National Day of Prayer at the White House (Rose Garden)

(UPDATED) Univision and Hillary Clinton: A Timeline of Corrupt Collusion

By Jorge Bonilla | October 25, 2016 | 1:46 PM EDT


UPDATED 10/25: As part of its ongoing "Podesta emails" campaign, Wikileaks released an email to Clinton Campaign Chair John Podesta from his Chief of Staff Sara Latham, which includes a full rundown of Univision programming for which Hillary Clinton appearances have been requested, and the following quote:


Haim Saban talked to HRC about us not doing enough with Univision and references this show (Sabado Gigante).

There can be no further doubt.



Our last dive into the WikiLeaks trove yielded the proverbial smoking gun that confirmed our suspicion of collusion between Univision and the Clinton campaign. Below is an evolving timeline that confirms, beyond reasonable doubt, that Univision is inextricably joined with the Clinton campaign in corrupt purpose and deed.

On April 12, 2015, Hillary Clinton published her presidential campaign announcement video. Five days later, Univision Executive Chairman and Clinton Foundation megadonor Haim Saban emails both Clinton campaign chair John Podesta and Univision's then-President of News and Fusion CEO Isaac Lee- a follow-up from prior phone conversations- and directs them to contact each other. Lee (set to deliver his infamous "Nazis" talk at UT-Austin the very next day) agrees to meet with Podesta "ASAP", and the two ultimately agree on a breakfast meeting.

The purpose of this breakfast meeting is revealed in a later email from Fusion Senior VP and Chief Strategy Officer (now President) Boris Gartner, who joined Lee and Podesta for breakfast at the Four Seasons:


As we had discussed when we had breakfast with Isaac in NY, we’ve been thinking about ideas for Univision/Fusion and Hillary.

The first "idea for Univision/Fusion and Hillary, of course, was enacted in the wake of Donald Trump's incendiary announcement speech and Saban's directly indirect influence over both campaign and network- which we covered here.

The collusion paid immediate dividends less than a month later, when Clinton's private e-mail server became a public scandal. On August 8th, Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri determined that Univision would be the friendliest venue in which to deal with the email scandal- and that Maria Elena Salinas should handle the interview:


I have a new thought on potential interviewer - Maria Elena Salinas of Univision. I would bill it as an interview on college affordability and she would ask her a few questions on emails. As you all know, I had hoped that we could use the "server moment" as an opportunity for her to be viewed as having take a big step to deal with the email problem that would best position us for what is ahead. It is clear that she is not in same place (unless John has a convo with her and gets her in a different place). Accepting that, I think Univision is best chance for success. We have momentum coming out of Jeb's women's health comment and their bad debate. A Univision interview will be viewed as more offense and show that she is confident and not rattled.

Of course, Clinton was able to appear "confident and not rattled" and emerged from her Univision interview scot-free, chiefly because Salinas dutifully avoided any serious probing into the budding scandal and allowed Clinton to deflect on to Judicial Watch. (Read the full MRC Latino writeup of that interview here.)

Fast forward to Super Tuesday. As Team Clinton celebrates, look at Huma Abedin's gushing over Hillary's victory speech, and its targeting of Univision viewers:


It was the most amazing night!

and the crowd just loved her

all those Univision viewers......

Why was Abedin so exultant about Univision viewers? It was because of this portion of Clinton's victory speech, which Team Clinton knew would get heavy run on the network:


Now it might be unusual, as I’ve said before, for a presidential candidate to say this, but I’m going to keep saying it, “I believe what we need in America today is more love and kindness.”

Because you know what? It works. Instead of building walls we’re going to break down barriers and build ladders of opportunity and empowerment so every American can live up to his or her potential, because then and only then can America live up to its full potential too.

The campaign knew what it had to do in order to get the most favorable coverage. Univision's coverage of Clinton's victory speech predictably focused around the spotlighted quote. This a pretty obvious example of the campaign acting in accordance with Saban's admonition from July of 2015, and giving the network something to cover in a friendly and favorable manner.

These WikiLeaks publications reveal the extent to which Univision and its News Division have been willfully corrupted by the Clinton campaign. Readers of this byline knew that to be the case all along, based on our coverage of the network's pillow-soft coverage of anything having to do with Hillary Clinton. But now there is incontrovertible corroborating evidence to support our longstanding claim- of Univision as a liberal special interest group with a news division, dependent on the election of Democrats to the White House and Congress for their long-term survival.

Exit question: What are the "...basically 2" reasons for which Saban loves Univision viewers?

Source

Univision Anchor’s Electioneering Sparks 'Ramos Must Go' Drive

Univision Anchor’s Electioneering Sparks 'Ramos Must Go' Drive

By MRC Latino Staff | September 14, 2016 | 10:15 AM EDT


In reaction to Univision chief news anchor Jorge Ramos’ repeated statements in the media opposing the election of Donald Trump, an effort is underway to both highlight Ramos’ compromised coverage of the election, as well as bring pressure to bear on Univision to remove Ramos from the network’s news anchor desk between now and Election Day.

The Media Research Center (MRC)-led campaign, titled Ramos Must Go!includes both grasstops and grassroots components. At the grasstops level, the MRC announced that over 15 respected Latino community figures in media and public policy have issued a joint “Call for Corrective Action at Univision.”

The statement faults Ramos for crossing “a significant line in his coverage” of the presidential campaign by his decision to break with established journalistic election coverage norms and openly oppose the election of Trump.

“The issue created by Ramos’ action as Univision’s lead news anchor has nothing to do with the relative merits of Donald Trump as a presidential candidate,” say the statement’s signers. When it comes to elections, the group of Latino leaders holds that “journalists have a responsibility to report on them with as much impartiality, independence and fairness as they can possibly muster…it is certainly not the job of journalists to tell citizens either who to vote against or who to vote for.”

<<< Click on the button below to help us with your tax-deductible gift! >>>
DONATE

Thank you for your support!

The signers go on to invoke “the interests of both Univision’s audience and the capacity of the network itself to serve as an impartial and credible source of news” in calling on Univision to remove Ramos from his duties as the network's nightly news anchor until after Election Day.

The statement’s initial signers include:

Richard Aguilar, Publisher, Latino American Today

Bertica Cabrera Morris, Former Administrator, Orange County, Florida Public Schools

Adolfo Castaneda, Director of Hispanic Education, Human Life International

Sergio de la Peña, Ret. Col., U.S. Army and political analyst

Mario Díaz, General Counsel, Concerned Women for America

Rey Flores, Grassroots Programs Coordinator, The Leadership Institute

Irene García, Editor, Judicial Watch

J.D. Gordon, Executive Director, Protect America Today

Antonio Hernández-Almodóvar, Esq., Second Amendment Expert

Luis Hernández, Former News Director, Noticias Mundo Fox

Maricruz MaGowan, Former Vice President, National Economists Club

Ken Oliver-Méndez, Director, MRC Latino

Lizzy Nelson, Former Univision News Anchor in Colorado

Genaro Pedroarias, Environmental Policy Expert

Yuri Pérez, Latin America Human Rights Activist

Jason I. Poblete, Esq., Former Senior Congressional Staff

Gus Portela, Executive Director, College Republican National Committee

Miguel Prado, Former Candidate for Congress in New York

Camille Solberg, Former Federal Drug Free Communities Commissioner

In addition to the grasstops petition, thewww.ramosmustgo.com website includes an online grassroots petition page where the public can register their agreement that “Ramos has rendered himself incapable of serving as a credible, impartial news anchor for Univision’s millions of viewers.” The grassroots effort also includes a phone-in campaign to Univision President Randy Falco, to tell him that “Ramos must go!”

The website also features a video in which MRC President Brent Bozell issues an as yet unanswered challenge to Ramos to a debate about the “role of journalists in a free society.” “His abuse of journalism is flat out indefensible,” Bozell says in the video. Previously, Bozell stated “If Jorge Ramos has any sense left of professional integrity, he should tender his resignation and pursue his new passion, as an anti-Trump, pro-Clinton political activist.”

Ramos recently called the prospect of Trump’s election “a bad dream” and has unequivocally declared that “America is facing a serious threat in Trump.” He also called the first general election television ad of the Republican presidential candidate a “xenophobic and anti-immigrant ad.”

Earlier in the election cycle, Ramos also told his viewers that “Cruz and Rubio had a chance to be our community’s heroes, but instead they decided they wanted to be like the villain.”


CALL FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AT UNIVISION

Jorge Ramos, the veteran anchorman of Univision's principal nightly news program, recently decided to cross a significant line in his coverage of the 2016 presidential campaign. Specifically, Ramos has decided to break with established journalistic election coverage norms, and is now openly opposing the election of Donald Trump.

The issue created by Ramos' action as Univision's lead news anchor has nothing to do with the relative merits of Donald Trump as a presidential candidate, but everything to do with the unprofessional precedent Jorge Ramos is attempting to set for journalists and how they cover electoral politics.

Elections are matters of utmost public importance. Journalists have a responsibility to report on them with as much impartiality, independence and fairness as they can possibly muster. At the end of the day, it is up to an honestly informed electorate to make their own decisions about the relative merits of the candidates and who they wish to vote for.

It is the duty of journalists to help voters in this process, through accurate, comprehensive and unaligned reporting. It is certainly not the job of journalists to tell citizens either who to vote against or who to vote for. Yet, as has been repeatedly documented in recent weeks by the Media Research Center, Univision's Jorge Ramos is deliberately doing exactly that, and continues to do so. This situation merits swift corrective action.

In support of the interests of both Univision’s audience and the capacity of the network itself to serve as an impartial and credible source of news, we the undersigned therefore respectfully call on Univision to remove Jorge Ramos, effective immediately, from his duties as the network's nightly news anchor from now through Election Day, November 8, 2016.

Richard Aguilar, Publisher, Latino American Today

Bertica Cabrera Morris, Former Administrator, Orange County, Florida Public Schools

Adolfo Castaneda, Director of Hispanic Education, Human Life International

Sergio de la Peña, Ret. Col., U.S. Army and political analyst

Mario Díaz, General Counsel, Concerned Women for America

Rey Flores, Grassroots Programs Coordinator, The Leadership Institute

Irene García, Editor, Judicial Watch

J.D. Gordon, Executive Director, Protect America Today

Antonio Hernández-Almodóvar, Esq., Second Amendment Expert

Luis Hernández, Former News Director, Noticias Mundo Fox

Maricruz MaGowan, Former Vice President, National Economists Club

Lizzy Nelson, Former Univision News Anchor in Colorado

Ken Oliver-Méndez, Director, MRC Latino

Genaro Pedroarias, Environmental Policy Expert

Yuri Pérez, Human Rights Activist, Latin America

Jason I. Poblete, Esq., Former Senior Congressional Staff

Gus Portela, Executive Director, National College Republican Committee

Miguel Prado, Former Candidate for Congress in New York

Camille Solberg, Former Federal Drug Free Communities Commissioner


Source

Sanders Exposes Himself on National TV

Cliff Kincaid — March 10, 2016





Democratic presidential candidate and Senator Bernie Sanders has finally been exposed as the hard-core communist he is. It happened at the debate in Miami on Wednesday night, hosted by Univision and The Washington Post, and broadcast on CNN. On Thursday, CNN trumpeted the news from the debate that Sanders had refused to disavow his previous support for the Castro dictatorship in Cuba. Instead, he had reverted to anti-American nonsense while smearing a Democratic president named John F. Kennedy in the process.

As we have been saying for months, “democratic socialism” is just another name for communism.

Until that point, Sanders had been riding a wave of support from foolish Democrats who thought socialism was somehow different than communism, and that Sanders didn’t favor a dictatorship of any kind. He had spoken of socialism in places like Denmark. He was seen as the friendly face of “democratic socialism” with a powerful message of taking it to the so-called “one percent.”

But on Wednesday night, the real Bernie Sanders came through loud and clear.

Hard-core Marxists had been rallying around the Sanders campaign for months. Alan Maass, the editor of SocialistWorker.org, had said,“…the Bernie Sanders campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination has done more than anything else to bring the discussion of socialism into the mainstream.” Maass was ecstatic that “the opinion polls tell us that more and more people are identifying with socialism, or at least preferring socialism over capitalism…”

It was true. A poll of 1,000 likely Democratic voters by the American Action Forum (AAF) found that 57 percent answered “positive” to the question, “Do you think socialism has a positive or negative impact on society?”

This was happening because news organizations had not explained how socialism makes people poor and dependent on government—and murders those who get in the way of the Marxist planners. Hence, in the Fox News Democratic presidential town hall on Monday night, even moderator Bret Baier highlighted how Sanders is considered “honest and trustworthy” in opinion polls. This followed Sanders’ claims that he would control the national debt by giving people free health care and college.

During that town hall, when asked how he would get his proposals enacted into law, Sanders said, “I was the chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. Working with people like John McCain, Jeff Miller over in the House—he was chairman in the House Republican. We put together the most comprehensive veterans’ health care bill in the modern history of America, okay?”

A new health care bill was needed because the socialist VA health care system failed veterans. We have pointed out that Sanders’ pitiful performance as chairman of the Senate Veterans Committee came under serious scrutiny by CNN and other media for defending the VA bureaucrats, putting their interests above the veterans they are supposed to serve.

It’s true that Sanders, who had become chairman of the Senate Veterans Committee in 2013, had worked with Republicans to craft a bill designed to fix the problems. But after playing down the serious nature of the scandal, Sanders was forced to recognize, under pressure from Republicans, that the government-run VA health care system could only be saved by giving patients a private health care option.

We had previously reported how Fox News groveled to Sanders to get him to appear on the town hall. It took several more weeks to get Hillary Clinton to agree to appear. While Baier asked Mrs. Clinton some tough questions, the appeasement of Sanders continued. Baier failed to ask about such topics as Sanders’ membership in a communist Israeli kibbutz called Shaar Haamakim that was dedicated to mass murderer Joseph Stalin, and whose members celebrated May Day with red flags.

But during Wednesday night’s debate in Miami, the issue of Sanders’ support for communist totalitarian regimes was brought up. It will prove to be a major turning point in the campaign. Univision anchor María Elena Salinas said to Sanders: “In 1985, you praised the Sandinista government and you said that Daniel Ortega was an impressive guy. This is what you said about Fidel Castro. Let’s listen:”


Sanders: You may recall way back in, when was it, 1961, they invaded Cuba, and everybody was totally convinced that Castro was the worst guy in the world. All the Cuban people were going to rise up in rebellion against Fidel Castro. They forgot that he educated their kids, gave them health care, totally transformed their society.

The “they” Sanders was referring to was the anti-communist U.S. presidency of Democrat John F. Kennedy, who was determined to overthrow Castro. The evidence shows that Kennedy was killed by a Soviet-Cuban conspiracy involving Marxist “Fair Play for Cuba” member Lee Harvey Oswald. A Palestinian Marxist Killed JFK’s brother Robert.

Sanders, the independent-turned-Democrat, had shown callous indifference to the anti-communism that used to dominate the national Democratic Party. He seems oblivious to the evidence that Castro was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.

Salinas asked, “In South Florida there are still open wounds among some exiles regarding socialism and communism. So please explain what is the difference between the socialism that you profess and the socialism in Nicaragua, Cuba and Venezuela.” Socialism is so successful in Venezuela that the currency is worth less than toilet paper, which is in short supply.

When Sanders failed to answer the question, Salinas shot back: “Senator, in retrospect, have you ever regretted the characterizations that you made of Daniel Ortega and Fidel Castro that way?”

This exchange then took place:


Sanders: I’m sorry. Please say that…

Salinas: In retrospect, have you ever regretted the characterizations of Daniel Ortega and Fidel Castro that you made in 1985?

Sanders: The key issue here was whether the United States should go around overthrowing small Latin American countries. I think that that was a mistake…

Salinas: You didn’t answer the question.

Sanders: …both in Nicaragua and Cuba. Look, let’s look at the facts here. Cuba is, of course, an authoritarian undemocratic country, and I hope very much as soon as possible it becomes a democratic country. But on the other hand… it would be wrong not to state that in Cuba they have made some good advances in health care. They are sending doctors all over the world. They have made some progress in education.

Except for the rather vague and misleading reference to Cuba being “an authoritarian undemocratic country,” it was noteworthy that Sanders had not one word of criticism for the Castro dictatorship.

Sanders talks a lot about non-intervention. In fact, however, Sanders supported NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999, an illegal and unconstitutional war waged by President Clinton.

On the matter of Cuba, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was prepared, coming back during the debate to say, “I just want to add one thing to the question you were asking Senator Sanders. I think in that same interview, he praised what he called the revolution of values in Cuba and talked about how people were working for the common good, not for themselves. I just couldn’t disagree more. You know, if the values are that you oppress people, you disappear people, you imprison people or even kill people for expressing their opinions, for expressing freedom of speech, that is not the kind of revolution of values that I ever want to see anywhere.”

An anti-communist Hillary had suddenly emerged on the scene. We all know it’s about getting votes in Florida, but it was a decisive moment nonetheless.

The day after the debate, the Hillary Clinton campaign let loose, noting that Sanders “has a troubling history of admiration for the Castros.” The headline over the item on the Clinton-for-president website blared, “Bernie Sanders just refused to disavow his past support for Fidel Castro.” Among other things, Sanders had called Cuba “a model of what a society could be.”

Referring to the poll on Democratic Party support for socialism cited earlier, an editorial in Investor’s Business Daily asked, “How could average Americans of a supposedly mainstream political party throw their lot in with a creed that’s responsible for more human misery and poverty in the world than any other? It boggles the mind. Socialism, and its evil twin, communism, murdered well over 100 million people during the last century, a scale of slaughter unmatched in human history.”

The answer is that some people, like Sanders, deliberately try to separate socialism from communism, despite the fact that the father of both is Karl Marx. Analyst Trevor Loudon notes that so-called “democratic socialism,” as preached by Sanders, is simply a euphemism for socialism. “Socialism is the last stop on the road to Communism,” he notes. The Marxist dialectic is said to produce the final stage of communism through struggle or conflict.

Some people get confused because they think that Communist China has abandoned both socialism and communism in favor of capitalism. Those who doubt that China is still communist should take a look at the recent Wall Street Journal article entitled, “China’s Xi Jinping Puts Loyalty to the Test at Congress.” It’s all about enforcing loyalty to the Chinese Communist Party. The communists are using capitalism to strengthen communism. They consider it another phase the country has to go through to achieve the highest stage of communism.

One of Ronald Reagan’s favorite jokes was about two Russians walking down the street, and one asks, “Comrade, have we reached the highest state of Communism?” The other replies, “Oh, no, I think things are going to get a lot worse.”

This is the brutal and bloody record of socialism and communism.

Yet our media let Sanders run around the country talking about socialism being “democratic.”

Our media have tried to get around this question by framing the issue as one of “income inequality.” It’s just another term for Marxist class warfare.

Now we know that when Sanders talks about imposing socialism on the American people, he’s talking about a dictatorship. Thanks to Univision and anchor María Elena Salinas for bringing out the facts in this case.


Source
.

Highlights From Univision’s Bombshell Fast & Furious Report

October 1, 2012 | | Posted by Doug Johnson

Here’s a summary of some of the new information unearthed in Univision’s Fast & Furious investigation that aired on Aqui y Ahora (Here and Now) last night. Information provided by ABC/Univision:

1. Fast and Furious Guns Used in Infamous Massacre

Mexican military reports show that at least three guns from Fast and Furious were used in the Salvarcar massacre in 2010. A total of 15 people died in that incident, most of them teens. They were gunned down by the Juarez cartel, which mistook the group for rival Sinaloa cartel members. According to one document, the weapons entered Mexico illegally through a border point near Columbus, New Mexico.

2. 57 Previously Unidentified Weapons Surface

Univision cross-referenced the serial numbers off guns used in Fast and Furious against guns seized in Mexico. Nearly 100 of those weapons were used in crimes, and 57 of them were not mentioned in an investigation carried out by the U.S. Congress.

3. Mexico Knew About Fast and Furious

Andrew Selee, vice president for programs at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington D.C. says the Mexican government was aware of the gun-walking, in spite of releasing a statement saying they were not. William Newell, the special agent in charge of ATF’s Phoenix field division and one of the supervisors of Fast and Furious, told Univision, via his attorney, that the Procuraduria General De La Republica (PGR) in Mexico was certainly aware of the operation.

4. U.S. Gun-Walking Operations Extended to Other Countries

Fast and Furious was not the only ATF operation of its kind that went awry. In Operation Castaway, Hugh Crumpler, a former ATF informant, told Univision News the ATF deliberately allowed guns to pass into Honduras, Puerto Rico and Colombia. Several of those weapons have already been found at crime scenes and in the hands of local cartels. In an email message, the ATF claims that they “found out about the weapons when they had already been shipped.”

5. U.S. Agents Were Attacked with U.S. Weapons

Victor Avila and Jaime Zapata, two U.S. Federal Agents assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Mexico, were in the process of transporting surveillance equipment when their vehicle was surrounded by cartel members and shot more than 90 times. Zapata died and Avila was seriously wounded.

Prior to traveling into the region, Avila reached out to a supervisor expressing concerns over security that were backed by a U.S. State Department document which forbade U.S. Embassy employees from traveling in that area. The reason: It was heavily controlled by the Zetas cartel. According to an exclusive interview with Avila, the supervisor did not share his concerns. Three of the guns used in this shootout were also from a gun-walking operation, but not Fast and Furious.

You can see a 9 minute segment of the report below.

There’s a lot more to the report that isn’t yet available. Since ABC and Univision have a news partnership one would suspect that ABC will eventually air some or all of the report. It’s time to take to Twitter to ask every ABC News anchor and correspondent when they will be airing the piece.

Source

.

Obama slammed on Fast and Furious in Spanish-language TV interview: Shouldn’t you ‘fire’ Holder? [VIDEO]

Published: 5:16 PM 09/20/2012

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/20/obama-slammed-on-fast-and-furious-in-spanish-language-tv-interview-shouldnt-you-fire-eric-holder/#ixzz27sejJmEL

.