Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump....Agree?

This is a very good example of how the MSM works. Please watch the following 2 videos but before i do let me explain the reason. Outside of the call to stop immigration, one of the points that has come up in BOTH of the last GOP and Democratic debates has been " Would the ME be better off if Libya and Iraq still had their leaders?"

The MSM has attempting to crucify Donald Trump since he said yes but there is someone else in the race who...agrees. It is not about supporting a dictator but about sanctioning and not allowing complete chaos as we see in Libya, Egypt, Syria and Iraq. Removing the dictators and 'withdrawing' has left a void that ISIS has taken....It was Bernie Sanders.

Note the way they are both talked to by the moderator of the interview.

BERNIE
TRUMP

I am sure many of you know how this works, but again, this is for those who are blind to the words that are fed to them each day.

The proof is in the pudding as the saying goes.
the western world knows nothing about the middle east folks,obviously the middle east folks have learned over the centuries that a dictatorship is the thing that works best in that part of the world.

The west( and America in particular) thinks that everyone in the world is enlightened enough and capable of living in a democracy.
The western leaders aren`t even in touch with the reality of their own people, so they certainly don`t have a clue as to the reality of people from half a world away.

a reply to: matafuchs

What they said was similar.

Trump said that it was 100% certain that if the dictators weren't removed there would be more stability and less immigration. to fight ISIS first, however, ISIS didn't even exist when Saddam was removed.

Sanders said it was a 'catch22', they should have been removed, yet it caused instability.


I don't see Meet the Press crucifying trump in the video you provided. They are MSM. It is sort of the premise of the show "come into contact with the Press". No one was mean to trump there or tried to 'crucify' him.

At least we now know Sanders is a war monger.

a reply to: matafuchs
You do not realize Trump and Sanders are of the same Libertarian Stamp. Trump embodies the far right, Sanders the far left within this ideology. They should run on an Independent ticket together; if so; could win.

originally posted by: xuenchen

xuechen: At least we now know Sanders is a war monger.

He had a student deferral; as was in College (was a Conscientious Objector): so no war mongering applies here.

What is it with her obsession with videos? Does she honestly believe that anyone will fall for that one? I'll bet even George The Second won't be fooled by that one again!

I see the msm guy trying to stir up discord. All that gaff implying that it is simply impossible that two presidential candidates from opposing parties could find any agreement on an issue is just fluff. In fact, the entire interviews seemed to me to be fluff designed to make money for the network while disallowing any discussion of substance.

I'm still amazed that the political handlers of the Dems are allowing this trumpeting of Trump to continue. It's the craziest thing I've ever witnessed in my entire life of political observations. I really thought that after they saw the result of this sort of campaigning, (the recent KY gubernatorial election) these tactics would change.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Who says I do not know both candidates? This thread is about how perception in the MSM is used. There was a poll, and when it was asked do you believe with Trump and banning Muslim immigrants it was 15 points lower than simply excluding Trump and asking the voter do you believe in banning Muslim Immigrants. Funny how that works, no?

a reply to: matafuchs

I don't agree with Donald Trump on everything, but I do agree with him that the Middle East would be better off with their old leaders. I'm beginning to think that the dictators kept the Muslim extremists in line. Certainly after they left, the region became much less stable and the Muslim extremists started to do far worse things than the dictators.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Who says I do not know both candidates? This thread is about how perception in the MSM is used. There was a poll, and when it was asked do you believe with Trump and banning Muslim immigrants it was 15 points lower than simply excluding Trump and asking the voter do you believe in banning Muslim Immigrants. Funny how that works, no?

My response had no thing to do with banning Muslims; rather potential candidates for election.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
a reply to: matafuchs
You do not realize Trump and Sanders are of the same Libertarian Stamp. Trump embodies the far right, Sanders the far left within this ideology. They should run on an Independent ticket together; if so; could win.

I've been saying the EXACT same thing.

Trump and Sanders, in my opinion, are the least likely, currently "visible candidates", to be heavily affiliated with NWO/Old-Money types. Trump and Sanders weren't "born into" the "right kind" of political families, in fact their ancestors were immigrants from the lower classes of Europe. Its actually really too bad they can't be on the same ticket, running as Independents, with Sanders and Trump as President and VP, with people like Ralph Nader, Jessie Ventura and Ron Paul filling the various cabinet positions (pooling campaign resources, with the intention of actually trying to win, as a team and not solo).

But if they tried to pull a "hat trick" like that, I'm sure quite a few of them would QUICKLY find themselves at risk of being in a "plane crash" or on the wrong end of a "car accident".

I also really don't quite understand why some people think Donald Trump is a worse choice than "Clinton part II" or "Bush part III".

Trump is running a Presidential Campaign and a company with 22,000+ employees, that has billions of dollars in real estate holdings. People need to start giving the guy some friggin credit. In contrast, what other organization, WITH EMPLOYED STAFF, was Obama "running" during his initial Presidential campaign? NONE, just his Presidential campaign, with some skeleton crew staffers left behind, to autopilot his Senate duties, same goes for "Bush part II" (just replace the title "Senator" with "Governor").

Although Trump did grow up rich, inheriting money and property from his fathers businesses, the Trump Family is self-made for the most part and do not seem to be directly connected with NWO/Old-Money types (all the Trumps are Tax Dodgers BTW). Trumps grandfather did not process properly through Ellis Island, in the late 1800's and had left behind many unpaid debt in Europe by the time he came to America and started his new businesses. What regualr people don't seem to understand is that folks like Donald Trump and Ross Perot are considered "trash" by the standards of the Romney and Bush clans types, with family members having held political offices, in the Untied States, as far back as the 1850's. Note, Reagan, Clinton, and Obama also had no direct family ties to the NWO/Old-Money types. However, they were not nearly as wealthy, nor as independently bold, as Trump or Perot and eventually all of them did "toe the line", following the orders of the NWO/Old-Money types.

The reality is that Trump will NEVER be accepted as part of the true "Owners of Capital" club because he is the decedent of regular working class immigrants from Germany, that came to the USA via Ellis Island. Whether voters believe it or not, people like Donald Trump and Ross Perot before him, are truly, the best chance, regular people have to being represented by someone in office who's family is not beholden to or part of the NWO/Old-Money types. Although I have not thoroughly checked, it does not appear that Donald Trump nor Ross Perot were ever invited to or attended the Bilderberg Conference. That's a GOOD sign, not a bad one.

Also there are some other things to consider, if Trump has a REAL chance at winning the republican nomination or somehow gets huge backing as an Independent, the "Owners of Capital" will simply do what they did to Ross Perot and once that process unfolds he will eventually decide to "willingly withdraw" from the race.

Also, do people really believe, that if someone like Donald Trump wins the election, that he will be able to do what he wants, as apposed to, what the "Military Industrial Complex" wants him to do?

Anyone who becomes President of the United States has to "cow tow" to the "Military Industrial Complex" and even Donald Trump is not immune to a guaranteed "CIA visit" once in office.

Be assured they will pay him a visit, if he ever wins, and like Ross Perot, Jessie Ventura, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Obama, he too will be told to "toe the line" and "play ball", as they dictate. For example, why in the world did Arnold Schwarzenegger need to do ANYTHING along party lines? His fame and popularity COMPLETELY transcended political parties, yet somehow he was still "answering" to politicians who "in theory" should have had no affect on his personal life, political career or personal fortune, all of which existed prior to being elected and was held COMPLETELY outside of the confines or influence of the "Military Industrial Complex".

Also consider this angle, there is a huge assets difference between someone like Mitt Romney, who has a $250 million net worth and Ross Perot with a $5 billion net worth (Donald Trump has a net worth of $4 Billion). Yet, someone like Romney was a shoe in for party nominations. As I alluded to above, its NOT the money nor the popular vote that matters, people like Mitt and Jeb Bush are government insiders and both come from families that always have been government insiders. That was not the case at all with Perot and the same goes for Trump, hence neither of them can be elected regardless of the popular vote or the public's desires or how much money they spend.

Ross Perot dropping out of the 1992 election was not happenstance either, nor simply about his daughters wedding:

Mr. Perot offered no evidence, only quoting friends and an unidentified "top Republican." "I can't prove any of it today," he said on tonight's CBS News program "60 Minutes." "But it was a risk I did not have to take," he added, "and a risk I would not take where my daughter is concerned." Mr. Perot accused the unidentified C.I.A. employee of being hired to tap into his computerized stock trading program to prevent him from having the money to revive his campaign.

I think Ross Perot would have done a much better job than ANY of the "good ol' boys" that we've gotten as Presidents since then. Again, Perot dropping out of the 1992 election was not happenstance, nor was it simply about his daughters wedding. He was likely threatened in some way that none of us can imagine. Which is most likely why he has he been so quiet, for the last 20+ years. In the end Trump and Snders will be no different, but, if either decides to run for President and somehow wins, best case scenario, it will be Arnold Schwarzenegger or Ronald Reagan all over again.

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: matafuchs

I don't agree with Donald Trump on everything, but I do agree with him that the Middle East would be better off with their old leaders. I'm beginning to think that the dictators kept the Muslim extremists in line. Certainly after they left, the region became much less stable and the Muslim extremists started to do far worse things than the dictators.

Someone should have banned building ocean going boats after the Phoenician times (1350 ME).

a reply to: darkbake

i agree with alot of trump