Sanders Supported Marxist Totalitarians in Nicaragua
Sanders Supported Marxist Totalitarians in Nicaragua
How the self-identified socialist tried to undermine Reagan’s foreign policy in the 1980s.
In recent weeks, leftwing media outlets – after decades of giving Bernie Sanders a free pass -- have finally begun to explore the Vermont senator’s long and well-documented history as an apologist for, and an admirer of, Communist regimes around the world. The media’s sudden decision to focus on Sanders’ very obvious affinity for communism, is motivated by strictly political concerns. In short, they fear that if the senator were to win the Democratic presidential nomination, his pro-communist history would be fully exposed by the Trump campaign. This, in turn, might awaken and frighten large numbers of Americans who thus far have been under the false, benign impression that Sanders is merely a committed “liberal” or “democratic socialist.” Thus, the media have decided that the better strategy would be to try to derail Sanders’ campaign right now, rather than allow him to make it to the November election.
The dirty little secret, however, is that there is scarcely a hairsbreadth of difference between the social and economic policies of Bernie Sanders on the one hand, and those of his Democrat rivals on the other. But those rivals are generally much more careful to frame their socialist, totalitarian agendas with the rhetoric of “liberalism.”
In this article, Discover the Networks examines how Sanders consistently praised the Marxist-Leninist leaders of Nicaragua during the 1980s, and how he sought to undermine the Reagan administration’s efforts in that region.
In 1985 Sanders traveled to Managua, Nicaragua to speak at the sixth anniversary celebration of the revolution by which the Marxist-Leninist Sandinistas had taken power from an American-backed leader, Anastasio Somoza, and had instituted a revolutionary socialist government. The “Sandinista Creed” was unambiguous in its intentions: “I believe in the doctrines and struggles of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Che, the great teachers and guides of the working class, which is the productive and true driving force of the class struggle which will bury forever the dehumanized, anti-Christian exploiting class. I believe in the building of the Marxist-Leninist socialist society.”
In the course of his 1985 speech, Sanders said: “[I]n the last 30 years, the United States has overthrown governments in Guatemala, [the] Dominican Republic, they murdered Salvador Allende in Chile, they’ve overthrown the government of Grenada, they attempted to overthrow the government of Cuba, they overthrew a government in Brazil, and now they are attempting to overthrow the government of Nicaragua.” He also denounced the U.S. for “dominating weak nations and poor nations.”
In a letter which he addressed to the people of Nicaragua, Sanders denounced the anti-Communist activities of the Reagan administration, which he said was under the control of corporate interests. Assuring the Nicaraguans that Americans were “fair minded people” who had more to offer “than the bombs and economic sabotage” promoted by President Reagan, he declared: “In the long run, I am certain that you will win, and that your heroic revolution against the Somoza dictatorship will be maintained and strengthened.”
Following his trip to Nicaragua, Sanders reported that he had been “treated in a special way” by his Nicaraguan hosts. He praised the living conditions under that country’s Communist regime:
The dirty little secret, however, is that there is scarcely a hairsbreadth of difference between the social and economic policies of Bernie Sanders on the one hand, and those of his Democrat rivals on the other. But those rivals are generally much more careful to frame their socialist, totalitarian agendas with the rhetoric of “liberalism.”
In this article, Discover the Networks examines how Sanders consistently praised the Marxist-Leninist leaders of Nicaragua during the 1980s, and how he sought to undermine the Reagan administration’s efforts in that region.
In 1985 Sanders traveled to Managua, Nicaragua to speak at the sixth anniversary celebration of the revolution by which the Marxist-Leninist Sandinistas had taken power from an American-backed leader, Anastasio Somoza, and had instituted a revolutionary socialist government. The “Sandinista Creed” was unambiguous in its intentions: “I believe in the doctrines and struggles of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Che, the great teachers and guides of the working class, which is the productive and true driving force of the class struggle which will bury forever the dehumanized, anti-Christian exploiting class. I believe in the building of the Marxist-Leninist socialist society.”
In the course of his 1985 speech, Sanders said: “[I]n the last 30 years, the United States has overthrown governments in Guatemala, [the] Dominican Republic, they murdered Salvador Allende in Chile, they’ve overthrown the government of Grenada, they attempted to overthrow the government of Cuba, they overthrew a government in Brazil, and now they are attempting to overthrow the government of Nicaragua.” He also denounced the U.S. for “dominating weak nations and poor nations.”
In a letter which he addressed to the people of Nicaragua, Sanders denounced the anti-Communist activities of the Reagan administration, which he said was under the control of corporate interests. Assuring the Nicaraguans that Americans were “fair minded people” who had more to offer “than the bombs and economic sabotage” promoted by President Reagan, he declared: “In the long run, I am certain that you will win, and that your heroic revolution against the Somoza dictatorship will be maintained and strengthened.”
Following his trip to Nicaragua, Sanders reported that he had been “treated in a special way” by his Nicaraguan hosts. He praised the living conditions under that country’s Communist regime:
- “Many of the things that we saw were impressive. There’s a tremendous sense of energy.
- “I was impressed by their intelligence and by their sincerity. These are not political hacks.”
- “No one denies that they are building health clinics. Health care in Nicaragua is now free…. Infant mortality has been greatly reduced.”
- “[The Nicaraguan government is] giving, for the first time in their lives, real land to farmers, so that they can have something that they grow. Nobody denies that they are making significant progress.”
- “Sometimes American journalists talk about how bad a country [like Nicaragua] is because people are lining up for food [e.g., bread lines]. That’s a good thing. In other countries, people don’t line up for food. The rich get the food, and the poor starve to death.”
Praising the Nicaraguan government’s seizure of private farms and businesses, Sanders said: “In terms of land reform, giving, for the first time in their lives, real land to farmers. And people of Nicaragua, the poor people, respect that. Rich people, needless to say, are used to having a good life there, are not terribly happy.”
In an August 8, 1985 television interview, Sanders characterized Daniel Ortega as “an impressive guy” while criticizing then-U.S. President Ronald Reagan. “The Sandinista government, in my view, has more support among the Nicaraguan people, substantially more support, than Ronald Reagan has among the American people,” said Sanders. “If President Reagan thinks that any time a government comes along, which in its wisdom, rightly or wrongly, is doing the best for its people, he has the right to overthrow that government, you’re going to be at war not only with all of Latin America, but with the entire Third World.”
Notably, Sanders did not mention the fact that by 1985, watchdog organizations had exposed the Sandinistas as perpetrators of enormous human-rights violations, including mass executions, the persecution of indigenous peoples, and the unexplained disappearance of hundreds of citizens each month.
Accusing the American media and the Reagan administration of deliberately covering up the good news of a successful socialist society, Sanders said: “Many of us get depressed about what’s [supposedly] going on in Nicaragua today, the absolute lies that are coming out of the White House. In fact, we have a right to be very exhilarated.” He praised the Sandinistas for “talking about a transformation of society, giving power to the poor people, to the working people.”
Lauding “the type of example Nicaragua is setting for the rest of Latin America,” Sanders responded to critics of the Sandinistas by saying: “Is [the Sandinistas’] crime that they have built new health clinics, schools, and distributed land to the peasants? Is their crime that they have given equal rights to women? Or that they are moving forward to wipe out illiteracy? No, their crime in Mr. Reagan’s eyes and the eyes of the corporations and billionaires that determine American foreign policy is that they have refused to be a puppet and banana republic to American corporate interests.”
Sanders had no problem with the Sandinistas’ war against La Prensa, a daily newspaper renowned for its criticism of the Daniel Ortega dictatorship. When asked to comment on the Sandinistas’ heavy-handed censorship of Nicaraguan media outlets, Sanders stated that undemocratic measures were sometimes necessary in times of war.
In 1987 Sanders hosted Sandinista politician Nora Astorga in Burlington. Astorga was a woman who, as the publication The Daily Beast puts it, was “notorious for a Mata Hari-like guerrilla operation that successfully lured Gen. Reynaldo Perez-Vega, a high-ranking figure in the Somoza dictatorship, to her apartment with promises of sex. Perez-Vega’s body was later recovered wrapped in a Sandinista flag, his throat slit by his kidnappers.” When Astorga died of cancer in 1988, Sanders publicly praised her as “a very, very beautiful woman” and a “very vital and beautiful woman.” He also speculated that her illness may have been brought about by the stress she felt as a result of American policies toward Nicaragua. “I have my own feelings about what causes cancer, and the psychosomatic aspects of cancer,” said Sanders. “One wonders if the war didn’t claim another victim; a person who couldn’t deal with the tremendous grief and suffering in her own country.”
At one point in the Eighties, Sanders asked a group of University of Vermont students to consider how “we [the United States] deal with Nicaragua, which is in many ways Vietnam, except it’s worse. It’s more gross.” To help offset the effects of America’s many alleged transgressions against Nicaragua, Sanders sought to raise money and material support for the Sandinista revolution; he also established a sister city program in Nicaragua, like he did in the Soviet Union and attempted (without success) to do in Cuba.
In 1991 a sympathetic biographer wrote that Sanders “probably has done more than any other elected politician in the country to actively support the Sandinistas and their revolution.”
To view a comprehensive profile of Bernie Sanders’ political career and agendas, click here.
There is Nothing
‘Loony’ About Bill Ayers as Obama’s Muse
I do know
where the Ayers stuff got started because I started it with a major assist
from American Thinker on these pages on October 9, 2008.
I never said Ayers wrote Dreams, but I presented overwhelming
literary forensic evidence that Ayers, a skilled writer and editor, helped
Obama shape Dreams.
Democrats Allow Communists
to Infiltrate Their Party Across the Nation
THE OBAMA MARXIST-MUSLIM BANKSTER-FUNDED
THIRD TERM for life:
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/03/obamas-marxism-still-hankering-for.html
In an August 8, 1985 television interview, Sanders characterized Daniel Ortega as “an impressive guy” while criticizing then-U.S. President Ronald Reagan. “The Sandinista government, in my view, has more support among the Nicaraguan people, substantially more support, than Ronald Reagan has among the American people,” said Sanders. “If President Reagan thinks that any time a government comes along, which in its wisdom, rightly or wrongly, is doing the best for its people, he has the right to overthrow that government, you’re going to be at war not only with all of Latin America, but with the entire Third World.”
Notably, Sanders did not mention the fact that by 1985, watchdog organizations had exposed the Sandinistas as perpetrators of enormous human-rights violations, including mass executions, the persecution of indigenous peoples, and the unexplained disappearance of hundreds of citizens each month.
Accusing the American media and the Reagan administration of deliberately covering up the good news of a successful socialist society, Sanders said: “Many of us get depressed about what’s [supposedly] going on in Nicaragua today, the absolute lies that are coming out of the White House. In fact, we have a right to be very exhilarated.” He praised the Sandinistas for “talking about a transformation of society, giving power to the poor people, to the working people.”
Lauding “the type of example Nicaragua is setting for the rest of Latin America,” Sanders responded to critics of the Sandinistas by saying: “Is [the Sandinistas’] crime that they have built new health clinics, schools, and distributed land to the peasants? Is their crime that they have given equal rights to women? Or that they are moving forward to wipe out illiteracy? No, their crime in Mr. Reagan’s eyes and the eyes of the corporations and billionaires that determine American foreign policy is that they have refused to be a puppet and banana republic to American corporate interests.”
Sanders had no problem with the Sandinistas’ war against La Prensa, a daily newspaper renowned for its criticism of the Daniel Ortega dictatorship. When asked to comment on the Sandinistas’ heavy-handed censorship of Nicaraguan media outlets, Sanders stated that undemocratic measures were sometimes necessary in times of war.
In 1987 Sanders hosted Sandinista politician Nora Astorga in Burlington. Astorga was a woman who, as the publication The Daily Beast puts it, was “notorious for a Mata Hari-like guerrilla operation that successfully lured Gen. Reynaldo Perez-Vega, a high-ranking figure in the Somoza dictatorship, to her apartment with promises of sex. Perez-Vega’s body was later recovered wrapped in a Sandinista flag, his throat slit by his kidnappers.” When Astorga died of cancer in 1988, Sanders publicly praised her as “a very, very beautiful woman” and a “very vital and beautiful woman.” He also speculated that her illness may have been brought about by the stress she felt as a result of American policies toward Nicaragua. “I have my own feelings about what causes cancer, and the psychosomatic aspects of cancer,” said Sanders. “One wonders if the war didn’t claim another victim; a person who couldn’t deal with the tremendous grief and suffering in her own country.”
At one point in the Eighties, Sanders asked a group of University of Vermont students to consider how “we [the United States] deal with Nicaragua, which is in many ways Vietnam, except it’s worse. It’s more gross.” To help offset the effects of America’s many alleged transgressions against Nicaragua, Sanders sought to raise money and material support for the Sandinista revolution; he also established a sister city program in Nicaragua, like he did in the Soviet Union and attempted (without success) to do in Cuba.
In 1991 a sympathetic biographer wrote that Sanders “probably has done more than any other elected politician in the country to actively support the Sandinistas and their revolution.”
To view a comprehensive profile of Bernie Sanders’ political career and agendas, click here.
There is Nothing
‘Loony’ About Bill Ayers as Obama’s Muse
This past week several people called my attention
to a post by Scott Johnson on his influential PowerLine blog
that addressed the literary relationship between Barack Obama and his radical
friend, Bill Ayers.
In the post Johnson spoke of his high regard for
David Garrow’s “staggeringly researched” 2017 Obama biography, Rising
Star. “Without resolving all mysteries,” Johnson writes, “[Garrow’s]
scholarship belies the notion that [Dreams from My Father] was
ghostwritten by Bill Ayers or other such collaborator.”
Johnson emailed Garrow to follow up on the
authorship question, and Garrow responded, “I don’t recall exactly where the
Bill Ayers [stuff] got started, but it, like the Frank-Davis-as-father notion,
is just beyond loony, ’cause Dreams is already *in galleys*
when Barack and Bill first get to know each other.”
I did not advance this theory casually. I
understood then what Obama biographer David Remnick would later affirm, namely
that my theory, “if ever proved true, or believed to be true among enough
voters, could have been the end of [Obama’s] candidacy.”
My research on this topic, aided by several
helpful literary detectives, culminated in my 2011 book, published by Simon
& Schuster, Deconstructing Obama. I think I can safely assume Garrow
has never read it. I would invite those curious about the evidence to read the
book or even to read the preliminary article cited above.
That Garrow does not know the source of a theory
he dismisses offhand as “beyond loony” is, unfortunately, altogether typical of
establishment political writers. His airy dismissal, in fact, reinforces the theme
of my forthcoming book Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True
Story of a Failed Presidency.
In the book, I use the phrase “samizdat” --
Russian for underground press -- to describe the loose coalition of
conservative blogs, online publications, talk radio shows, and legal monitors
such as Judicial Watch that challenged the Left -- and, occasionally, the
“responsible” right -- for control of the Obama narrative.
For eight-plus years, the samizdat broke
virtually every major unflattering story about Obama and his presidency, some
of which the major media grudgingly confirmed, some of which they continue to
suppress. In the book I tell how the individuals in question managed to break
these stories out. In every case, as you might imagine, the samizdat
journalists were met with condescension, if not outright contempt, from the
major media.
Obama’s biographers were among the more
contemptuous. Curiously, the four major biographers are all named David --
Mendell, Remnick, Maraniss, and Garrow. The last three are Pulitzer Prize
winners. To his credit, Garrow was the only one of the four who refused to prop
up what Remnick called Obama’s “signature appeal: the use of the details of his
own life as a reflection of a kind of multicultural ideal.”
The story Obama told about his happy
multicultural family at the conventions was pure fiction. According to Garrow,
Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, and Barack Obama Sr. “never chose to live together
at any time following the onset of Ann’s pregnancy.” Garrow quotes approvingly
one unnamed scholar to the effect that Obama Sr. was no more than “a sperm
donor in his son’s life.” All of this was common knowledge in the samizdat as
early as 2008, but it came as news to many of Garrow’s readers in 2017.
Like his fellow Davids, however, Garrow has no
use for information gleaned from the samizdat, especially information I
introduced. On the subject of the Obama poem “Pop,” for instance, Garrow notes,
“Most commentators presumed that Obama had written about his grandfather, Stan
Dunham, not Frank Marshall Davis.”
This much was true, but “hostile critics,” Garrow
continues, insisted the poem was about Obama’s bi-sexual Communist mentor,
Davis. The “hostile critics” Garrow cites in the footnotes are historian Paul
Kengor and me.
Instead of giving me credit for being the first
to decode “Pop,” Garrow describes me in the footnote as “someone who is cited
with the greatest reluctance.” What I did to deserve this slight is left
unsaid, especially since Garrow knows I nailed the identity of “Pop” two years
before anyone in the mainstream media did, including the other Davids.
As to Bill Ayers’s involvement in the writing
of Dreams, Garrow does not even deign to dismiss the possibility.
He has a discovery of his own, namely that outside literary help came from a
law school buddy of Obama’s named Rob Fisher. This is an important find
if for no other reason than it undercuts Obama’s 2008 boast to a crowd of
schoolteachers, "I've written two books. I actually wrote them myself."
An established economist before starting law
school, Fisher became good friends with Obama at Harvard. There, they
co-authored a manuscript that perhaps prophetically was never finished. One
completed chapter dealt with the always sexy topic of plant closings.
“The quest is to develop guidelines,” they wrote,
“on how politically progressive movements can use the market mechanism to
promote social goals.” Garrow quotes the unfinished manuscript extensively. Its
style is wonkish and ungainly throughout.
Sentences like the following suggest that one
author wrote as awkwardly as the other: “While Yuppies can afford the expensive
frivolities provided by The Sharper Image, others receive insufficient
nutrition to allow their minds to develop properly.”
I do not question Fisher’s involvement. Obama
needed all the help he could get. What I do question is Fisher’s ability to
provide the poetry, the rage, the postmodern rhetoric, and the Homeric
structure that inspired Oona King of the London Times to
overpraise Dreams as “a beautifully written
personal memoir steeped in honesty.”
Garrow seems to dismiss my thesis for no more
substantial reason than his belief that Dreams was already in
galley form when “Barack and Bill first get to know each other.” Garrow traces
the first meeting of these two gentlemen to a breakfast some time in early
1995. He bases this timing on the suspiciously well-remembered account of a
common friend who claims to have introduced them.
Garrow, however, has a problem with chronology.
He writes that Obama took six weeks off from his law firm job “in late spring
1994” to finish Dreams. He needed time to complete the book’s third
section, the one on Africa. Garrow claims Obama worked largely from letters he
sent in 1988 while in Kenya and retrieved from his girlfriend at the time,
Sheila Jager.
David Maraniss told a different story in his 2012
bio. According to Maraniss’s source, Crown editor Henry Ferris, Obama made an
additional trip to Kenya for further research. Obama confirmed this trip when
interviewed by Marannis. Garrow makes no mention of this mysterious trip, which
would have taken place in 1994. No one else does either. Like much in his life,
Obama appears to have made it up.
A more likely possibility is that Obama lied to
Ferris about the trip. Instead of going to Kenya, Obama may have contented
himself with going to the local library and pillaging the memoirs of longtime
Kenya resident Kuki Gallmann.
This is the theory proposed by
tireless researcher Shawn Glasco. He was intrigued by the many words and
phrases in Dreams that also appeared in Gallmann’s book, African
Nights, which was published in 1994. These include Baobab [a tree], bhang
[cannabis], boma [an enclosure], samosa [a fried snack], shamba [a farm field],
liana [a vine], tilapia [a fish], kanga [a sheet of fabric], shuka [decorative
sashes], and many, many more.
Based on Garrow’s imprecise timeline, Obama flew
to New York to hand the completed book off to Ferris no later than early June
1994. In other words, he spent six weeks to finish the last third of the
400-page book between “late spring” 1994 and early June 1994, which is, in
fact, late spring.
In his 2009 book, Barack and Michelle:
Portrait of an American Marriage, celebrity biographer Christopher Andersen
offers a much more credible account of how Obama managed to finish a project
that hung over his head ever since he finished law school.
According to Andersen’s two sources in Chicago’s
Hyde Park, Obama found himself deeply in debt and “hopelessly blocked.” At
“Michelle’s urging,” Obama “sought advice from his friend and Hyde Park
neighbor Bill Ayers.” Noting that Obama had already taped interviews with many
of his relatives, both African and American, Andersen elaborated, “These oral
histories, along with his partial manuscript and a trunkload of notes were
given to Ayers.” Andersen’s six-page account makes sense, logically and
chronologically, but Garrow fully ignores it.
Andersen is a best-selling, mainstream author. He
even appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball to discuss the book. Said
Chris Matthews at the end of the interview, “You‘re amazing, successful
guy. You have a winning streak here.” Matthews likely did not read the
book. Garrow did read it and cites the book in the footnotes but, oddly, not on
the subject of authorship.
Garrow nonetheless offers some valuable insights
into the Ayers-Obama relationship, insights that I believe strengthen my
thesis. Once Ayers helped launch Obama’s political career in 1995, Garrow
writes, “Barack and Michelle began to see a great deal more of not only Bill
and Bernardine [Dohrn] but also their three closest friends, Rashid and Mona
Khalidi and Carole Travis."
According to Garrow, the three couples attended
"almost nightly dinners” together up until the time Obama ran for the U.S.
Senate in 2004. This information, of course, makes complete hash out of Obama’s
infamous claim during a 2008 debate that Ayers was “just a guy who lives in my
neighborhood.”
Khalidi, a radical Palestinian, begins his 2004
book, Resurrecting Empire, with a tribute to his own literary
muse. “First, chronologically and in other ways,” writes Khalidi, “comes Bill
Ayers.” Unlike the calculating Obama, Khalidi had no reason to be coy about
this relationship. He elaborates, “Bill was particularly generous in
letting me use his family’s dining room table to do some writing for the
project.” Khalidi did not need the table. He had one of his own. He
needed help from the skilled neighborhood editor and writer who obviously could
and would provide it.
There is nothing “loony” about Bill Ayers helping
a good friend finish his book. That is what Ayers did. He was grooming Obama
for higher office and was savvy enough to keep his writing relationship with
Obama under wraps. Being a friend of a terrorist, Ayers knew, would not exactly
help Obama’s career.
Jack Cashill’s most recent book, a
political thriller called “The Hunt” co-authored with Mike McMullen, is
available wherever you buy books. For a signed collector’s edition, see
www.TheHuntBook.com.
Democrats Allow Communists
to Infiltrate Their Party Across the Nation
“Obama’s new home in
Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the
anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said
that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the
“resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a
variety of groups organizing direct action against
Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features
lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”
*
“Professor Paul Kengor has
extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David
Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the openly
Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put
Obama into power.”
*
We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia –
President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair
election process.
BARACK OBAMA:
Was he America’s first closet Communist president?
Obama choose Communists and Marxists
for the highest, most powerful positions in our land, including his closest
political advisors, and his head of the CIA. These facts are not in
dispute. Most are openly admitted by the people in question, as necessary
damage control. Our press chooses not to report them.
Professor
Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny
include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama. Add the
openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who
put Obama into power.
OBAMA’S WAR ON THE JEWS
The Democrats are now
officially the party of Jew-hatred. This is largely due to the disastrous
presidency of Barack Hussein Obama. PAMELA GELLER
*
*
Abunimah’s piece -- and Obama’s numerous
anti-Semitic associations -- got little attention. Throughout his life Barack
Obama has been close friends with numerous virulent anti-Semites: Jeremiah
Wright, Bill Ayers, Khalid al-Mansour, Rashid Khalidi and others. PAMELA GELLER
THE OBOMBS AND HARVARD
OBAMA AND HIS SAUDIS
PAYMASTERS… Did he serve them well?
Malia,
Michelle, Barack and the College Admissions Scandal https://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2019/03/malia-michelle-barack-and-college.html
Michelle was the next to attend Harvard, in her case Harvard
Law School. “Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren’t good
enough for an Ivy League school,” writes Christopher Andersen in Barack and
Michelle, “Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway.”
GOOGLE WHAT THE OBOMB DID FOR HIS SAUDIS
PAYMASTERS
Barack Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before
prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their
dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire
peddled to get Obama into Harvard.
“Of course,
one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry”
is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein
Obama was president for eight long years." MATTHEW VADUM
THE OBAMA MARXIST-MUSLIM BANKSTER-FUNDED
THIRD TERM for life:
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/03/obamas-marxism-still-hankering-for.html
"Cold War historian Paul Kengor
goes deeply into Obama's communist background in an article in
American Spectator, "Our First Red Diaper Baby President," and in an
excellent Mark Levin interview. Another Kengor article describes the Chicago communists whose
younger generation include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein
Obama. Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into
power." Karin
McQuillan
*
"We know
that Obama and his inner circle have set up a war room in his D.C.
home to plan
and execute resistance to the Trump administration and his legislative
agenda.
None of these people care about the American people, or the fact that
Trump won
the election because millions of people voted for him."
Patricia McCarthy / AMERICAN THINKER.com
No comments:
Post a Comment