Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

News

WATCH: Ocasio-Cortez Complains On Video About Having to Work ‘All The Time’

Is this for real? Can she be serious?

John Salvatore

Published

on

Freshman Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY) earns $174,000 annually, just like every other member of Congress – aside from the leaders of the House and Senate, who make more.

The 29-year-old Alexandria has only been in office for a couple of months and she’s already complaining about working “all the time.”

No joke.

Trending: AOC Reveals Plans to Implement Gun & Immigration Changes — WITHOUT Congress

AOC: “Okay guys, I’m just getting out of work, that’s my office behind me.”

take our poll - story continues below

Do you think Democrats will push out Representative Ilhan Omar over her anti-Semitism?

  • Do you think Democrats will push out Representative Ilhan Omar over her anti-Semitism?  

  • 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.

AOC: “Um the thing they don’t tell you about working in Congress is that if you do what you’re supposed to do, you’re working all the time, which means you have no time to set up your life.

WATCH:

Americans work, Alexandria. It’s what we do.

For $174,000, AOC has to know she’s doing far better than the average worker, right? RIGHT!?

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has finally come out to tell Ocasio-Cortez that enough is enough with the “Green New Deal.”

From Daily Wire:

Pelosi has been coy about her support for the GND (or lack thereof), calling the plan “enthusiastic” when it first debuted earlier in February, and has regularly distanced herself from Ocasio-Cortez — and she hasn’t tabled the Green New Deal for a vote, leaving it effectively dead as an answer to “climate change.”

This week, though, Pelosi unleashed her characteristic subtle criticism on Ocasio-Cortez and her partner in the Green New Deal, Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA), in an interview with a reporter from “Rolling Stone” magazine, who asked her why she had yet to allow House Democrats to dicuss the plan openly.

“The Green New Deal,” Pelosi said, goes “beyond our charge.” and “is not what we hope to achieve.”

This is not exactly the first time a member of AOC’s own party has told her to stop.

Not even close, actually.

Ocasio-Cortez’s “Green New Deal,” if somehow passed by Congress, was thought to have cost U.S. taxpayers tens of trillions of dollars.

A new report suggests the real number could nearly hit $100 trillion.

That would come to, roughly, $650,000 per American household.

From Daily Wire:

Bloomberg reports that Ocasio-Cortez’s far-left plan would “tally between $51 trillion and $93 trillion over 10-years, concludes American Action Forum, which is run by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who directed the non-partisan CBO from 2003 to 2005.”

The enormous price tag, which amounts to over $650,000 per U.S. household, covers a low-carbon electricity grid, net zero emissions transportation system, guaranteed jobs, universal health care, guaranteed green housing, and food security.

S. Mitra Kalita has a blue checkmark on Twitter and works in the programming department for CNN.

She sent the following tweet:

Seeing the words “prepared” and “authentic” to describe @AOC, often with surprise that she’s made it so far. This is the superpower of women of color: to prep more than everyone else, read the room, yet stay true to yourself because the alternative ain’t worth it. Just guessing.

Self-described Democrat Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez responded, essentially playing the victim card:

People think it’s a joke when folks say we have to work 2x as hard for the same seat.

Whether you believe it or not, the upside is when we do get here,we’re used to being held to a diff bar. To being doubted. To getting new hoops thrown @ us last min.

So we know how to perform.

Twiter took notice, and things quickly backfired on Alexandria:

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

News

Dems and Trump Agree: Release As Much of The Mueller Report as Possible

When Trump and the democrats agree on something, but Mitch McConnell doesn’t, where do we go from here?

Published

on

mueller report

It isn’t very often that you’ll find Donald Trump and  a majority of the democratic party on the same page…especially in regard to the Russian “collusion” conspiracy theory. For nearly two years the democrats, along with their lapdogs in the “infotainment” industry, had already precluded that Donald Trump was some sort of Russian double agent, handpicked by the Kremlin to rise to the highest office in the land in order to do Vladimir Putin’s bidding. Yes, it was absurd, and yes, we’re glad that Robert Mueller sorted that out for us. Now, the democrats, the American people, and Donald Trump all seem to agree:  Show us the report. The republicans, on the other hand, seem hesitant. House Democrats pressed the Justice Department to provide the full report from special counsel Robert Mueller even as Republicans gleefully called for them to “move on” from the Russia investigation . President Donald Trump accused those responsible for launching Mueller’s probe of “treasonous things against our country” and said they “certainly will be looked into.” Trump said the release of Mueller’s full report “wouldn’t bother me at all,” and Democrats quickly put that statement to the test, demanding that his administration hand over the entire document and not just Sunday’s four-page summary from Attorney General William Barr. The President has said on several occasions that releasing the entire report would be amenable to him, as he maintains his innocence in the matter. Mitch McConnell yesterday struck down an attempt to make the entire report public – a move that has raised some eyebrows among Trump supporters and other conservatives.      

Continue Reading

News

Wikipedia Joins Censorship Racket with ‘Paid Protection’ Posts

As if it weren’t enough to have the mainstream media’s infotainment imbecility on our doorstep, Wikipedia is now coming under fire for malfeasance as well.

Published

on

wikipedia

In society today, there is an embarrassing reality that we must face, in which information is so readily available that entire cottage industries have sprung up around the idea of herding and hoarding such knowledge. Of course, it all began with the mainstream media; an “infotainment” complex of well-paid and ostensibly attractive people telling you what happened today, in their own words.  Where are these exorbitant salaries generated?  During the commercial breaks that these television personalities are tasked with leading you in and out of. So, of course, a grain of salt is necessary when getting any information from these wealthy pundits. In our modern day, however, there is a new realm in which we can find ourselves bamboozled by “facts” and the gatekeepers that control them.  I’m speaking, of course, about the internet – a place whose ideas about free speech certainly don’t line up with the reality on the ground. While most of the discussion about internet censorship and far-left fascism revolve around entities such as Facebook and Google, a new tidbit of information has Wikipedia coming under fire as well. A report in Huffington Post recently revealed the case of Wikipedia editor Ed Sussman, who was paid by media clients such as NBC and Axios to help diminish critical material. Paid editors operating in a similar manner to Sussman have worked on behalf of CNN contributor Hilary Rosen and the CEOs of Reddit and Intel, among other clients. Other conduct by Sussman not covered by the Huffington Post shows him authoring fluff pieces for NBC executives and getting his proposed changes approved by another paid Wikipedia editor. Just how sleazy are the adjustments? In one example Feinberg cited, Sussman requested changes to the page of Axios journalist Jonathan Swan regarding a false report he made last September claiming…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend