@Lash,
Who's lieing? She's a wolf in green clothing:
Stein's financial disclosure, filed in March 2016, indicated that she maintained investments of as much as $8.5 million, including mutual or index funds that included holdings in industries that she had previously criticized, such as energy, financial, pharmaceutical, tobacco, and defense contractors.[54] In response to questions about her finances, Stein said in part: "Sadly, most of these broad investments are as compromised as the American economy—degraded as it is by the fossil fuel, defense and finance industries",[54] and later characterized the article as a "smear attack" against her.[55]
Stein said in an interview with Politico that: "Donald Trump, I think, will have a lot of trouble moving things through Congress. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, won't ... Hillary has the potential to do a whole lot more damage, get us into more wars, faster to pass her fracking disastrous climate program, much more easily than Donald Trump could do his."[60][61]
In the same interview with Politico, Stein said regarding Trump's business dealings and refusal to release his tax returns: "At least with Clinton, you know, there was some degree of transparency, but what's going on with Trump, you can't even get at, and what he said was that even to clarify 15 out of these 500 deals, these are just like the most frightening mafiosos around the world. He's like—he's a magnet for crime and extortion."[62]
On Mother's Day Stein tweeted "I agree with Hillary, it's time to elect a woman for President. But I want that President to reflect the values of being a mother. #MothersDay." When this was criticized by a pseudonymous activist on Medium[63] and on Twitter, Stein said she "was criticizing her record as a war monger."[64]
You conservatives just love this kind of a green - conservative green.
Stein played a significant role in several crucial battleground states, drawing a vote total in three of them — Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania — that exceeded the margin between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.[69]
No chance at less than 4% of the vote, but a spoiler just the same.
In November 2016, a group of computer scientists and election lawyers including J. Alex Halderman and John Bonifaz (founder of the National Voting Rights Institute) expressed concerns about the integrity of the presidential election results. They wanted a full audit or recount of the presidential election votes in three states key to Donald Trump's electoral college win—Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania—but needed a candidate on the presidential ballot to file the petition to state authorities. After unsuccessfully lobbying Hillary Clinton and her team, the group approached Stein and she agreed to spearhead the recount effort.[70]
Her less than 4% wouldn't change to help her, so why did she join with a REPUBLICAN group to screw with the election?
Meanwhile, however, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that Stein, who placed fourth, had no chance of winning and was not an "aggrieved candidate" and ordered the Michigan election board to reject her petition for a recount.[79] On December 7, 2016, Judge Goldsmith halted the Michigan recount.[80] Stein filed an appeal with the Michigan Supreme Court, losing her appeal in a 3–2 decision on December 9, 2016.[81]
On December 12, 2016, U.S. District Judge Paul S. Diamond rejected Stein's request for a Pennsylvania recount.[82]
In May 2018, The Daily Beast reported that approximately $1 million of the original $7.3 million had yet to be spent and that there remained uncertainty about what precisely the money had been spent on.[83]
Nothing but a spoiler, an election denier, follower of the big lie and in the pockets of the Shitgibbon and the basket of deplorables.
Russia probe
On December 18, 2017, The Washington Post reported that the Senate Intelligence Committee was looking at the presidential campaign of Green Party's Jill Stein for potential "collusion with the Russians."[84] The Stein campaign has released a public statement stating that the campaign will work with investigators and provide requested materials, citing public transparency.[85]
In December 2018, two reports commissioned by the US Senate found that the Internet Research Agency boosted Stein's candidacy through social media posts, targeting African-American voters in particular. After consulting the two reports, NBC News reporter Robert Windrem said that nothing suggested Stein knew about the operation, but added that "the Massachusetts physician ha[d] long been criticized for her support of international policies that mirror Russian foreign policy goals." Windrem reported that his publisher (NBC News) had found that in 2015 and 2016 there had been over 100 favorable stories about Stein on Russian state-owned media networks RT and Sputnik.[86]
In an official statement, Stein called one of the reports, the one authored by New Knowledge, "dangerous new McCarthyism" and asked the Senate Committee to retract it, saying the firm was "sponsored by partisan Democratic funders" and had itself been shown to have been "directly involved in election interference" in the 2017 US Senate election in Alabama.[87]
By July 31, 2018, Stein had spent slightly under $100,000 of the recount money on legal representation linked to the Senate probe into election interference.[88]
There’s nothing honest or straightforward about this "candidate".
Take a look with whom she hangs with ....
[imghttps://i.imgur.com/3fXnYwm.jpeg[/img]
Her platform was as honest as the Orange Shitgibbons.
In October 2019, Hillary Clinton said that Russia's ongoing efforts to influence U.S. elections included a plot to support a third party candidate in 2020, which could either be Jill Stein, whom she described as a "Russian asset," or Tulsi Gabbard.[90] A few days later, Clinton's comments were clarified to indicate that she thought that it was, in fact, Republicans who were behind the plot.[91] Stein denounced Clinton's comments on both herself and Gabbard, describing them as "slanderous".[92]
She and Tulsi Gabbard are two RW GOP cats' paws.
Just to be clear, I want all student debt forgiven. Jill's Platform is very lite on details :
Stein has argued for "free higher public education".[107] Stein favors canceling all student loan debt, saying that it could be done using quantitative easing and without raising taxes.[109] She has described quantitative easing as a "digital hat-trick" or "magic trick that basically people don't need to understand any more about than that it is a magic trick".[110
Or these other detail lite "plans":
"Stein has argued for "free higher public education".[107] Stein favors canceling all student loan debt, saying that it could be done using quantitative easing and without raising taxes.[109] She has described quantitative easing as a "digital hat-trick" or "magic trick that basically people don't need to understand any more about than that it is a magic trick".[110"
or
Stein said this plan would end unemployment and poverty.[95] Asked how the funds of the Green New Deal would be distributed, Stein said that it would be "through a community decision-making process" but that the details remained to be worked out.[96]
Stein has drawn parallels between her student loan proposal and the Wall Street bailout, saying that the US government bought up Wall Street debt and then canceled it. Jordan Weissmann of Slate argues that Stein's Wall Street comparison is "flat wrong": the Federal Reserve did not buy and cancel debt owed by the banks but bought and held onto debt owned by the banks.[105] When asked why her plan includes canceling upper-income individuals' debt, Stein responded that higher education "pays for itself" and that education is not a "gift," but a "right," and a "necessity."[107]
or this wrong minded wrongly reasoned BS:
According to Stein, the United States should use force only when there is "good evidence that we are under imminent threat of actual attack".[96] When asked by the Los Angeles Times editorial board whether that standard would have prevented US involvement in World War II, Stein answered, "I don't want to revisit history or try to reinterpret it, you know, but starting from where we are now, given the experience that we've had in the last, you know, since 2001, which has been an utter disaster, I don't think it's benefited us."[96] Asked whether such a standard would force the US to withdraw from all of its mutual defense treaties, Stein answered that the treaties need to "be looked at one by one", mentioning NATO in particular.[96] Stein criticized the 2003 invasion of Iraq, U.S.-led War in Afghanistan and U.S. involvement in the Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen, stating: "We are party to the war crimes that are being committed by Saudi Arabia, who’s using cluster bombs made by us. And we’ve supplied $100 billion worth of weapons to the Saudis in the last decade...It’s against our own laws. The Leahy bill requires that we not sell weapons to human rights abusers."[130] She wanted to remove U.S. nuclear weapons from foreign countries.[131]
On the subject of NATO, Stein has said that NATO has violated international law in Libya, and that it is part of "a foreign policy that has been based on economic and military domination".[107] When asked whether she agreed with Ajamu Baraka's description of NATO as "gangster states", Stein answered that she would not use Baraka's language but that "he means the same thing I'm saying".[107] Stein criticized NATO's eastward expansion. She has said that NATO "pursued a policy of basically encircling Russia — including the threat of nukes and drones and so on."[132] According to Stein, "now we got the Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse going on, where we have now surrounded Russia with missiles and nuclear weapons and NATO troops".[130] When asked by The Washington Post about NATO's role in protecting the Baltic states against Russia, Stein responded: "At this point, I'm not prepared to speak to that in detail" but said that NATO has not followed its stated policy after the fall of the Berlin Wall not to move "one inch to the East". (This claim is disputed; see Controversy in Russia regarding the legitimacy of eastward NATO expansion.) She further argued that there has been provocation on both sides and that a diplomatic approach is necessary.[107] Stein has said that NATO fights invented enemies in order to provide work for the weapons industry.[133] Stein accused NATO member Turkey of supporting Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, saying that "we need to convince Turkey, our ally in theory, to close its border to the movement of jihadi militias across its border to reinforce ISIS."[130]
When asked in a Vox interview about Russian military policy in Crimea and Ukraine, Stein answered, "These are highly questionable situations. Why are we — Russia used to own Ukraine. Ukraine was historically a part of Russia for quite some period of time, and we all know there was this conversation with Victoria Nuland about planning the coup and who was going to take over ... Let's just stop pretending there are good guys here and bad guys here. These are complicated situations. Yeah, Russia is doing lots of human rights abuse, but you know what? So are we."[108] When asked by Politico if she thought that Putin was an "incipient despot", Stein answered, "To some extent, yes, but there could be a whole lot worse ... when we needlessly provoke him and endanger him and surround him with war games--you know, this is sort of the Cuban Missile Crisis on steroids, what we are doing to Russia right now, and I don't think this is a good idea."[134]
Stein has argued that the United States "helped foment" a coup in Ukraine, maintaining that Ukraine should be neutral and that the United States should not arm it.[132] She was critical of the Ukrainian government formed after the Revolution of Dignity, saying that "ultra-nationalists and ex-Nazis came to power."[135] She met with President Vladimir Putin in Moscow in December 2015 at a banquet to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Russian state television network RT. While in Russia, Stein criticized U.S. foreign policy (saying that the U.S. had a "policy of domination" instead of "international law, human rights and diplomacy") and human rights in the U.S. Stein told CNN that she attended the conference to advocate for a ceasefire in the Middle East and to tell Russia to stop its military incursion in Syria.[136]
She has said that her approach to the Syrian Civil War would be to put in place a weapons embargo, freeze funds going to ISIL and other terrorist groups, and push for a peace process leading to a ceasefire.[107] Stein is also in favor of taking "far more" than the 10,000 Syrian refugees Obama pledged to take in.[107]
Stein has been sharply critical of the use of drones, calling them a human rights violation and an "illegal assassination program" saying that they are "off target nine times out of ten."[137] She has also been critical of America's "expanding wars" and accused the United States of currently "bombing seven countries," which Politifact rated as a true statement.[138]
Stein is against the construction of Israeli settlements in the Jordan Valley and wants to end the occupation of the West Bank.[139] Stein has accused the Israeli government of "apartheid, assassination, illegal settlements, blockades, building of nuclear bombs, indefinite detention, collective punishment, and defiance of international law."[140] She supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel[141] and regards Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a "war criminal".[142][better source needed] Upon the death of Nobel Peace Laureate Elie Wiesel, Stein praised him in a tribute on her Facebook page, but deleted the post when commenters criticized Wiesel's Zionism.[143] When asked in September 2016 whether she had a "position on whether a two-state solution is a better solution than a one-state solution", Stein answered, "I feel like I am not as informed as I need to be to really weigh in on that".[96]
Stein does not think the U.S should become involved in territorial disputes in the South China Sea.[132]
Immediately after the UK voted to leave the European Union in June 2016, Stein posted a celebratory statement on her website, saying the vote was "a victory for those who believe in the right of self-determination and who reject the pro-corporate, austerity policies of the political elites in the EU ... [and] a rejection of the European political elite and their contempt for ordinary people."[144][145] She later changed the statement (without indicating so), removing words like "victory" and adding the line, "Before the Brexit vote I agreed with Jeremy Corbyn, Caroline Lucas and the UK Greens who supported staying in the EU but working to fix it."[144][145][146][147]
In 2012, Stein favored maintaining current levels of international aid spending.[148]
On the eve of the 15-year anniversary of the September 11 attacks, Stein called for "a comprehensive and independent inquiry into the attacks," saying that the 9/11 Commission Report contained many "omissions and distortions."[149] The next day, she said: "I think I would not have assassinated Osama bin Laden but would have captured him and brought him to trial."[150]
After the death of Cuban former communist leader Fidel Castro, Stein tweeted that "Fidel Castro was a symbol of the struggle for justice in the shadow of empire."[151]
or, and I won't hold my breath for details of her plan:
Stein is in favor of replacing the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) with a "Medicare-for-All" healthcare system[148] and has said that it is an "illusion" that Obamacare is a "step in the right direction" toward single-payer healthcare.[167] When asked in August 2016 whether she supported a ballot measure in Colorado to create the first universal healthcare system in the nation (ColoradoCare), Stein said she was not ready to endorse the plan, citing concerns about gaps and loopholes in the ballot measure.[168]
or her vaxx reticience:
In an interview with The Washington Post, Stein stated that "vaccines have been absolutely critical in ridding us of the scourge of many diseases," and said that "[t]here were concerns among physicians about what the vaccination schedule meant, the toxic substances like mercury which used to be rampant in vaccines. There were real questions that needed to be addressed. I think some of them at least have been addressed. I don't know if all of them have been addressed."[172][173] The Guardian says that "research has shown schedule-related concerns about vaccines to be unfounded, and that delays to vaccines actually put children at greater risk. Anti-vaxx campaigners often claim that there are dangerous compounds in vaccines, though decades of safe vaccinations contradict the claim and no evidence shows that trace amounts that remain in some approved vaccines cause any harm to the body."[173]
In The Washington Post interview, Stein said that vaccines should be approved by a board that people can trust, and "people do not trust a Food and Drug Administration," or Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "where corporate influence and the pharmaceutical industry has a lot of influence."[172][174] According to The Guardian, eleven members of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee are medical doctors who work at hospitals and universities, and two work at pharmaceutical companies, GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi Pasteur US.[173] In response, Stein said that "Monsanto lobbyists help run the day in those agencies and are in charge of approving what food isn't safe".[172] Emily Willingham, scientist and contributor at Forbes, described Stein's statements on vaccines as "using dog whistle terms and equivocations bound to appeal to the 'antivaccine' constituency".[175] Dan Kahan, a professor at Yale who has studied public perception of science, says that it is dangerous for candidates to equivocate on vaccines, "Because the attitudes about vaccines are pretty much uniform across the political spectrum, it doesn't seem like a great idea for any candidate to be anti-vaccine. The modal view is leave the freaking system alone."[176] In response to a Twitter question about whether vaccines cause autism, Stein first answered, "there is no evidence that autism is caused by vaccines," then revised her tweet to "I'm not aware of evidence linking autism with vaccines."[177]
In a later interview at the Green party convention, Stein answered "no" to the question "do you think vaccines cause autism?"[178] She called this a "nonsense issue, meant to distract people" and likened it to smear campaigns used in previous presidential elections, citing the "Swiftboat issue" or the "birther issue,"[178] pointing out that in her previous published work on autism and other child development issues,[158] no mention was made of vaccines.[178] When asked about vaccines by Jacobin editor Bhaskar Sunkara, Stein responded: "One of the issues I used to work on was reducing mercury exposure. That was an issue at one point in vaccines. That's been rectified," adding, "there are issues about mercury in the fish supply that many low-income people and immigrant communities rely on, and in indigenous communities especially. This is a huge issue and the FDA has refused for decades to regulate and to warn people."[179]
In an October 21, 2016, interview, producer Bec Gill with the ScIQ YouTube channel asked Stein: "You talk extensively on your concern about corporate influence over U.S. vaccine regulations. My question is, what evidence do you have that corporate influence has caused either the FDA or the CDC to make decisions that endanger American children's health?" Stein offered as evidence Vioxx and Monsanto.[180]
Could she have possibly been more vague about her stand???
or, this mixing of the shits in with true whistle blowers and political prisoners. I think Chelsea faced the music the way a real whistle blower does and the dirty traitor Snowdon and the beneath contempt Assange are two total sellout dipfucks:
In her acceptance speech for the Green Party nomination, she called for "end[ing] the war on whistleblowers, and free[ing] the political prisoners ... Leonard Peltier, Mumia Abu Jamal, Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, Jeffrey Sterling, and Edward Pinkney".[123] She said that she would have Snowden in her Cabinet if elected.[181] In an op-ed on the subject of WikiLeaks, Stein argued that Assange was doing what other journalists should be doing but are not, and added that whistleblowers have been increasingly subject to "character assassination" and prosecution during the Obama administration.[182]
Want to discuss Tulsi Gabbard next?
About half of what Stein offers I can get behind easily enough, Joe Biden could, too. But half is not enough to support or vote for.
I've read her goofy little platform, too - so there. I bet you don't read a thing I post.
