Despite claims by Hillary surrogates and the mainstream media, there is no evidence of violence occurring at the Nevada Democratic Convention
The establishment media has been pushing a grotesquely deceitful narrative about so-called “violence” from Bernie Sanders supporters. The recent Nevada Democratic Convention got heated, and out of it the media has tried to paint Bernie supporters as violent. Not only are these claims baseless, they don’t spell well for a united Democratic Party come November.
The Nevada convention was a debacle, and Bernie supporters felt legitimately cheated by the state party. Yes there was a lot of shouting, and it did get heated. Politics has a way of getting the passion out of people, for sure. Fifty-eight Bernie delegates were barred entry due to a rather shady process. There were also some shady rule changes rushed through by a voice-vote, in which the votes were decided without a clear count, rules which favored the Hillary Clinton camp. This of course left Bernie supporters justifiably angry.
The mainstream media did not really cover the Nevada convention as the chaos broke out. There was almost no TV coverage of the event until after Hillary and her camp complained about Bernie and his “penchant for extra-parliamentary behavior.” Once Hillary accused Bernie supporters of violence, then the media seemed interested in covering the event in Nevada. Funny how things work out.
The real travesty out of this Nevadan debacle is that there have been bogus reports circulating on the mainstream media that Bernie supporters committed acts of violence at the convention and that Hillary operatives were physically threatened and “feared for their safety.”
The media has been demanding an apology and condemnation from Bernie Sanders, and have even gone as low to compare Bernie supporters to Trump supporters. These claims have no weight to them, but that hasn’t stopped the establishment from running with it.
Let’s examine this claim that Bernie supporters reacted violently at the Nevada convention. The convention was videoed heavily, so we do have an actual way of confirming these accounts. Yes, a lot of shouting and cursing took place, words got heated. However, no video showed any act of physical violence taking place.
There was no punching or throwing chairs, as the media has claimed. One video showed a man holding a chair over his head, but he soon put the chair down, and hugged out his frustration with other Bernie supporters.
Video also showed that the event had a clear police presence, and in no instance did it show them arresting anyone or breaking up acts of violence. Again, the event has a lot of video, and certainly a raucous act of violence would have turned up in a clip somewhere. But absolutely no evidence at all exists that violence took place.
Barbara Boxer, a California Senator and Hillary surrogate, who attended the convention in Nevada, said that she “feared for her safety” during the events. She of course implied that Bernie supporters were behaving violently, towing the establishment line.
Surprising, no video shows Boxer under any threat of danger, nor Roberta Lange (head of the Nevada Democratic Party). Both Boxer and Lange were under heavy Secret Service protection, and there was also a police presence at the convention (as mentioned earlier). Neither Boxer nor Lange were attacked, nor were there any signs of being physically threatened by anyone. Boxer even blew a kiss to the crowd as she was walking off the stage, a strange gesture by someone who felt threatened.
The establishment media has also been circulating tapes of what seems to be threats against Nevada Democratic leader Roberta Lange, which are claimed to be from Bernie supporters. Yet, the calls were never traced and the identities of the callers are not clear. Obviously if these were Bernie supporters, we should condemn them for such threats. However, we have no idea who these people were, and it seems unfair to paint all Bernie supporters as violent based on unconfirmed allegations.
Despite the fact that we have no actual confirmation that violence occurred, media pundits and Hillary surrogates are making the rounds and demanding Bernie apologize and condemn the violence that didn’t actually take place.
Bernie of course rightfully refused to cower, and rather than bow to bogus claims he attacked the reason his supporters were so angry in the first place. The Nevada convention was shady, and its events only helped reinforce the suspicion held by Bernie supporters that the Democratic establishment is rigging the system in Hillary’s favor.
What happened in Nevada is only another example of the Democratic Party establishment rigging the game against Bernie, and his supporters have a right to be angry. This is a bad sign going forward, especially if Hillary has any hope to unite the progressive base behind her in the general election.
Hillary and her surrogates have been giving a lot of talks about party unity, yet it seems an unwise strategy to unify the party by blatantly rigging the rules against Bernie and then calling his supporters violent when they rightfully express their (non-violent) anger.
Things have gotten so ridiculous that writers and Hillary supporters on social media have been comparing Bernie and his supporters to the likes of Trump. Bernie has run one of the most non-violent campaigns in history, matching with his equally non-violent career. Can you honestly make the case that Bernie Sanders, arguably the most non-violent and anti-war candidate we’ve ever had, is somehow fostering his people to commit violence? Again, on what grounds?