Clinton and Sanders Meet, Pledge Party Unity. “It’s Clear Where Sanders Stands”
By Stephen Lendman
Global Research, June 16, 2016

Url of this article:

Following her District of Columbia win, concluding the long primary/caucus season, Clinton met privately with Sanders at a downtown Washington hotel – discussing rapprochement and party unity to defeat Trump in November.

Representatives of both camps called the meeting “positive.” Sanders spokesman Michael Briggs said talks focused on “how best to bring more people into the political process and about the dangerous threat that Donald Trump poses to our nation.”

The NYT highlighted the concluded Democrat party nomination contest, saying Clinton and Sanders met to “expor(e) what kind of alliance they might build for the general elections against” Trump.

Unity is certain, including Sanders endorsing Clinton, likely promised a high-level position in her administration if she’s elected in November, maybe offered the vice-presidency.

At the same time, his rhetoric rings hollow, saying “the time is long overdue for a fundamental transformation of the Democratic (sic) party” – while doing virtually nothing to achieve it throughout his 30-year political career, largely supporting business as usual.

His voting record belies his rhetoric, consistently saying one thing and doing another – on the wrong side of too many major issues to ignore.

Most disturbing is his pro-war advocacy, despite claiming otherwise and opposing Bush’s 2003 Iraq war. He supported:

  • the 1991 military buildup prior to the Gulf War; a former staffer said he wasn’t “going to let some damn war cost him the election…So he dumped on the left anti-imperialist peace movement;”
  • illegal sanctions on Iraq, responsible for killing half a million children – 5,000 under aged five monthly;
  • NATO’s killing machine;
  • the rape of Yugoslavia;
  • the September 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) against nonexistent US enemies;
  • the phony war on terror;
  • naked aggression on Afghanistan;
  • Obama’s wars on Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen;
  • “protect(ing) Eastern Europe against (nonexistent) Russian aggression,” adding “Vladimir Putin is not going to get away with aggressive action in Europe or elsewhere,” stressing “the United States should isolate (him) politically and economically” by maintaining sanctions; and
  • drone wars largely killing noncombatants, among other hawkish policies.

Earlier he disgracefully called Hugo Chavez “a dead communist dictator,” turned truth on its head, saying Assad is a “brutal dictator who has slaughtered many of his own people.”

It’s clear where Sanders stands – an opportunist willing to go along to get along, largely supporting business as usual while claiming otherwise.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] 

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.” 

Visit his blog site at 

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.