Sometimes, the truth gets out.

Jeffries is the fifth most powerful Democrat in the House and
considered the heir apparent to jurassic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
He's a power.

His self-revision in that video, that he was talking about "César"
Chávez, is total nonsense. César Chávez was a famous labor
organizer who had little to do with voting rights. He had a job in
his youth registering voters, but that's a nothingburger compared to
his claim to fame with organizing a large union and advocating for
rural workers' rights. Hugo Chávez, by contrast, is the late,
unlamented Venezuelan dictator who pioneered rigged elections under
gaslighting claims, repeated on the American left, of expanding
democracy for all. Hugo was able to seize absolute power by
corrupting Venezuela's election process, starting in 2004, when he
knew he was an unpopular political goner and subject to a recall
referendum under his own revised constitution. Chávez put the power
to call a recall out there for public relations purposes and was
shocked when the Venezuelan public took him up on it. After that
happened, he was all about the rigging.

Chávez at the time started by claiming that the signatures were
invalid, lost on those bids in the then-still-independent courts,
and things just went downhill from there, eventually with him
amassing all power, as well as a Fidel Castro–style one-party state,
all through the miracle of election-rigging. Voters at the time
reported malfunctioning machines, machines that flipped votes, vote
receipts that showed the wrong candidate getting the vote, testimony
of non-secret balloting, and a strange contradiction of all the
polls out there. After that, Hugo and his successor Nicolas Maduro
were free to spend up the nation's oil bounty on bureaucrats and
welfare schemes, destroy the independence of the courts, destroy the
legislature with a super-legislature, take over private businesses
and private homes, steal farmland, print money, encourage crime to
get out of control to make the population passive, employ goons who
became death squads, target dissidents for torture and prison and
extrajudicial killings, and take orders from Castro's henchmen.

The result speaks for itself.

Shockingly, Jeffries says that's his inspiration. It was nice for
Hugo, who died a billionaire in 2013. It's hell on Venezuelans,
however — and millions now have fled the country for an improved
future as...refugees. The short story is that Venezuela, which the
press and the left still bill as a "democracy," is now hell on
earth.

That brings us back to Jeffries and his supposed gaffe.

Why was Hugo Chávez in his head as his "example"? Seriously, who
thinks of Hugo when talking of "democracy"? What kind of talk goes
on in the back scenery of Democrat politics for that to float out of
his mouth? Why did he pronounce the words "Oogo Chávez" so very
correctly, unlike a lot of other Democrats who can't even get the
accent on his very common Spanish last name right? A guy who can
pronounce Hugo's name right is a guy who thinks a lot about Hugo.

Who is Jeffries? Jeffries is a proxy of the New York political
machine — Brooklyn, actually, which is pretty much a sewer, but
that's their establishment. He's a loud supporter of Hillary
Clinton, choosing her over Barack Obama in 2008, but since closely
allied to President Obama. He's not part of the crazy upstart scene
of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who defeated longtime Democrat
fixture Rep. Joe Crowley. Based on what I can tell, Crowley seems
to have been a mentor of Jeffries. The three congressional
districts of Brooklyn are all palsy with one another and have
produced the likes of Jerry Nadler, Anthony Weiner, Nydia Velazquez,
Chuck Schumer, Crowley, and the like. Closely aligned to them have
been Reps. Gregory Meeks of Queens and Jose Serrano of the Bronx.
The latter two were prominent in the early aughts with Hugo Chávez's
CITGO free or low-cost fuel giveaway, brokered by another
establishment Democrat, Joe Kennedy, Jr. and his Citizens' Energy.
Jeffries was never explicitly connected to Chávez praise as they and
their ilk were. But New York City certainly was a recipient of the
free Hugo fuel. Jeffries may have been too smart and disciplined as
a Democrat to openly praise Hugo as they did. It's also significant
that Jeffries tends to speak up for the interests of his
constituents, which, in his case, involve many Guyanese-American
voters. They're quite socialist, and had a love-hate relationship
with Chávez, premised on Chávez's vow to invade and annex half their
country. It's safe to say that on the ground level, rather than the
government level, Guyanese don't like Chávez, and Jeffries seems to
be in tune with that.

He's the establishment. He's the new leader, the Pelosi successor.
He's actually a pretty disciplined, focused, and smart politician,
according to most all of the accounts about him.

Yet still he praised Hugo Chávez and declared the thug the
Democrats' new model for America.

I'm not flattering the guy, just stating that he is not normally a
wild madman.

Focused? Check. A puff piece on Jeffries's wife, for instance,
from lo-fo-focused Glamour Fame, sums up what seems to be Jeffries's
raison d'être:

The politician knew what he wanted to do with his life, and getting
into politics was the end to all means for Hakeem.

Disciplined? Check. From Politico, from December 2021:

Jeffries is more guarded, with a small circle of confidantes. The
New York Democrat won't entertain questions about his leadership
aspirations, telling reporters he's focused on the job in front of
him.

More disciplined? Check. From a puff piece in New York magazine in
March 2019:

They aren't gaffes; Jeffries is incapable of making those. Asked
whether it is really elevating the discourse to call the president
of the United States the Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, the
congressman shrugs. "It is unfortunate that someone with the
tendency to act like a racial arsonist now finds himself as
president of the United States of America, who should be trying to
bring us together instead of tearing us apart. "

This makes his gaffe, which he imperfectly tried to change to César
Chávez, all the more interesting. How could a guy who doesn't gaffe
like Joe Biden make that kind of mistake? What's more, do you
notice that his bid to catch himself, he finishes up with blather
about admiring "leaders"? Does that include both Hugo and César?
He didn't even do a good denial.

The left has been enamored of Hugo Chávez for years, and always
stepped up to the plate to serve as his apologist. It's harder now,
with a quarter of Venezuelans on the road, and people back home
drinking out of sewers and eating zoo animals, but the love remains
on the left. Not only do they love the guy; they eat up his
propaganda about being in a democracy, which couldn't be farther
from the truth, and worse still, they view his dictatorship in
democracy's clothing as a model.

Venezuela can't even get election observers anymore in its
elections, but the left loves on. The Organization of American
States has condemned its last one as "fraudulent." Here's the Voice
of America lede on the matter:

On December 6, the illegitimate regime of Nicolas Maduro in
Venezuela staged a political farce intended to look like legislative
elections.

The Carter Center in 2005 wrote this about Venezuela's 2004 recall
referendum, which it gullibly certified as free and fair:

Notice that credulous quality, assuming from the start that the
elections were all free and fair, and all they needed to do was open
their process to "enhance confidence." Just a little public
relations problem, you see. They didn't seem to notice that maybe
the totalization room is the most likely location to find vote
fraud. George W. Bush, Jr., it should be noted, is the one who
signed off on putting Carter to the job of monitoring Venezuela's
votes, and accepted the findings, so Carter wasn't the only
credulous one here. The Obama administration carried forward the
credulousness, too. Chavista e-zine Venezuelanalysis noted that
President Obama's secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, actually
plagiarized Bush's secretary of state:

Clinton then labelled Chávez as "a democratically elected leader who
does not govern democratically." The latter remark constituted a
virtual verbatim plagiarizing of the Bush administration's Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice who accused Chávez during her own
confirmation hearings four years ago of being a "democratically
elected leader who governs in an illiberal way."

The pair of them argued repeatedly that Chávez was elected
"democratically."

By 2013, though, the Carter Center threw in the towel on these
"democratic" elections, pointing to huge irregularities in the
presidential "re-election" and then refusing to observe the fraud
hellhole it had certified earlier at all after that.

In article <20220121.111451.5ba27634@mix2.remailer.xyz>,
Dean Webber <dwebber@verizon.com> wrote:

> Sometimes, the truth gets out.
>
>
> Jeffries is the fifth most powerful Democrat in the House and
> considered the heir apparent to jurassic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
> He's a power.
>
> His self-revision in that video, that he was talking about "Cesar"
> Chavez, is total nonsense. Cesar Chavez was a famous labor
> organizer who had little to do with voting rights. He had a job in
> his youth registering voters, but that's a nothingburger compared to
> his claim to fame with organizing a large union and advocating for
> rural workers' rights. Hugo Chavez, by contrast, is the late,
> unlamented Venezuelan dictator who pioneered rigged elections under
> gaslighting claims, repeated on the American left, of expanding
> democracy for all. Hugo was able to seize absolute power by
> corrupting Venezuela's election process, starting in 2004, when he
> knew he was an unpopular political goner and subject to a recall
> referendum under his own revised constitution. Chavez put the power
> to call a recall out there for public relations purposes and was
> shocked when the Venezuelan public took him up on it. After that
> happened, he was all about the rigging.
>
> Chavez at the time started by claiming that the signatures were
> invalid, lost on those bids in the then-still-independent courts,
> and things just went downhill from there, eventually with him
> amassing all power, as well as a Fidel Castro-style one-party state,
> all through the miracle of election-rigging. Voters at the time
> reported malfunctioning machines, machines that flipped votes, vote
> receipts that showed the wrong candidate getting the vote, testimony
> of non-secret balloting, and a strange contradiction of all the
> polls out there. After that, Hugo and his successor Nicolas Maduro
> were free to spend up the nation's oil bounty on bureaucrats and
> welfare schemes, destroy the independence of the courts, destroy the
> legislature with a super-legislature, take over private businesses
> and private homes, steal farmland, print money, encourage crime to
> get out of control to make the population passive, employ goons who
> became death squads, target dissidents for torture and prison and
> extrajudicial killings, and take orders from Castro's henchmen.
>
> The result speaks for itself.
>
> Shockingly, Jeffries says that's his inspiration. It was nice for
> Hugo, who died a billionaire in 2013. It's hell on Venezuelans,
> however-- and millions now have fled the country for an improved
> future as... refugees. The short story is that Venezuela, which the
> press and the left still bill as a "democracy," is now hell on
> earth.
>
> That brings us back to Jeffries and his supposed gaffe.
>
> Why was Hugo Chavez in his head as his "example"? Seriously, who
> thinks of Hugo when talking of "democracy"? What kind of talk goes
> on in the back scenery of Democrat politics for that to float out of
> his mouth? Why did he pronounce the words "Oogo Chavez" so very
> correctly, unlike a lot of other Democrats who can't even get the
> accent on his very common Spanish last name right? A guy who can
> pronounce Hugo's name right is a guy who thinks a lot about Hugo.
>
> Who is Jeffries? Jeffries is a proxy of the New York political
> machine-- Brooklyn, actually, which is pretty much a sewer, but
> that's their establishment. He's a loud supporter of Hillary
> Clinton, choosing her over Barack Obama in 2008, but since closely
> allied to President Obama. He's not part of the crazy upstart scene
> of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who defeated longtime Democrat
> fixture Rep. Joe Crowley. Based on what I can tell, Crowley seems
> to have been a mentor of Jeffries. The three congressional
> districts of Brooklyn are all palsy with one another and have
> produced the likes of Jerry Nadler, Anthony Weiner, Nydia Velazquez,
> Chuck Schumer, Crowley, and the like. Closely aligned to them have
> been Reps. Gregory Meeks of Queens and Jose Serrano of the Bronx.
> The latter two were prominent in the early aughts with Hugo Chavez's
> CITGO free or low-cost fuel giveaway, brokered by another
> establishment Democrat, Joe Kennedy, Jr. and his Citizens' Energy.
> Jeffries was never explicitly connected to Chavez praise as they and
> their ilk were. But New York City certainly was a recipient of the
> free Hugo fuel. Jeffries may have been too smart and disciplined as
> a Democrat to openly praise Hugo as they did. It's also significant
> that Jeffries tends to speak up for the interests of his
> constituents, which, in his case, involve many Guyanese-American
> voters. They're quite socialist, and had a love-hate relationship
> with Chavez, premised on Chavez's vow to invade and annex half their
> country. It's safe to say that on the ground level, rather than the
> government level, Guyanese don't like Chavez, and Jeffries seems to
> be in tune with that.
>
> He's the establishment. He's the new leader, the Pelosi successor.
> He's actually a pretty disciplined, focused, and smart politician,
> according to most all of the accounts about him.
>
> Yet still he praised Hugo Chavez and declared the thug the
> Democrats' new model for America.
>
> I'm not flattering the guy, just stating that he is not normally a
> wild madman.
>
> Focused? Check. A puff piece on Jeffries's wife, for instance,
> from lo-fo-focused Glamour Fame, sums up what seems to be Jeffries's
> raison d'etre:
>
> The politician knew what he wanted to do with his life, and getting
> into politics was the end to all means for Hakeem.
>
> Disciplined? Check. From Politico, from December 2021:
>
> Jeffries is more guarded, with a small circle of confidantes. The
> New York Democrat won't entertain questions about his leadership
> aspirations, telling reporters he's focused on the job in front of
> him.
>
> More disciplined? Check. From a puff piece in New York magazine in
> March 2019:
>
> They aren't gaffes; Jeffries is incapable of making those. Asked
> whether it is really elevating the discourse to call the president
> of the United States the Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, the
> congressman shrugs. "It is unfortunate that someone with the
> tendency to act like a racial arsonist now finds himself as
> president of the United States of America, who should be trying to
> bring us together instead of tearing us apart. "
>
> This makes his gaffe, which he imperfectly tried to change to Cesar
> Chavez, all the more interesting. How could a guy who doesn't gaffe
> like Joe Biden make that kind of mistake? What's more, do you
> notice that his bid to catch himself, he finishes up with blather
> about admiring "leaders"? Does that include both Hugo and Cesar?
> He didn't even do a good denial.
>
> The left has been enamored of Hugo Chavez for years, and always
> stepped up to the plate to serve as his apologist. It's harder now,
> with a quarter of Venezuelans on the road, and people back home
> drinking out of sewers and eating zoo animals, but the love remains
> on the left. Not only do they love the guy; they eat up his
> propaganda about being in a democracy, which couldn't be farther
> from the truth, and worse still, they view his dictatorship in
> democracy's clothing as a model.
>
> Venezuela can't even get election observers anymore in its
> elections, but the left loves on. The Organization of American
> States has condemned its last one as "fraudulent." Here's the Voice
> of America lede on the matter:
>
> On December 6, the illegitimate regime of Nicolas Maduro in
> Venezuela staged a political farce intended to look like legislative
> elections.
>
> The Carter Center in 2005 wrote this about Venezuela's 2004 recall
> referendum, which it gullibly certified as free and fair:
>
> Notice that credulous quality, assuming from the start that the
> elections were all free and fair, and all they needed to do was open
> their process to "enhance confidence." Just a little public
> relations problem, you see. They didn't seem to notice that maybe
> the totalization room is the most likely location to find vote
> fraud. George W. Bush, Jr., it should be noted, is the one who
> signed off on putting Carter to the job of monitoring Venezuela's
> votes, and accepted the findings, so Carter wasn't the only
> credulous one here. The Obama administration carried forward the
> credulousness, too. Chavista e-zine Venezuelanalysis noted that
> President Obama's secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, actually
> plagiarized Bush's secretary of state:
>
> Clinton then labelled Chavez as "a democratically elected leader who
> does not govern democratically." The latter remark constituted a
> virtual verbatim plagiarizing of the Bush administration's Secretary
> of State Condoleezza Rice who accused Chavez during her own
> confirmation hearings four years ago of being a "democratically
> elected leader who governs in an illiberal way."
>
> The pair of them argued repeatedly that Chavez was elected
> "democratically."
>
> By 2013, though, the Carter Center threw in the towel on these
> "democratic" elections, pointing to huge irregularities in the
> presidential "re-election" and then refusing to observe the fraud
> hellhole it had certified earlier at all after that.
>
> The fraud was just too out there, so they acted as if this was
> something new, which it wasn't. Venezuelan experts had carefully
> pointed to the fraud, again and again, dating from that fraud-filled
> 2004 recall referendum, which was duplicated and worsened in every
> election since.
>
> By 2017, the Wall Street Journal was reporting this:
>
> EL CASABE, Venezuela-- Aires Perez Rodriguez traveled by canoe for
> three hours to deliver the paper receipts showing a total of 225
> votes cast for state governor in this hamlet. Then he passed them to
> his aunt, who drove them a further 150 miles to the Bolivar state
> capital.
>
> When the official count was released days after the Oct. 15
> election, however, there were an extra 471 votes for the
> government's candidate. It wasn't just Mr. Perez, the opposition
> party's election monitor, who noticed. The ruling Socialist Party's
> own election supervisor in El Casabe realized it, too.
>
> "This is illegal," said Luciano Mendoza, the election supervisor,
> who showed The Wall Street Journal the voting-machine receipts that
> counted just a third as many votes from the hamlet as reported by
> electoral authorities later. "They say they bring justice, but
> instead they commit fraud."
>
> Mr. Perez's evidence prompted opposition officials in Ciudad Bolivar
> to make more comparisons of voting receipts to an official tally on
> the National Electoral Council's website. All told, in records
> reviewed by the Journal, they discovered that more than 2,500 votes
> were added statewide, flipping the winner of the Bolivar state
> election from the opposition candidate-- briefly listed as the winner
> on the Electoral Council's website-- to the government choice.
>
> The declared winner, Justo Noguera, a National Guard general from
> outside the state who never held political office, took office two
> days later in a surprise midnight ceremony.
>
> And now we have Jeffries, deep with his Democrat machine politics,
> vowing to bring that Hugo scene to America. If that's not a reason
> to reject Democrats in the next election, what is? What they want
> for America is rigged phony Chavista-style elections. Jeffries just
> let the cat out of the bag.

On 1/21/2022 2:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <20220121.111451.5ba27634@mix2.remailer.xyz>,
> Dean Webber <dwebber@verizon.com> wrote:

>>
>> And now we have Jeffries, deep with his Democrat machine politics,
>> vowing to bring that Hugo scene to America. If that's not a reason
>> to reject Democrats in the next election, what is? What they want
>> for America is rigged phony Chavista-style elections. Jeffries just
>> let the cat out of the bag.
>
> No, no, no... haven't you been listening? We have to give them the means
> to Chavez-style our elections in order to *save* democracy!

Agreed. Or were you just trying to sound like a dipshit?