Blaming Bernie Sanders for a Shooting

The mainstream media usually won’t blame non-violent political speech for a crazed gunman’s shooting spree, but made an exception linking Bernie Sanders to the GOP-baseball-practice shooting, notes Norman Solomon.

By Norman Solomon 

It’s routine for right-wing outlets like Fox to smear progressive activists under the guise of “news” coverage. But why the New York Times? And why the special venom for Bernie Sanders?

Sen. Bernie Sanders speaking to one of his large crowds of supporters. (Photo credit: Sanders campaign)

After the horrific June 14 shooting of Congressman Steve Scalise and three other participants in a Republican baseball practice, the media floodgates opened for slimy innuendos. Before the day was done, a major supplier of the political sewage was the New York Times, which prominently published a left-blaming article that masqueraded as news reporting.

The media watch group FAIR pointed out that the Times piece “started with a false premise and patched together a dodgy piece of innuendo and guilt-by-association in order to place the blame for a shooting in Virginia on ‘the most ardent supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders.’”

It would be a mistake to think that the Times story was only the result of bias inflamed by the grisly shooting spree. A few days earlier, the newspaper had front-paged another “news” story hostile to grassroots political forces aligned with Sanders — a de facto editorial masquerading as news coverage, headlined: “Democrats in Split-Screen: The Base Wants It All. The Party Wants to Win.”

In a bizarre disconnect from electoral reality, the article portrayed a party establishment that had lost election after election, including a cataclysmic loss to Trump, as being about winning. And the article portrayed the party’s activist base as interfering with the establishment’s winning ways.

Such Times stories are now operating under a heightened sense of journalistic impunity since the newspaper abolished its 14-year-old ombudsperson position of “public editor” more than two weeks ago — further insulating its reporters and editors from accountability. More than ever, calling the shots at the Times — the most influential news outlet in the United States — means never having to say you’re sorry, or even justify what you’ve done.

Media Hostility

Corporate-owned media hostility toward Sanders and the progressive base has been conspicuous and well-documented. That hostility started early in his campaign and never let up, sometimes manifested as giving him scant coverage. When the momentum of the Bernie campaign gained powerful traction as a threat to the corporate order, big media efforts to trash him went over the top.

A sign at a Bernie Sanders rally in Washington D.C. on June 9, 2016. (Photo credit: Chelsea Gilmour)

At a key political moment last year, as FAIR analyst Adam Johnson wrote, “the Washington Post ran 16 negative stories on Bernie Sanders in 16 hours, between roughly 10:20 PM EST Sunday, March 6, to 3:54 PM EST Monday, March 7 — a window that includes the crucial Democratic debate in Flint, Michigan, and the next morning’s spin.” The day after this onslaught, Sanders stunned the elite pundit class by winning the Michigan primary. 

Now, in mid-2017, with no presidential election in sight, why is the corporate media hostility toward Sanders so prone to surface?

Consider, as an example, this structural reality: Jeff Bezos, the owner of the Washington Post, has just unveiled plans for his company Amazon to buy Whole Foods. And Bernie Sanders, the most popular politician in the United States according to polls, is strongly opposed to allowing such huge consolidations of corporate power.

For good reasons, media powerhouses like the New York Times and Washington Post are averse to Donald Trump. At the same time, they remain quite cozy with Hillary Clinton’s political orientation and especially with the sectors of the corporate-military establishment that she represents. Like so much of the mass media, those outlets see Sanders as dangerously anti-corporate and way too willing to challenge Wall Street, big insurance companies, the fossil fuel industry and the like.

On a political level, the Clinton wing of the party has been running on the equivalent of dumpster-fire fumes since the disastrous loss in November. The party’s establishment, entwined with Wall Street and an agenda of continuous military intervention overseas, was just barely able to shoehorn its handpicked choice, Tom Perez, into becoming the new chair of the Democratic National Committee.

In a classic joint interview with MSNBC two months ago, Perez and Sanders showcased just how different their politics are. Perez mumbled platitudes, Sanders was forthright. Perez spoke about victims of an unfair economy, but he refused to denounce or even name their corporate victimizers — while Sanders was glad to do so.

The U.S. media establishment often conflates “populism” of the right and the left, as though Trump and Sanders are somehow symmetrical as anti-establishment figures. And, as in the case of the New York Times article that appeared hours after the GOP baseball tragedy, the Times has sometimes jumped at the chance to draw far-fetched parallels between Trump’s violence-tinged, pseudo-populist messaging from the right and Sanders’s humane, inclusive messaging from the left.

Like it or not, the battle over the future of the Democratic Party — including what kind of presidential nominee the party should have in 2020 — is already underway. Overall, the top echelons of corporate media are oriented toward promoting the Clinton wing while denigrating the Bernie wing. The forces that brought us the disastrous 2016 Clinton campaign are not about to give up.

Norman Solomon is the coordinator of the online activist group and the executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. He is the author of a dozen books including War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.

63 comments for “Blaming Bernie Sanders for a Shooting

  1. Evangelista
    June 20, 2017 at 20:07

    Bernie Sanders does bear a larger than average Congress-member’s significant degree of responsibility for the mad Bernie-Bro Shoot-Up of the 2017 Republican Baseball Team in its late spring-training practice session, in May, 2017. Sanders’ additional degree of personal responsibility does not arise from his standard among Congress-persons advocacies and actions based on common Congress-person presumptions of superiority to, authority to rule and right to supervise, order, dominate and control as rulers over The People, to whom, each and individually, not as a Socialist Whole, the United States Constitution defines Congress-persons, and all others engaged in government, servants, with obligation to serve, and not to supervise or dictate to, or for his equally common among Congress-persons, and others engaged in governing in the United States and states thereof, and governmental divisions within those, disdain and dismissal of the authority of The People, and of the Constitution, and the oaths each swore to uphold those upon assuming office.

    For all of those common Congress-person offenses, and their constituting Treason against the lawful Constitutional United States, established by the United States Constitution, and its ratification, Bernie Sanders, along with all the other Congress-persons with whom he abuses the powers entrusted to him by The People of the United States, does deserve to suffer the fate the Mad Bernie-Bro attempted, incompetently and precipitately, to levy upon the 2017 Republican Congressional Baseball Team.

    The Constitution of the United States establishing a Principled System, and the principle Principle of its System being Presumption of Innocence, and Presumption of Innocence requiring proof of failure to act innocently, even though the United States Bernie Sanders and the others of his common-lot Congress-member defendants have established and maintain and continue to perpetrate does not honor the First Principle of the Constitutional United States, any more than they do that United States’ Constitution, honor for the United States Constitution and the United States it founded, requires that Bernie Sanders and his fellow violators be given fair trials at which their Treasons against the Constitution and Constitutional United States must be proved, to establish their guilts before the law, before thy may be shot.

    Thus, the precipitate shooter, while, indicated by proofs to be, in all probability, not be wrong in his judgment that the Republicans in question, was wrong in placing his cart (tumbrel) for them ahead of the horse of fair trial.

    What the precipitate shooter needed to have done was advocated for Treason Trials for not only the Republicans (and lobbyists, a varmint-species) that he targeted, while also putting his name in to volunteer to be a member of the squads assigned to carry out sentence after the trials (I don’t see why it would not be possible for him, and others of his persuasions, to volunteer only to shoot Republicans convicted, since undoubtedly there are others who would be oppositely inclined, to shoot Democrats, being uncomfortable shooting Republicans, having grown accustomed to them as pets, or something). The only thing the law would be concerned with would be that the whol lot needing shot would be. That is all that would concern me.

    In the meantime, the precipitate shooter would obviously have done well to have taken a gun safety course and then joined a militia, to learn some gun-control. His handling of his weapons in the instance demonstrated an appalling ignorance of his hardware and controlling its functions. While his incompetence might be perceived fortuitous under the circumstances, since with some competence he might have killed someone, with a little militia training he might have also learned some discipline, specifically to hold fire until the formalities had been carried through. I am sure that if alive today he would be more than a little chagrined to recognize that his blazing away like some precipitate drugstore-cowboy, like he did, put him squarely alongside President Trump, who did exactly the same, but by proxy and with Tomahawk missiles, instead of NATO regulation rifle ammo.

    What sets Bernie Sanders above his fellow self-aggrandized from servant to superior Treasonous Criminals , making him more responsible for the precipitate shooter’s spiraling up into out-of-control violence is Bernie’s silence during the 2016 United States Presidential Campaign when his adherents engaged in aggressive assault and violence against those whose political views they opposed, primarily Candidate Donald Trump.

    The violence in political campaigning, to remain within permissible limits, must be confined to verbal forms. Political campaigns are, in effect, controlled mini-revolutions, the partisans of each campaigning camp being intent to overthrow the government, existing or proposed, of the parties they oppose. To prevent political campaigns growing into physical revolution campaigns the restrictions on violence, requiring it be held to verbal, must be strictly observed. Especially by candidates.

    It is because of this, and because Bernie Sanders remained silent and did not rein in, or attempt to rein in, his campaigners, instead, let them aggress and attack other than verbally, that he bears responsibility, both for the physical aggressions, intimidations and violences those campaigning for him, with no restraints, engaged in, and for the carrying forward of the same tendencies to physically violent aggressive assertions of political preferences, in the case of the Congressional Baseball Team shoot-up, carried forward into a mis-use of weapons event.

  2. Bill Goldman
    June 20, 2017 at 14:31

    I don’t remember Sanders ever advocating violence. I do remember Sanders succumbing to anti-Russian and anti-Putin propaganda as venomously as did the Republicans and the Democratic right. It is fashionable in America to go jingoistic because war talk stimulates war and corporate interests are behind that and favor it as a diversionary tactic when people are frustrated about a weak economy. Instead of playing footsie with the right, the left should be publicizing the “war is a racket” mantra and like Marine Corps General Smedley Butler explain it as he did, to wit, “We (the Marines) were “hit men for the corporations”. I get license plate slogans from the Quakers reading “War is Not the Answer”, but none stating that “War is a Racket.”,, which it clearly is.

    • Abe
      June 20, 2017 at 17:41

      Of course, blaming Sanders for a gunman’s shooting spree is both a calumny and a diversionary tactic.

      In fact, Saint Bernard has been an advocate of military violence abroad:

      Sanders is a down-the-line supporter of the state of Israel, repeatedly endorsing Israeli onslaughts against the Gaza Strip, most recently the savage bombardment of July-August 2014 which killed nearly 2,000 Palestinians, including more than 500 children.

      At an August 2014 town hall meeting, Sanders notoriously demanded that audience members “shut up” when they questioned his support for Israel’s criminal actions.

      Sanders backed the US intervention in Ukraine to foment a coup spearheaded by fascist elements to overthrow the pro-Russian government and set up a pro-Western stooge regime.

      Sanders has voted repeatedly for vast Pentagon appropriations bills, maintaining funding of the wars he was (rhetorically) opposed to, as well as funding for the CIA, NSA and the rest of the vast American intelligence apparatus, the infrastructure for police-state spying against the American people.

      When the warmongering campaign in the US and European media was at its height, Sanders declared “The entire world has got to stand up to Putin.” At a January 2017 CNN town hall, Sanders proclaimed that “the evidence is overwhelming” that Russia interfered “to help elect the candidate of their choice, Mr. Trump” and “to undermine in a significant way American democracy.”

      Sanders is a longtime proven defender of US imperialism, not a half-hearted or inconsistent opponent.

  3. Charlotte Scot
    June 20, 2017 at 07:31

    The NYT and most MSM have always 1)either ignored Bernie Sanders or 2) put forth negative stories on him. Most Washington and NY media outlets are closely aligned with the Third Way policies promoted by the DNC and Clinton wing of the Democratic Party. Bernie has always been a threat to their cushy cocktail circuit relationships with establishment power players. Often writers create stories which only soil the long time reputations of their publications. This was really a new low. Pathetic. Shoddy and deceptive journalism is contributing to the demise of our once great democracy.

  4. June 19, 2017 at 17:46

    Realist, you have great comments! I didn’t think of Madame Curie, but she surely had much greater mental powers than Madame Clinton.

  5. Tim
    June 19, 2017 at 17:44

    I was incensed when I read how Sanders was blamed. Seems like you’ve got it correct that the Clinton wing is supported by MIC. What I’m surprised about is, when Seth Rich was murdered after contacting Wikileaks, then the emails, followed by resignations some key DNC figures, and FBI does not seize computers then Russia gate/Trump deflection from the real issue; the murder connected to the leaking, not hacking of DNC emails with collusion by IC. It’s amazing how the MIC controls outcomes by manipulating the mainstream press. They can demonize Putin and Russia on no evidence. That, my friends is truly magic.

  6. June 19, 2017 at 17:43

    Absolutely true, no system is a solution. The problem, as the “lowly mike k” (have to smile about that, mike) said the other day, the fault lies within human nature. Capitalism has engendered greed and selfishness, and socialism never works because no system makes people better, they have to have their own internal self-reflection, a quality sorely lacking nowadays.

  7. exiled off mainstreet
    June 19, 2017 at 17:12

    Sanders is not to blame, though he has supported the absurd post-Soviet conspiracy theory which excited his erstwhile supporter. I blame the lamestream pro-Clinton media and the Clinton controllers of the democratic party. With this phony Russia story, they have forfeited their last vestiges of legitimacy and come out as fascists.

  8. Cal
    June 19, 2017 at 17:10

    Neither the Hilary corporate wing nor the Bernie socialist wing is worth the powder it would take to blow them to blankety blanket.

    Neither pure socialism or pure capitalism is the answer for the US.

    To envision how socialism would work imagine a nation of people with the same mentality as unmotivated and incompetent government workers who cant be fired.
    To envision a nation run by pure capitalism–well…just look around at today’s corporate cannibals culture.

    There is such a thing as ‘Socially Responsible’ capitalism… that motivates the individual to create and innovate and take risk for his ‘fair’ rewards—BUT to have that we must have a government that rides herd on and regulates the hell out of the excesses and the unethical and the criminal elements in it.

    Why is it so many people feel they must adopt one eco/soc system or the opposite other system—a ‘nanny’ socialist government or a ‘wild, wild west no government’ government—–with no in between or balance?

    Pure socialism and pure capitalism are both losers for nations and human populations.

    • backwardsevolution
      June 20, 2017 at 00:13

      Cal – good comments. Yes, a balance between the two systems would be preferable.

      • Brad Owen
        June 20, 2017 at 11:50

        This has come to be called dirigism, or, in plain english, a mixed economy with and strong public sector and a strong private sector…basically what we had from Roosevelt through a sputtering Nixon/Ford/Carter era to its end under Reagan, who maintained that the public sector is the problem (wrong; the Synarchists in the private sector, wishing to capture the regulatory machinery of the public sector, for a fascist era controlled by 1%ers, is precisely the problem). Fortunately for the world, Russia and China have entered their Dirigist eras, which explains their economic miracles. It is no magic. It’s what works, every time it’s used. LaRouche and Tarpley are our best representatives of Dirigism in America.

    • Bob In Portland
      June 20, 2017 at 02:40

      Sanders has never preached a pure socialist system.

  9. Abe
    June 19, 2017 at 17:06

    Sanders deserves special venom for his “Left” imperialist advocacy of the corporate-military establishment:

    “War is not a side issue in the United States; it is the central political issue, on which all the others turn. War mania is the enemy of all social progress — especially so, when it unites disparate social forces, in opposition to their own interests, in the service of an imperialist state that is the tool of a rapacious white capitalist elite. Therefore, the orchestrated propaganda blitzkrieg against Russia by the Democratic Party, in collaboration with the corporate media and other functionaries and properties of the U.S. ruling class, marks the party as, collectively, the Warmonger-in-Chief political institution in the United States at this historical juncture. The Democrats are anathema to any politics that can be described as progressive. […]

    “Sanders is a warmonger, not merely by association, but by virtue of his own positions. He favors more sanctions against Russia, in addition to the sanctions levied against Moscow in 2014 and 2016 for its measured response to the U.S-backed fascist coup against a democratically elected government in Ukraine. Rather than surrender to U.S. bullying, Russia came to the military aid of the sovereign and internationally recognized government of Syria in 2015, upsetting the U.S. game plan for an Islamic jihadist victory.

    “Back in April of this year, on NBC’s Meet The Press, Sanders purposely mimicked The Godfather when asked what he would do to force the Russians ‘to the table’ in Syria:

    “’I think you may want to make them an offer they can’t refuse. And that means tightening the screws on them, dealing with sanctions, telling them that we need their help, they have got to come to the table and not maintain this horrific dictator.’

    “Of course, it is the United States that has sabotaged every international agreement to rein in its jihadist mercenaries in Syria.

    “Sanders is a regime-changer, which means he thinks the U.S., in combination with self-selected allies, is above international law, i.e., ‘exceptional.’ […]

    “[Sanders] s now the second most important Democrat in the country, behind the ultra-corrupt Bill-Hillary Clinton machine — and by far the most popular. On top of that, Sanders loves being the hero of the phony left, the guy who gimmick-seeking left-liberals hope will create an instant national party for them, making it unnecessary to build a real anti-war, pro-people party from scratch to go heads up with the two corporate machines.”

    Why Bernie Sanders is an Imperialist Pig
    By Glen Ford

    • Draxx
      June 19, 2017 at 23:40

      Oh give me a fucking break. Take everything you just said about Sanders, multiply it by 100x, and you’ve got Trump.

      • Abe
        June 20, 2017 at 02:09

        Dude, you’re like totally right on. Donald Trump is 100x more the guy who gimmick-seeking left-liberals hope will create an instant national party for them. Hillary Clinton came in at a measly 50x. Guess that’s why Bernie urged us all to give her a fucking break. Pass the vape, Draxx.

  10. June 19, 2017 at 16:17

    Actually, I meant “polarization” rather than “polarity”, which is a physics term.

    • Realist
      June 19, 2017 at 17:35

      LOL. You must have shifted your mental track to physics throughout that sentence, harkening “Madame Curie” by referring to “Madame Clinton.”

      Obama involved? He’s established a simulated White House in DC to headquarter the shadow government he’s created. It’s personal between him and Trump.

  11. June 19, 2017 at 16:04

    Elections, though, have become a joke, they are so manipulated and fraudulent. Tulsi Gabbard is already getting smeared in anticipation of reelection, and Elizabeth Warren is being targeted to get her out because she wants to bring back Glass-Steagall. She, of course, caved to the DNC to support Clinton, and her foreign policy is ignorant, including supporting Israel because she’s a “tribal follower”, Bill Bodden’s term for that type who won’t rock the boat in Congress. Anyone who doesn’t follow their party-tribe gets targeted for ousting. The corruption of Congres is complete. Mike k brought up the image of Diogenes looking for an honest man the other day, where is there one? And the polarity of Americans is beyond the pale since Madame Clinton’s loss, never anything like it! The press is stoking it, social media stokes it, most likely the CIA, as you say, backwards evolution, tracking social media, and probably Soros may be involved with the Clinton machine. And I think Obama is involved also.

  12. Mike K.
    June 19, 2017 at 15:41

    Good grief.

    Why the Times?

    Why Sanders?

    Did Mr. Solomon ever consider the media treatment Ron Paul got?

    There is plenty of hypocrisy to go around, as always.

    But of late, it is Leftist/Progressive advocates enbracing violence and, in neo-Bolshevik fashion, dehumanizing its political opponents in a way largely accepted by the *mainstream* Left and media.

    Just about no one blames Sanders for the act of a Left wing nut.

    But the legacy media and ‘progressive activists’ will seiftly and unironically blame ‘hate speech’ and other non Leftist non statist CRIMETHINK on the set of all ‘rightwingers.’

    Right before reminding those ‘right wingers’ (who are all, literally, Nazis it is always okay to assault) after the next Islamic terror attack that it is ‘hate’ to blame ‘all Muslims’ or even fundamentalist Islam qua ideology.

    Mr. Solomon, with respect: you need to broaden your sources of news.

    • mike k
      June 19, 2017 at 16:11

      I guess it should be obvious that the (capitalized) “Mike K” is not the
      lowly mike k most here are familiar with. His is not my style, nor my sentiments.

      • Realist
        June 19, 2017 at 17:25

        Sehr interessant!

        I would have glossed right over that.

  13. Bob In Portland
    June 19, 2017 at 14:15

    At the end of May a psychotic alt-righter slashed the throats of three men trying to stop the psychotic’s bullying of two teenaged girls (one black, one dressed as a Muslim) on public transit. Two of the men died.

    What was curious was how all the alt-righters appeared in the comments sections of the Oregonian claiming that, because the killer said something nice about Sanders in the middle of one of his xenophobic, anti-Semitic Facebook rants, the guy was a Sanders supporter.

    When propaganda is pushed, different groups are targeted differently. Apparently, the alt-righters in Oregon were given the message that Sanders’ followers were violent before it became a national meme.

    I wrote here:

    that the DNC behavior surrounding the “Russian hack-Putin-Trump” wave of stories was going to be President Clinton’s casus belli for a big war against Russia. Trump wasn’t supposed to win. When he did that stream of propaganda was fully directed at Trump to sink his Presidency.

    But a look at the results of the months of propaganda have not made Clinton’s neoliberal position any more popular even as Trump’s numbers are hammered. The beneficiary? Sanders. He’s still the most popular politician in the US, quite simply because he talks about what most Americans want to hear.

    Thus it has become necessary to open a direct line of attack on Sanders. The Deep State’s plans have failed and they are scrambling.

    It is a good time to watch the workings of the Mighty Wurlitzer.

    • backwardsevolution
      June 19, 2017 at 14:49

      Bob in Portland – I agree with much of what you’ve said, but I still believe Bernie is an insider. He caved in to Clinton, embraced her. When he should have been screaming about DNC corruption against his campaign, he stayed silent. He just voted in favor of more sanctions against Russia. He’s stated that the U.S. elections were hacked by Russia. He would be even worse than Trump.

      With the exception of a very few (Tulsi Gabbard, Dennis Kucinich, maybe Rand Paul), they’re all bought and paid for.

      Vote them all out!

      • mike k
        June 19, 2017 at 15:58

        It will take more than a lone savior to pull our chestnuts from the roaring fire we have created. A more general awakening is called for, and unless a leader can kindle that, he/she will be ineffectual to reverse the widespread rot of our society.

        • Cal
          June 19, 2017 at 17:21

          There has long been a ‘general awaking’ in a lot of the public——a disgust with Washington corruption and criminal capitalist practices above the law.

          That is what people who supported Trump responded to–it wasn’t racism and the other crap the demos claim drew voters to him for the majority of Trump voters—it was disgust and anger at the present system rigged against the ordinary working population. And yes illegal immigration was a issue for them but not based on racism for the majority.

          Unfortunately Trump has turned out to be a dud and honking mule plowing for the special interest just like all his predecessors.

          There are no heroes on the horizon so give that hope up.

          • backwardsevolution
            June 19, 2017 at 20:58

            Cal – I wouldn’t give up on Trump yet. He’s only been in for five months and in that time he’s been crushed and mushed by absolutely everyone. I have hope that he will open his eyes. False hope maybe, but some hope.

        • Libby
          June 20, 2017 at 12:25

          Interesting and prescient comment.

      • Bob In Portland
        June 20, 2017 at 02:38

        I’d be wary of Tulsi Gabbard too.

        As far as Sanders, he may well be an insider, in which case we are really fucked.

  14. Skip Scott
    June 19, 2017 at 13:23

    I thought it interesting that the GOP victims embraced the NRA line even after being shot at. I remember one guy (maybe Flake of AZ) say thank god we had armed people to return fire! The obvious question is why the security detail didn’t canvas the area enough to find this guy before he started shooting. And what government (even in mostly unarmed western Europe) doesn’t have an armed security detail for their representatives? But of course the GOP will never pass up an opportunity to kiss up to the gun lobby.

    • Realist
      June 19, 2017 at 17:20

      I’ve come to regard any remarks by politicians about guns following a mass killing as nothing but empty talking points by both sides. It’s just part of the theatrics they put on for their base.

      The grimmest reality is that after every incident the public becomes collectively more afraid and more pliable in the hands of those who would justify giving more and more power to the government and the police. Do our “protectors” have a real incentive to stop the threat? Or do they milk it like their TSA does at all the airports every day?

  15. J. D.
    June 19, 2017 at 13:14

    After detailing the hostility to Bernie Sanders for his anti-Establishment views, the author then feels compelled to recite the requisite disclaimer: “For good reasons, media powerhouses like the New York Times and Washington Post are averse to Donald Trump.” Really? Has it not been made clear over and over since at least last summer that aside from state opposition to wars of regime change, Trump’s support for Glass-Steagall, the overwhelming reason for the ongoing campaign to oust this president is his desire for better relations with Russia and actively collaborate with Putin against terrorism. Not only has Trump refused to back down, but he has gone on to establish a strong working relationship with China’s Xi. In the eyes of the Establishment these are crimes which cannot be forgiven.

    • John
      June 19, 2017 at 19:45

      Is this why the US just shot down a Syrian bomber? To gain favor with Russia?

    • Draxx
      June 19, 2017 at 22:43

      I’m sorry, but if you honestly believe Trump ever gave two shits about Glass-Steagall or deescalating tensions with Russia you’re quite possibly more naïve than the typical member of the New York Times pep squad. His entire public life for the past three decades is proof positive that he’s a quintessential capitalist oligarch, with a touch of flimflam hucksterism thrown in for good measure. He’s just the first one of them who actually had the chutzpah (or idiocy) to run for office himself instead of taking the easy way out and bribing a reliable patsy. Every single promise he made on the campaign trail was done knowing full well that he’d be wiping his ass with them when and if he won the election.

      • Brad Owen
        June 20, 2017 at 03:39

        Then why the intense effort to tar&feather, impeach, 25th amendment one of their own? No, you wake up and see. The former governor of Iowa is now ambassador to China, and is a personal friend of President Xi since the eighties. Tillerson is a personal friend of Putin. There is a civil war going on among the Establishment/Deep State oligarchs themselves. Some of the financiers themselves are wanting to jump off the titanic and swim aboard the Glass-Steagall ship to save their $ from burning up in a Crash and Panic. You wake up. Check out Executive Intelligence Review(EIR) and its LaRouchePAC to help you wake up to what is really going on. We are on the verge of a New Rennaisance, with the unlikeliest leader at the helm that we’ve ever had (the real politicians being too bought-off and gutless).

  16. June 19, 2017 at 12:37

    Good point, cmack, on the drug issue, which some investigation in past incidents have shown the perpetrator on something, usually an antidepressant. And your point, Mr. Watkins, makes lots of sense, and I wasn’t thinking of that, who stoked this guy? Did he have a handler behind the scene?

    • backwardsevolution
      June 19, 2017 at 14:39

      Charles and Jessica – did someone stoke this guy, get him agitated, steer him in a certain direction? Most likely this is exactly what happened. The CIA do this all the time, befriend these guys, sympathize with them, and then lead them to do what they do. These people are loners, already angry at the world, on prescription drugs, so it wouldn’t take much to steer them. And they’re almost always shot dead, so they don’t tell tales.

      • Realist
        June 19, 2017 at 17:09

        So, they are the American equivalent of the Middle East suicide bombers? I can see the intel agencies being so manipulative. And, I can see them wanting to whip up violent dissension in this country as a pretext for imposing marshal law. That way the establishment could do anything they pleased and the public wouldn’t even know about it, let alone complain.

        • backwardsevolution
          June 19, 2017 at 20:18

          Realist – love your description: “equivalent of Middle East suicide bombers”. Yes, I’ve read some interesting articles on how the CIA does this.

          It looks like they’re definitely trying to point out how wacko progressives now are. This baseball shooter is being labeled a “progressive”, and the media has been talking about how violent the progressives are becoming, Berkeley, etc. Probably trying to drive the herd away from both Bernie and Trump, and up through the middle to The Warlord herself.

          Martial law? I could see them using this if they felt it was necessary, yes.

  17. Charles Watkins
    June 19, 2017 at 12:23

    I have yet to read a coherent explanation for the shooting. Are we to believe he got stoked up about Sanders and went out to roam around stalking Republicans, and coming across a baseball practice, he asked whether they were Republicans or Democrats and then decided to open fire? This was the plan?

    • Richard Ong
      June 22, 2017 at 05:39

      I think he was “stoked up” for reasons having to do with personal sickness of the soul.

  18. cmack
    June 19, 2017 at 12:22

    oh yeah,
    one more thing in relation to all of these shootings…….

    ever hear about what prescription drugs these guys always seem to be on?

    can’t report on our biggest advertisers can we?

    • Richard Ong
      June 22, 2017 at 05:36

      Antibiotics are prescription drugs. Which ones in particular do you have in mind?

      • cmack
        June 22, 2017 at 09:55

        ssri’s specifically.

        go look them up. and how many mass shooters have been on them. and while your at it, look up the giant list of side effects.

  19. AC
    June 19, 2017 at 11:56

    New York Times is a joke … even the Onion has more credibility.

  20. June 19, 2017 at 11:38

    Thanks for the article, Norm Solomon. The shooting in itself is yet another example of how unhinged the whole country has become, irrational, petty and vicious, nonstop, including journalists who have no interest in looking rationally at events because they serve their corporate masters. The USA has become so uncivil that a second civil war seems more and more possible, especially since the bought-and- paid for government officials do nothing to address the immiseration of so many. And it was Bernie Sanders who did address that issue, but the elites of the NYT sitting in their comfy offices in a high rise of New York City couldn’t care less about the squalid state of much of the country, only their nice paychecks. The Clinton wing of the party fostered this in addition, that anyone could consider Hillary Clinton as concerned for peoples’ welfare given her actual record shows just what a propaganda wash the press does on the gullible public. Your statement that the Clinton wing are running on the equivalent of “dumpster fumes” is apt; they are so noxious and have done so much damage as to bring us even close to war with Russia, victim of their venom. Interestingly, from statements of President Putin and Russia’s savvy Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, Russians clearly see the insanity that has overtaken the USA. Getting these people to sanity is, however, another matter.

    • Realist
      June 19, 2017 at 17:04

      Yes, the pols from both side of the aisle are doing nothing but (purposely?) whipping up dissension and war fever with their votes and their media tools. They think the venom will be directed outwardly against Russia and America’s other contrived enemies, but if they have miscalculated, domestic terrorism in this country could be directed against our fellow citizens just as it was in Northern Ireland for so many years. People forget the killing that went on there, often every day, usually through the use of car bombs. The media taught us how easy home-made explosives are to make after the incident in Boston. And, we can’t forget Timothy McVeigh (assuming he was not a patsy in a false flag). Maybe TPTB want a violent insurrection to justify an even more onerous police state.

  21. mike k
    June 19, 2017 at 11:26

    Also, to think Bernie would stand up to the deep state any better than Trump is very doubtful. After all he is a big fan of the MIC. Any candidate who does not effectively challenge the deep state is essentially worthless.

    • turk151
      June 19, 2017 at 12:52

      It would seem that after Obama, they would have learned that the easily broken idealist is the magic formula; once the corruption is visible, it is too late in the process.

    • nice2bgreat
      June 19, 2017 at 14:38

      I’m not a fan of rationalizing poor policy or political impotence and of raising comparative differences as differences of substance. Clearly, foreign policy is Bernie Sanders’ most glaring weakness.

      However, there are subtleties and distinctions that Sanders makes, that, just in differing with the MIC, CIA, etc., are notably important and of consequence.

      I also trust Bernie Sanders to strive toward long-term peace and for his judgement — not without err, but in order to further and achieve his domestic agenda.

      I would caution against establishing rigid litmus tests against Sanders and cherrypicking criticism or nitpicking without at least a small comparison to alternatives and consideration of consequences against Sanders’ primary agenda.

      What Bernie Sanders represents — shortcomings and all — is far from “worthless”, except in the narrow confines of speculative and implied continuity of aspects of Deep State.

      With all that will be on a 2021 President Sanders’ plate — and accepting that due criticism ought be levied if and when deserved — speculative aspersions disproportionate to alternative choices, that simply serve as undermining Sanders, which, therefore, helps maintain the status quo — all without recognizing or supporting Sanders’ greater agenda — is either short sighted, small minded, or smacks of ulterior motives.

  22. Zim
    June 19, 2017 at 10:59

    TPTB are very afraid of Bernie and what he represents. With Corbyn and Melenchon doing so well in their respective elections, they can see that the progressive Left is on the rise. There’s no putting the genie back in the bottle. The mid-terms will be another disaster for the Dems. It’s very clear the Establishment would prefer Trump over Bernie. Unless they run a progressive in 2020, Trump will win another term. Sanders/Gabbard 2020. Peoples Party.

    • mike k
      June 19, 2017 at 11:22

      If you can pry Bernie away from the democratic party. His sell-out to them was truly shameful. It would be nice to see a real socialist run for election.

      • cmack
        June 19, 2017 at 12:20

        bernie was never meant to win. he was a ringer for hillary. it’s called “energizing the base”. he was given a deal to run a campaign to get all the people who really didn’t like hillary excited for the election….in retailing, it’s called a “bait and switch”. you advertise a great product at a great price but when the sucker shows up to buy it, the retailer is “all sold out”…..

        if bernie actually believed ANYTHING that he was running on, he would have NEVER, EVER, endorsed hillary.

        contrast his campaign with the two ron paul campaigns…..very similar. except the republican party was never on board to let dr. paul energize the right wing base. same cheating abuses happened to him while the media routinely left him out of their reporting.

        in the end, ron paul refused to endorse mccain or romney.

        that’s a man of real principle….

        don’t even get me started on jill stein or gary johnson.

        • backwardsevolution
          June 19, 2017 at 14:32

          cmack – completely agree with you.

        • Realist
          June 19, 2017 at 16:49

          It’s sad to consider, but you may be right. If so, then I’m afraid that everyone holding political office has been bought and paid for by a corporate boss. Probably the easiest explanation of 98-2 votes to continue escalating a needless war with Russia. It means the sonofabees are totally beyond reach of the people. What options are left for change when that happens? The shooter chose poorly, achieving only suicide and condemnation of the progressive movement he supported by the establishment media. More reason for the power structure to clamp down on the freedom of speech. They will say this piece is just more “fake news” by the conspiracy theorists. Thanks, Hillary, for introducing one more new meme to American culture: “fake news” is now right up there with “wag the dog,” “the homeland,” “change you can believe in!” and “Putin’s Puppet.”

          • JWalters
            June 19, 2017 at 19:21

            Also consider the 100-0 votes to support Israel’s continuing history of slaughter, theft, and injustice. The NYT, MSNBC, the Congress, etc are controlled by Israel, as Israeli PMs Sharon and Netanyahu have both stated. As Senator Dick Durbin said of the U.S. Senate, “The banks own this place”. So the question is “Why is Israel slamming Sanders?”

          • JWalters
            June 19, 2017 at 19:24

            Clarification – The Israelis have said they control America, not specific institutions. But the behavior of those institutions make it plain that they are full participants in the Israeli cover-up.

    • Richard Ong
      June 22, 2017 at 05:32

      Melenchon is a communist so I see what you mean when you say “progressive left.”

      I would have liked to see May taken to the woodshed but a Corbyn government would have been too high a price to pay for 5 minutes of schadenfreude.

  23. Joe Tedesky
    June 19, 2017 at 10:53

    Leaving Hillary Clinton’s defeat out there as a real loss for the country is ludicrous on it’s face value. What should be the story, rather than Russia-Gate is Hillary’s Podesta’s DNC sabotage of the Sanders campaign. The lack of concern over this, is even more proof of how Julian Assange Wikileaks barely effected Hillary, because if more U.S. Citizens had read the emails uncovered by Assange then more of the voting public’s concern would have been paid to Hillary’s corrupted ways.

    The other thing which the corporate owned MSM is proving, is just how badly the corporate powers wish to keep the American public at large divided. The ‘practice baseball shooting’ should have been a reason to bring citizens together, but no the corporate powers can’t have that now, can they? These violent acts of political passion works even better than the 3 G’s & A (God, guns, and gays & abortion) wedge issues, to keep the masses divided.

    Like everything else in America ‘big isn’t always better’, and the sooner we downsize our corporate owned MSM into small independently owned news companies the better.

  24. cmack
    June 19, 2017 at 10:41

    i think blaming politicians rhetoric for violence against others is moronic but lets face it….every thing has been trumps fault for so long that asshats on the right are using the same tactic that the left media has been using since the election….

    funny thing is that many of the articles blaming trump for violence against….fill in the blank….have turned out to be hoaxes.

    it’s similar to the left or the right thinking that only the other party is capable of stealing elections…..ha

    • Joe Tedesky
      June 19, 2017 at 11:06

      To further the point you are making cmack I would like to add, that what this article states is how we are getting a complimentary taste test of what a Sanders presidency would have encountered via the MSM, if Bernie had won the presidency. Unless it were Hillary regardless of any other candidate other than madam Clinton, that that winning candidate was going to get the rough treatment, as we are now witnessing Trump receive from the MSM. The slanted propaganda and manipulation of the electorate is without a doubt something to behold, for it is so blatant that it is hard to ignore. Only without a mass information source that could educate the ignorant masses we are rendered helpless to form a body of concerned citizens enough to make a difference.

    • glitch
      June 19, 2017 at 12:42

      The frame is corporate versus populist, whether the populist is “left” or “right”.

    • June 21, 2017 at 08:07

      What planet have you been living on? DURING HIS CAMPAIGN Trump REGULARLY used violent rhetoric: he ACTUALLY SAID (caught on VIDEO) “rough ;’em up!” “I’ll pay your legal bills” etc. Try watching something other than Fox BEFORE commenting her at Consortium. You’re just spreading more right-wing PROPAGANDA. This is a serious news site that deals in FACTS.

      • cmack
        June 22, 2017 at 09:53

        earth. and not REGULARLY(see i can yell too). occasionally,….. used not politically correct speech. did your precious left wing media tell you that every speech he gave was interrupted constantly? sometimes with violent protesters? did your precious left wing media tell you that hillary’s campaign was getting volunteers to “bird dog” trump speeches? did your precious left wing media actually report on the constant assaults on trump supporters outside of his speeches?

        do you remember your precious left wing media calling trump hitler for a couple of months?

        did you read what i said in my post? i said that the right wing asshats are now doing what your precious left wing media has been doing…….which you still can’t seem to comprehend…..blaming political speech for actions done by someone else. it’s stupid. and only someone who watches fox news, msnbc, cnn, cbs, nbc, abc, or npr would believe such crap.

        the reason morons fall for such rubbish that you seem to agree with is from programming. constant programming….both right and left. think for yourself.

        btw. i don’t watch tv. go back and read my original post.

Comments are closed.