Connect with us

Susan Sarandon Still Glad She Voted for Jill Stein, Told Her Gay Friends Hillary Has ‘Been Terrible to Gay People’

Published

on

‘She’s Been Terrible to Gay People for the Longest Time’ Sarandon Says of Hillary Clinton

During the 2016 presidential campaign actress Susan Sarandon was an avid Bernie Sanders supporter. When Hillary Clinton won the Democratic nomination Sarandon refused to support her, instead voting for Green Party candidate Jill Stein (who some on social media believe was knowingly or not part of Russia’s efforts to disrupt the U.S. election.)

Sarandon didn’t just vote for Jill Stein, she actively worked against Hillary Clinton, posting tweets attacking the Democratic nominee as late in the game as October 4.

Many believe those who voted for anyone but Clinton are, at least in part, responsible for putting Trump in the White House. It is true that in many states votes for third party candidates, including Stein and Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson, were more than enough to have given Clinton the win.

FiveThirtyEight’s Dave Wasserman makes it clear: in the three states in which Trump won the Electoral College vote where he was not expected to win – handing him the presidency – Stein’s votes, had they gone to Clinton, would have given Hillary the White House. For example, Trump won Michigan by 10,704 votes, and 51,463 people voted for Stein.

Regardless, suffice it to say Sarandon, who has 570,000 followers on Twitter, is not sorry for supporting Stein, even though for her a Donald Trump presidency is far less destructive than it is for many minorities, LGBT people, and women overall. Sarandon has the wealth and privilege to protect herself from most of Trump’s policies and actions. Most others do not.

The Guardian‘s Emma Brockes interviewed Sarandon. In an article published Sunday, she asks, “Does she have any sympathy with the critique that casting a protest vote is the luxury of those insulated from the effects of a Trump presidency?”

“It wasn’t a protest vote. Following Bernie wasn’t a protest.” Voting for Jill Stein was, by any definition, a protest vote. “Well, I knew that New York was going to go [for Hillary]. It was probably the easiest place to vote for Stein. Bringing attention to working-class issues is not a luxury. People are really hurting; that’s how this guy got in. What we should be discussing is not the election, but how we got to the point where Trump was the answer.” (We should also, she says, inching towards the space where the extreme right meets the left, be discussing how “you can’t judge by the mainstream media what’s going on in the country. How did we lose all our journalists and media?”)

And in the aftermath of the 2016 election, Brockes wanted to know if Sarandon “lost friends over all this.” 

“No. My friends have a right to their opinions. It’s disappointing but that’s their business. It’s like in the lead-up to Vietnam, and then later they say: ‘You were right.’ Or strangely, some of my gay friends were like: ‘Oh, I just feel bad for [Clinton]. And I said: ‘She’s not authentic. She’s been terrible to gay people for the longest time. She’s an opportunist.’ And then I’m like: ‘OK, let’s not talk about it any more.’”

Apparently, Sarandon has decided to not fight – but she continues to throw Clinton under the bus, attacking her as “terrible” to LGBT people, when the evidence says otherwise.

OUT magazine’s Rose Dommu sums up Sarandon’s remarks about her support of Jill Stein and her “audacity” of bringing “the gays into it” by saying simply, “Girl, please.”

To comment on this article and other NCRM content, visit our Facebook page

Image by David Shankbone via Wikimedia 

If you find NCRM valuable, would you please consider making a donation to support our independent journalism?

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

NOT HOW THIS WORKS

Busted: White House Counsel Worked to Keep Whistleblower Report From Congress – WaPo

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s White House counsel has reportedly been personally involved in keeping Congress from reviewing a whistleblowing report involving Ukraine.

“The revelation that Trump pushed Zelensky to pursue the Biden probe, which was first reported by The Wall Street Journal, represents the most detailed account so far of the president’s conduct that prompted a U.S. intelligence official to file a whistleblower action against the president,” The Washington Post reported Friday. “The disclosure comes amid new details about the White House’s role in preventing Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire from complying with Congressional demands for the material in the complaint.”

In addition to confirming the WSJ report, The Post also furthered the story with new reporting on the role of the White House in the scandal.

“White House Counsel Pat Cipollone has been engaged in the matter since shortly after the whistleblower action surfaced, officials said, helping to identify legal obstacles to the sharing of information that could be politically damaging to Trump,” The Post reported. “Cipollone’s involvement reveals a more direct White House role in the dispute than has previously been reported.”

Read the full report.

Continue Reading

IMPEACHABLE OFFENSES

Trump Urged Ukraine President ‘About Eight Times’ to Work With Giuliani to Get Dirt on Biden’s Son: WSJ

Published

on

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that President Donald Trump “repeatedly pressured” the president of Ukraine to work with his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to get dirt on the son of his top political opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden.

In a July phone call Trump urged President Volodymyr Zelensky “about eight times to work with Rudy Giuliani,” the Wall Street Journal says.

But the Journal’s reporting in the second paragraph offers details that appear to minimize what experts have been suggesting actually happened. The Journal’s report also does not name sources or even suggest if they are White House or intelligence community officials.

“Mr. Trump didn’t mention a provision of foreign aid to Ukraine on the call, said this person, who didn’t believe Mr. Trump offered the Ukrainian president any quid-pro-quo for his cooperation on an investigation,” the Journal says.

That would lessen the magnitude of the allegations against President Trump, although they would still be impeachable offenses.

Related: Trump to Meet With Ukrainian President Amid Bombshell Whistleblower Allegations

The Trump team has become expert at controlling the national conversation and forging a narrative that bends most elements of truth, then getting the conservative base to believe them.

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.

Continue Reading

IMPEACH

Some Among Democratic Base Grow Increasingly Frustrated as Pelosi Issues Statement Chastising Trump Over Whistleblower

Published

on

Statement  Does Not  Say ‘Impeachment’

Some among the Democratic base appear frustrated with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi who has not been supportive of the majority of House Democrats who want to impeach President Donald Trump. Friday afternoon the Speaker quietly issued a lengthy statement responding to the bombshell news that a whistleblower has filed a “credible” and “urgent” complaint with the intelligence community.

Pelosi’s statement, which was not posted to her social media accounts as of this writing, made its way through Twitter via a handful of reporters.

“If the President has done what has been alleged, then he is stepping into a dangerous minefield with serious repercussions for his Administration and our democracy,” Pelosi said, as a Politico congressional reporter pointed out:

Nearly two-thirds of House Democrats support impeaching Trump, or beginning a formal impeachment inquiry at the very least, according to Politico. But the majority of the nation does not, nor do a majority of Democratic voters, according to recent polls.

“Only 37 percent support beginning impeachment proceedings, while half oppose it,” Politco reports, citing its own polls.

Speaker Pelosi’s statement concludes with this:

“We will continue to follow the facts and explore every possible option to ensure the American people get the truth. We would hope that Republicans would join us in supporting the Constitution.”

Some online are calling her statement “weak,” while others are disappointed with the lack of specific threats of action, and others are expressing exasperation with the Speaker not supporting impeachment:

RELATED STORIES:

Watch: Nancy Pelosi Brilliantly Explains Why She Has Disinvited Trump From Delivering State of the Union

Nancy Pelosi Comes Out Swinging: Mocking Trump in Every Direction

White House Wanted to Catch and ‘Deport’ Caravan Migrants – to the Streets of Nancy Pelosi’s District as Political Payback

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2019 AlterNet Media.