1114 Forward & JTA no cover of Weinstein trial; Bloomberg just bought the DNC- Tulsi Gabbard

Forward & JTA no cover of Weinstein trial; Bloomberg just bought the
DNC- Tulsi Gabbard

Newsletter published on February 2, 2020

(1) Forward & JTA no cover of Weinstein trial
(2) Weinstein is Interesx - No Testicles (undescended), but a serial Rapist
(3) Jessica Mann said Weinstein was screaming, "you owe me!"
(4) Weinstein claimed that she "owed him one more time"
(5) Weinstein's head drooped as Mann said he was deformed
(6) Feminist backlash against Bettina Arndt's Gender Equity award
(7) Queensland judge cans Campus Kangaroo Courts - Bettina Arndt
(8) DNC change rules to allow Bloomberg in debate; "Billionaire
Bloomberg just bought the DNC"- Tulsi Gabbard
(9) Billionaires shouldn't be allowed to play by different rules -
Elizabeth Warren
(10) Ding Dong the EU is gone. George Galloway celebrates, and explains
what's wrong with the EU

(1) Forward & JTA no cover of Weinstein trial

searched Sun 2 Feb 2020

Forward

https://forward.com/search/?q=weinstein

latest article is 25 Oct 2019

JTA

https://www.jta.org/?s=Weinstein

latest article is JANUARY 6, 2020

Weinstein ’does not have testicles’;

(2) Weinstein is Interesx - No Testicles (undescended), but a serial Rapist

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/harvey-weinstein-accuser-testifies-that-hollywood-producer-does-not-have-testicles

Harvey Weinstein accuser testifies that Hollywood producer ’does not
have testicles’

by Anthony Leonardi

January 31, 2020 07:04 PM

A Harvey Weinstein accuser testified in court that the disgraced
Hollywood producer "does not have testicles."

Jessica Mann, one of Weinstein's accusers, testified in a Manhattan
courtroom on Friday, alleging that Weinstein, 67, raped her in 2013.

"The first time I saw him fully naked, I thought he was deformed and
intersex," she said in her testimony, according to a Vulture report. "He
has an extreme scarring that I didn’t know, maybe [he] was a burn victim."

"He does not have testicles, and it appears that he has a vagina," Mann,
34, added to the court's record. Mann also said that Weinstein forced
her to perform oral sex on him. Mann accused him of urinating on her.

Prosecutors have also charged the disgraced filmmaker with multiple sex
crimes in Los Angeles as he undergoes a trial in New York.

(3) Jessica Mann said Weinstein was screaming, "you owe me!"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/jessica-mann-testifies-as-weinstein-prosecution-portrays-a-cunning-mogul-taking-advantage-of-naive-young-girl/2020/01/31/3fccbd42-444b-11ea-b5fc-eefa848cde99_story.html

Jessica Mann testifies, as Weinstein prosecution portrays a cunning
mogul taking advantage of naive woman

By Shayna Jacobs

Feb. 1, 2020 at 9:33 a.m. GMT+10

NEW YORK — Harvey Weinstein's rape accuser — portrayed by prosecutors as
a "naive" country girl — was at times unstable on the witness stand
Friday as she testified that he forced sex on her in 2013 while conning
her into a "dirty" long-term relationship.

Jessica Mann, a native of rural Washington who spoke at times in a soft,
childlike demeanor, made bold claims on direct examination to defend her
choice to take part in a years-long relationship with Weinstein. At
moments during her testimony, she sounded shy and reserved but would
then quickly switch to expressing anger and defiance toward Weinstein.

Before her testimony, prosecutors made a point in open court of telling
the defense that she is not on any psychotropic drugs at present.

The 34-year-old admitted to having a consensual relationship with
Weinstein, claiming she felt bad for Weinstein after seeing what she
took to be genital deformity and scarring on his body.

"When I first saw him naked, I was filled with compassion, absolute
compassion," she said, even offering that she thought "his anger came
from a place of shame."

Mann said their relationship began when Weinstein performed oral sex on
her at the Peninsula hotel in Los Angeles — before the rape she alleges
— and she decided to carry on physically with him after that. Soon
after, she claimed the relationship turned "degrading."

"He would talk very dirty to me . . . [about] fantasies and things," she
said, "and compare me to other actresses that he said were doing kinky,
dirty things with him."

Mann was emotional from the moment she took the witness stand, fighting
tears as she took her seat in front of dozens of people in the gallery.

The day of the alleged sexual assault in 2013, she said, he went into
the bathroom of his hotel room and "he came out naked and he got on top
of me" then "put himself inside me. His penis inside of me."

"Inside your vagina?" prosecutor Joan Illuzzi-Orban asked.

"Yeah," she said, bashfully. She said it was the first instance of
intercourse with Weinstein.

She wept as she detailed that Weinstein, who she said didn’t use a
condom, had injected himself in the penis with an erectile dysfunction
medication.

Mann met Weinstein at a party in Los Angeles in 2013, and he took an
interest in her. "I like how you look. I’m very interested in you as an
actress," Mann said he told her. He called her not long after and asked
her to meet at a bookstore so he could get her books on film history.

Mann said she was excited about the prospect of having a movie mogul
working to help her career. "With my religious background and
everything, I thought it was a blessing," she said.

In describing her first sexual encounter with Weinstein, Mann said she
and a friend were invited to his hotel suite to ostensibly look over
scripts. There, he pulled her into the bedroom and said, "You’re not
leaving until I do something for you," she claims.

Her voice was breaking as he told the jury that he performed oral sex on
her. "I started to fake an orgasm to get out of it," she testified. "He
asked me how it was, if I liked it. I was nervous so I told him, ‘Oh,
it’s the best I’ve ever had.’ "

She said she felt "horrified" and "confused" by the incident. She also
said that because she wasn’t the type to have sex with strangers, she
decided to stick with Weinstein, in what became a confusing string of
testimony.

Jaws dropped in the courtroom when she said Weinstein didn’t have
testicles and "it appears like he also had a vagina." She also said his
hygiene was "very bad."

"He smelled like s---. Excuse me, sorry. Like poop. And he was just
dirty," Mann said.

At the end of the day’s court session, a reporter asked Weinstein
whether he agreed with Mann’s account of his body.

"Yeah, perfect," he mumbled, sarcastically.

Prosecutors have emphasized the point that Mann was completely
outmatched by Weinstein as a 27-year-old, painting her as a "naive"
country girl. She "was raised in the evangelical church in a small dairy
town in Washington state," Assistant District Attorney Meghan Hast said
in her opening arguments.

Mann sobbed and trembled when she described another encounter with
Weinstein at the Peninsula hotel in November 2013, for which Weinstein
isn’t charged. She said she told Weinstein that she now had a boyfriend
but was terrified to tell him he was a fairly well-known actor, which
she thought would have set him off.

"His eyes changed and he wasn’t there. They were very black, and he
ripped me up from my chair from the table," she said. Weinstein "was
screaming, you owe me!"

On cross-examination Mann was confronted by Weinstein lawyer Donna
Rotunno about her repeated sexual encounters with Weinstein and was
grilled about what she wanted from him.

Rotunno asked her whether she "wanted the benefit" of the secret
liaisons, and Mann stumbled over her words and refused to answer.

"I can’t answer that question. I would like to explain," Mann said.

"I think you answered it with your non-answer," Rotunno said, prompting
an objection from prosecutors.

Mann was also confronted with a strange missive recovered from the Notes
app on her phone, which was supposed to be a humorous take on a group
sex event that Weinstein allegedly pushed her into with an Italian
actress in Los Angeles, also in 2013.

"Do I have to?" Mann asked Justice James Burke when he ordered her to
read it aloud, per Rotunno’s request.

Mann insisted the note was fiction based on truth, like other blog posts
she wrote at the time. She never posted the one she read from, titled
"The Failed Threesome, Part 1," in which she describes a stunning
"skinny blond Italian." "I felt like a 14-year-old boy about to lose my
virginity," she read.

Rotunno suggested the playful and erotic rhetoric undermines Mann’s
claim, that she ran into the bathroom terrified and traumatized instead
of taking part. She admitted to involvement in threesomes with "friends."

Weinstein, 67, faces the most prison time on predatory sexual assault
charges. For that, he faces a minimum of 10 years incarceration and up
to life. Those charges, related to a pattern of sexual assaults, involve
actress Annabella Sciorra.

Mann is the third accuser who is officially part of the case to take the
stand. Weinstein is charged with two counts of rape in connection to
Mann. He is also charged with forcing a sex act on Mimi Haleyi on July
10, 2006.

(4) Weinstein claimed that she "owed him one more time"

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/tearful-accuser-testifies-harvey-weinstein-raped-her-2013-1275285

JANUARY 31, 2020 10:05am PT

  by Jeremy Barr

Breaking Down in Tears, Second Key Accuser Testifies That Harvey
Weinstein Raped Her in 2013

Jessica Mann, a fledgling actress who hoped to break into Hollywood,
said that Weinstein forced oral sex on her and then raped her at a hotel
in Manhattan.

On Friday morning, the jury heard emotional and vivid testimony from
Jessica Mann, who alleged that Harvey Weinstein forced oral sex on her
and raped her in 2013, when she was a fledging actress hoping to get her
big break from the movie mogul.

Like Miriam Haley, who testified on Monday morning, Mann’s allegations
are part of Weinstein’s indictment in New York County on charges of
sexual assault and rape. The prosecution has endeavored to back up their
claims with the testimony of four "prior bad acts" witnesses: Sopranos
actress Annabella Sciorra, Dawn Dunning, Tarale Wulff and Lauren Young,
who is expected to testify early next week.

After being introduced at a party in Los Angeles, Weinstein and Mann met
up for drinks at a hotel bar. When Weinstein fretted that he was being
noticed by fellow patrons, he moved the meeting to his room. Once
inside, he asked Mann if he could give her a massage. She chose to give
him one instead.

"I was a little stunned," she said. "I didn’t want to go up there, but I
thought I was helping him get away from all the public attention he was
getting. I didn’t have a reason to sense anything bad was coming. It was
odd. It was odd."

Despite this interaction, Mann still believed that Weinstein was
interested in her as an actress — "naively," as a prosecutor said last
week. "He made me feel stupid for why I thought it was a big deal," she
said of the massage incident.

After another hotel bar meeting with Weinstein, Mann went up to his room
with her friend, at which time she alleges that he forced unwanted oral
sex on her.

"He was pushing me back and I was able to turn my body to go, and he
still had me by one arm, and that’s when he really tightened his grip,"
she told jurors. "And the more I fought, the angrier he got. This anger
scared me, so I tried to joke and calm him down and he said, ‘I’m not
letting you leave until you let me do something for you.' He started
manipulating me, like, ‘You accepted my invitation to my party,’ a lot
of like stuff like that, and then, 'You’re not leaving until I do
something for you.'"

She said she was "horrified and confused" after the encounter. Feeling
that she was trapped and hoping to make the best of a bad situation,
Mann continued communicating with Weinstein — messages that have been
seized on by his defense. "I was confused about what happened and I made
the decision to be in a relationship with him," she said. In March 2013,
Mann agreed to have a breakfast meeting with Weinstein and one of her
friends at the Doubletree hotel in midtown Manhattan. To her surprise,
Weinstein showed up early to the hotel and booked a room. Once inside
his room on his request, Weinstein demanded that she take off her
clothes, and then, she told the jury, he got on top of her and
penetrated her.

"I gave up at that point and I undressed and he stood over me until I
was completely naked," Mann testified. "And, once I was naked and laid
on the bed, he went into the bathroom and sort of closed the door behind
him. The door was still kind of open a little bit. And then he came out
naked, and then he got on top of me and that’s when he put himself
inside me. His penis inside me."

Mann said that Weinstein was "sharp and angry" in ordering for her to
undress, "like a drill sergeant."

Upon using the bathroom, Mann noticed a needle in the trash can that she
later realized was an injected medicine for an erectile condition. "He
stabbed himself with a needle and there had to be blood and he was
inside of me," she said, crying. A few months later, in November 2013,
Mann says that Weinstein raped her again after she told him that she had
a boyfriend. She says he claimed that she "owed him one more time,"
sexually.

Throughout her testimony, Mann described Weinstein's body in graphic and
specific detail. "The first time I saw him fully naked, I thought he was
deformed and intersex," she said. "He has extreme scarring that I didn’t
know if he was a burn victim, but it didn’t make sense. He does not have
testicles and it appears that he has a vagina."

After the prosecution makes their case to the jury, the defense is
expected to argue that Mann's relationship with Weinstein was
consensual, as evidenced by the emails she sent him. In one, she wrote:
"I love you, always do. But I hate feeling like a booty call."

"The evidence will show the complaining witnesses sent dozens and dozens
of loving emails to Harvey Weinstein," Weinstein lawyer Damon Cheronis
said during opening statements last Wednesday, Jan. 22.

Mann, when questioned by the prosecution, discussed her thinking. "I
tried to break up the actual relationship very soon," she said. "I
stayed in contact with him for several reasons. I thought he was going
to hurt my father. I had a fight with my dad once and he saw that I was
upset and he said he had guys with bats and he would send those guys
with bats."

After additional prosecution witness testimony on Monday and Tuesday of
next week, into Wednesday, Weinstein's lawyers are expected to present
their witnesses next Thursday and Friday.

(5) Weinstein's head drooped as Mann said he was deformed

https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/harvey-weinstein-trial-jessica-mann_n_5e347d1ac5b69a19a4aee0aa

01/02/2020 7:53 AM AEDT | Updated 8 hours ago

Harvey Weinstein Told Victim 'You owe me,' she Testifies

Jessica Mann also described the disgraced film executive's body and
hygiene, calling him "deformed" and "dirty."

By Jenna Amatulli

Former actress Jessica Mann testified in graphic detail Friday about her
encounters with Harvey Weinstein, alleging the disgraced film executive
raped her in a hotel room seven years ago.

Mann is the fifth accuser to take the witness stand against Weinstein.
Her testimony comes a week after Annabella Sciorra, an actor known for
her work on "The Sopranos" and several films, took the stand for nearly
two hours. Sciorra detailed the night she claims Weinstein burst into
her New York apartment in late 1993 or early 1994 and forcibly performed
oral sex on her.

In Mann’s testimony, she said she met Weinstein at a Los Angeles party
in either 2012 or 2013, after moving to the city to pursue acting. Like
many of the women accusing Weinstein of misconduct, Mann said the film
mogul took an interest in meeting with her under the guise of helping
her further her career.

In her testimony, Mann said that in an early meeting, Weinstein asked
for a massage. At a later meeting purportedly for a movie role, Mann
alleged that Weinstein forced oral sex on her. She told the court she
faked an orgasm "to get out of it," The New York Times reported.

Weeks after these meetings, Weinstein raped her at the DoubleTree hotel
in Midtown Manhattan, Mann alleged. During that encounter, Weinstein
injected his penis with erection medication, forced her to undress, and
barred her from leaving the room, she said.

Mann gave vivid descriptions of both Weinstein’s rhetoric and body
during these interactions, making claims that he didn’t have testicles,
appears to have a vagina, and is "intersex."

"He would talk very dirty to me about fantasies and things, and compare
me to the other things actresses that he said were doing kinky, dirty
things with him," Mann testified. "He always wanted to film me. I never
gave him permission."

"He would say, ‘Do you like my big, fat, Jewish dick?’" Mann said.

"The first time I saw him fully naked," she said, "I thought he was
deformed and intersex. He has an extreme scarring that I didn’t know,
maybe [he] was a burn victim …"

Weinstein’s head visibly drooped as Mann said he was deformed, New York
Magazine reported.

Mann also testified that Weinstein once peed on her, and criticized the
film mogul’s hygiene.

"It was very bad," she said. "He smelled like shit — excuse me, sorry,
like poop. He just was dirty."

After the alleged assaults, Mann had what prosecutors described as a
"friendly relationship" with Weinstein, based on emails the two
exchanged. (Of course, as the Times notes, rape can occur in consensual
relationships, and it’s not uncommon for victims to "choose — or are
forced by circumstances — to maintain outwardly friendly relationships
with their attackers.")

Mann testified that at one point, she told Weinstein she had a
boyfriend. In response, he screamed "‘You owe me one more time!’ and
raped her again, she alleged.

This morning #HarveyWeinstein came into the court early. The second
complaining witness/ victim,#JessicaMann testified today. For more
updates follow @LawCrimeNetworkpic.twitter.com/XRClduLHTf

— Brian G. Buckmire (@BuckEsq) January 31, 2020 Weinstein has been
accused of sexual misconduct by dozens of women since two explosive
reports on his patterns of inappropriate behavior came out in 2017. Six
women have agreed to testify about their alleged assaults. Weinstein
faces five felony charges.

In relation to Mann, Weinstein is charged with first- and third-degree
rape, and predatory sexual assault; earlier this week, former Weinstein
Company Production Assistant Mimi Haleyi testified that Weinstein
forcibly performed oral sex on her at his Manhattan townhouse in 2006.

Weinstein, 67, has insisted all encounters were consensual.

(6) Feminist backlash against Bettina Arndt's Gender Equity award

https://www.facebook.com/thebettinaarndt/videos/564113024142853/UzpfSTE0NDM3ODk1OTU2NjIzNzU6MzQyOTgwODY0MDM5Mzc4NA/

Bettina Arndt says that

- Accusations against high-profile rapists like Weinsten (she did not
name him) led #MeToo to wrongly accuse a lot of ordinary men, wrecking
their lives.

- 60% of uni graduates in Australia are Women (only 40% are Men)

- 6 of 8 people who commit suicide each day in Australia are Men.

- schools are biased against Men ... much talk of Male Violence, Toxic
Masculinity

- universities have set up Kangaroo Courts targeting Men for Rape,
without adequate protections for those accused.

She's an older feminist who thinks that Feminism has gone off the
rails - like Germaine Greer (UK) and Camille Paglia (US).

She recently received an Order of Australia award.

The Feminist lobby has urged the Governor-General to rescind it.

This is a very hot issue here at present. ==

https://www.facebook.com/thebettinaarndt/

Bettina Arndt

The feminist backlash against my Honours award alleges I am a pederast
apologist for my interview with Nicolaas Bester. Watch this interview on
Studio 10 this morning where I was confronted with these allegations and
explained that the Bester interview is being used as part of a malicious
campaign which aims to shut me down because my campus activities
threaten the tight grip End Rape on Campus has over our universities.

It was quite a fiery interview and it would be useful if you could help
me circulate this so people are exposed not just to the smears but the
background to what is going on here. I have just highlighted in the news
section of my website the role being played by the founder of End Rape
on Campus, Nina Funnell, in the constant campaign against me. Funnell
has been at it again this weekend, pushing the Bester video out in all
the captured media and publishing her own articles maligning me. Please
help me make sure more people learn the truth by referring them to my
website.

But for all the people contacting me concerned about the battering I am
receiving, never fear. I am delighted to see feminists exposing their
poisonous determination to retain control of the narrative. It’s a
wonderful demonstration of the threat I pose to their dangerous ideology. ==

(7) Queensland judge cans Campus Kangaroo Courts - Bettina Arndt

https://www.spectator.com.au/2019/11/queensland-judge-cans-campus-sex-claims-kangaroo-courts/

Queensland judge cans Campus Kangaroo Courts

Bettina Arndt

23 November 2019 11:29 AM

We have had a huge victory. The Queensland Supreme Court has just
determined that universities have no jurisdiction to adjudicate sexual
assault.

Justice Ann Lyons ruled yesterday in a pivotal case involving a
University of Queensland medical student who was accused of sexual
assault by another student. Wendy Mulcahy, the lawyer for the accused
student, took the matter to the Supreme Court arguing that UQ did not
have the jurisdiction to adjudicate such matters.

In her landmark judgment, Justice Lyons concluded universities are only
entitled to make decisions in sexual assault cases which have been
proved in criminal court. The university’s role is then to decide on any
further penalty could be imposed on someone found criminally guilty of
such a crime – such as expelling him or her from the university.

Here’s Lyon’s statement:

I consider that when read together, the University policy and procedures
documents make it clear that the University only has jurisdiction in
relation to criminal acts of a sexual nature where the alleged offence
is proven. In my view that jurisdiction is limited to determining what
penalty is to be imposed as a consequence of a finding that the alleged
offence is proven.

This means it is not the university’s job to investigate or determine
the guilt in sexual assault cases. Lyon’s judgment brings into question
the legality of the committees which have been established in
universities across Australia to adjudicate these matters. Last month
Senator Amanda Stoker grilled the university regulator, TEQSA, about the
role of that organization in encouraging the establishment of these
kangaroo courts. Lyon’s decision exposes TEQSA’s complicity in this
issue as even more shameful.

Justice Lyons accepted Wendy Mulcahy’s concerns that a university
committee is ill-equipped to conduct a fair investigation. She noted:

It would indeed be a startling result if a committee comprised of
academics and students who are not required to have any legal training
could decide allegations of a most serious kind without any of the
protections of the criminal law.

Since UQ’s own policies state that the university does not have
jurisdiction over criminal acts, Lyons concludes that this;

Removes the jurisdiction of the University in relation to allegations of
a criminal offence of a sexual nature.

The Judge also drew attention to other legal cases which highlight the
problems of university disciplinary boards providing fair treatment for
the accused in such matters:

Those decisions outlined very real concerns about the disciplinary
processes of the University and the lack of procedural fairness afforded
to a student against whom allegations were made of sexual misconduct.

This critical judgment has serious implications for our universities
which have blundered into this territory in response to bullying from
feminist lobby groups. It is quite extraordinary that none of the
lawyers employed in the higher education sector anticipated the obvious
legal pitfalls highlighted in Justice Lyon’s judgment – particularly in
the light of the 200 plus cases where American colleges have lost
significant lawsuits over failure to protect the due process rights of
accused students.

Shame on our spineless university administrators for kowtowing to the
tiny, noisy group of feminist activists, selling out the reputation of
our universities, and exposing the entire higher education sector to the
risk of lawsuits over unfair and illegal handling of such matters.

Please help me circulate this wonderful news.

(8) DNC change rules to allow Bloomberg in debate; "Billionaire
Bloomberg just bought the DNC"- Tulsi Gabbard

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/definition-rigged-system-dnc-changes-debate-rules-billionaire-latecomer-mike-bloomberg


"Definition Of A Rigged System": DNC Changes Debate Rules for
Billionaire Latecomer Mike Bloomberg

Sat, 02/01/2020 - 12:15

Authored by Eoin Higgins via CommonDreams.org,

After debate rules were changed in favor of allowing billionaire Mike
Bloomberg to join the candidates onstage vying for the 2020 Democratic
presidential nomination on Friday, Sen. Bernie Sanders' campaign hit
back, calling the decision emblematic of the corrupt political system
the Vermont senator has centered his run for the White House on defeating.

"To now change the rules in the middle of the game to accommodate Mike
Bloomberg, who is trying to buy his way into the Democratic nomination,
is wrong," Sanders senior adviser Jeff Weaver told Politico.

"That's the definition of a rigged system," Weaver said.

Democratic presidential candidate, former New York City Mayor Michael
Bloomberg. Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) announced Friday afternoon that
the criteria for making the debate stage will no longer include a
requirement about individual donors— allowing Bloomberg, whose campaign
is largely self-funded, to join the candidates if his polling numbers
reach the new threshold.

"DNC changing the rules to benefit a billionaire," tweeted Sanders
campaign manager Faiz Shakir. "I much prefer Democrats being a
grassroots party. And under Bernie Sanders, that's the way it will be."

New statement from Bernie Sanders senior adviser Jeff Weaver on DNC
debate rules: "To now change the rules in the middle of the game to
accommodate Mike Bloomberg, who is trying to buy his way into the
Democratic nomination, is wrong. That’s the definition of a rigged
system." — Holly Otterbein (@hollyotterbein) January 31, 2020

According to Politico:

Candidates will need to earn at least 10% in four polls released from
Jan. 15 to Feb. 18, or 12% in two polls conducted in Nevada or South
Carolina, in order to participate in the Feb. 19 debate in Las Vegas.
Any candidate who earns at least one delegate to the national convention
in either the Iowa caucuses or New Hampshire primary will also qualify
for the Nevada debate.

The rules change caught Democrats by surprise.

Some observers noted the timing of the change and wondered if it was
part of a coordinated attack on Sanders from both the DNC and Bloomberg.

The Intercept's Ryan Grim, citing Federal Elections Commission data,
noted Bloomberg donated $325,000 to the DNC in November 2019.

"Totally normal system," said Grim.

Just before jumping into the race, @MikeBloomberg gave $325,000 to the
DNC, on top of the gobs he spent on ads this month. Totally normal
system. pic.twitter.com/u4JDelWb7H — Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) January 31, 2020

The debate rules have been a source of contention throughout the primary
process, with some former hopefuls like Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and
former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro questioning
the restrictions on polling and donors as prohibitive to their campaigns.

If you look at the new DNC debate thresholds as anything other than "Get
Andrew Yang off stage and put Mike Bloomberg on," Then you are high. —
Brad Bauman (@bradbaumn) January 31, 2020

Progressive strategist Tim Tagaris wondered what could have been
different if not for the qualifications.

"How much money did candidates like Julián Castro and Cory Booker have
to spend chasing donor thresholds that could have been spent building
organizations in early states?" said Tagaris.

And in a now-deleted tweet, Tagaris added: "Weaver pointed to other
current & past candidates like Booker, Yang & Castro, who dropped off
the stage because they couldnt meet the minimum polling threshold.

Now, suddenly because Bloomberg couldnt satisfy one of the prongs, we
see it get changed?'"

Comedian and writer Jack Allison took a wry look at the changes and what
they mean about the party. "Remember when they wouldn't even think of
changing them for like Cory Booker," Allison tweeted. "This is what we
mean when we talk about the DNC cheating, obviously and out in the open."

"Thankfully seeing Bloomberg speak can only hurt his standing," Allison
added, "but still."

But it was outspoken filmmaker Michael Moore that really went off on the
DNC's decision. Speaking Friday night at a Sanders rally in Clive, Iowa,
Moore went on an expletive-filled rant against the party.

"I watched the debate in Iowa here two weeks ago - the all white debate
- and the fact that the Democratic, the DNC will not allow Cory Booker
on that stage, will not allow Julian Castro on that stage, but they are
going to allow Mike Bloomberg on the stage?" Moore roared.

"Because he has a billion f*cking dollars!"

The crowd went wild, and Moore continued using profanity throughout his
remarks.

"I am sorry, those days are over," Moore said of the DNC moving to help
Bloomberg. "Those days are over."

(9) Billionaires shouldn't be allowed to play by different rules -
Elizabeth Warren

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2020-democrats-slam-party-rule-change-that-could-let-bloomberg-debate

2020 Democrats slam party rule change that could let Bloomberg debate by
Emily Larsen

February 01, 2020 05:38 AM

Current and former candidates for the 2020 Democratic presidential
nomination lashed out at the Democratic National Committee for changing
debate qualification rules that would give Michael Bloomberg an opening
to make the stage.

"The DNC didn’t change the rules to ensure good, diverse candidates
could remain on the debate stage. They shouldn’t change the rules to let
a billionaire on. Billionaires shouldn't be allowed to play by different
rules — on the debate stage, in our democracy, or in our government,"
Massachuetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren said in a tweet on Friday.

Bloomberg, 77, was not eligible for other debate stages because the
former New York mayor and ultrabillionaire is self-funding his
presidential bid and not accepting campaign contributions, making it
impossible for him to meet the DNC's 225,000 individual donor threshold
for the stage.

On Friday, the DNC announced a system for the Feb. 19 debate in Las
Vegas based entirely on delegate allocation from the Feb. 3 Iowa
caucuses and Nov. 11 New Hampshire primary and polling thresholds,
giving him a chance to make the stage.

"Billionaire Bloomberg just bought the @DNC," tweeted Hawaii Rep. Tulsi
Gabbard. [...]

(10) Ding Dong the EU is gone. George Galloway celebrates, and explains
what's wrong with the EU

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/479595-brexit-eu-uk-future/

08:23 GMT, Feb 01, 2020

Ding Dong the EU is gone. Britain finally Brexits into an uncertain
future (by George Galloway)

George Galloway was a member of the British Parliament for nearly 30
years. He was one of the leaders of the anti-war movement in the UK and
is known worldwide for his stand against imperialism. He presents TV and
radio shows (including on RT). He is a film-maker, writer and a renowned
orator. Follow George Galloway on Patreon.com. Follow him on Twitter
@georgegalloway

31 Jan, 2020 23:06

Sing Hallelujah! The wicked witch is dead. The anti-democratic
super-state, into which we were taken in 1973 (fittingly, without a vote
being cast) thanks to Labour rebels providing Tory PM Ted Heath with his
majority, is no more. At least for us. Though I doubt we will be the
last to leave the failing fading cluster.

Leading Labour rebel Roy Jenkins, the deputy leader of the Labour Party,
former chancellor, former home secretary, later president of the
European Commission, was dumped on his ample backside out of Parliament
in 1987 by me. It was my greatest victory.

Without Jenkins and his 80 fellow apostates Britain would never have
joined the cursed cluster, because the Conservatives – then, as now –
contained enough of the patriotic bourgeoisie to stop the globalist
prime minister and yachtsman Heath. Our membership of the Common Market,
thus born in treachery, sailed ever deeper into public rejection.

Britain was always half-in, half-out of the EU. No power on Earth could
have dragged us into the single currency, and the only way we could be
dragged into the single market was by late-night parliamentary chicanery
– against which, under the leadership of the late Tony Benn, I was fully
engaged. None dared offer a referendum on what represented a qualitative
change in membership, from being part of a common market to membership
of a Union, ever wider, ever deeper.

Fittingly, the peoples of the EU member states were never consulted over
this shift; those who dared to demur were forced to vote again until
they came up with the right answer. The project – effectively the
liquidation of the nation-state and the creation of a European Empire –
had not only no democratic legitimacy, no democracy within its
decision-making processes, but required its members to sign up in
advance to an unalterable neo-liberal model of capitalism carved into
the very pillars of its constitution.

No state intervention in defence of strategic industries, no public
sector procurement preferences, no fiscal deficits beyond that which
suited the European Central Bank, itself a wholly owned subsidiary of
Germany. No public ownership of natural monopolies like rail, mail,
water, electricity and gas, every one of which had to be made happy
hunting grounds for the privateers and buccaneers of globalised capital
– Sir Richard Branson being the poster boy.

In our 47 years of membership, Britain lost its coal, steel, car, truck,
bus, motorcycle, shipbuilding, ship repair and railway workshop
industries, and much more besides. All in exchange for the fools’ gold
of the casino economics of the City of London, the devotion to which
almost destroyed the country in 2008. Germany was to be the industrial
power, France the agricultural, Britain the financial. This all led to
the desertification of post-industrial Britain and the mounting anger
which swept EU membership away in the Brexit referendum.

I was, and always will be, proud to have been at the front of the fight
for Brexit in the 2016 referendum. But unlike others in that leadership,
I believe that Brexit is a necessary – but not sufficient – condition
for the building of a better Britain. Regaining our national sovereignty
without putting it to good use would be next to pointless. Equally,
swapping EU domination for American domination would be worse than
pointless. Becoming the 51st state of the USA, the worst state of all.

We now can and should rebuild Britain as an industrial and trading
nation of the first class. ‘Made in Britain’ must become brand new
again. All of our people capable of being so must be put to meaningful
work as the process of sucking the youngest, brightest, and best from
their homes and families in eastern and central Europe comes to an end.
The low-wage, cheap-cuts British economy must be transformed into a
high-wage, high-quality, educated, cultured and knowledge-based future.
We must bear no ill-will to anyone, invade, occupy and sanction no-one.
We must be a broker of peace and conflict resolution, no longer the
auxiliary we were in Iraq and Libya, and so many others.

We must remake a real Commonwealth; we share language, culture and
history with literally billions of people there. We can build Jerusalem
in this green and pleasant land. But only if we resolve to.

1