Democrats are desperate to pass a set of radical “voting rights” bills. If passed, these bills would make some of the most fundamental changes to our democracy since the founding of our country. Some of the worst things in these bills include the federalizing of our elections and the elimination of voter ID.
One liberal, eager to push these toxic bills, made a boast about who “inspired” them. He wanted to sound impressive to the media. Instead, he might have made a really bad Freudian slip. Because he claimed these bills were influenced by a man infamous for destroying an entire nation’s democracy.
Democrat Representative Hakeem Jeffries said the Democrats’ federal election takeover is “inspired by Hugo Chavez…Cesar Chavez,” during the House Democrats’ weekly press conference on 1/19/2022.
Oops! Democrat Hakeem Jeffries said his party’s radical hijacking of our elections was inspired by Hugo Chavez, dictator of Venezuela. He was infamous for staging sham elections where he won by an overwhelming majority. Yet he was regularly called out for widespread voter fraud and voter manipulation.
Quickly Jeffries realized his mistake and said “Cesar Chavez.” Yikes, not a great recovery, Hakeem. Cesar Chavez was a famed union organizer out of California praised by the left for his aggressive tactics.
Although considered a socialist by some, he ironically opposed illegal immigration, something modern leftists conveniently ignore.
TRENDING : Bernie Sanders Plan To Take Down Moderates Backfires Immediately – If He Takes Down Sinema And Manchin He Risks GOP Takeover
Cesar Chavez would actually be opposed to the left’s current attempt at destroying our elections. He would have been in favor of voter ID, a measure that is necessary to prevent non-citizens from voting in our elections. His strong stance on immigration would have made him an opponent of the current election bills.
However, Hugo Chavez made a mockery of democracy and encouraged measures that made him president indefinitely. He turned Venezuela into a hell hole, with people scrounging in the garbage for food—as he lived high off the hog. For Hakeem to confuse the two men are telling.
Perhaps it was just a mistake. But what did Freud say? There are no mistakes? Perhaps Hakeem wasn’t too far off the mark the first time?