1.5K
Please share this article as widely as you can.
Mena Beaumont
Mena Beaumont, a member of TGP's Facebook group just brought this to our attention.
Except she is NOT challenging power with her voting record. The latest...she voted with her party on anti bds.
Beware. Things aren't always as they appear. She has her backers. That’s how she got in.
"Compromises"
In just 6 months Ocasio has:
- 1. Wholeheartedly endorsed Nancy Pelosi, one of the most corrupt people in the history of Congress and praised war criminal, John McCain as "an unparalleled example of human decency".
- 2. Voted to fund ICE on her first week on the job after calling for the abolition of ICE as one of the central points of her campaign,
- 3. Voted in favor of HR 221 - a bill which criminalizes boycotts to Israel under the false pretense of nominating a Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism Act - a composite bill that would give Israel billions of dollars and “combat” the campaign to boycott Israel over its human rights violations among its measures." AOC however voted against the so-called House "anti-BDS" resolution (HR 246). This is certainly confusing, for while HR 221 clearly supports and implies the criminalisation of criticism and actions against Israel, categorising such as "anti-Semitic", the anti-BDS rsolution is more forthright, condeming all boycotts and hostile campaigns against Israel. This resolution Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, along with the rest of her friends in the "Squad", all voted against.)
- 4. Voted for HR 676 - the NATO Support Act which reaffirms US support for NATO and rejects any attempts to withdraw from this international criminal alliance.
- 5. Voted for HJ Resolution 30 to reject a proposal to lift Apr. 2018 sanctions imposed under CAATSA to Russia, Iran, and North Korea.
- 6. Manufactured consent for regime change in Venezuela by perpetuating the "Maduro bad man" imperialistic non-sense that she claims to oppose and said she would follow the Democratic Party’s leadership in regards to Venezuela.
- 7. Backed H.R.1616 to subsidize new gas infrastructure in Europe and Euroasia - a handout to the fossil fuel mafia (so much for that New Green Deal)
- 8. Backed legislation containing a prohibition against the IRS offering on-line tax filing- a handout to tax service companies
- 9. Voted for $738 billion for the military, a record amount for the Pentagon.
Can anyone please explain how these actions are radical or revolutionary in any shape or form?
—Raúl Fernández-Berriozábal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
This article is false on the 2 items that I checked. AOC voted not for but against the FY 22 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA: https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2021293 That was not $738 billion, it was $767.6B: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57471 I object to the editors’ acceptance of articles that make allegations that aren’t linked to their sources, the documentation. Any such articles should be rejected immediately. I usually find that articles that don’t link to their evidence are loaded with falsehoods. In the present case, it took me years to getting around to checking this one out. Checking out the allegations in an article that… Read more »
The commenter seems to forget that this publication enjoys the services of no paid editors, that it operates on probably 1/billionth the budget of the New York Times; and that it operates in an ocean of data which is immensely difficult to verify to the degree the commenter thinks is needed to convey the direction of truth about any subject, in this case, AOC’s fraudulence as an agent of radical change. Furthermore he also forgets that truth about a particular subject, truth enough to make decisions as to where we stand, does not need to be footnoted ad infinitum, and… Read more »
“AOC’s fraudulence as an agent of radical change” is a topic that interests me but as soon as I spot-checked an article which asserts that hypothesis and found both of the allegations false, I not only have no reason to trust the truth of the allegation but also have reason to trash the article’s writer as being not trustworthy and therefore not worth reading that writer in the future. I don’t have time to spot-check articles that fail to link to their sources, but now, years after that article was published, I finally did, a bit of time to do… Read more »