Seconds After Kamala Leaks Her VP - His Dirty Laundry Comes Spilling Out
She really can pick 'em!
Harris VP Pick Tim Walz Faces Scrutiny Over Past Actions Amid 2024 Election
By Mick Farthing
For a while, it looked as if Kamala Harris would pick Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro as her vice president running mate. But the anti-Semitic progressives must have had their way because word is that Kamala is picking another governor to be her patsy. Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota has been slotted to carry Harris’ baggage through November.
This isn’t a monumental surprise, given how Minnesota is another must-win swing state. Harris’ people are probably banking on Walz’s popularity to help her win Minnesota.
The video player is currently playing an ad. You can skip the ad in 5 sec with a mouse or keyboard
But how popular is Walz in his home state? While he might enjoy support from liberal voters, he is far from a slam dunk for Harris. The Democrat nominee has to convince Americans she won’t be as big of a disaster as her boss—even though she promises the exact same administration. But by bringing along Walz, Harris is proving her administration will be as corrupt and incompetent as the one she is currently serving in.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D)… failed in 2020 to anticipate and react to riots in Minneapolis after the death of George Floyd at police hands.
The violence led to the destruction of a police precinct, widespread looting, and the spread of riots nationwide.
The Minneapolis Star Tribune reported that Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey blamed Walz for failing to respond.
In addition to this major issue, stories are surfacing of a DUI Walz committed years ago. One that hasn’t been properly addressed to the public.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D), who emerged Tuesday as Vice President Kamala Harris’s running mate, will likely face new scrutiny over a 1995 DUI arrest after court records emerged to suggest he had misled the public about the case.
Walz and the BLM Riots
In the lead-up to the 2024 election, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is under fire for his handling of past events that are now resurfacing with a vengeance. The dual controversies include his failure to effectively manage the Black Lives Matter (BLM) riots and his past DUI arrest, both of which are casting a long shadow over his political aspirations.
As the BLM riots swept through Minnesota, Walz’s leadership came under intense scrutiny. Critics argue that his lack of decisive action allowed the chaos to escalate. Kamala Harris’s involvement didn’t help matters; she was busy soliciting bail money for arrested protesters, adding fuel to the fire. This dual-pronged approach from key political figures left many Minnesotans feeling abandoned and betrayed as their communities suffered.
A prominent critic said, “Governor Walz had a chance to protect his constituents, but instead, he chose to stand by and watch as the city burned.”
The DUI Scandal
Adding to his woes, Walz’s past DUI arrest has resurfaced, raising questions about his character and judgment. The details of the incident are murky, with conflicting claims about what transpired. This lack of clarity is only making matters worse for Walz, as voters question his integrity and ability to lead. During a congressional run in 2006, Walz seemed to lie about the arrest, claiming it was a “misunderstanding.” Did the cops misunderstand that he was driving drunk? I don’t think so.
Fallout for 2024
Why did Harris reportedly pick this man with so much baggage? Did she think people would see her in a better light compared to this governor? That’s not a winning strategy. But we are not surprised she picked a controversy-ridden politician with little credit to his record. Harris is the vice president of an administration full of incompetent people unqualified for their jobs. She is sure to continue that legacy if she becomes president.
Key Takeaways
BLM Riots: Walz was criticized for failing to control the riots, and Kamala Harris’s actions complicated the situation.
DUI Arrest: Past DUI arrest raises questions about Walz’s character, with conflicting claims damaging his credibility.
Election Impact: Both controversies are likely to influence voter perception and impact his 2024 election campaign
Source: All Breitbart
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You cannot hold public office without having a conscience. Moscow Waltz does not own a conscience because he believes, he is a magician, and he can stand before a mirror and turn a lie it into a fact both to himself as well as voters.
He knew Trump rejected Proposition 2025, that the RNC has also done so and the person who drafted it was no longer involved. Yet "Moscow Walz" lied thinking he could get away with doing so because the unwashed would buy his lie. Obviously if he will lie to you and himself campaigning what would he do if elected?
Blackboard Kamala also believes she is a magician and can turn lies into facts. She knew Biden's health was deteriorating as well as his mental acuity. However, she denied it both to herself and you, the voter. Why did she believe she could get away with doing this? Because she wanted to become president, gain power and rule over her subjects like a monarch.
Is this the kind of president we want to rule our republic?
Let's look at Trump who we know lacks a presidential persona. Trump stretches the truth but when he said more were present at his inauguration he was not doing so as a magician. Yes, he stretched the truth but that is not the same as lying.
Lying is destroying truth and replacing it, not stretching it with something else. That is what Democrats have been doing for years. They have weaponized politics, turned their lying projections into imputing they are those of their opponents so they can retain power at any cost. Their projections are a shameless act of bald face lying and are unconscionable acts..
By doing so, they impute lies they tell to their opposition in the hope they can get voters to buy their version of the truth. Moscow Walz and Blackboard Kamala believe they are magicians.
+++
Josh Shapiro and the unmaking of a vice president
The successful campaign to keep the Jewish governor of Pennsylvania off the Democratic ticket is a watershed moment for Democrats and American Jews.
By Jonathan S. Tobin
There was probably more than one reason why Vice President Kamala Harris chose Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz rather than Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro to be her running mate. It may well be that Shapiro rubbed Harris the wrong way in their interviews when she was auditioning potential candidates. The same factors that led Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) to advise her against picking Shapiro might have influenced her. Shapiro does not have a reputation as a team player. His steady rise through Pennsylvania politics has been fueled by genuine talent as well as the sort of naked self-interested ambition that would have to be put on hold if he were to be the No. 2 in a campaign and an administration.
But there’s little doubt that the decision to bypass a popular governor who could have played a decisive role in winning a key battleground state that Harris must have if she is to beat former President Donald Trump in November wasn’t made solely because of Shapiro’s healthy ego. As we all know, that is a quality that hardly marks him as an outlier among politicians. Instead, it was his identity as a Jew and an unabashed supporter of Israel that sparked an ultimately successful campaign among Democrats to spike the Shapiro boomlet.
His positions on Israel and the war on Hamas are not, in fact, very different from those of the other men Harris was considering, including Walz and Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly. They, too, support Israel’s right to exist and condemned the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks on Israel, as well as expressed concern about the pro-Hamas demonstrations that have become the hallmark of a surge in American antisemitism during the last 10 months. And like them, Shapiro supports proposals for a two-state solution to the Middle East conflict that is hopelessly out of touch with what Palestinians want; all are critics of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Choosing Dearborn over Pennsylvania
But only the possibility of Shapiro being a heartbeat away from the presidency caused leftist magazines like The New Republic and Slate to denounce him for being “egregiously bad on Palestine.” As reports in The New York Times and other publications also made clear, his willingness to stand up on the issue in recent months was seen in a different light than that of other pro-Israel Democrats. The fact that he had rightly compared the pro-Hamas antisemites to members of the Ku Klux Klan, while Harris had voiced understanding and sympathy for them, was seen as disqualifying.
Indeed, it got so bad that when an op-ed Shapiro wrote for his college newspaper in 1993 popped up, in which he voiced skepticism about the Oslo Accords and doubted whether the Palestinians would ever choose peace, he was forced to back away it. Of course, everything he wrote at that time was subsequently proven correct. But when confronted with it, Shapiro acted as if it was a youthful indiscretion. “Something I wrote when I was 20, is that what you’re talking about? I was 20.”
This is an election in which leading Democrats believe they are going to need a united party with their left-wing activist base fully on board with the national ticket. That’s why President Joe Biden sent officials to bend their knees to Dearborn, Mich., earlier this year to the pro-Hamas mayor of the city known as America’s “jihad capital.” Shapiro being an affiliated synagogue member who attended Jewish day school and sends his own children to them, as well as has a record of support for Israel dating back to his youth, made him unacceptable to that crucial wing of the party.
That put Harris in something of a dilemma.
If winning the election and “saving democracy” from alleged threats by former President Donald Trump and the Republicans were primary goals, then Shapiro was her best bet. Naming him gave her the best chance of tipping Pennsylvania, where Trump has led for most of the year, back into the Democratic column. And his centrist approach would have expanded the Democratic coalition, giving it a better chance to win over independent voters who have also favored Trump this year.
Indeed, his gracious and respectful attitude to the victims of the attempted assassination of Trump in Butler, Pa., last month struck a chord with both Republicans and Democrats at a time when most politicians seem determined to drive us farther apart.
Sending a message
It also would have also shored up Jewish support, both in terms of votes and campaign contributions. It’s not clear whether that would have won Harris any more Electoral College votes. But in a year when there are some signs that even the most partisan Jewish Democrats have been shocked by the way left-wing anti-Semites have been allowed to run amuck on college campuses and in the streets of U.S. cities spouting hate for Jews and Israel since Oct. 7, it would have sent a message to Jews that they still have a home in a Democratic Party, even though many in its left-wing base think that they are intersectional villains who are guilty of “white” privilege.
More than that, it would have given Harris a “Sister Souljah moment” like the one Bill Clinton seized in 1992 when he criticized a black artist for saying there was nothing wrong with blacks killing whites, and in doing so, demonstrated both his centrist bona fides and a willingness to take on extremists within his own party.
But Democrats don’t believe in Sister Souljah moments anymore. Harris, who supported a fund that bailed out Black Lives Matter rioters in 2000, had no appetite for confronting the anti-Semitic, anti-Israel wing of her party. While there are still far more votes to be won in the pro-Israel center of American politics than on the pro-Hamas left, choosing the person that leftists have now dubbed “Genocide Josh” would have guaranteed dissension inside the Democratic National Convention in Chicago and riots outside of it.
Walz is no leftist, but he was definitely the most left-leaning of all the potential vice-presidential nominees that were finalists for the Democrats. That’s why members of the far-left congressional “Squad” and Socialist Democrats like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) celebrated Harris’s choice. Though Democrats are rebranding him as being no different from Shapiro in most respects, he’s clearly the favorite of “progressives.” He’s a supporter of the anti-Semitic Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), imposed draconian COVID-19 lockdowns on his state and dithered for three days before finally agreeing to the anguished pleas of Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey to send in the National Guard to stop Black Lives Matter rioters from burning down the city.
Walz is a capable politician, and there are some Democrats who think his experience as a Midwestern high school football coach is exactly the kind of résumé line that Harris needs to balance her reputation as a San Francisco liberal. It’s also true that most Republicans breathed a sigh of relief when they heard of her decision. Putting Shapiro on the Democratic ticket might not have guaranteed them victory, but it would have made the task for Trump and the GOP in battleground states a lot harder. That would have also been the case if Harris had picked Kelly, a former astronaut and U.S. Navy combat pilot with centrist appeal.
Had Harris chosen Shapiro, it would have signaled that she was determined to steer the Democrats back into the political center on not just Israel but other issues like school choice, though Shapiro’s stand on that topic is also anathema to the Teachers Unions that hold so much sway among Democrats.
A lot has changed since 2000
Above all, the rejection of Shapiro after he was bashed by so many on the left serves as a reminder of how much the Democratic Party has changed in the last 24 years.
At this moment, August 2000 seems like a very long time ago. When then Vice President Al Gore choose Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman to be his running mate, the decision was hailed as a brilliant political move by the Democratic Party’s nominee. It both solidified the hold of moderates on the Democratic Party and marked the first time a Jew was named to a national ticket. Like Shapiro is now, Lieberman’s views were liberal on most issues. But he was also a well-respected centrist Democrat as well as an observant Jew, whose piety and plain-speaking manner was admired by people of all faiths.
As is true of almost all vice-presidential nominees, neither Lieberman nor his Republican counterpart Dick Cheney played a decisive role in determining the outcome of an election that was razor-close and decided in favor of George W. Bush by a mere 553 votes in Florida. Lieberman’s nomination was a milestone in American history that seemed to prove that Jews were accepted virtually everywhere in the United States and could aspire to the nation’s highest offices without being subjected to anti-Semitic invective.
The attacks on Shapiro illustrate that this is no longer the case.
That is not to say that Shapiro has no future in national politics. Should Harris lose this year, he will immediately be classified as among the likely Democratic presidential contenders in 2028. Perhaps political fashions will shift in the next four years in a way that will ease his path. For now, though, it’s hard to imagine the Democrats picking someone who is considered a centrist and well as seen as a throwback to an earlier era where pro-Israel Democrats were the rule and Israel-haters were the exception in the party.
++++
Radical Islamist shoe finally has begun dropping.
By Sara Fischer
Politics & Policy
Money still pouring into election ads
Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios
Political advertising around the 2020 election is expected to reach $6.7 billion this cycle, up 12% from initial projections of around $6 million, according to a new report. Nearly $2 billion will be spent on digital video, primarily on Facebook and Google.
Why it matters: The pandemic has forced campaigns to shift budgets from in-person campaign events, like canvassing and town halls, to digital advertising and virtual events. This has expedited a growing shift from traditional campaign marketing to dgital.
Technology
Joe Biden surges past Trump on Facebook and Google spending
i
Adapted from Advertising Analytics; Chart: Andrew Witherspoon/Axios
Why it matters: For a while, Trump was dominating online advertising spend on Google and Facebook, giving his campaign an unprecedented early lead in drumming up grassroots support ahead of 2020. Now, Democrats — led by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris — are catching up.
Go deeper (1 min. read)
By Sara Fischer
Economy
2020 candidates are mostly focusing their advertising spending online
A phone with a dollar bill as a screen.
Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios
The 2020 presidential election is being fought online at a level we've never seen before, eclipsing television's traditional dominance.
Why it matters: Television is still one of the most important vehicles for candidates to message during a presidential election, especially during the general election, but its dominance is quickly being eaten by digital, and that's including digital alternatives of television, like commercials on Hulu.
+++
Much Ado About Nothing
By Sherwin Pomerantz
Well, everyone here has been hunkered down since the weekend waiting for the big attack by Iran and its proxies (i.e. Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houtis, and even Palestinians living in Judea & Samaria/the West Bank), yet, except for a drone here and there from Lebanon …..nothing. It actually seems now that all the supplies we put in to our “safe rooms” in case we were attacked may not be needed after all. So, what happened?
Frankly a lot of things because nobody anywhere in this region except Iran really wants a regional war to break out and that is a feeling shared by other countries of influence as well.
Som observations from a lay person……
First. the United States sent two strike forces (i.e. each is an armada of warships led by an aircraft carrier or two) to the eastern Mediterranean and parked them right off Israel’s coastline. The appearance of that much naval firepower along with fighter aircraft ready to launch was a message to Iran & Co. that perhaps they better think twice before attacking us lest they suffer the wrath of the US’ show of strength, joined by the UK as well.
No doubt this made the Iranians think twice about unleashing their own firepower. They clearly remember that when they tried this the last time on April 13th, 98% of the 300+ drones and missiles that they launched in that barrage were shot down in mid-air, and not just by us. The US, UK, France and even Jordan and Saudi Arabia joined in our defense.
Second, Russia’s Putin travelled to Tehran earlier this week to meet with the Iranian leadership as well. According to reliable press reports he told the Iranians that if they did attack Israel, they should make sure not to go after civilians in Israel but stick to military targets only. The Iranians, of course, don’t want to get the Russians angry as Russia is a huge buyer of Iranian oil and a political ally as well. Of course, the Russian instructions to Iran are also very difficult to follow technologically, as the Iranian missiles are not so accurate as to be able to differentiate targets very well. If they try to comply there will be a lot of “oops” moments for sure.
Third, Jordan’s foreign minister also paid a visit to Tehran this week, the first time there has been such a high-level Jordanian in Iran in twenty years. His purpose in going there was to make it clear to the Iranians that Jordan will not permit Iran to use its air space in order to attack another country (read: Israel). Given that the biggest physical obstacle between Iran and Israel’s eastern border is Jordan, that would make it impossible for Iran to lob missiles directly at Israel from the east, unless they go via Saudi Arabia but…….
Fourth, not to be outdone, shortly after Jordan made its point to the Iranians, the Saudis said “us too,” and took the same position as the Jordanians, warning Iran that Saudi air space is also closed to Iranian missiles aimed at a third country (again, read: Israel).
A cursory look at the map of the Middle East will show that once you eliminate the possibility of launching missiles at Israel via Jordan and Saudi Arabia, the only border left is the northern border with Lebanon whose access is only possible via Iraq and Syria. That provides a very narrow geographical window of opportunity and it is not 100% clear that Hezbollah, although it is a proxy of Iran, would be able to convince the Government of Lebanon to permit this. While their government is not very strong the people of Lebanon as a whole are not happy with the presence there of Hezbollah so this kind of permission cannot be assumed.
As a result, my guess is we will see a very very muted response from the Iranians, in spite of all their bluster over the last ten days. They will try something for sure but it may be simply a series of drones launched from Lebanon or even a missile or two that they will apologize to the Jordans about and which will be neutralized enroute.
This does, of course, still leave us with the issues on our northern border with which we have been dealing since October 8th. It is not clear where that will end up but it would be good to be able to limit the fronts where we are fighting to two rather than the present seven.
Let’s hope that the Iranians are as smart and strategic as people give them credit for. They won’t walk away from this loving us, but defanged enemies are much easier to deal with than those who actually mean what they say and have the wherewithal to act out their threats without any restraints. And if it works out this way, once again us believers will have seen the hand of the Lord in all its glory.
++++
President Herzog's message to world Jewry as Israel is threatened by Iran
As Israel faces threat of attack, President Herzog sends a message to Jewish communities around the world
President Isaac Herzog today, Wednesday, sent a message to Jewish communities around the world, as Israel continues to face the ongoing threat of imminent attack from the Iranian regime and its terrorist proxies across the region.
In his message, President Herzog spoke of the importance of the resilience of the Israeli people, of the great capabilities of the defense and security services, and of the centrality of the steadfast alliance with Israel’s allies – especially, the United States of America. The President said that the Israeli people and Jewish communities shared in the tensions and anxieties surrounding the threats of today, and noted that the concern and care between Israel and Jews around the world was mutual and deep.
Herzog began, “Dear Jewish sisters and brothers from around the world, these are difficult moments for the State of Israel and the Jewish people. These very days, we mark 10 months since the brutal massacre of October 7. It coincides with another heartbreaking moment in time, the fifth anniversary of Ariel Bibas, the little red-headed boy from Kibbutz Nir Oz who was abducted from his home by Hamas terrorists on that dark day, along with his mother, Shiri, his father, Yarden, and his baby brother, Kfir."
He contonued, “At the same time, our enemies, poisoned by hatred, blinded by radicalism and antisemitism, have vowed to attack us again. We all feel the tension, the anxiety, and the vulnerability of these moments. These feelings are natural. But my friends, rest assured. I want to state clearly, we have the capacity to confront our enemies and to defeat them. The State of Israel is blessed with many resources, most importantly incredible human resources. We have an excellent and highly motivated military, air force, intelligence services, and others. We have advanced air-defense systems. We have strong and enduring alliances that are committed to protecting not only Israel but the rules-based world ord
++++er we are fighting for, and we are so grateful to them – especially to our closest ally and friend, the United States of America, which is leading the coalition actively defending the values of life and liberty."
“But beyond all of that, we carry another most precious resource, the remarkable resilience of our people. A resilience which is rooted in the deep sense of connection and shared destiny that we have shared all across the ages. It is what has enabled us to get back up and rebuild after even the worst tragedies, and it is what we lean into right now," Herzog said.
“I want to say to our sisters and brothers everywhere that the depth of our connection and our caring is mutual. We in Israel also see the anxieties, concerns and vulnerability of Jewish communities around the world. And just as you carry us in your hearts, we carry you in our hearts too.
“Dear friends, Am Yisrael Chai,” Herzog concluded.
++++
Veterans Will Not Be Fooled by Tim Walz
No comments:
Post a Comment