News

Bernie, Biden, Buttigieg Make Clear That Soleimani Would Be Alive If They Were President (Watch)

But he was planning to kill a whole lot of people…

Published

1 year ago

February 7, 2020

John Salvatore

Parler Facebook Twitter

Why does Joe Biden wear an American flag pin on his lapel? Who does he think he’s kidding? Joe, Joe, Joe, you crazy cat. It’s like he thinks we can’t see right through him.

In case you missed it – and I’m positive you did – the Democrats held another debate on Friday. It was the opposite of riveting. Michael Bloomberg wasn’t on stage, not that you care. Just thought I’d throw that out there.

Check out Bernie, Biden, and Buttigieg saying they wouldn’t have taken out terror leader Soleimani if given the chance. They have to know that we know that they’re only saying this because Trump did it, right?

From Daily Wire:

take our poll - story continues below

Do you think the 2nd Amendment will be destroyed by the Biden Administration? (1)

Do you think the 2nd Amendment will be destroyed by the Biden Administration?
Do you think the 2nd Amendment will be destroyed by the Biden Administration?*

Yes.

Yes, but only parts.

Not a chance.
Email*

Name
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Three top Democrat presidential candidates – Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden, and Bernie Sanders – all hit President Donald Trump on Friday night during ABC News’ Democrat debate over his decision to kill Iranian terrorist Qasem Soleimani.

Here’s Pete:

Pete Buttigieg says if he was president, terrorist leader Soleimani would still be alivehttps://t.co/xVJmOgtiEV pic.twitter.com/FE3YFyYExs

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) February 8, 2020

Here’s Bernie:

Bernie Sanders claims killing a terrorist leader plotting to kill Americans creates "international anarchy"https://t.co/supAISr8pn pic.twitter.com/CynsTF7O4C

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) February 8, 2020

Here’s Biden:

Joe Biden, who opposed the raid on Osama bin Laden, says he would not have ordered the strike on terrorist leader Soleimanihttps://t.co/5noRYCqs6w pic.twitter.com/PKHHGXSCWR

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) February 8, 2020

Reactions:

Would you have ordered the Soleimani strike?
Buttigieg: depends on the circumstances
Biden: no
Sanders: no
Everyone else: ?

— Lachlan Markay (@lachlan) February 8, 2020

Sanders wants to sit down with murderers of Americans like Obama did…. which allowed Soleimani to CONTINUE killing Americans. #Brilliant #FITN #NHPolitics #DemDebate

— Kimberly Morin (@Conservativeind) February 8, 2020

In 2004 cycle, Howard Dean's campaign imploded when he said we weren't any safer with Saddam dead. In 2020, no Democrat feels that they can risk claiming they would have ordered the killing of one of the world's worst terrorists.

— Philip Klein (@philipaklein) February 8, 2020

Doesn’t Buttigieg understand that foreigners paint the U.S. in a negative light when they see Americans saying this kind of stuff about America?

Sure he does. He just doesn’t care.

From Daily Wire:

Democrat presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg faced intense backlash on Thursday for appearing to suggest that the United States was at least partially responsible for Iran shooting down an Ukrainian passenger plane this week.

[…]

Buttigieg responded to Garrett’s reporting, which was featured in a tweet from CBS News, by writing, “Innocent civilians are now dead because they were caught in the middle of an unnecessary and unwanted military tit for tat. My thoughts are with the families and loved ones of all 176 souls lost aboard this flight.”

WATCH:

Buttigieg on Trump killing top Iranian terrorist Qasem Soleimani: “Taking out a bad guy is not necessarily a good idea."

Soleimani was responsible for murdering hundreds of U.S. soldiers & wounding thousands more.

Remarks from an event today in NH pic.twitter.com/DRakmHJP72

— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) January 4, 2020

Reactions:

Uh, Pete, they weren’t “caught in the middle.” They were shot down BY IRAN. Military incompetence by the leading state sponsor of terrorism. Just because Dems hate Trump doesn’t justify false equivalence w/ Iran. Soleimani was a brutal terrorist who killed hundreds of Americans. https://t.co/KiGS8p5kHL

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) January 9, 2020

Democrats are fine-people-on-both-sides-ing Iranian terrorists to avoid siding with America because of their deranged hatred of Trump. https://t.co/1FFc9F0qIS

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 9, 2020

Nope. Nope. Nope.

Iran launched a missile strike against our own troops, and then blundered by shooting down a civilian airliner when it wasn't even under attack. That's the story. This is on Iran. https://t.co/VzjnJk2jR8

— David French (@DavidAFrench) January 9, 2020

The I, R, A, and N keys must be missing from his keyboard. https://t.co/qt1iM4oi0H

— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) January 9, 2020

Of course, the reaction to this moral equivalency will be indignation that anyone dare question his patriotism.

— David Harsanyi (@davidharsanyi) January 9, 2020

This isn't what happened. The Iranians knew they were about to proceed with a complicated military operation. The airport shouldn't even have been open. This is not "caught in the middle" of anything, it's a screw up by the Iranians. https://t.co/nqKD5hGY9n

— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) January 9, 2020

Check out Pete…

"The people who wrote the Constitution did not understand that slavery was a bad thing."

– @PeteButtigieg pic.twitter.com/rM7Njnm8pU

— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) December 30, 2019

Parler Facebook Twitter

Up Next

Ilhan Omar Doesn’t Know If Her ‘Children Will Have A Planet to Live On In 20 Years’

Don't Miss

Biden Elevates Woman Who Praised Mao to Leadership Role In 2020 Campaign, A Former Obama Adviser

News

Tone-Deaf Portland Runs Tourism Ad After Riot Police Quit En Masse

If you’re looking for chaos, have we got the vacation spot for you!

Published

4 hours ago

June 21, 2021

Andrew West

Parler Facebook Twitter

For months on end, a never-ending series of protests-turned-riots have plagued the city of Portland, Oregon. Night after night the northwestern locale rages, as protesters march in the street, commit arson, clash with cops, and generally relish in their new role as liberal nuisances to the citizens of the city. Things have gotten so bad, in fact, that a large contingent of the city’s riot police coordinated a mass resignation from that portion of the force. That makes the timing of the city’s latest tourism push all the more asinine. Portland ran a pricy full-page Sunday ad in the New York Times promoting tourism after the Portland police riot squad quit Thursday. “Some of what you’ve heard about Portland is true. Some is not. What matters most is that we’re true to ourselves,” Travel Portland wrote in the ad that could have cost up to $250,000. “You’ve heard a lot about us lately. It’s been a while since you heard from us,” it continues. “After a year of encouraging visitors and locals to support small businesses here and from a distance, it’s time to issue an invitation to come back to Portland,” the ad states. “Two sides to the same coin that keeps landing right on its edge. Anything can happen. We like it this way.” The ad also says “new ideas are welcome” in the city, a place where “you can be yourself.” “This is the kind of place where new ideas are welcome — whether they’re creative, cutting-edge or curious at first glance. You can speak up here. You can be yourself here,” it continues. Of course, the taxpayer money used to procure this ad could have been spent on any number of the projects that would have helped secure the city from these anarchistic rabble-rousers.

Parler Facebook Twitter

News

Canada Bucks International Trend, Won’t Open Border as Pandemic Fades

Airline industry officials are not happy.

Published

5 hours ago

June 21, 2021

Andrew West

Parler Facebook Twitter

In America and around the world, there is much optimism. The year-plus reign of the COVID scourge is coming to an end as vaccination and natural antibody rates climb ever higher, and businesses from coast to coast begin to ramp up their capacities. But there are still those out there who are unwilling to admit this very palpable and tangible truth, and who are throttling economic recovery in their reticence. Our northern neighbors just so happen to fit that description. Canada said on Monday it would start cautiously lifting border restrictions for fully vaccinated citizens on July 5 but made clear it would be months before U.S. and other foreign travelers could enter the country. From 11:59 p.m. EDT on July 5 (0359 GMT on July 6), those who have received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine will no longer have to spend time in quarantine. The move applies to Canadians and permanent residents. “This is the first phase of our precautionary approach … at this time we are not opening up our borders any further,” said Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc. Ottawa first announced the plan on June 9. LeBlanc told reporters that Ottawa was talking to its domestic and international partners “with the goal of allowing fully vaccinated travelers to enter Canada for non-essential reasons in the months to come.” Canada’s unwillingness to capitulate to the reality of the pandemic’s end has adversely affected the airline industry, and has drawn criticism from American lawmakers who believe that more could be done by our allies to the north in the realm of reopening.