It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

@AOC Claims Crazy Green New Deal Document FROM HER OWN WEBSITE Is a Fake

page: 5
26
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Ocasio-Cortez adviser admits he falsely claimed Green New Deal didn't promise security for those 'unwilling' to work'


www.foxnews.com...





posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 07:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: xuenchen

Where's the original document?
What does it matter? Cortez and this professor are in Da Nile and I
Don’t mean river in Egypt.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Can't answer that for her. But in my opinion, it can mean a lot of things. If you're a citizen of the US you should have security from the economy your contribute to. If you lose your job, should you become homeless, starve, or be barred from welfare and food stamps? But, people are focusing on the 'unwilling' aspect of the FAQs document.
People are focusing on that because it’s what she said.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

What did she say?



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa
Not to mention who wants the control that comes with it! We always pay the price one way or another.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

What did she say?
Ok it came from her office if you want to get technical

The actual resolution that outlines the Green New Deal does not include the "unwilling to work" part, but the overview document, released by New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's office, does include the "unwilling" language. The overview entails the "nuts and bolts" of the plan. Ocasio-Cortez identifies as a democratic socialist.
www.google.com... work.html
And I will explain something else to you. Marxist doctrine specifies

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is a slogan popularised by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program.[1]
en.m.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:08 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

So she didn't say it...

Great. Just more garbage in this thread to smear AOC over a literal nothing blog post of a draft FAQ sheet that was posted by accident and dug up by a bunch of butt hurt internet trolls that made it's way to FOX and other anti dem websites. This is a fiasco, fake news all over it. Can't wait till people forget about this in a day or two.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

So she didn't say it...

Great. Just more garbage in this thread to smear AOC over a literal nothing blog post of a draft FAQ sheet that was posted by accident and dug up by a bunch of butt hurt internet trolls that made it's way to FOX and other anti dem websites. This is a fiasco, fake news all over it. Can't wait till people forget about this in a day or two.


SO, you agree it WAS in the draft then?

Wonderful, we are making progress.

Now, the big question, are you ready?

WHY was that phrase even in a DRAFT if it was not considered or discussed unless it was part of their thought process?

And, bonus question, what was that old phrase about a frog???????



edit on 2/10/2019 by Krakatoa because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

At least you now admit that it was posted to her own website.


...and other anti dem websites.


Would you consider NPR anti dem?



Green New Deal FAQ


Overall, we rate NPR (National Public Radio) Left-Center Biased based on story selection that leans slightly left and Very High for factual reporting due to thorough sourcing and very accurate news reporting. (5/18/2016) Updated (M. Huitsing 9/4/2018)


NPR - Media Bias Fact Check



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

I said many post ago that it was a draft ...
It's also full of fallacies, like getting rid of cars, and nuclear power. The actual bill says nothing of the sort. Who ever wrote the published blog post didn't read the bill and caused this, the mistake was seen, and fixed. AOC has nothing to do with this fiasco, and she even pokes fun at it how people just blew it up into earth shattering news like it actually means something.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:34 PM
link   
AOC will be a great leader. Don't blame me, it was the people I selected to help me lead you that screwed up. I call not me.

I suppose it is the 21st century where that is the new way responsibility works.

edit:

So tired of our leaders not owning their mistakes. Just tell it like it is instead of dancing around it looking to push off blame. There are a lot of people who respect admitting error and don't respect dodging it.
edit on 2/10/2019 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

This is going full circle here. I've made posts acknowledging everything there is to know about this situation. at this point it's beating a dead horse. The facts are this, someone posted a draft of a FAQ, which is riddled with mistakes and grammar mistakes. Once people saw the 'unwilling to work' and shutting down nuclear power, people started to question and point out the obvious, it's not a true representation of the actual bill proposed. It was taken down.

Then people started slapping their tin foil hats on and claiming they changed it based off being called out. Hmmm really? Lets put some sense into this, why would they post a FAQ that didn't even produce anything remotely precise to the actual bill? It means no-one proof read it, looked over it, no - one sent it to AOC, or even a lawyer to look over.

There's two possible reasons for this, either someone posted the wrong document, or they were somehow testing the waters to see a public reaction. But given how fast it was taken down, I'm going to go with it was a mistake.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Krakatoa

I said many post ago that it was a draft ...
It's also full of fallacies, like getting rid of cars, and nuclear power. The actual bill says nothing of the sort. Who ever wrote the published blog post didn't read the bill and caused this, the mistake was seen, and fixed. AOC has nothing to do with this fiasco, and she even pokes fun at it how people just blew it up into earth shattering news like it actually means something.


See, a leader, a real leader, takes responsibility for those they lead.


Well, she did the exact opposite. She threw those in her circle that posted this under the bus at the first sign of trouble.

Do you think she would think any more of regular citizens if the SHTF?

That speaks volumes. It's called pressure under fire, and she failed, big time IMO.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

So she didn't say it...

Great. Just more garbage in this thread to smear AOC over a literal nothing blog post of a draft FAQ sheet that was posted by accident and dug up by a bunch of butt hurt internet trolls that made it's way to FOX and other anti dem websites. This is a fiasco, fake news all over it. Can't wait till people forget about this in a day or two.
It was stated on her website. That means it is a statement she supports. Apparently though there must have been a lot of flak about it or it would not have been removed. Are you of the opinion that Republicans actually hacked her website and out that insane stuff on it as her representative said on Tucker Carlson ? I listen to that interview and the guy is a piece of work.
And oh yah it’s all just trolls, fake news, and accident that thing landed on her website.
Even if it was just a “draft”..... do I really need to say what the final would be like ?
edit on 10-2-2019 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:50 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

It's the internet, anything can happen.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

I'm not even in support of her. She's young, still learning. But has potential.
Honestly, she's taking this in her own way, and some people love it, some people hate it. That's politics. But when I see blatant smear campaigns like this, I try to find the truth, even if it's against popular opinion.

Politics is a jungle. I think she's teasing the pythons and tigers a little to much.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

It's the internet, anything can happen.
Oh so now it’s just the Internet and not a website that represents her opinion.
I’ll tell you another one that was just the Internet. Obama’s website that had the fake birth certificate on it that got removed. Oh wait now it’s a smear campaign ... cause she couldn’t possibly have put that stuff there. Oh it was Republicans. That’s truly hilarious. She really doesn’t need Republucans to make her look foolish. The whole premise of the Green New Deal is unrealistic utopian unicorns.

edit on 10-2-2019 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

It's the internet, anything can happen.


So, her campaign staff are so incompetent that cannot stop a page defacement? Hell, they should hire me to admin their one website. I have quite a few, all being attacked 24/7, for the past 8 years, and not one defacement yet.



posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:57 PM
link   
The latest excuse is "it was a draft" and got put on the website "by accident" ROFLOL 🤡




posted on Feb, 10 2019 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

Yes, this is the Internet and as we all know, it is for ever.

What happened in this case was not that anyone other than AOC's office put up the FAQ. This was AOC's chief of staff who posted the FAQ, not some low level flunky:


But over the weekend, Saikat Chakrabarti, Ocasio-Cortez's chief of staff, admitted that the FAQ shared with NPR and posted on Ocasio-Cortez's website was genuine. Metadata from the document posted by NPR confirmed that Chakrabarti was listed as one of the authors of the FAQ.

“An early draft of a FAQ that was clearly unfinished and that doesn’t represent the GND [Green New Deal] resolution got published to the website by mistake,” Chakrabarti tweeted. “But what’s in the resolution is the GND.”

Both Chakrabarti and Ocasio-Cortez also referred supporters to a stripped-down resolution they formally introduced in Congress, which does not include the FAQ's language on universal economic support. The resolution is not a bill, and contains only broad language.


Ocasio-Cortez adviser admits he falsely claimed Green New Deal didn't promise security for those 'unwilling' to work'

The parody version actually didn't contain the, "unwilling to work," verbiage.

Is her Chief of Staff not privy to meetings about legislation which AOC is authoring or sponsoring?



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join