’s a death threat alright… against free speech.
THOR: He is a danger to America and I got to ask you a question and this is serious and this could ring down incredible heat on me because I’m about to suggest something very bad. It is a hypothetical I am going to ask as a thriller writer.
With the feckless, spineless Congress we have, who will stand in the way of Donald Trump overstepping his constitutional authority as President? If Congress won’t remove him from office, what patriot will step up and do that if, if, he oversteps his mandate as president, his constitutional-granted authority, I should say, as president.
If he oversteps that, how do we get him out of office? And I don’t think there is a legal means available. I think it will be a terrible, terrible position the American people will be in to get Trump out of office because you won’t be able to do it through Congress.
BECK: I would agree with you on that and I don’t think you actually have the voices we’ve been talking about and we’ve been talking about this off-air for a while. I think the voices like ours go away. I don’t think we are allowed – especially if things, and I believe the economy is going to go to crap, even if Jesus was in office. It’s going to naturally reset. It has to.
SiriusXM is suspending Glenn Beck for a week of broadcasts relating to a conversation Beck had with author Brad Thor last week. They are suspending him during the same week that Glenn went on vacation. That’s just despicable and cowardly. If they think it will cow Beck, Thor or any other real conservative, they are delusional in the extreme.
This is guilt by imagination… the event never happened and is made up. I guess any excuse will do… the Trump lynch mob is using words like ‘implied’, ‘hinted’ and ‘insinuated’. Do you people see what you are doing? Really? You are doing everything you have accused the left of forever, only worse, because you are aggressively doing it. Worse yet, they know it is a lie. Beck has never advocated violence and the last time I looked, calling someone out for acting like a dictator was not a crime. Either these ‘so-called’ conservatives never heard the exchange or they are so brainwashed by the Trump movement, they are twisting everything they hear and see that isn’t pro-Trump. As Dom Theodore, the GM of the Glenn Beck Radio Show pointed out, this viral hatchet job is based on 49 seconds out of a 15-minute interview that gives no context of the hypothetical posited from by Brad Thor, a thriller writer.
SiriusXM is a private company and they have every right to do this. But we also have a right to boycott them and I will never, ever listen to them again. I understand quite a few others feel the same way. If you are sooo in the tank for Trump that you feel safe abridging someone’s constitutional right to free speech, then as far as I’m concerned you are a propaganda outlet and a Marxist one at that.
SiriusXM encourages a diversity of discourse and opinion on our talk programs. However, comments recently made by a guest on the independently produced Glenn Beck Program, in our judgement, may be reasonably construed by some to have been advocating harm against an individual currently running for office, which we cannot and will not condone. For that reason, we have suspended The Glenn Beck Program from our Patriot channel for the coming week and are evaluating its place in our lineup going forward. SiriusXM is committed to a spirited, robust, yet responsible political conversation and believes this action reflects those values.
That’s rich coming from a station that showcases Howard Stern who explicitly talks about sex all the time. It would seem that what they won’t condone is any stance against Trump. But filth, hey… go for it.
Both Glenn Beck and Brad Thor are terrified of what Donald Trump will do. I’m right there with them. Beck predicted that if constitutional conservatives and those who stand against Trump don’t hang together, we will most assuredly all hang separately as per Ben Franklin’s quote. And he was right. It’s begun already and Trump is only the nominee right now. I expect he will win the presidency and then the real silencing and purging will begin.
Constitutional conservatives and those taking a principled stand against Trump are being kicked out of groups and purged from social media interactions. We won’t be silenced, but that won’t stop the onslaught. Beck predicted every bit of this. SiriusXM is either a coward or bought and paid for by the Trump campaign or both. The outlets pushing this garbage should be ashamed of themselves. They are acting like brownshirts for Trump. Glenn Beck and Brad Thor did nothing wrong and have absolutely nothing to apologize for. Both sides of the political aisle are now enemies within and have gone dark and evil. I fear this is only the beginning.
Despite their comparatively “moderate” name, Democratic Socialists of America, like Sanders himself, draws inspiration from the “socialism through stealth” tactics of Italian Communist Party theoretician Antonio Gramsci.
Longtime Iowa City academic, DSA comrade and leading Sanders supporter, Jeff Cox, endorsed Tom Fiegen in a May 20th letter to the Iowa City Press-Citizen:
Jeff Cox, Iowa City
Johnson County Democrats have an opportunity to revitalize a moribund Democratic Party by voting in the June primary for three county supervisor candidates who endorsed Bernie Sanders: Rod Sullivan, Kurt Friese and Jason T. Lewis. They represent the future of the Democratic Party, a party that says ‘yes we can’ rather than ‘no we can’t.’
We can also vote in the primary for the only Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate who endorsed Sanders, former state Sen. Tom Fiegen of Cedar County. He has a distinguished record of campaigning against factory farming and corporate agriculture. Unlike his opponents in the Democratic primary, he does not take campaign contributions from corporations, corporate political action committees or other campaign committees that accept corporate funding. Like Sanders, Tom Fiegen is not for sale.
Jeff Cox is a longtime Democratic activist and the point man for a Johnson County steering committee which helped draft Sanders for the 2016 presidential contest.
At the University of Iowa – Ames, the local Young Democratic Socialists branch, has endorsed Tom Fiegen and are actively training members and supporters to join his campaign.
Hey everyone, a quick reminder that there will be a surrogate training for Tom Fiegen this Saturday. We strongly endorse Tom, and would love to spread the word about his plans for senate on campus. This training will be the best way to get started!!
This is not the first time Iowan Marxists have supported Tom Fiegen.
In 2004, Democratic Socialists of America targeted local races where control of state houses were up for grabs and where statewide electoral vote outcomes hinged on successful local district turnouts.
In Iowa, Tom Fiegen—who says his politics are in the tradition of the radical lay Catholic Worker Movement,—is attempting a return to the Iowa state Senate (District 40)..”
We reported on the candidates that DSAers were supporting in the last issue of Democratic Left. How did they do?Longshot progressive insurgents Al Weed in Virginia, Lin Whitworth in Idaho, Dave Franker and Tom Fiegen all lost.
Let’s hope this attempt is as unsuccessful as the last. Iowa just got rid of long-serving socialist Senator Tom Harkin in 2014.
Does the Hawkeye State really want to send another Marxist to Washington?
Blair Bertaccini investigates “wage theft” with the State Department of Labor. He previously served as the President of AFSCME Local 269, which represents workers from the Connecticut State Department of Labor, Department of Veterans’ Affairs and Department of Worker’s Compensation Rehabilitation Services Division.
Two urgent tasks loom for patriots. Stop communist Hillary Clinton (or the more likely and equally dangerous Joe Biden/Elizabeth Warren ticket) and save the US Constitution. How can #NeverTrump help achieve those goals.
First we must stand strong and support each other in our support for the Constitution, and our opposition to Donald Trump’s candidacy.
If we cave now, we give up the one thing we still have left – LEVERAGE.
Donald Trump needs to know that at least 20% of the GOP base is militantly opposed to his candidacy. He needs to know that a big chunk of his potential vote is going to write-in Ted Cruz, vote Libertarian, stay home or work on saving the GOP Senate majority which many of us fear Mr. Trump will destroy. He needs to fear in his bones that if we stand firm it will likely cost him the Presidency.
Katrina Jorgensen, the Communications Chair of the Young Republicans, resigned this week because she could not back Donald Trump, which is what the Republican Party is now doing. That took a lot of guts and I deeply admire her principles. Would you be willing to walk from your job or position because you felt this strongly over your principles? I would, but I don’t think there are many out there that would follow suit.
As of today, Donald Trump now has the delegates to be the Republican Party nominee. For Katrina to have stayed where she was, she would have had to promote Trump and support him per the Party. She couldn’t do that and instead, followed her conscience.
Here is the letter of resignation that Jorgensen submitted: