Tag: hypocrisy

‘War Industry’ Silenced Democrat Opposition On Iran Strikes: Sen. Murphy

A leading Democratic senator has offered a frank and rare explanation for why many in his party are disconnected from everyday Democratic voters when it comes to foreign policy, which for a brief spell during the Bush years was dubbed ‘anti-war’—a platform which pretty much disappeared during the Obama years and later Biden admin.

Senator Chris Murphy was on MSNBC this week to talk about President Trump’s strike on Iran’s nuclear sites, which was not so much as debated much less formally approved by Congress. Murphy pointed out to Chris Hayes that an overwhelming 87% of Democrats expressed disapproval, according to a recent poll, and that 56% of Americans overall opposed the military action.

“I gotta say, if you just looked at elected Democratic members of Congress I don’t think you would think the voting members of the party were as overwhelmingly against this strike as they are compared to the people they send to go represent them in Congress,” Hayes told Murphy in the Tuesday interview, asking, “Do you feel like there’s a pretty big distance on these kinds of issues, between Democratic voters and democratic electeds?”

“I mean yes,” Murphy responded without hesitation. “That’s because, listen, there is a war industry in this town. There just is. There’s a lot of people who make money off of war.

“The military, I love them, they’re capable. But they are always way overly optimistic about what they can do,” the senator added.

“So the American people get it,” Murphy then said. “This town, you know, has, like I said, a degree of optimism and hubris about military action that is derivative of the fact that the war industry spends a lot of money here in Washington telling us that the guns and the tanks and the planes can solve all of our problems.”

Keep reading

AOC’s ‘Bronx Girl’ Act Exposed as a TOTAL FRAUD by Republican Sharing School Yearbook Photo

New York leftist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez loves to present herself as someone who grew up in the hood. A person who knows the streets, is tough, and faced a hard life. None of that is true.

She grew up in an affluent area, went to Boston University where the tuition is currently more than $60K a year, and interned at the office of the late Senator Ted Kennedy.

The Gateway Pundit ran an exclusive report about this back in 2019, exposing AOC’s true past when she was known as “Sandy.”

During one of her recent and stupid quips on Twitter/X, she called herself a Bronx girl. That’s pure fantasy, and Republican New York Assemblyman Matt Slater just exposed her for the fraud she is.

FOX News reports:

GOP assemblyman calls out AOC’s suburban roots with yearbook proof after Trump spat

A New York state lawmaker called out Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., over her upbringing after she referred to herself as a tough “Bronx girl” during an internet spat in which she traded jabs with President Donald Trump.

State Assemblyman Matt Slater, a Republican, called out the progressive firebrand, who represents portions of the Bronx and Queens, and shared an image of her during her freshman year in suburban Yorktown High School, almost an hour north of the Bronx.

“If you’re a BX girl then why are you in my Yorktown yearbook? Give it up already,” Slater tweeted.

Slater’s move came after Ocasio-Cortez got into a social media spat with Trump after she called for his impeachment for ordering strikes over the weekend that targeted Iranian nuclear sites.

In a lengthy post on Truth Social, Trump criticized the congresswoman, calling her “stupid” and “one of the ‘dumbest’ people in Congress.”

Keep reading

Instant Regret Hits Bernie Sanders as Joe Rogan Interview Backfires Spectacularly

It’s not every day a major politician sits down with Joe Rogan.

Bernie Sanders did, and now we know why most skip the invitation.

Bernie pushed the global warming narrative. Rogan crushed him with undeniable data.

Then it got worse.

Rogan made Sanders instantly regret saying we should tax the rich more—because Rogan immediately asked why we’d give more money to a corrupt government.

Then, Rogan questioned the government’s monopoly on power, which left Sanders scrambling.

Watch it all unfold below.

The conversation started off strong for Bernie, as he returned to his 2015–2016 form.

Sanders shined a light on three mega-powerful investment firms with a massive grip on American politics: BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard.

“The three of them combined are the major stockholders of 95% of American corporations,” he said. “That’s power.”

Rogan nodded in agreement.

The conversation shifted to money in politics, and Sanders made some great points.

He noted that billionaires have had way too much power ever since the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which opened the floodgates for corporate spending.

But he made the fatal error of singling out Elon Musk, while ignoring George Soros, Reid Hoffman, and every other mega-billionaire. Rogan quickly called this out.

SANDERS: “Elon Musk—And I know Elon was on your show… he spent $270 million to elect Trump as president. I think that’s absurd that any one person—”

ROGAN: “What’s the most someone donated towards the Harris campaign?”

SANDERS (now disrupted): “They spent a lot of money on Harris as well.”

ROGAN: “They spent $1.5 billion just over the course of a couple of months.”

SANDERS: “Combined. You got it. All right, let me talk about it. So I’m not here just to say it’s a Republican. That’s my point here.”

ROGAN: “Right.”

SANDERS: “Okay.”

And just like that, Rogan turned Bernie’s Elon attack into a total flop.

Keep reading

War Powers Resolution From House Democratic Leaders May Not Limit Trump’s War Powers

As Democrats try to push forward legislation that would block further strikes on Iran, one measure advanced by House leadership could actually strengthen the Trump administration’s justification for subsequent attacks, anti-war advocates warn.

House progressives on Wednesday were trying to reach a compromise with Democratic leaders that would curb further U.S. military involvement in Iran while satisfying concerns from pro-Israel members about American support for Israel’s missile defense.

There are three different war powers resolutions in play in Washington. In the Senate, a resolution from Tim Kaine, D-Va., appears to be on track for a vote on Friday. In the House, however, Democrats remain sharply divided between two resolutions.

“There’s no upside to advancing a competing War Powers Resolution. It’s not just unnecessary — it’s actively counterproductive,” Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser at Demand Progress, said in a statement. “There’s still time to reconcile this on the House side, and we hope an agreement can be reached to enable a strong vote with the best possible language.”

The resolutions in both chambers face long odds, thanks to near-unanimous support from the majority Republicans for President Donald Trump’s strikes.

Keep reading

‘No Kings’ Protests Prove Dems Only Hate ‘Tyranny’ When Not in White House

This past weekend, some 2,000 “No Kings” protests visited American cities in opposition to President Trump’s deportation efforts after violent riots engulfed Los Angeles the week prior.

In addition to signs reading, “Due process is for everyone,” and “Immigrants make America great,” there have been numerous violent encounters between rioters and law enforcement, bystander battery and harassment, and even a shooting in Salt Lake City, Utah.

Meanwhile, Democrat politicians posted an almost verbatim script on social media, espousing America’s greatness in defiance of tyrants. California Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis remarked to MSNBC: “People are very determined to get out there and be seen. This is the United States. We do not want a king.” New York Sen. Chuck Schumer posted, “Millions of Americans are standing up today to say loud and clear: No kings in America.” Sen. Patty Murray of Washington wrote, “There are no kings in America. We need to remind ourselves that our voices are important. … That’s how we change the direction of this country. That’s what democracy is.” Illinois governor and Hyatt hotel billionaire JB Pritzker exclaimed: “Let me remind you: we don’t have kings in America—and I won’t bend the knee to one. … This is what democracy in action looks like.”

While it is a breath of fresh air to see Democrats adopting a new love for liberty, do these “No Kings” protests actually reflect a grassroots effort against “tyranny,” or are they something else entirely?

Keep reading

Ilhan Omar Deletes Juneteenth Post After Called Out for Present Day Slavery in Somalia

Somalia refugee Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) deleted a Juneteenth post on slavery Thursday after being called out for slavery currently being practiced in her home country. A different Juneteenth message by Omar that did not mention slavery remains online.

Omar originally posted, “160 years ago on June 19, 1865, slavery ended in this country. Today, we celebrate Black freedom, resilience, and achievement, and continue the work to root out systematic racism from our policies and institutions.”

At 1:10 p.m. EDT, MAGA poster Gunther Eagleman replied, “Somalia still has slaves. Ilhan should go fight to free her own people.”

Keep reading

“No Kings,” Except for the Bureaucrats

Over the weekend, thousands of anti-Trump advocates gathered for “No Kings” protests across the country, but their aims were not directed at constitutional norms; instead, they are engaged in a protest against the President’s authority over the Executive Branch. 

The chief issue in Washington since the second Trump inauguration is whether the commander-in-chief is empowered to control the Executive Branch, which houses nearly all federal agencies. 

The Vesting Clause answers that question with absolute certainty: The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. 

In response to the Trump administration’s efforts to abolish the government’s vast censorship apparatus, however, Democrats and judicial activists offer an anti-constitutional alternative for the country: The power to fire taxpayer-funded bureaucrats or reduce their funding shall be vested in no person.

In April, Secretary of State Rubio announced the closure and defunding of the State Department’s Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (R/FIMI), formerly known as the Global Engagement Center (GEC). 

Under Rubio’s predecessor, Antony Blinken, the GEC was instrumental in silencing dissent, as it worked to “limit the reach of, the circulation of, and render unprofitable, disfavored press outlets by funding the infrastructure, development, and marketing and promotion of censorship technology and private censorship enterprises to covertly suppress speech of a segment of the American press,” according to one lawsuit. 

But this week, California District Judge Susan Illston upended the President’s control of the executive branch and ordered Secretary Rubio to halt the abolishment of R/FIMI. According to Judge Illston, not only is the Ministry of Truth permitted to censor Americans for alleged “disinformation,” such as the Hunter Biden laptop, the lab-leak theory, or natural immunity; but the Constitution actually prohibits the president from exercising control over the State Department. 

Unsurprisingly, the “No Kings” crowd offered no pushback to the judge’s defense of a censorious cabal’s entitlement to taxpayer funding. 

Keep reading

Ivy League Researchers Scaremonger About GOP Health Policy But Say Nothing About Similar Democrat Plans

Ivy League faculty members have a leftist bias — would you believe it?

That sarcastic conclusion comes from the latest example of rhetorical scaremongering over the budget reconciliation bill being considered by Congress. When Republican lawmakers decide to scale back health care benefits, the professoriate loudly proclaims that people in their legions will die. But when Democrat lawmakers do the same thing, these same commentators decide to join the Witness Protection Program.

Deaths Metric

On June 3, a series of researchers affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania’s Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics and the Yale School of Public Health released a letter regarding the House-passed budget reconciliation bill. In it, they claimed that several specific provisions in the bill “would result in more than 42,500 deaths annually.” They further claimed that allowing enhanced Obamacare subsidies to expire at year’s end, as they are scheduled to do under current law, “will cause an additional 8,811 deaths,” meaning that “altogether, we project that these changes will result in over 51,000 preventable deaths.”

The letter leaves much to unpack. For starters, the idea that anyone can know with any level of certainty the precise number of deaths attributable to a specific policy — not 8,810 or 8,812, mind you, but exactly 8,811 — is absurd on its face. If the researchers know the specific number of people who will die due to one policy change, then why not tell us the names of said individuals, and where, when, and how those people will die, while they’re at it?

Second, the expiration of the enhanced subsidies at year’s end comes because of Democrats, not Republicans. When they controlled Congress and the presidency, Democrats passed provisions letting these subsidies expire. Democrats fully expected future Congresses to extend them but wanted to try to disguise their true cost, just like they tried to hide the full $5 trillion cost of the failed Build Back Bankrupt legislation. They should neither complain nor blame Republicans for not wanting to fix or extend Democrats’ bad law. (The same applies to Republicans when it comes to tax gimmicks they might include in reconciliation.)

Ideological Bias

But the real “tell” regarding this letter comes in the form of a question the researchers didn’t answer. I emailed the lead authors, Rachel Werner at Penn and Alison Galvani from Yale, with a simple question: “Do you plan on conducting similar analyses on the number of deaths associated with Gov. [Gavin] Newsom’s proposal to freeze enrollment of undocumented immigrants in MediCal, and charge existing undocumented enrollees a $100 monthly premium? Why or why not?”

Astute readers may not be surprised to learn that, even after following up, I received nary an acknowledgement, let alone a reply. The researchers might claim they never received my message or that they only published their letter in response to a request from Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., for an analysis of the effects of the reconciliation bill. (Any Republican lawmakers in California reading this should please — please — ask the researchers for the type of analysis I requested, if only to highlight their hypocrisy.)

But it doesn’t take a Ph.D. in economics to recognize the real reason for the disparate treatment. The letter was a headline — “Republican bill will kill X people per year!” — in search of a story and a justification. That’s why Wyden and Sanders requested it, and that’s why the researchers gladly complied. But when it comes to attacking Newsom, or Democrat Govs. J.B. Pritzker of Illinois or Tim Walz of Minnesota, all of whom have proposed scaling back taxpayer-funded coverage of illegal immigrants — not because they believe such benefits should go only to citizens, mind you, but because of skyrocketing costs — they suddenly become mute.

Keep reading

Top FDA Official Admits She Refused the Covid-19 Vaccine While Pregnant

One of the most powerful figures at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has admitted she refused the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine while pregnant—even as her agency promoted it as “safe and effective” for all pregnant women.

Dr Sara Brenner’s explosive disclosure, made on 15 May 2025 at the MAHA Institute Round Table in Washington, DC, is as revealing as it is troubling.

A preventive medicine physician, Brenner has worked at the FDA since 2019. As the FDA’s Principal Deputy Commissioner—and briefly its Acting Commissioner—Brenner was at the centre of decision-making.

Prior to that, she was Chief Medical Officer for diagnostics and was detailed to the White House to support the Biden administration’s Covid-19 response. She didn’t just participate in the pandemic response, she helped shape it from within.

“Knowing what I knew—not only about nanotechnology, about medicine, about the medical countermeasures—but also having a very strong and firm grounding in bioethics…there were many things that were not right,” she told the audience.

That someone with her seniority and access to internal data privately rejected the vaccine, while her agency promoted it to millions of pregnant women, presents a profound ethical dilemma.

Keep reading

About That White Guy Laughing in the Face of a Black Mom Trying to Get to Work…

I mean, I wish I could say you can’t make it up, but the Left has become so unspooled that nothing shocks. It doesn’t mean it makes it any less entertaining, however. There are anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement protests and riots popping up nationwide. There’s bound to be shenanigans at this ‘No Kings’ event today, especially in Philadelphia. We’ll keep you abreast of that, but remember that anti-ICE protest in New York City? A horde of white liberals blocked the road, which prevented a black mother from getting to work. They laughed at her face and told her illegal aliens’ kids were more important.

Well, that guy in the video is reportedly a Black Lives Matter activist, Trevor Britvec, who got a six-figure settlement from the city during the 2020 summer of mayhem.

Keep reading