Jill Stein: 'Biden can end the Gaza war with 1 phone call'
Jill Stein: 'Biden can end the Gaza war with 1 phone call'
US presidential candidate, Jill Stein, says because of AIPAC's $100 million funding of the US election, it has become ''politically toxic' to speak out against the genocide in Gaza.
‘If we have concerns about the right to life before birth, how about a right to life after birth,’ she said in reference to Israel’s killing of innocent children and the elderly in Gaza. US President Joe Biden 'can end this war with a phone call’, she added.
You're viewing a single thread.
And that is why she isn't a serious or viable candidate.
And she never has been.
Oh, she isn't a serious or viable candidate for way more than that, not least of which is the fact that she's a Russian asset.
So I doubt you know the state department released a statement saying nothing nefarious happened while she was seated at that table for a few minutes.
I actually tried to find the State Department statement on that, and couldn't. Do you have a link?
they may have been referring to the Senate intelligence committee investigation
*Senate Investigation Committee, and they still found nothing nefarious.
Okay, now I'm looking for a Senate intelligence committee investigation of Jill Stein that looked into that photo and others, and I'm not finding it. When I look up the intelligence committee and Stein, what I find is the report that indicated Russian propaganda efforts to get people voting for her, but that's it. Could you provide a link, please?
So she wolfed down all that food and a glass of wine in just a few minutes? Impressive.
That wasn't her table assigned for dinner.
That's not what she says about sitting there at the head table in December 2015. https://www.pbssocal.org/shows/democracy-now/clip/why-jill-stein-attended-moscow-dinner-with-putin-and-flynn
Also, it's kind of a weird coincidence that that russian propaganda just happened to launch a pro Jill campaign that helped take votes away from Clinton the following year. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/russians-launched-pro-jill-stein-social-media-blitz-help-trump-n951166 (Not saying Jill is necessarily a russian asset, but Putin still used her for his advantage.)
it wasn't the head table.
My bad. I called it the head table because that's what both the reporter and Jill said in the interview.
really? can you link that? i've been arguing about this irrelevant photo for over half a decade and this is the first i've heard it was the head table.
yup no problem, it's in my above comment. https://www.pbssocal.org/shows/democracy-now/clip/why-jill-stein-attended-moscow-dinner-with-putin-and-flynn
I'm not trying to say she was necessarily a russian asset, but Putin did seem to use her to his advantage to help trump, which is something Putin is pretty good at.
damn. i have watched that interview a dozen times and missed that it was the head table. what i did hear (and transcribed just now while watching it) was:
"war has failed in the middle east"
"we need a peace offensive"
"there was no interpreter"
"no introductions were made"
"it was a chance to lift up a different point of view about US ... as well as Russian foreign policy."
"I spent the dinner talking to the german diplomat"
"i wasn't paid a penny."
"i declined sponsorship"
"nothing happened at that dinner"
"that picture circulates without a single fact"
"i was there with a number of peace advocates"
i'm sure you can understand how i found it forgettable that it was the head table, and i hope you can forgive my assertion that it was not.
She didn't take any votes from Clinton, that's not how voting works. We would not have voted for Clinton even if there was no one else on the ballot.
Whose food was she sitting in front of?
i'm sure it was.
I'm sure you know nothing about the situation
i have been defending my vote for jill stein for 6 years. please dont tell me what i know. she bought a ticket to an event for one of the few media outlets that would give her a platform. she didn't know who else was assigned to her table. putin wasn't one of those, but he sat there for a few moments. he spoke only in russian and didn't engage with anyone speaking english.
Link the source, then. As for now, you can read up on why Stein IS a Russian Asset.
Are you actually using Third Way as a source? You have any idea who they are? And how they are one of the top reasons government is as fucked up as it is?
Cool.
Now, look up the fallacy of virtue and tell me that isn't you right now.
Thats like liberals hating whataboutisms until someone having a valid critique of Biden. Im sure I could go through your history, if I cared, and find comments dismissing valid stories based on the source.
Your source above from an org that was the main driving force behind shifting your entire party to the right. Ignoring the base while they pandered to moderate republicans, then when they got them into the fold, they got ignored so they could pander even further to the right. Rince and repeat for 30 years
she's not a russian asset.
Oh well that settles that!
I have presented exactly as much evidence as anyone else.
No you didn't.
anyone can read this and see
Reagan did it with one phone call to Begin, calling the invasion of Lebanon a Holocaust. While Biden privately supported it in 1982 saying he would go further than Israel.
Source on the Reagan phone call to Begin: https://www.nytimes.com/1982/08/13/world/reagan-demands-end-to-attacks-in-a-blunt-telephone-call-to-begin.html
Source on Biden saying to Begin he would go further: https://theintercept.com/2021/04/27/biden-israeli-invasion-lebanon/
Because something that happened 42 years ago is relevant today.
Gee, I wonder of the world and politics and power dynamics are different today.
Hmmmmm 🤔
It is relevant. It proves Biden could stop the genocide in Gaza but just like in 1982 he doesn’t want to. When Reagan angrily called Begin’s actions a Holocaust, Biden was privately saying to Begin he would go even further.
It "proves" nothing.
Things that happened 40 plus years ago have just about zero bearing on what happens today.
Maybe you're unfamiliar with everything that's happening since 1982 but things are considerably more complicated and shitty than they were then and Israel obviously doesn't give a shit what the rest of the world thinks.
Do I think that the USA could stop sending weapons and aid to Israel? Without reservation, YES.
Will a think that a phone call from Biden would stop Netanyahu from continuing?
Maybe you should call too.
Hey guys, I've seen this several times since entering this thread so it must be true!
Fuck off with your spam
It is cited and you can verify the source for yourself.
Copy and paste it a few more times, I don't think I got it.
If she doesn't take the AIPAC dollarydoos and sell her soul she'll never win is what you mean?
Pretty much, yeah. For multiple overlapping reasons (FPTP, media, campaign funding). Which is why reforming the system is critical.
Kind of makes it weird that so many people on Lemmy are like “the system is broken therefore I’m not voting even if the outcome is Trump coming to power and making it 10 times worse.” In my type of logic, “the system is broken therefore let’s reform the system by doing X Y and Z” would be more sensible, to the point that it kinda calls into question their motivations behind saying the first thing, but what do I know.
Shes on enough ballots to get past the post. Maybe it's time democrats did it our way since your way keeps producing brain dead geriatrics.
I mean technically?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballot_access_in_the_2024_United_States_presidential_election
She's on the ballot now in 23 states with a total of 279 Electoral College votes, so not a lot of wiggle room for a candidate who has only ever had around 1% of the vote and a party that maxxed out around 5% under Ralph Nader 24 years ago.
This compares to:
Democratic Party - 50 States+D.C. - 538 EC votes.
Republican Party - 50 States+D.C. - 538 EC votes.
Libertarian Party - 35 States - 352 EC votes.
Green Party - 23 States - 279 EC votes.
Kennedy - 14 States - 184 EC votes.
Constitution Party - 11 States - 114 EC votes.
West - 7 States - 44 EC votes.It would be better for everyone if the candidates who can't win drop out, but they won't.
If Democrats are so concerned about FPTP they have an opportunity to ensure she makes it past. They claim they don't like Biden but will still vote for him. How about trying it a different way and voting FOR something you want in government as opposed to voting against WHO you don't want in government.
Voters are their own worst enemy
Well, sure, because in recent memory, no 3rd party has won even a single state. You have to go back to George Wallace and 1968, he won 5 states in the south. The choice is hold your nose and vote Biden or you get Trump.
Even then, that's looking like it won't be enough.
I will not hold my nose for genocide, among other things.
Your choice is (as of this writing) an old man who believes Israel has the right to defend itself (Biden), and an old man who thinks Israel needs to go harder and faster to finish the job they started (Trump).
With a seemingly unlimited amount of money and weapons that Biden is providing and the refusal to draw a line in the sand for Netanyahu, Biden is allowing Israel to finish the job.
According to some of your own replies swing state polling Biden is losing. If he stays in the race it looks like a vote for Biden is a vote for Trump
Oh, there's no doubt Biden needs to drop out. I'm hearing rumors that a speech is already being written.
It doesn't matter if she's on the ballot when fewer than 2% will vote for her. Ballot access isn't the problem, getting your type candidate nominated by one of the two most voted-for parties is. And that will only happen by running and voting for those candidates in the major parties primaries.
That's not how FPTP works, if she gets 270 she wins. It's that simple. But democrats won't give up their privilege to break up the dysfunction in government.
She received zero electoral votes from her 1.07% of the popular vote in 2016. In fact, she did not win a single county or district nationwide in 2016. It appears further that no third party candidate has received any electoral votes since 1968. How do plan on breaking that streak this year? Polling says you won't. I understand that the possibility exists that out of nowhere a giant surge of third party voters could show up and do it. But reality up to now shows they probably won't since they previously haven't.
You're right that neither the Democratic nor the Republican party will give up their privilege. And the past 50+ years of results says you won't take it from them by voting 3rd party in the general. You will have to change the parties from within by getting those new candidates to run in Dem/Rep primaries instead and then showing up to vote them onto the ballot. It will take multiple election cycles.
The party cannot be changed from within. There will be no reform from inside the party. Those old troglodytes will not allow any new politicians into positions of power and influence until they parrot the official party lines. One of them needs to fade off into obscurity, there's only room for one right-wing party in the US, and there's barely room for that
Jill Stein is in her 70s.
And sharp as a tack. Unlike the 2 senile POS currently running
In my type of logic, “the system is broken therefore let’s reform the system by doing X Y and Z” would be more sensible, to the point that it kinda calls into question their motivations behind saying the first thing, but what do I know.
And the way to fix the system is by empowering the people that have broken it down over the years?
When the DNC took away Bernie in 2016 they destroyed the entire argument of "changing the system from the inside".
Rewind to the civil rights movement
Some black activist who is 1,000% outside the political mainstream, but wildly popular within all segments of the American populace runs for the nomination of one of the major parties, gets FORTY THREE PERCENT OF THE VOTE (and only that low because the establishment cheated its ass off)
Is the right answer:
- Holy shit that was almost a RADICAL change to the system, the anti abortion people took 40 years to get their radical change enacted and all it took for this one was like a popular guy and a moderate amount of internet organizing. We can fuckin win this. This is 10 times better than EITHER grimly voting for some third party who will never get more than 2% of the vote, OR grimly voting for whoever the DNC’s favorite is even though it’s horrible. Why, I bet even the establishment candidates will take notice of that and start pursuing all these worker-focused policies once they’re in office, not that the media would take any notice of it if they did
- Man fuck that let’s never try that again, or even vote at all
?
Sorry are you saying the guy that spent his entire life claiming the system can be changed from the inside and got blocked using dirty tactics proves your point? "moderate internet organizing" is a slight understatement here.
Let me correct you
Holy shit that was ALMOST a radical change to the system but then the Democrats sabotaged it because they would rather let Trump win than give up their duopoly.
You sound like you think he accomplished nothing because he didn't accomplish everything. Since he ran for the nomination in 2016 we have more progressives in federal office and higher youth voter turnout (meaning higher chance of electing more progressives). Change is happening. The primaries are where we need that pressure, by progressive candidates running and progressive voters showing up. There were 0.9 M Democratic primary ballots cast in Texas in 2024. That's not going to cut it to get better candidates.
We have Donald Trump about to become president because the Democrat president wants to support Genocide more than be a good president.
Change happened indeed.
So you're willing to let a man who says Israel must finish the job have authority of our military because the Democratic party presumptive nominee is merely better instead of perfect?
Ps - I am inferring that you will not vote for the Democratic nominee unless they are not Biden, so do correct if I'm wrong on that
Ps - I am inferring that you will not vote for the Democratic nominee unless they are not Biden, so do correct if I’m wrong on that
You can go back in my post history like 4 months I have already clearly stated that during the Michigan uncommitted votes. Far before now when everyone is now trying to get rid of Biden for his age which is another group of people that won't vote for Biden.
Biden has crossed a red line. And unlike Biden in Rafah, crossing a red line for someone with principles means that it's Joever. Biden had his chance to redeem himself and he decided to ignore it so surely he doesn't need those votes right?
If Democrats keep Biden in they must be very confident in all those votes he gained from supporting Genocide.
You can go back in my post history like 4 months I have already clearly stated that
I could have but it's just easier to clearly state my assumption in the present. Even if I had whose to say you hadn't changed your mind on something since then.
You acknowledge that Trump will be worse for the Palestinians, right?
It's true. She's speaks truth to power and is therefore kept out of political discussion.
Israeli military is funded by the US. They are given weapons. They are given logistical and intelligence support by the US. They are given diplomatic support. They are trained by the US. In almost everything but name, they are a US force. They would not exist without US support.
Joe Biden can tell them what to do at any time, and he chooses to ok the genocide.
That’s an interesting take considering where her campaign money comes from.
Truth to power? Shes Putin's number one fan, and has been for a decade+.
Jill Stein is a bought and paid for russian asset. Her only role is to cause turmoil in american elections however she can, by hopefully siphoning off left leaning votes in key states. She did just that in 2016, a year after this putin meeting, where her vote totals in key swing states were higher than the total margin for Hilary's loss. Her efforts were part of why Trump won in 2016, leading to all the chaos and turmoil we have today.
Her trying to cause division and sow discord in the left wing during this election is the exact same thing she did in 2016 and 2020.
Ah yes the infamous dinner she had with Russian notable. Having a dinner with a foreign power obviously means you are a paid spy to disrupt elections. Lots of dots to connect there!
The president can't just unilaterally withhold Congressionally approved aid. You may recall Trump was impeached for doing exactly that.
They gave a joke of a candidate like RFK Jr USSS protection and none for Jill whos polling higher than him.