The 2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Campaign

Project Veritas - That's the operation of James O'Keefe, king of the doctored videos.Scum - Nothing he has anything to do with should be paid any attention.Moose

Project Veritas? Really?Nothing little jimmy o'keefe has presented has stood up to scrutiny. He is a known liar that presents doctored video to push forward a radical agenda. That anyone would take anything he says serious is stunning.Next.

I don't even know who the guy is.I had no idea about the group.But he has video from the 'mouth.Christian Sierra, of CNN, talked about the networks attitude. It is cut and dry.The corporate media has several individual parts.Part of it has spoken.Live with it.

Whatever.

I haven't followed O'Keefe's work closely (which would be stupid to do), but I believe he has done (among other things) videos of question and answer sessions, where the answers were to different questions.The guy works the cutting edge of real FAKE NEWS. Alex Jones of InfoWars might be a more reliable information source.Read the Wiki page cite a did a few messages upthread.Moose

Then why would you pass on anything from him? Vetting sources unimportant to you?You continue your MO of a version of the gish gallop. Just throw shit against the wall and see what sticks.

I only knew of the video because I saw it while I was channel surfing (saw it on Tucker Carlson while switching between MSNBC and CNN).The video footage that interested me was the actual CNN guy himself talking (Sierra).I did a quick google search, and found some articles (including the Washington Times).The CNN guy is what matters. He is the one talking (aside from the questions).It is all on video.Deal with it.

I could not find any such video at your link. Post a video link? And O'Keefe is known to mate up questions and answers that were not mated in the real event. Did the questions even happen in the real event, or were they spliced in afterwords?James O'Keefe is well known as a distorter of what really happened - aka lying via doctored videos. Not remotely a reliable source.You going to believe an O'Keefe video that shows the sun rising in the west?MooseEdited by Minnemooseus, : Fix typo (left a letter out).

You have been shown repeatedly that James Okeefe is a criminal and a liar. The fact that no reputable news source has reported on this should be a clue.Dealt with.

Again, the issue was whether CNN's Sierra felt Gabbard was more liberal than center (or center-right).The issue was what CNN's Sierra said about her views.The issue was what Sierra said his network did not like about her.(I never mentioned that I have mixed views about some of what she has been saying about certain issues - like immigration - BUT THAT IS IRRELEVANT TO THE FACT-BASED CUT & DRY INTERVIEW I REFERENCED!)She does not sound right-wing to me on immigration (though she feels she get points for labeling her fellow Democrats as "open borders")Tulsi Gabbard’s Policies on Immigration IssuesDeal with Christian Sierra saying she was "actually pretty liberal".The video is not beyond your grasp.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

Here is a relevant story (from a paper I read every day when I am in NYC) which has a picture and quote from Sierra.(The quote, however, is not about Gabbard)Undercover Video Reveals Tension Between CNN Staff, Leadership Over Nonstop Trump FocusHere are some questions and answers (from the Veritas site) from Sierra, but no video it seems. It skipped that part where he said "she is actually pretty liberal", but the initial Washington Times link (in my first post) quoted it.(EDIT - - - I forgot the link and am no longer at the site, and I don't feel like finding it. It lacked video and the quotes of Sierra were selective anyway) (see Tucker Carlson link for relevant part, but, again, no video)I FOUND THE TUCKER TRANSCRIPT (the show from October 16 that caused me to post that night)

quote:

---

Watch this.

​

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

​

CHRISTIAN SIERRA, CNN MEDIA CONTRIBUTOR: I think the one they don't like is Tulsi, they don't like Tulsi Gabbard.

​

QUESTION: Now why do you think?

​

SIERRA: Because she supports Assad and she is ... she's not taking a conventional route when it comes to one policy, stuff like. But she is actually pretty liberal. But, when it comes to that one position, like I think there's a lot of people who are not cool with her.

​

(END VIDEO CLIP)

​

CARLSON: Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii joins us tonight. So, Congresswoman, you just heard that. I don't know if you've seen that. I know you've been on the road. But there's a CNN employee saying for taking an unconventional foreign policy position, you are the one Democratic candidate that CNN doesn't like. Does that surprise you?

​

GABBARD: It doesn't. You know, I think it's kind of absurd, actually, that as we saw in the days leading up to the debate last night, both "The New York Times" and CNN both ran hit pieces.

​

Today, the day after the debate, we see more of these hit pieces coming out, and for them to sit there and try to portray themselves as neutral arbiters, as objective and independent entities working with the D.N.C. to carry out a legitimate debate is frankly -- it's just a joke.

​

That's one of the reasons why I've been calling for, you know, a nonprofit organization like the League of Women Voters to actually host these debates in a way that actually serves the interests of voters, not the profit, you know, the profit-bearing corporate interests of the corporate media.

​

CARLSON: I couldn't agree more. So just for our viewers who maybe haven't followed this, when we say you've been attacked by "The New York Times" and CNN, it's not attacked, like they're saying your healthcare plan is too expensive.

​

GABBARD: No.

​

CARLSON: They're saying that you're working for a foreign power against America's interest - that you're a traitor to our country. That "New York Times" piece essentially said that. What is this about?

​

GABBARD: Well, this is exactly what happens to those like myself who are trying to end this regime change war in Syria, who are calling for an end to our country's policy of being the world's police, bring about an end to these regime change wars.

​

And this is something that is not just happening to me, you know, when they're issuing these smear attacks really what they're doing is smearing anyone who's calling for an end to these regime change wars, including veterans who I meet almost every single day all across this country who are not pacifists, but who understand and know firsthand the cost of war, and who are strongly, strongly calling for our country to put an end to these counterproductive regime change wars.

​

CARLSON: Yes.

​

GABBARD: So when they are issuing these smears and calling me a traitor to my country, they're essentially issuing these smears and attacks to every veteran who has been willing to lay their lives down in service to our country.

​

CARLSON: You know, there are many things we don't agree on, but one of the reasons I'm so sympathetic to you in what you're doing is because I've been there. I know exactly what you're saying. And what you're saying is absolutely real. It's the one subject that they won't accept any deviation on.

​

And so you deserve credit, I think, for your bravery in going forward.

​

Thank you. Tulsi Gabbard. Great to see you tonight.

​

GABBARD: Thanks, Tucker.

​

Tulsi Gabbard speaks out against attacks from CNN, New York Times | Fox News

---

I saw Christian Sierra say what this transcript showed.And my initial October 16 Washington Times link reported on the "liberal" views comment that I SAW SIERRA SAY.(On a side note, I felt the League of Women's Voters had an anti-immigration bias. It did make for some great answers by Ronald Reagan in his races against Carter and Mondale, however.)Edited by LamarkNewAge, : left out Project Veritas link. Sorry.

Who is Christian Sierra? Why is anything he says relevant?

There was a debate, here at EvC, which centered around people debating whether Gabbard was "center-right, or "center-left".The amazing thing is that the main accredited liberal group, Americans for Democratic Action, give her a 95% (according to the most recent year scored - 2016 - at a site I will link to below), which is something that only about a third of U.S. Senate/House Democrats could achieve in past decades (I don't follow the scorecard stuff much these days and have not for a while).Look at this comprehensive site showing all sorts of groups ratings, and it IS SORTED BY YEAR.(everything is sorted by an issue genre topic)The Voter's Self Defense System - Vote SmartLook at immigration, and I will look at the most recent year of each group belowThe National Iranian-American Council gave her 100% for positions taken in 2017 (the most recent year a pro immigration group scored members). The larger number of anti-immigration groups give here scores anywhere from 0% to a 13%.Hispanic Federation, LCLAA, LULAC, Mi Familia Vota, NCLR, and Voto Latino - National Immigration Scorecard gave her 100% in 2014 (the most recent year they scored)2014 UnidosUS (formerly known as National Council of La Raza) - Positions (Preliminary) 100%2013-2014 American Immigration Lawyers Association - Positions 100%2013 Arab American Institute - Positions on Arab-American Issues 100%Here is everything for education

quote:

---

Public Statements
Key Votes
K-12 Education
2017-2018 National Education Association - "Legislative Report Card" 100%
2015 National Education Association - Positions 100%
2014 Population Connection - Positions (Jan. 9, 2014) 100%
2013-2014 National Education Association - Positions 100%
2013 National Education Association - Positions 100%
2013 Population Connection - Positions (Sept. 2013) 67%

---

Healthcare scorecards since 2016

quote:

---

Public Statements
Key Votes
Health and Health Care
2019 Planned Parenthood Action Fund - Lifetime Positions [09/23/2019] 100%
2018 Planned Parenthood Action Fund - Lifetime Positions [10/26] 100%
2017 American Public Health Association - Positions 100%
2017 Food Policy Action - Positions 100%
2017 Planned Parenthood Action Fund - Lifetime Positions [12/29/2017] 100%
2016 American Public Health Association - Positions 100%
2016 Planned Parenthood Action Fund - Lifetime Positions [12/30/2016] 100%
2015-2016 Food Policy Action - Positions 100%

---

Foreign Affairs since 2016

quote:

---

Public Statements
Key Votes
Foreign Affairs
2018 National Iranian American Council - Positions 100%
2017-2018 Council on American-Islamic Relations - Positions 100%
2017-2018 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) - Positions 100%
2016 Armenian National Committee of America - Positions 57%
2015-2016 Council on American-Islamic Relations - Positions 67%
2015-2016 Friends Committee on National Legislation - Positions 29%
2015-2016 The Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans - Positions 88%
2015-2016 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) - Positions 0%

---

So you got nothing.

I apologize if this isn't the right place for this, but nothing else seems to fit either, and I don't want to start a whole new thread on something that probably won't generate a bunch of discussion.The Nation ran a profile on Ilhan Omar this week: Why Ilhan Omar Is the Optimist in the RoomI thought it was interesting since the usual media portrayals of the new leftist members of Congress seem to represent them as shrill extremist bomb throwers. This article presents another side to Omar's approach to politics.Warning to the rightwing: FAKE NEWS!