I have a column up at The American Spectator which calls out Bernie Sanders as a proximate cause of the assassination attempt on Steve Scalise…
Sanders, for whom Hodgkinson stumped in Iowa, took to the well of the Senate and declared himself “sickened” by the attack. He then made clear that violence is unacceptable. Which is all very well, but of course this is a man who spent an entire year barnstorming America demanding a “political revolution in this country.” A revolution necessitates assassinations, does it not? Or did Sanders mean something else? Did he want a nonviolent revolution? What history is there of that?
At minimum this should be the end of Sanders’ political career. Just four days before Hodgkinson’s attempt at a Franz Ferdinand-style kickoff to the revolution he suspected Sanders was asking for, the wild-haired semi-reformed Soviet sympathizer appeared at something called the People’s Summit in Chicago, delivering a broadside of calumnies and bromides so vicious as to sit right at home at a microphone in Caracas or Pyongyang or Havana. This came after Sanders had assaulted the faith of a Christian, Russell Vought, who is up for a position at the Office of Management and Budget, and declared him unfit for federal office because he believes in Christ as the central path to salvation.
Then, when one of his devotees acted on his inflammatory and vicious rhetoric the best he could offer was a “you’re doing it wrong” admonition to the movement he’s touched off.
The media has portrayed Bernie Sanders as a nice old man with some funny ideas. He’s nothing of the sort. He’s a monster who lacks the physical and moral courage to match his ambitions and merely masks his cowardice behind a patina of “non-violence” which is as fraudulent as it could possibly be.
Bernie Sanders isn’t for non-violence. Bernie Sanders likes violence just fine. He just doesn’t want any done to him. Otherwise, Sanders wouldn’t have cozied up to the Soviet Union, the Sandinistas, the Cubans and the Venezuelans at various times, and he wouldn’t have had his people to attempt to break up Donald Trump’s rallies during the 2016 campaign and then vigorously deny involvement, with help from the mainstream media.
Bottom line: when you travel the country proclaiming the need for a political revolution, and then one of your followers attempts the revolutionary act of a political assassination, you’re responsible. Sanders isn’t as responsible as James Hodgkinson is for what Hodgkinson did yesterday, but that doesn’t absolve him.
What it does is make very hollow these remarks on the Senate floor yesterday, which, if offered by someone with less blood on his hands, might be a credible show of goodwill…
In case you need more convincing, here was Sanders over the weekend at that People’s Summit. Think of the collection of unhinged lunatics he’s pumping up among the attendees with the incendiary rhetoric he’s offering, and tell us again Bernie Sanders isn’t a danger to civil society.
Nice old man? Really? We’ll quote from the Bible, that ancient document Sanders has such animus for. We bring you the words of Jesus, as detailed in Matthew 7:15-20…
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.”