Clinton Supporters Seek Revenge Challenge Against Bernie

by William Skink

You can thank James Conner for bringing my attention to these bitter Bernie haters:

Vermont resident Jon Svitavsky announced on July 5 that he is challenging Sen. Bernie Sanders in his upcoming re-election in 2018. In his most recent race for re-election, Sanders won over 71 percent of the vote and the Democratic Party didn’t bother to run a candidate. In the 2016 presidential primaries, Sanders received over 86 percent of the vote in Vermont. Among the small percentage of people who voted for Hillary Clinton in the state was Svitavsky, a homeless shelter director who is beginning to receive support from other disgruntled Clinton supporters across the country.

This is astoundingly self-destructive. The idea that any energy would be put toward defeating Bernie Sanders in 2018 is almost too absurd to believe. Going after the progressive fall-guy you rigged the primary against is beyond bad taste. It’s pathological.

Challenging Bernie in Vermont takes some serious audacity. I wonder who Jon Tester would support in this scenario. Here’s Farmer Jon from just a year ago:

Hillary Clinton is the most qualified candidate for president, Montana Sen. Jon Tester said Friday, announcing his endorsement of the former secretary of state.

“Hillary is the most qualified person on the ballot to unite our nation at a time when dangerous rhetoric threatens to divide us,” Tester said in a statement. “I look forward to working with her to create jobs, strengthen the middle class, keep our country safe, and invest in education and infrastructure so we can move our nation forward.”

Tester thanked Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders “for running a strong grassroots campaign,” energizing young voters and addressing important issues but added, “Now it’s time for us to come together to win up and down the ballot this November.”

If Hillary devotees feel compelled to punish Bernie for forcing them to corrupt the primary process in order to put him down, maybe Bernie supporters in Montana should see to it that Jon Tester goes back to the farm.

About Travis Mateer

I'm an artist and citizen journalist living and writing in Montana. You can contact me here: willskink at yahoo dot com
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Clinton Supporters Seek Revenge Challenge Against Bernie

  1. Big Swede says:

    Meanwhile in Sanders socialist utopian paradise Venezuela Mad Max biker gangs are hijacking food trucks while others are eating zoo animals.

    • JC says:

      I’m sure the chaos in Venezuela has nothing to do with our covert foreign policy.

      • Big Swede says:

        The Bushes did it.

        Had to dust that one off JC.

        • JC says:

          Hook, line and sinker… I learn from the best!

          Now that I gots your attention, lets look at some recent details. The National Endowment for Democracy (the CIA’s public, propaganda side) spent $1.5 million last year in Venezuela, and $1.9 mill in 2015. What did that money do besides support covert ops and provide local cover for infiltration?

          Buying off journalists in Venezuela to propagate the State Department’s and CIA’s covert and foreign policies for starters.

          Then there’s all this:

          The Dirty Hand of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in Venezuela

          Anti-government protests in Venezuela that seek regime change have been led by several individuals and organizations with close ties to the US government. Leopoldo Lopez and Maria Corina Machado- two of the public leaders behind the violent protests that started in February – have long histories as collaborators, grantees and agents of Washington. The National Endowment for Democracy “NED” and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) have channeled multi-million dollar funding to Lopez’s political parties Primero Justicia and Voluntad Popular, and Machado’s NGO Sumate and her electoral campaigns.

          These Washington agencies have also filtered more than $14 million to opposition groups in Venezuela between 2013 and 2014, including funding for their political campaigns in 2013 and for the current anti-government protests in 2014.

          And there’s more, lots more:

          NGOs: A New Face of Destabilization in Latin America

          …For example in Venezuela, an NGO called Sumate directly participated in the coup d’etat in Venezuela in 2002. Sumate, translated as Join Up, received tens of thousands of dollars from NED. The electoral-political group was headed by Marina Corina Machado, a former opposition lawmaker who in 2002 was a signatory to the decree dissolve all state institutions in the aftermath of the coup…

          Leaked cables reveal USAID intervened in Venezuela to stir anti-government sentiment.
          In Latin America, there is increasing awareness about the activities of these groups and those who fund them to undermine elected governments and subvert the region’s autonomy…

          How the US Funds Dissent against Latin American Governments

          …Also during this time, the United States government began putting an increasing amount of resources into organizations operating in Latin America. Under seemingly altruistic pretexts—including environmental promotion, defense of human rights, and strengthening democracy—these organizations received U.S. dollars often to intervene in the political affairs of country whose policies fall out of line with U.S. policies and objectives.

          In addition to the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID, which began in the 1960s, the newer National Endowment for Democracy, NED, and its branches such as the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, NDI, and the International Republican Institute, IRI), put tens of millions of dollars toward organizations that will carry out work in places where they would otherwise have to work covertly.

          …For example in Venezuela, an NGO called Sumate directly participated in the coup d’etat in Venezuela in 2002. Sumate, translated as Join Up, received tens of thousands of dollars from NED. The electoral-political group was headed by Marina Corina Machado, a former opposition lawmaker who in 2002 was a signatory to the decree dissolve all state institutions in the aftermath of the coup.

          …Documents leaked by WikiLeaks reveal that the USAID invested some US$15 million in 300 “civil organizations” in Venezuela between 2004 and 2006, using the premise of protecting human rights and education.

          The leaked report came from the political adviser of the U.S. Embassy in Caracas, Robert Downes, and described the strategic points devised by the U.S. government to undermine the government of Venezuela.

          …The cables also reveal that USAID’s Office of Transition Initiatives, or OTI, helped create 34 new NGOs as well as programs to spur anti-government sentiment.

          Cables sent by the U.S. ambassador to Venezuela, William Brownfield, leaked by WikiLeaks in 2013, show his support for opposition groups in Venezuela and outlines the funding they received from U.S. NGOs in Venezuela.

          According to the leaked documents, funding would be channeled through an official organism and included “more than 300 Venezuelan social organizations” involved in everything from helping the disabled to improving education…

          Need I say more? Really easy pickings here.

        • Big Swede says:

          No need to say anything more. Once you site “leaks” without authors you said it all.

        • JC says:

          So WikiLeaks invokes the ostrich response? Nice! It only happens if the government tells you so through official channels…

        • Big Swede says:

          Connect the dots for me JC. How does covert ops cause food scarcity?
          Is the CIA hijacking grocery trucks?

        • JC says:

          That’s an oil-dependent economy for you. Of course, this plays into the desired outcome for U.S. foreign/covert policy: install a U.S. friendly government. But of course, it isn’t as simple as declaring that socialism causes food shortages. Here’s a more accurate report:

          Last year, over 750 opposition-controlled offshore companies linked to the Panama Papers scandal were accused of purposely redirecting Venezuelan imports of raw food materials from the government to the private sector. Many of these companies sell their products to private companies in Colombia, which resell them to Venezuelans living close to Colombia.

          “Selling contraband is a serious problem. People here are taking large quantities of products meant for Venezuelans and selling them in Colombia,” Valencia resident Francisco Luzon told Al Jazeera in a 2014 interview.

          Reuters admitted in 2014 that Venezuelan opposition members living in border states are shipping low-cost foodstuffs provided by the Venezuelan government into Colombia for profit.

          Overall, Venezuela’s millionaire opposition are profiting handsomely from the country’s food crisis while blaming it on the socialist government that’s trying to eliminate it.

          This is too easy Swede. You’ll have to try harder. Time for a YouTube viddid?

    • Venezuela is a classic puppet state, allowed to think it has home rule, but run by agents of foreign powers. As with Cuba, when a population tends toward rebellion, they are allowed to think they had a successful one, and a puppet like Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez emerges as a “home grown” leader.

      Much the same tactics were used, in my developing view, in 1776. It explains why George Washington was allowed to stumble all over Long Island without being trapped and defeated. It was a stage show. It also explains why every American president, Washington on down save one, was a descendent of British royalty. We were allowed, like the Cubans, to believe we escaped.

  2. Eric says:

    Looking back on the not-so-distant election, Bernie sure didn’t seem too upset about being shafted was he?

    Have you considered the possibility that he was in on the ‘Fix’ ?

    • JC says:

      Sheepdoggin’, yep. I think even he and his supporters didn’t think he would do that well, and that dems would hate Clinton to the degree they did.

      • Steve W says:

        Bernie ran a Big Organizing campaign and people were ready and willing.

        Clinton had the delegates (because of the supers) locked up early, Jon not declaring until after the MT State primary and after Clinton had the nomination locked up tight was a gift to Bernie.

  3. Big Swede says:

    JC, Russia is dependent on oil prices. You don’t see starving Russians.

    Not only is V rich in oil reserves it’s also wealthy in ag land. But when you nationalize farms, oil rigs, and other industries you create scarcity.

    Forbes agrees.

    “2. The Chavez government has crippled private businesses and national industry through expropriations and nationalizations.

    The Chavez government has expropriated or nationalized numerous companies (no one seems to be able to count them all) involved in various sectors including aluminum, cement, gold, iron, steel, farming, transportation, electricity, food production, banking, paper and the media. The number of private companies in industry has dropped from 14,000 in 1998 to only 9,000 in 2011, according to Torres.

    Companies need investment to grow and hire new workers. One of the biggest failures of the Chavez government has been to drive away both domestic and foreign investors. In 2011 Latin America enjoyed a record of more than $150 billion in foreign investment with Brazil receiving $67 billion. Venezuela’s neighbor Colombia received $13 billion while Venezuela received only $5 billion. To avoid expropriation and find investment a number of Venezuelan companies have moved to Colombia, Panama and the United States.”

    • JC says:

      Russia is not as dependent on oil as it used to be. Sanctions have had the opposite effect on Russia, strengthening its economy. And Russia is working on expelling the privatizes and building national operations in strategic areas.

      Here, read some Helmer. He’s been watching and translating Russian economic matters better than anyone for a long time:

      If your enemy is waging economic war on you, it’s prudent to camouflage how well your farms and factories are doing. Better the attacker thinks you’re on your last legs, and are too exhausted to fight back. A new report on the Russian economy, published by Jon Hellevig, reveals the folly in the enemy’s calculation.

      Who is the audience for this message? US and NATO warfighters against Russia can summon up more will if they think Russia is in retreat than if they must calculate the cost in their own blood and treasure if the Russians strike back. That’s Russian policy on the Syrian front, where professional soldiers are in charge. On the home front, where the civilians call the shots, Hellevig’s message looks like an encouragement for fight-back – the economic policymaker’s equivalent of a no-fly zone for the US and European Union. It’s also a challenge to the Kremlin policy of appeasement.

  4. Big Swede says:

    Has anyone looked into the possibility that Russia was involved in preventing V from maximizing its’ output of oil production?

    There’s evidence that Russia is interfering here in the US.

Leave a Reply