Media bias is worse than ever, but fortunately this year MonCrief has come forward publicly a but earlier in the year than she did in 2008 to tell the ugly truth that needs to be told to and appreciated by the voters so that, in the words of the Preamble to the United States Constitution, we may continue to "form a more perfect union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and...secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" instead of being bullied and seduced by the Radical Left to undertake yet another failed socialist experiment like Cuba and Venezuela.
George Santayana wrote: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."Today MonCrief posted on her website Documenting the Radical Left Agenda Part I, which begins as follows:
Summary: Presenting a clear trail of agenda driven power moves and social engineering by radical leftist leaders and their various connected organizations.
The economic chaos and social unrest the U.S. has been facing in 2020 seems to have come out of nowhere, invading our lives with such a force as most people believe can only be explained as "unpredictable" and simply "a bad year."
But those of us who have experienced (and even participated) in the radical leftist movement any time over the past 40+ years can tell you that the events we are seeing play out are far from "unpredictable," and they will lead to more than just a "bad year," but a horrible century of we are no proactive now."
Part I is fifteen pages, begins with Chaos is the Key: Cloward-Piven Strategy. and introduces The New ACORN: Cloward-Piven Strategy 2020.
To access the original article and the accompanying video visit this link: https://anitamoncrief.com/2020/09/documenting-the-radical-leftist-agenda-part-i/.
Part II will cover the systemic influence of "new ACORN," dig into George Soros' involvement, how mainstream media continues to be complicit, and the remarkable success the Cloward-Piven strategy is having within our current climate of social, political and civil unrest.
This time the alternative to President Trump, Democrat Joseph Biden, successfully indulged his passionate pursuit of the Presidency of the United States.
Astonishingly, Biden speaks of a Harris-Biden Administration, as does his ambitious young running mate, Senator Kamala Harris, who is best known for criticizing Biden's civil rights record during the first debate of the Democrat hopefuls for the 2020 Democrat presidential nomination, winning the designation as the most liberal United States Senator and eagerly becoming positioned not only to become the first woman to be elected President or Vice President, but the first black female and first person of Indian ancestry to be elected President or Vice President.
Given Biden's age and medical history, the chance that Harris would replace him before the 2025 presidential inauguration is hardly negligible. so why would a "moderate" choose Harris as a running mate?
Biden once was a "moderate Democrat" who worked with Democrat segregationists, kept the secret of the late Dixiecrat turned Republican Strom Thurmond's black daughter and even as Vice President in 2010 eulogized the late Democrat Senate Majority Leader Robert "KKK" Byrd.
Biden's "moderate" views appear to have been abandoned for the sake of personal political ambition, but in 2008 Biden brought his many years of experience as a United States Senator and alleged gravitas to the Obama-Biden presidential campaign and 2012 brought reelection.
In 2016 Biden deferred to Hillary Clinton's ambition to become the first female President, but President Trump prevented that calamity and now is running for reelection.
Last June, I offered this heads up (www.renewamerica.com/columns/gaynor/200602): "Beware ANTIFA, ACORN Whistleblower Anita MonCrief's hiatus from politics ended. She is back!"
The day before, I had received this terse (but much appreciated) email from MonCrief: "It looks like it might be time to educate this new generation on what the leftist playbook really looks like. Sat out long enough. This is getting crazy."
Yes, that's the same Anita MonCrief who had proudly walked to the polls with her then two-year old daughter to vote for Obama-Biden on Election Day 2008 because she was a proud "liberal" even after exposing the illicit relationship between ACORN and the Obama-Biden campaign. MonCrief thought that President Obama needed to be separated from ACORN and that she could help the media make that happen.
Naive does not mean unable to learn, however, and, thanks be to God, finding something "scary" does not leave MonCrief paralyzed by fear and even motivates her to act.
The 2008 presidential race was exciting and historic and Biden was important to the Democrat success that year, became Obama was a rookie United States Senator with no military experience (unlike his Republican rival), no service in the Peace Corps or Vista, no executive governmental experience and no major legislative accomplishment and instead running on "the fierce urgency of now," hope and change.
Obama had beaten MonCrief's then preference, Hillary Clinton, a former two-term First Lady of the United States and a re-elected United States Senator for the 2008 Democrat presidential election.
After the 2008 national conventions, the Republican ticket (McCain-Palin) took the lead in the polls.
There was no once in a century pandemic that year, but was a financial crisis that flipped the polls and McCain’s presidential aspirations were pronounced dead by many.Relative;y few Americans were socialists and Americans didn’t want a president who would invite generated crises.
But with much of the mainstream media in the tank for Obama, what was needed was an ACORN whistleblower who will not only expose ACORN, but ACORN’s ties to Obama and the Obama campaign.
I posted an article titled “Blame Obama’s ACORN for the Financial Crisis” at the end of September and followed up with more articles on Obama and ACORN.
Enter ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief, from Stage Left.
MonCrief had read articles of mine on ACORN and Obama at www.webcommentary.com, set up an email account under an alias and emailed me this message on October 7, 2008: “I worked at Project Vote and ACORN for years and can provide inside information on the connections with Obama and FEC violations, IRS 501(c)3 violations and the threats and intimidation that ACORN has used to keep me quiet. I am willing to submit to a polygraph and turn over Obama's 2nd quarter donor list with was obtained by Project Vote Development Director Karyn Gillette directly from the Obama Campaign. I also have a DNC list that was forwarded to Project Vote along with donor lists for Kerry and Clinton.”
The idea that ACORN really is an arm of the Democrat Party and the Obama campaign was far from inconceivable to me, but was this a hoax or for real?
I immediately emailed back:
”I'm paying attention and looking forward to checking any illuminating material.
“What did Project Vote do with the lists?
“Please identify yourself and provide contact info and proof of your Project Vote and ACORN history. If you have a resume, please send me a copy.
“Please tell me specifically what you can prove as to Obama that the voters should know.”
The next day, MonCrief responded:
”I am a little nervous about sending you my resume. I have been black listed by ACORN, fired from my new job for bogus reasons and threatened daily. I turned to you because with whistle blowers, sometimes the media is the best protection. I am not sure how you would protect your sources.
“Project Vote used the list in violation of FEC rules for fundraising. Obama is in very deep with ACORN and Project Vote and I have knowledge of meetings between the campaign and Senior ACORN members.”
I immediately responded:
“Thanks for emailing me again.
“I was worrying that you had set up a gmail account to pose as a legitimate source and trap me into posting bogus info.
“I was fooled into posting the substance of a bogus email once and it's not something I intend to have happen again.
“Apparently your name is in your email, so you don't ordinarily hide, which is encouraging to me.“
Here's my contact info….
“If you haven't googled me, please do.”
”David is not my real name, just my alias. I am looking for help and did not know how else to contact you. I did google you and I was happy to see that you are a lawyer. I do have a lot of internal docs for ACORN and Project Vote. I took a call from the Obama campaign while working there and was privy to a meeting where information between the two camps was discussed. I was told by PV that we were working with them and that I was to de-dupe the Obama 2nd Quarter list and get to work contacting donors. We also received help from the DNC, Clinton and Kerry (in 2004). I will take a polygraph and turn over what I have. I am in DC. Obama's camp was contacted by the NYT about the documents and they claim that PV got it online from published document and more questions led to a screaming match between the reporter and the campaign. Two days after that PV began contacting old references and friends in an effort to discredit me. That's why I agreed to the polygraph because I am not lying, they are.”
I focused on this part—“Project Vote used the list in violation of FEC rules for fundraising. Obama is in very deep with ACORN and Project Vote and I have knowledge of meetings between the campaign and Senior ACORN members”—and emailed, “The sooner this is demonstrated, the better. If Obama wins, he will appoint the next United States Attorney General.”
But I lacked confirmation, so I also emailed:
“I think you are sincere and your information is newsworthy. As an anonymous person with an Internet alias, I can't check you out. You would have to contact me. Time is short. Please call me tonight.”
Minutes later, I read this: “Anita MonCrief. Google me. Please do not use my name with anyone until we connect. I also emailed Michelle Malkin but she scares me.”
I responded: “I googled that name and hope it's the real you. If it is, you should have plenty to prove that should be publicized. Please call me at or after 9 PM: 631-757-9452. I will be home by then and free to talk.”
MonCrief emailed: “I am really terrified. When I say threats and intimidation, I am not kidding. We (my 2 year old) are moving and I have had union pressure to make me be quiet. I am on linked in. If you still have doubts add me and I will confirm you.”
I checked Linked In and then emailed:
”One, call me at or after 9 PM.
“Two, and more importantly, email Martha.J. Raddatz@abc.news.com. As you probably know, Martha is ABC's Chief White House correspondent. You can google her if you are unsure about her. I think you'd be more comfortable with her that Laura Ingraham or Stuart Taylor, others to whom I might have referred you. I chose based on what I thought would be best for you. I have NOT told Martha your name, since you wanted it treated confidentially, but I got her permission to have my ‘source’ email her and her commitment to deal with you totally off the record if that is what you want. Use you alias email account first, but you have documents for Martha to examine, so the two of you are likely to get together and the more you reveal, the more credible you will be. And the sooner, the better.”
MonCrief’s response was to mail me her resume.
It showed that MonCrief had attended the University of Alabama, focused on political science and history and won a University of Alabama faculty and staff award for academic excellence.
It showed that in 2002, she had interned in Washington, D.C. with the American Bar Association Central European and Eurasian Law Initiative as a legislative assistance and research program intern early in 2002.It showed that later that year MonCrief had served as an election observer with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, in which capacity she assessed the conduct of the election in the context of domestic legislation and international standards and practices, interviewed members of local election commissions and executive bodies regarding the conduct of the election and documented human rights abuses, media-related incidents and vote fraud during and after the campaign period.
No wonder ACORN recruited MonCrief!
The resume showed that MonCrief simultaneously joined ACORN and Project Vote in Washington, D.C. in October 2005. With ACORN, she was a strategic writing, research and design consultant. With Project Vote, she was a development associate. She designed ACORN’s 2005, 2006 and 2007 political operations year end PowerPoint presentations.
MonCrief did not call at 9 PM that night, but she called later that night and provided many documents.
It had to be very hard for a “progressive” who supported Obama to come forward.
But before MonCrief emailed Michelle Malkin and me, she had been working with New York Times national correspondent Stephanie Strom, but what ended up published as Ms. Strom’s ACORN articles were so “watered down” that MonCrief decided to turn elsewhere.
MonCrief advised me that Ms. Strom apologetically canceled a meeting for today and explained that New York Times policy was not to publish what might be a game changing article this close to the election.
I think that should be in a footnote to the New York Times’ “All the news that’s fit to print” motto.
Media bias is worse than ever, but fortunately this year MonCrief has come forward publicly a but earlier in the year than she did in 2008 to tell the ugly truth that needs to be told to and appreciated by the voters so that, in the words of the Preamble to the United States Constitution, we may continue to "form a more perfect union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and...secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" instead of being bullied and seduced by the Radical Left to undertake yet another failed socialist experiment like Cuba and Venezuela.© Michael Gaynor
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.