OR a Revolution!

Ain't that the truth.

Someone should retweet this to him, accusing his front-running opponent of committing a Federal crime:

He is very busy on these campaign trails.

I'm sure he was apprised of the accusations.

this is classic trump projection and lies. Was taught well by his leader. He's toast in Michigan. He knows it. Flailing at the wind. Desperate.

Link to tweet

My Op is about Bernie's full support. He likes the way Abdul is running his campaign. This after Abdul attacked Whitmer and accused her of a federal crime of money laundering.



Deleted and rewrote "Legal Money Laundering", when there is no such thing. Then deleted that as well.

You are very interested in crowd size, I assume you are equally supportive of the truth. Abdul did not tell the truth, he made shit up.

With respect to the tweets you mention, I thought they were pretty ugly.

My belief is that anything can happen in this race, and I would not be surprised if there was an upset.

I hope that when the primary is over that all the candidates can rally behind the winner and work together to defeat whoever wins on the Republican side.

BS gave a full endorsement. No qualifiers. No comment on HIS candidate accusing another candidate who happens to be the front runner of a federal crime, not once but twice.

He did not. He took it to the convention long after he lost.

it's the truth. What's wrong with the truth?

that I think we all know why that's bullshit. But you are entitled to your own bullshit. have a good one

Not a silly point at all. In fact it's very relevant, after someone else has secured the nomination.

rewrite history.

Look at a calendar if you don't believe it...

One might just as well say that Trump admitted the meeting with Don Jr. was with Russian intelligence about election interference "after he was asked about it."

How long after is key.

Thus: he endorsed Hillary and campaigned for and with her. Which is what I had said.

When one's opponent has secured the nomination, and one refuses to concede, that is not support.

That a fact not lost on history.

Especially on DU.

One could say truthfully that DT "said the meeting attended by Don Jr. was about getting opposition information from Russian operatives after he was asked about it," but one would be leaving out a very important detail, wouldn't one?

Strike while the iron is hot, as they say. Cultivating one's brand is everything, as Tad Devine no doubt counseled.

And of course if "an external event," as his staff put it, were to occur in the weeks following the convention, I'm sure he felt he needed to be prepared to be the headliner, not the opening act.

Perhaps her fainting on 9/11 gave him new hope that he would replace the candidate that the Democratic voters had selected, and he held out a few weeks longer.

I think he was also having to deal with more than half the staff of his new 501(c)(4) quitting because Bernie had promised them there would be no Jeff Weaver involved, and the 501(c)(4) structure negated all they had worked towards in keeping dark money out of campaigns. I imagine that was certainly more important to him than the general election, now that he wasn't the focus of it.

But once he did decide it was time, he recited his delegate counts before "praising" Hillary as being better than Trump, reminding people that he was the true understudy, waiting in the wings, ready to take her place.

about actually doing something.

people have a way of diverting distracting from the truth in this election season and willfully and purposefully creating confusion for people who don't delve into their INTENT. You are right, they are wrong They are trying to dilute what BS qualified as a full endorsement of his acolyte, Sayed to make that endorsement innocuous. Won't work people are smarter than them these days and know BS when they see, read and hear it. Democrats must unify and stay strong in spite of outliers in minor factions with minor leaders.

For the most part we Democrats are doing just that. This election is critical, heaven.

It's not very full.

She gets dressed down for shooting the photo before the rally started and her odd angle choice. . .

[link:https://mobile.twitter.com/lsarsour/status/1026245778791194624/photo/1|]

[link:https://mobile.twitter.com/greenandluvinit/status/1026213230274703360/photo/1|]

https://mobile.twitter.com/greenandluvinit/status/1026213230274703360/photo/1

Sarsour seems to be implying that this might be a case of fake news concerning crowd size.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

about "misinformation".

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

no doubts.

is pretty immaterial, but it's dangerous and desperate to accuse reporters of spreading false news.

I was at a the re-opening of John Brooks and Liuba Grechen Shirley's campaign office on Long Island yesterday. About 150 people were packed into a small office, and many stayed afterwards to canvass in 90+ heat.

Democrats County Executive Laura Curran, Town Supervisor Laura Gillen, and State Senator John Brooks were all there, along with Andrew Cuomo who formally endorsed Liuba in her bid to topple Peter King. The energy was electric.

https://www.newsday.com/long-island/cuomo-liuba-grechen-shirley-1.20306524

Accusing an on the scene local reporter of misrepresenting facts is not "dressing someone down".

Lawler live tweeted that there was an enthusiastic crowd of 1,400 people in a room set up for 2,500 and that empty seats were later removed. The objective report she wrote for MI Live noted the fact of the crowd size and focused on what each speaker said at the event.

It's a fact-based, objective news story, "alternative facts" and partisan accusations on twitter notwithstanding.

If Lawler is incorrect about the crowd estimates, I'm sure her editors will issue a correction.

https://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2018/08/bernie_sanders_abdul_el-sayed.html

Link to tweet

More fibs.

Figures.

use that tactic to make supporters more convinced that the candidate is more popular than he/she is.

Interesting for a candidate that is running as a "not politics as usual" candiate.

at the rally actually said about anything

After he tweeted not once but twice how his opponent committed a federal crime, then had to delete the lies....

or did he just take attendance and leave?

Bernie made no mention of the other candidates, he simply talked about the positions and his support for the candidate of his own choosing.


You're drumming up nothing with tissue paper thin arguments.

You can just say that you support another candidate and would like to see BS and candidates affiliated with him castigated out.

Quite literally every time these big events happen it's all about how the crowd numbers, it's never about the policies.

And mind you the crowd size numbers come from Sanders' side.

The key is that these places are carefully managed events. There are event managers who will see a big gap in the crowd and send out feelers for people to move around. In some images you can see every other seat occupied, to spread out the people, especially in the back.

Any many images (not this event) you will see an entire wall placed to cover up the vast empty of a room so that carefully managed photos can be made.

In this case it certainly wasn't filled to capacity and they put a media riser in the center of the room so you couldn't see empty seats beyond it.

And what follows is a direct quote of what BS told the crowd:

Yeah, I just bet he does.. We Don't.

They do have much in common when it comes to campaigns.

Great to see people energized to come out for Democrats!

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Thats a very common PR tactic. The house was set for 2500, and 1400 showed up.

Many clubs that are concert venues use a stage that they move forward based on tix sales, so the place is always "packed" no matter how few are sold.

Without the moving stage, removal of chairs is the other way to create the illusion of a "packed house."

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

And I already saw those tweets here, thanks:

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=10967182

I think that attempts to smear reputable journalists at this point in time is not only unwise, but harmful to our democracy, no matter what side one is on.

over media any day

He taught AOC and Sayed very well. His little ego is peaked!!!~ He's such a destroyer, obviously a destroyer. A big from me. The truth from the mouth of destroyers...damn he and trump have been openly confessing their culpability on trying to destroy our Party and democracy lately...they do not fear repercussions. I hope karma brings all of them to their knees.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Thank you so much for posting this, Randy. Charles Gaba is correct, it is ugly.

....(i.e., "New Member" ) 20 minutes earlier, and isn't even a registered twitterer.

Link to tweet