Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Democratic National Committee DNC’

DNC’s John Lewis Quote Backfires – It Actually Condemns Leftist Rioters


Reported By Andrew J. Sciascia | Published August 20, 2020 at 8:04pm

The American left’s tone-deafness and blatant ignorance caught up with it Thursday night at the 2020 Democratic National Convention. Rounding out the fourth and final night of the event with a tribute to the late civil rights hero and 17-term U.S. Rep. John Lewis, who died in July, the Democratic Party unknowingly took itself to task on matters of criminal justice reform and civil disobedience.

The topics again have become mainstays in the American political discourse following the officer-involved deaths of unarmed black Americans George Floyd and Breonna Taylor earlier this year. And the social-justice left has been quick to assert itself again as arbiters and champions of racial justice.

A quote from Lewis himself embedded within the DNC tribute to his life, however, reveals modern Democrats and progressives have no idea what it means to move the dial on such issues.

“The means by which we struggle must be consistent with the end we seek,” Lewis could be heard saying amid a slew of his most famous quotations and the praises of fellow Democratic politicians.

According to The New Republic, it was a statement made in 1994, during a PBS debate between Lewis and controversial fellow civil rights activist Al Sharpton on the topic of violence and retributive hate within the civil rights movement.

Lewis, like civil rights icon Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., was a firm supporter of peaceful civil disobedience and attempts to strive, with love, toward unity on the issue of racial injustice in the United States. The debate had been spurred on by growing support within the movement for figures such as anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan and fellow members of the Nation of Islam. But Lewis, the longtime Georgia congressman, did not hold this opinion for a brief moment at the time of the Nation of Islam’s relevancy. He lived it, skipping the historic Million Man March in 1995 due to Farrakhan’s presence, according to excerpts from his memoir.

“I did not march because I could not overlook the presence and central role of Louis Farrakhan, and so I refused to participate,” Lewis wrote. “I believe in freedom of speech but I also believe that we have an obligation to condemn speech that is racist, bigoted, anti-Semitic or hateful.”

“The means by which we struggle must be consistent with the end we seek, and that includes the words we use to pursue those ends,” he added.

WARNING: The following tweets contain graphic language and images that some viewers will find offensive.

Unfortunately, the modern American left does not seem to hold Lewis’ personal philosophy in the same esteem that it does his Democratic voting record. Or perhaps the left simply does not understand Lewis’ words at all.

Either way, apathy or ignorance, the consequences have been great in recent months, as Democratic politicians made excuses for — or outright granted a stamp of approval to — violent Black Lives Matter demonstrations nationwide.

By the second week of June, race riots had resulted in more than $25 million worth of physical damage in Floyd’s home state of Minnesota alone, MarketWatch reported. According to WITI-TV, an unofficial tally done at the time also indicated that at least 17 people, the majority of them black, had died in the opening weeks of the unrest.

 

Since the start of the demonstrations, businesses have been razed. People have, literally, been beaten and bloodied to near death in the streets by angry mobs. If only the Democrats would make an effort to understand and live by the words they espouse, the words of the late, great figures of days gone by — perhaps they wouldn’t be doomed to radicalism.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Media Celebrate Trump Mishandling $280k. Forget Obama Mishandled $88 Million.


Reported By Kara Pendleton | August 22, 2018 at

12:44pm

Another day, another “we’ve got him now. No, really, we’ve really, truly, madly, deeply got him, now!” series of headlines from the establishment media about President Donald Trump.

This time the focus is on campaign finance.

And once again, voters are left to their own devices to figure out what the truth really is and if there actually is a crime involved. Add to that the way the establishment media addressed the topic when President Barack Obama was involved in similar “scandals,” and you have more evidence as to why the establishment media outlets are so often called “fake news.”

The latest “Get Trump” establishment media feeding frenzy stems from a plea deal made by Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen. On Tuesday, Cohen pleaded guilty to eight criminal charges against him, including two alleged campaign finance violations. One involved a payment of $130,000 in 2016 from then-candidate Trump to porn star Stormy Daniels. The other involved coordinating a $150,000 payment by the National Enquirer’s publisher to former Playboy model Karen McDougal, according to The Wall Street Journal.

A great breakdown of the situation comes from radio and television personality Mark Levin, who is also a lawyer and worked in the Justice Department during the Reagan administration.

Appearing on “Hannity,” Levin offered his “help to the “the law professors, the constitutional experts, the criminal defense lawyers, the former prosecutors, and of course the professors” in regards to “what the law is” surrounding the campaign finance issue and Michael Cohen plea deal.

“The general counsel for the Clinton Mob Family, Lanny Davis, he had his client plead to two counts of criminality that don’t exist. These campaign finance violations that they are saying all over TV implicates the president directly.”

“First, let’s back up. It’s a guilty plea. It is a plea bargain between a prosecutor and a criminal. A criminal who doesn’t want to spend the rest of his life in prison. That is not precedent. That applies only to that specific case,” Levin said.

“Nobody cites plea bargains for precedent. That’s number one.

“Number two: Just because a prosecutor says that somebody violated a campaign law, doesn’t make it so. He’s not the judge, he’s not the jury. We didn’t adjudicate anything–it never went to court. That’s number two.

“A campaign expenditure, under our federal campaign laws, is an expenditure solely for campaign activity. A candidate who spends his own money, or even corporate money, for an event that occurred not as a result of the campaign, it is not a campaign expenditure.”

Levin then gave some examples, one being a candidate for office having disputes with a vendor and not wanting the negative publicity. In this scenario, the hypothetical candidate instructs his private attorney to just pay the vendors and he (the candidate) will reimburse the attorney.”

Levin adds that this is “perfectly legal” and a “point” made that such an act would “influence an election” was “stupid.”

Earlier this year, Newsweek tackled the “the question of whether longtime Trump attorney Michael Cohen’s $130,000 hush money payment to adult actress Stormy Daniels was an illegal campaign contribution.”  Ex-Federal Election Commission Chairman Bradley Smith told Newsweek in March that, “It looks like Trump has made these kinds of payments to people before unrelated to his campaign or as a candidate. It’s hard to show this payment was made solely because he was running for election.”

By way of comparison as to how the media handled a “campaign finance scandal” when it came to Trump’s predecessor, let’s first ask if anyone was aware there even was one.

In one of the few mainstream media reports about it, a U.S. News & World Report headline from 2013 announced, “Obama Campaign Fined Big for Hiding Donors, Keeping Illegal Donations.”

The article went on to note that,The FEC levied one of its largest fines ever against Obama’s campaign committee, new documents show.” The Federal Election Commission fined his campaign $375,000 for “a failure to disclose or improperly disclosing thousands of contributions to Obama for America during the then-senator’s 2008 presidential run.”

More specifically, citing the FEC, the article stated that “the Obama campaign failed to disclose the sources of 1,300 large donations, which together accounted for nearly $1.9 million. Election Commission rules state campaigns must report donations of $1,000 or more within 20 days of Election Day.”

“Obama for America was also fined for ‘untimely resolution of excessive contributions,’ according to the conciliation agreement, FEC says,” the report continues. “The campaign accepted more than $1.3 million in contributions that came from donors who had already given $46,000 — the maximum allowed by FEC rules. The campaign eventually refunded the excess cash but did not do so within the 60-day window allotted for resolving such cases.

“In addition to failing to report big donors and excess donations in a timely manner, the Obama campaign incorrectly dated the filings dealing with $85 million in funds, the FEC claims. This error appears to have been primarily the result of one transfer to the campaign committee from the Obama Victory Fund, a fundraising group that includes money raised by the Democratic National Committee that is earmarked for the presidential race.”

Do you remember the media having a field-day with the news and screaming for Obama to be impeached?

Was anyone sent to jail over actual mishandling of actual campaign funds? (No Russians were implicated in the commission of those violations of federal election law, either.)

The sharp contrast between the two situations is undeniable.

To anyone with eyes to read, there is a distinct appearance of the establishment media using extreme measures to smear a sitting president and build public pressure for impeachment. Neither of which is the duty of a free press or an honorable Fourth Estate.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: