Could Reddit Bombshell Deliver Another Impeached President Clinton?

In the wormhole that is the Hillary Clinton email scandal, the burrowing has deepened into an unknown space-time continuum. News broke yesterday that Paul Combetta, the Platte River Networks technician working for Hillary Clinton’s IT provider, was a fan of Reddit, a social news aggregation and discussion website. Combetta, also the technician who pleaded the Fifth about wiping Clinton's server clean, is now suspected of reaching out to the tech community on Reddit about covering the tracks of a certain VIP.

RELATED: Hillary’s IT Guy Paul Combetta Wouldn’t Chat With Congress, but Is This Suspicious Reddit Post Talking?

"I'm telling you right now, if Hillary Clinton is elected, she will either retire due to health, or she will be impeached her first term. This is all mounting. You know what this feels like? This feels like Watergate," Glenn said Tuesday on his radio program.

That would be an unfortunate similarity for Clinton, as Richard Nixon resigned the presidency following the Watergate scandal.

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to this cornucopia of questions:

• Who had more pre-scandal popularity --- Hillary Clinton or Richard Nixon?

• If elected, will we see a second President Clinton impeached?

• Should I post on a public forum about covering my tracks?

• Is "stonetear" a clever name for a Reddit user, city street or Etsy account?

• Can you make money crocheting in a jail cell?

• How VIP is very VIP?

• Are there more emails that prove Hillary sold guns to ISIS?

• Does anyone in the media like Hillary?

• How does President Kaine sound?

Listen to this segment, beginning at mark 2:25, from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN: I'm telling you right now, if Hillary Clinton is elected, she will either retire due to health, or she will be impeached her first term. This is all mounting. You know what this feels like? This feels like Watergate. The election right before the Watergate scandal. Remember, Pat? You are old enough to remember. Watergate felt just like this. Everyone knew he had done something wrong, but his own supporters were arguing, "There's no proof of this. There's no way he did that. Move on. You're just trying to -- whatever.

STU: Go out on a limb and say that she does not carry 49 states, however.

GLENN: Did he carry 49 states?

STU: Right. Wasn't it 49? Yeah. It was 49 states against McGovern, right? '72?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Yeah, he lost Massachusetts.

GLENN: Wow.

STU: And DC.

GLENN: Right. So she's not going to carry the 49 states. She won't be as popular as Nixon was.

STU: Actually, not -- not DC. Sorry. There was that one unfaithful elector that voted for the Libertarian in that election. But it was a blowout. Let's -- electoral count 520 to 17.

GLENN: Okay. Holy cow. Holy cow.

JEFFY: Wow.

STU: That's amazing.

PAT: Good thing he broke into the hotel to find out his campaign strategy.

GLENN: Yeah, couldn't beat that guy.

(laughter)

PAT: Wow. That was razor-thin.

STU: Yeah, Massachusetts and DC. That's it.

PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: And we even do have Russia hacking in to find her campaign strategy. This is 1972 all over again. And she's not going to make it. Look at the scandals that are coming out today. By the way, more on the IRS scandal too. Did you see this? Democratic documents now have been leaked, where Democratic senators were saying, "How can we not just go arrest these guys? We got to go arrest these Tea Party people." And it was a conversation between senators and the IRS. "Why can't you go out and get these guys?"

PAT: Jeez.

GLENN: I mean, it's bad.

Okay. So let's see. Tell me how she survives. We'll put the DHS scandal off to the side here. Tell me how she survives just these two. Just these two. Because, remember, the press hates her.

Once you have Donald Trump out of the way -- this is the press' thinking -- once you have Donald Trump out of the way, they don't like her. They will -- she will be the bad guy. She will be the bad guy.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: She will not be able to get anything done. Nothing!

Listen to this: Hillary's IT guy wouldn't talk to Congress, but now Reddit has posts that they say are his. And it's circumstantial evidence, but the circumstantial evidence is pretty -- pretty amazing.

Let's see: We're in weird times. 2016. This is Reddit. It was only about a month ago before her collapse at a 9/11 event that asking about Hillary Clinton's health put one firmly in the deplorable conspiracy theorist basket, at least according to many in the mainstream media.

So it's best to tread lightly when approaching the news that Paul Combetta, a technician with Hillary's IT provider, Platte HEP River Networks, left behind a few incriminating crumbs on the internet, ironically when asking about how to cover someone else's tracks.

Have you heard this?

STU: One way not to cover your tracks is to post on a public forum about covering tracks.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh. Hey, can somebody help me out?

Let's just for now, that the US News HEP and World Report has taken an interest, as has Major HEP Garrett of CBS News. US News staff writer Steven Nelson notes the requests match neatly with publicly known dates related to Clinton's use of a private server while Secretary of State.

How soon before the cable and broadcast networks pick up the story? Never.

Reddit calls itself the front page of the internet, which might sound like an empty boast for those not familiar with the site. It's a huge discussion board, covering every topic in existence. It's ugly as sin, with none of the candy-colored buttons or graphical trappings of a HEP Web 2.0 or whatever web now we're on, which makes it a paradise for computer nerds and geeks of all stripes. Ask anything and someone will answer.

Some are claiming to have evidence that Combetta, who is reportedly the technician who, oops, obliterated Hillary Clinton's email archive using BleachBit HEP software and then pleaded the Fifth before the House Oversight Committee last week, popped onto a Reddit discussion board in 2014 to ask how to remove or replace -- this is quoting -- the to and from address on archived emails.

A lot of theory depends on attaching Combetta to the user name stonetear. Is it stonetier or tear? But it looks like internet detectives have now done just that. A good thing people captured screens while they could. It looked like stonetear's Reddit history has been wiped like with a cloth or something.

STU: And in realtime, as they were discovering this. So like people were like, "Wait a minute. Is this the guy?" And started talking about it. And as they were doing it, they would refresh the screen, and there would be less posts this guy had because he was deleting them as they were doing it. That's how -- and, you know, the circumstantial evidence is pretty interesting. This guy does have accounts on other websites with this name. You know, it's from a couple years ago.

GLENN: Yep.

STU: And he, I believe, has a house that is on that street.

GLENN: Right. And he is -- he went to a wedding with a friend. And what is it? Let's see here.

This image confirms stonetear user name, Hillary, Paul Combetta, he's granted immunity, blah, blah.

But he was at a -- he was at a party of some sort, and it's him with a friend. And they're like, "Look how tall stonetear is."

STU: Oops.

GLENN: Oops. You might want to be a little more clever with your names.

STU: He also has an Etsy page.

GLENN: Yes, that's right.

STU: So in case you want to order arts and crafts, you can apparently do that.

JEFFY: Crocheting in the cell?

GLENN: So what he did was --

PAT: Didn't he say something about I'm deleting for a very --

GLENN: Yes. I am --

PAT: I can't say anything, but whose husband used to be president.

(laughter)

GLENN: Of another -- of a company.

STU: Here's the quote: I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP, parentheses, very VIP -- in capitals -- email address from a bunch of archived email.

PAT: She's a Democrat, and it's rumored she may run for president.

(laughter)

So ridiculous.

GLENN: I mean, it is almost -- it is -- you could almost convince me this is a setup. Is this guy that stupid?

PAT: Maybe.

STU: I mean, I don't know enough about Reddit to know if you can back date posts. I would think the answer to that is no, or that that would have been pointed out in any of these articles. But that's the only thing that makes any sense.

GLENN: And it correlates. They ask for something. And that day, he goes on and posts on Reddit. I mean, all of the dates -- this is why US News, World Report, this is what they're doing. They notice all of the dates fit exactly with him.

STU: Right. And this is the guy who had the OS moment. Oh, crap moment. That has been described in the testimony. And so in March 2015, he had to implement a 60-day email retention policy. But he had -- he theoretically was supposed to do that earlier and forgot. So later on came to do it.

And the dates with his posts about a 60-day email retention policy line up with when he initially posted about it.

So like, it was initially supposed to happen in December. He posted about it in December, but then forgot to do it until March. But he posted about it at the time when they were discussing it. And, again, like, I don't know, could a hacker do this? Go back and --

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know.

STU: I don't know. Maybe. I just don't know the site well enough.

But, I mean, if these things exist, none of the media sources covering it are pointing it out. Like if you could backdate posts or if you could go in and somehow manipulate the boards --

GLENN: Right. Is there anybody who is, you know, expert enough on this to be able to tell us, can you back-date stuff? You would think that that would have been one of the first things people would have said.

STU: Right. I got to imagine that's not true. And, you know, it's amazing. Because this is the guy who used BleachBit to get rid of these --

GLENN: Right. And didn't he also do something on Reddit about BleachBit?

STU: I don't know -- I think that was his initial ask was about how to remove --

GLENN: BleachBit. I mean, this is crazy. So this is all coming undone.

Now, let me give you another one. Now he's announcing that Hillary Clinton and her State Department -- this is a political insider. WikiLeaks confirms that Hillary sold weapons to ISIS.

He's announcing now -- insider -- that Hillary Clinton and her State Department were actively arming Islamic jihadists, which includes the Islamic State in Syria.

Clinton has repeatedly denied these claims, including during multiple statements while under oath in front of the United States Senate. WikiLeaks is about to prove that Hillary deserves to be arrested.

In Obama's second term, the Secretary of State authorized the shipment of American made arms to Qatar, a country beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood, to the friendly Libyan rebels, in an effort to topple the Libyan Gadhafi government, and then ship those arms to Syria in order to fund al-Qaeda and topple Assad in Syria.

I just want you to know, this is exactly what we said they were doing four days after Benghazi. Do you remember?

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: We said they were trying to get all of those American arms back out of the arms of the people that they gave them to. And that's why they were there. They were making deals with warlords to try to get those armaments back. And then they were shipping them over to Syria through Turkey.

Gee. Who was right?

Clinton took the lead role in organizing the so-called Friends of Syria to back the CIA-led insurgency for regime change in Syria.

That explains why they were protected by the CIA and nobody else.

Under oath, Hillary Clinton denied she knew about the Weapon's shipments. In an interview with Democracy Now, WikiLeaks' Julian Assange is now stating that 1700 emails contained in the Clinton cache directly connect Hillary to Libya, to Syria, and directly to al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Here's the transcript. Let's see here. Let me see if I can just get the Julian Assange.

WikiLeaks has become the rebel Library of Alexandria. It's the single most significant collection of information that doesn't exist elsewhere in searchable and accessible, citable form about how modern institutions actually behave. And it's going on to set people free from prison, where documents have been used in their court cases to hold the CIA accountable for rendering programs, feed into election cycles, which have resulted in the termination of some cases or contributed to the termination of governments. In some cases, taken the heads of intelligence agencies, ministers of defense, and so on. So you know, our civilizations can only be as good as the knowledge of what our civilization is. We can't possibly hope to reform what we don't understand.

So those Hillary Clinton emails, they connect together with the cables that we have published of Hillary Clinton, creating a rich picture of how Hillary Clinton performs in office. But more broadly, how the US Department of State operates. For example, the absolutely disastrous intervention in Libya, the destruction of the Gadhafi government, which led to the occupation of ISIS, of large segments of that country, weapons flows going over to Syria, being pushed by Hillary Clinton into jihadists within Syria, including ISIS. That's there in the emails.

There's more than 1700 emails in Hillary Clinton's collections that we have released just about Libya alone.

How does she survive?

STU: Well, I mean, in normal circumstances, right? The Democrat just gets -- they lay down cover and they survive from the media.

GLENN: And they're going to lay down cover for the next 50 days.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: Once that's over -- once the bogeyman is gone, she has no more cover. I'm telling you, if she wins, she's a one-term president that is either impeached or leaves because of health reasons. You're looking at President Kaine.

PAT: She won't be impeached, I don't think.

GLENN: I think it will mount and she will do exactly what Nixon did. She won't want to be -- both Clintons being impeached from office? No way.

PAT: Yeah, they wouldn't want that label.

GLENN: They would not want that. It's over. And that's not even counting the Clinton Global Initiative. That thing is so dirty. They haven't even started on that yet.

PAT: Do people care?

GLENN: Yes, they do.

PAT: You think they do?

GLENN: Yes, I do. I think not now. Not now. Because we're in the political fog of war.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: But once -- once the --

PAT: Like if she wins, you think they will care?

GLENN: Yes, they will. Because they will like Kaine more than Hillary. They don't like Hillary. And they'll want her to pay a price. They're not going to let her get away with it.

JEFFY: Bill already explained the Foundation issue, right? I mean, people did give money. They probably expected to get some kind of influence. But, hey, the State Department -- he expected the State Department to do what was right.

(laughter)

PAT: Of course, he did.

GLENN: Right. And they were expecting him to do right.

Featured Image: Featured Image: Original cartoon created by Pat Cross Cartoons for glennbeck.com. Pat Cross loves drawing, America and the Big Man upstairs.

It's time for our April 29, 2019 edition of our Candidate Power Rankings. We get to add two new candidates, write about a bunch of people that have little to no chance of winning, and thank the heavens we are one day closer to the end of all of this.

In case you're new here, read our explainer about how all of this works:

The 2020 Democratic primary power rankings are an attempt to make sense out of the chaos of the largest field of candidates in global history.

Each candidate gets a unique score in at least thirty categories, measuring data like polling, prediction markets, fundraising, fundamentals, media coverage, and more. The result is a candidate score between 0-100. These numbers will change from week to week as the race changes.

The power rankings are less a prediction on who will win the nomination, and more a snapshot of the state of the race at any given time. However, early on, the model gives more weight to fundamentals and potentials, and later will begin to prioritize polling and realities on the ground.

These power rankings include only announced candidates. So, when you say "WAIT!! WHERE'S XXXXX????" Read the earlier sentence again.

If you're like me, when you read power rankings about sports, you've already skipped ahead to the list. So, here we go.

See previous editions here.

20. Wayne Messam: 13.4 (Last week: 18th / 13.4)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

A former staffer of Wayne Messam is accusing his wife of hoarding the campaign's money.

First, how does this guy have "former" staffers? He's been running for approximately twelve minutes.

Second, he finished dead last in the field in fundraising with $44,000 for the quarter. Perhaps hoarding whatever money the campaign has is not the worst idea.

His best shot at the nomination continues to be something out of the series "Designated Survivor."

Other headlines:

19. Marianne Williamson: 17.1 (Last week: 17th / 17.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Marianne Williamson would like you to pay for the sins of someone else's great, great, great grandparents. Lucky you!

Williamson is on the reparations train like most of the field, trying to separate herself from the pack by sheer monetary force.

How much of your cash does she want to spend? "Anything less than $100 billion is an insult." This is what I told the guy who showed up to buy my 1989 Ford Tempo. It didn't work then either.

Other headlines:

18. John Delaney: 19.7 (Last week: 15th / 20.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Good news: John Delaney brought in $12.1 million in the first quarter, enough for fifth in the entire Democratic field!

Bad news: 97% of the money came from his own bank account.

Other headlines:

17. Eric Swalwell: 20.2 (Last week: 16th / 20.2)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

The Eric Swalwell formula:

  • Identify news cycle
  • Identify typical left-wing reaction
  • Add steroids

Democrats said there was obstruction in the Mueller report. Swalwell said there “certainly" was collusion.

Democrats said surveillance of the Trump campaign was no big deal. Swalwell said there was no need to apologize even if it was.

Democrats said William Barr mishandled the release of the Mueller report. Swalwell said he must resign.

Democrats say they want gun restrictions. Swalwell wants them all melted down and the liquid metal to be poured on the heads of NRA members. (Probably.)

16. Seth Moulton: 20.6 (NEW)

Who is Seth Moulton?

No, I'm asking.

Moulton falls into the category of congressman looking to raise his profile and make his future fundraising easier— not someone who is actually competing for the presidency.

He tried to block Nancy Pelosi as speaker, so whatever help he could get from the establishment is as dry as Pelosi's eyes when the Botox holds them open for too long.

Moulton is a veteran, and his military service alone is enough to tell you that he's done more with his life than I'll ever do with mine. But it's hard to see the road to the White House for a complete unknown in a large field of knowns.

Don't take my word for it, instead read this depressing story that he's actually telling people on purpose:

"I said, you know, part of my job is take tough questions," Moulton told the gathered business and political leaders. "You can ask even really difficult questions. And there was still silence. And then finally, someone in the way back of the room raised her hand, and she said, 'Who are you?' "

Yeah. Who are you?

15. Tim Ryan: 21.6 (Last week: 14th / 20.7)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

When you're talking to less than sixteen people in Iowa one week after your launch, you don't have too much to be excited about.

Ryan did get an interview on CNN, where he also talked to less than sixteen people.

He discussed his passion for the Dave Matthews Band, solidifying a key constituency in the year 1995.

Other headlines:

14. Tulsi Gabbard: 25.2 (Last week: 14th / 25.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Tulsi Gabbard torched Kamala Harris in fundraising!!!!! (Among Indian-American donors.)

No word on who won the coveted handi-capable gender-neutral sodium-sensitive sub-demographic.

She received a mostly false rating for her attack on the Trump administration regarding its new policy on pork inspections, a topic not exactly leading the news cycle. Being from Hawaii, the state which leads the nation in Spam consumption, she was probably surprised when this didn't go mega viral.

Other headlines:

13. Andrew Yang: 27.2 (Last week: 12th / 27.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Yang has a few go-to lines when he's on the campaign trail, such as: "The opposite of Donald Trump is an Asian man who likes math." Another is apparently the Jeb-esque "Chant my name! Chant my name!"

Yang continues to be one of the more interesting candidates in this race, essentially running a remix of the "One Tough Nerd" formula that worked for Michigan Governor Rick Snyder.

I highly recommend listening to his interview with Ben Shapiro, where Yang earns respect as the only Democratic presidential candidate in modern history to actually show up to a challenging and in-depth interview with a knowledgeable conservative.

But hidden in the Shapiro interview is the nasty little secret of the Yang campaign. His policy prescriptions, while still very liberal, come off as far too sane for him to compete in this Stalin look-alike contest.

Other headlines:

12. Jay Inslee: 30.4 (Last week: 11th / 30.4)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

If you read the Inslee candidate profile, I said he was running a one-issue climate campaign. This week, he called for a climate change-only debate, and blamed Donald Trump for flooding in Iowa.

He also may sign the nation's first "human composting" legalization bill. He can start by composting his presidential campaign.

Other headlines:

11. John Hickenlooper: 32.2 (Last week: 10th / 32.0)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

John Hickenlooper was sick of being asked if he would put a woman on the ticket, in the 0.032% chance he actually won the nomination.

So he wondered why the female candidates weren't being asked if they would name a male VP if they won?

Seems like a logical question, but only someone who is high on tailpipe fumes would think it was okay to ask in a Democratic primary. Hickenlooper would be better served by just transitioning to a female and demanding other candidates are asked why they don't have a transgendered VP.

Other headlines:

10. Julian Castro: 35.7 (Last week: 9th / 36.2)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Lowering expectations is a useful strategy when your wife asks you to put together an Ikea end table, or when you've successfully convinced Charlize Theron to come home with you. But is it a successful campaign strategy?

Julian Castro is about to find out. He thinks the fact that everyone thinks he's crashing and burning on the campaign trail so far is an "advantage." Perhaps he can take the rest of the field by surprise on Super Tuesday when they finally realize he's actually running.

Other headlines:

9. Kirsten Gillibrand: 38.1 (Last week: 8th / 37.8)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Gillibrand wants you to know that the reason her campaign has been such a miserable failure so far, is because she called for a certain senator to step down. The problem might also be that another certain senator isn't a good presidential candidate.

She also spent the week arm wrestling, and dancing at a gay bar called Blazing Saddle. In this time of division, one thing we can all agree on: Blazing Saddle is a really solid name for a gay bar.

Other headlines:

8. Amy Klobuchar: 45.1 (Last week: 7th / 45.5)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Klobuchar is attempting a run in the moderate wing of the Democratic primary, which would be a better idea if such a wing existed.

She hasn't committed to impeaching Donald Trump and has actually voted to confirm over half of his judicial nominees. My guess is this will not be ignored by her primary opponents.

She also wants to resolve an ongoing TPS issue, which I assume means going by Peter Gibbons' desk every morning and making sure he got the memo about the new cover sheets.

Other headlines:

7. Elizabeth Warren: 45.3 (Last week: 6th / 46.0)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Elizabeth Warren is bad at everything she does while she's campaigning. I don't really even watch Game of Thrones, and the idea that Warren would write a story about how the show proves we need more powerful women makes me cringe.

Of course, more powerful people of all the 39,343 genders are welcome, but it's such a transparent attempt at jumping on the back of a pop-culture event to pander to female voters, it's sickening.

We can only hope that when she's watching Game of Thrones, she's gonna grab her a beer.

Other headlines:

6. Cory Booker: 54.9 (Last week: 5th / 55.5)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Booker is tied with Kamala Harris for the most missed Senate votes of the campaign so far. He gets criticized for this, but I think he should miss even more votes.

Booker is also pushing a national day off on Election Day—because the approximately six months of early voting allowed in every state just isn't enough.

Of course, making it easier to vote doesn't mean people are going to vote for Booker. So he's throwing trillions of dollars in bribes (my word, not his) to seal the deal.

Bookermania is in full effect, with 40 whole people showing up to his appearance in Nevada. Local press noted that the people were of "varying ages," an important distinction to most other crowds, which are entirely comprised of people with the same birthday.

Other headlines:

5. Robert Francis O’Rourke: 60.2 (Last week: 4th /62.6)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Kirsten Gillibrand gave less than 2% of her income to charity. The good news is that she gave about seven times as much as Beto O'Rourke. Robert Francis, or Bob Frank, also happens to be one of the wealthiest candidates in the race. His late seventies father-in-law has been estimated to be worth as much as $20 billion, though the number is more likely to be a paltry $500 million.

He's made millions from a family company investing in fossil fuels and pharmaceutical stocks, underpaid his taxes for multiple years, and is suing the government to lower property taxes on a family-owned shopping center.

He's also all but disappeared. It's a long race, and you don't win a nomination in April of the year before election day. If he's being frugal and figuring out what he believes, it might be a good move.

But it's notable that all the "pretty boy" hype that Bob Frank owned going into this race has been handed over to Mayor Pete. Perhaps Beto is spending his time working on curbing the sweating, the hand gestures, and the issues with jumping on counters like a feline.

Other headlines:

4. Pete Buttigieg: 62.9 (Last week: 3rd / 62.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

When we first put candidates in tiers earlier this year, we broke everyone into five categories from "Front Runners" to "Eh, no." In the middle is a category called "Maybe, if everything goes right," and that's where we put Pete Buttigieg.

Well, everything has gone right so far. But Mayor Pete will be interested to learn that the other 19 candidates in this race are not going to hand him this nomination. Eventually, they will start saying negative things about him (they've started the opposition research process already), and it will be interesting to see how Petey deals with the pressure. We've already seen how it has affected Beto in a similar situation.

The media has spoken endlessly about the sexual orientation of Buttigieg, but not every Democratic activist is impressed. Barney Frank thinks the main reason he's getting this amount of attention is because he is gay. And for some, being a gay man just means you're a man, which isn't good enough.

When you base your vote on a candidate's genitals, things can get confusing.

Other headlines:

3. Kamala Harris: 68.6 (Last week: 1st / 69.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

There are a couple of ways to view the Harris candidacy so far.

#1 - Harris launched with much fanfare and an adoring media. She has since lost her momentum. Mayor Pete and former Mayor Bernie have the hype, and Kamala is fading.

#2 - Harris is playing the long game. She showed she can make an impact with her launch, but realizes that a media "win" ten months before an important primary means nothing. She's working behind the scenes and cleaning up with donations, prominent supporters, and loads of celebrities to execute an Obama style onslaught.

I tend to be in category 2, but I admit that's somewhat speculative. Harris seems to be well positioned to make a serious run, locking up more than double the amount of big Clinton and Obama fundraisers than any other candidate.

One interesting policy development for Harris that may hurt her in the primary is her lack of utter disgust for the nation of Israel. There's basically one acceptable position in a Democratic primary when it comes to Israel, which is that it's a racist and terrorist state, existing only to torture innocent Palestinians.

Certainly no one is going to mistake Harris for Donald Trump, but a paragraph like this is poison to the modern Democratic primary voter:

"Her support for Israel is central to who she is," Harris' campaign communications director, Lily Adams, told McClatchy. "She is firm in her belief that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself, including against rocket attacks from Gaza."

Just portraying the rocket attacks as "attacks" is controversial these days for Democrats, and claiming they are responses to attacks indicates you think the Jeeeewwwwwwwws aren't the ones responsible for the start of every hostility. Heresy!

Someone get Kamala a copy of the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' before she blows her chance to run the free world.

2. Bernie Sanders: 69.2 (Last week: 2nd / 68.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

If Bernie Sanders hates millionaires as much as he claims, he must hate the mirror. As a millionaire, it might surprise some that he donated only 1% to charity. But it shouldn't.

It's entirely consistent with Sandersism to avoid giving to private charity. Why would you? Sanders believes the government does everything better than the private sector. He should be giving his money to the government.

Of course, he doesn't. He takes the tax breaks from the evil Trump tax plan he derides. He spends his money on fabulous vacation homes. He believes in socialism for thee, not for me.

Yes, this is enough to convince the Cardi B's of the world, all but guaranteeing a lock on the rapper-and-former-stripper-that-drugged-and-stole-from-her-prostitution-clients demographic. But can that lack of consistency hold up in front of general election voters?

If Bernie reads this and would like a path to credibility, clear out your bank account and send it here:

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Funds Management Branch
P.O. Box 1328
Parkersburg, WV 26106-1328


Other headlines:

1. Joseph Robinette Biden Jr.: 78.8 (NEW)

Joe has run for president 113 times during his illustrious career, successfully capturing the presidency in approximately zero of his campaigns.

However, when the eternally woke Barack Obama had a chance to elevate a person of color, woman, or anything from the rainbow colored QUILTBAG, he instead chose the oldest, straightest, whitest guy he could find, and our man Robinette was the beneficiary.

Biden has been through a lot, much of it of his own making. Forget about his plagiarism and propensity to get a nostril full of each passing females' hair, his dealings while vice president in both Ukraine and China are a major general election vulnerability— not to mention a legal vulnerability for his children. But hey, win the presidency and you can pardon everyone, right?

His supposed appeal to rust belt voters makes him, on paper, a great candidate to take on Trump. The Clinton loss hinged on about 40,000 voters changing their mind from Hillary to Donald in a few states—the exact areas where victory could possibly be secured by someone named "Middle Class Joe" (as he alone calls himself.)

No one loves Joe Biden more than Joe Biden, and there's a relatively convincing case for his candidacy. But we must remember this unquestionable truth: Joe Biden is not good at running for president.

He's a gaffe machine that churns out mistake after mistake, hoping only to have his flubs excused by his unending charisma. But, will that work without the use of his legendary groping abilities? Only time, and a few dozen unnamed women, will tell.

Also, yes. Robinette is really his middle name.

If only Karl Marx were alive today to see his wackiest ideas being completely paraded around. He would be so proud. I can see him now: Sprawled out on his hammock from REI, fiddling around for the last vegan potato chip in the bag as he binge-watches Academy Awards on his 70-inch smart TV. In between glances at his iPhone X (he's got a massive Twitter following), he sips Pepsi. In his Patagonia t-shirt and NIKE tennis shoes, he writes a line or two about "oppression" and "the have-nots" as part of his job for Google.

His house is loaded with fresh products from all the woke companies. In the fridge, he's got Starbucks, he loves their soy milk. He's got Ben & Jerry's in the freezer. He tells everyone that, if he shaved, he'd use Gillette, on account of the way they stand up for the Have-Nots. But, really, Marx uses Dollar Shave Club because it's cheaper, a higher quality. Secretly, he loves Chic-Fil-A. He buys all his comic books off Amazon. The truth is, he never thought people would actually try to make the whole "communism" thing work.

RELATED: SOCIALISM: This is the most important special we have done

Companies have adopted a form of socialism that is sometimes called woke capitalism. They use their status as corporations to spread a socialist message and encourage people to do their part in social justice. The idea of companies in America using socialism at all is as confusing and ridiculous as a donkey in a prom dress: How did this happen? Is it a joke? Why is nobody bursting out in laughter? How far is this actually going to go? Does someone actually believe that they can take a donkey to prom?

Companies have adopted a form of socialism that is sometimes called woke capitalism.

On the micro level, Netflix has made some socialist moves: The "like/dislike" voting system was replaced after a Netflix-sponsored stand-up special by Amy Schumer received as tidal wave of thumb-downs. This summer, Netflix will take it a step further in the name of squashing dissent by disabling user comments and reviews. And of course most of us share a Netflix account with any number of people. Beyond that, they're as capitalist as the next mega-company.

Except for one area: propaganda. Netflix has started making movie-length advertisements for socialism. They call them "documentaries," but we know better than that. The most recent example is "Knock Down the House," which comes out tomorrow. The 86-minute-long commercial for socialism follows four "progressive Democrat" women who ran in the 2018 midterms, including our favorite socialist AOC.

Here's a snippet from the movie so good that you'll have to fight the urge to wave your USSR flag around the room:

This is what the mainstream media wants you to believe. They want you to be moved. They want the soundtrack to inspire you to go out and do something.

Just look at how the mainstream media treated the recent high-gloss "documentary" about Ilhan Omar, "Time for Ilhan." It received overwhelmingly bad ratings on IMDb and other user-review platforms, but got a whopping 93% on the media aggregator Rotten Tomatoes.

This is exactly what the media wants you to think of when you hear the word socialism. Change. Empowerment. Strength. Diversity. They spend so much energy trying to make socialism cool. They gloss right over the unbelievable death toll. BlazeTV's own Matt Kibbe made a great video on this exact topic.

Any notion of socialism in America is a luxury, made possible by capitalism. The woke companies aren't actually doing anything for socialism. If they're lucky, they might get a boost in sales, which is the only thing they want anyway.

We want to show you the truth. We want to tell you the stories you won't hear anywhere else, not on Netflix, not at some movie festival. We're going to tell you what mainstream media doesn't want you to know.

Look at how much history we've lost over the years. They changed it slowly. But they had to. Because textbooks were out. So people were watching textbooks. It was printed. You would bring the book home. Mom and dad might go through it and check it out. So you had to slowly do things.

Well, they're not anymore. There are no textbooks anymore. Now, you just change them overnight. And we are losing new history. History is being changed in realtime.

RELATED: 'Good Morning Texas' joins Glenn to get an inside look at Mercury Museum

You have to write down what actually is happening and keep a journal. Don't necessarily tell everybody. Just keep a journal for what is happening right now. At some point, our kids won't have any idea of the truth. They will not have any idea of what this country was, how it really happened. Who were the good guys. Who were the bad guys. Who did what.

As Michelle Obama said. Barack knows. We have to change our history. Well, that's exactly what's happening. But it's happening at a very rapid pace.

We have to preserve our history. It is being systematically erased.

I first said this fifteen years ago, people need clay plots. We have to preserve our history as people preserved histories in ancient days, with the dead see scrolls, by putting them in caves in a clay pot. We have to preserve our history. It is being systematically erased. And I don't mean just the history of the founding of our country. I mean the history that's happening right now.

And the history that's happening right now, you're a problem if you're a conservative or a Christian. You are now a problem on the left, if you disagree and fall out of line at all. This is becoming a fascistic party. And you know what a fascist is. It doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or a Republican or an independent. If you believe it's my way or the highway, if you believe that people don't have a right to their opinion or don't have a right to their own life — you could do be a fascist.

Christianity might seem pretty well-protected in the U.S., but that's not the case in many parts of the globe.

On Easter Sunday, suicide bombers made the news for killing 290 innocent Christians in Sri Lanka and injuring another 500. On Tuesday, ISIS claimed responsibility for the massacre. Of course, the Western world mourned this tragic loss of life on a holy day of worship, but we forget that this isn't an isolated incident. Indeed, Christians are discriminated at extreme levels worldwide, and it needs to be brought to light. And whenever we do highlight brutal persecutions such as the Easter bombings in Sri Lanka, we need to call them what they are — targeted attacks against Christians. Sadly, many of our politicians are deathly afraid to do so.

RELATED: Hey media, there is absolutely a war on Christians!

A 2018 Pew Research Center study found that Christians are harassed in 144 countries — the most of any other faith — slightly outnumbering Muslims for the top of the list. Additionally, Open Doors, a non-profit organization that works to serve persecuted Christians worldwide, found in their 2019 World Watch List that over 245 million Christians are seriously discriminated against for their religious beliefs. Sadly, this translates into 4,136 Christians killed and 2,625 either arrested, sentenced, imprisoned, or detained without trial over the year-long study period. And when it comes to churches, those in Sri Lanka were merely added to a long list of 1,266 Christian buildings attacked for their religion.

These breathtaking stats receive very little coverage in the Western world. And there seems to be a profound hesitation from politicians in discussing the issue of persecution against Christians. In the case of the Sri Lanka bombings, there's even a reluctance to use the word "Christian."

After the horrific Pittsburgh Synagogue and New Zealand Mosque shootings, Democrats rightfully acknowledged the disturbing trend of targeted attacks against Jews and Muslims. But some of these same politicians refer to the Sri Lanka bombings with careless ambiguity.

So why is it so hard for our leaders to acknowledge the persecutions Christians face?

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, for instance, certainly did — calling the incursions "attacks on Easter worshippers." Understandably, the term confused and frustrated many Christians. Although, supporters of these politicians argued the term was appropriate since a recent Associated Press report used it, and it was later picked up by a variety of media outlets, including Fox News. However, as more Democrats like 2020 presidential candidate Julián Castro and Rep. Dan Kildee continued to use the phrase "Easter worshippers," it became clear that these politicians were going out of their way to avoid calling a spade a spade.

So why is it so hard for our leaders to acknowledge the persecutions Christians face? For starters, Christianity in democratic countries like the U.S. is seen differently than in devastated countries like Somalia. According to Pew Research, over 70% of Americans are Christian, with 66% of those Christians being white and 35% baby boomers. So while diverse Christians from all over the world are persecuted for their faith—in the U.S., Christians are a dominant religion full of old white people. This places Christians at the bottom of progressives' absurd intersectional totem poll, therefore leaving little sympathy for their cause. However, the differing experiences of Christians worldwide doesn't take away from the fact that they are unified in their beliefs.

By refusing to name the faith of the Sri Lankan martyrs, politicians are sending a message that they have very little, if no, concern about the growing amount of persecution against Christians worldwide.

Martyrs don't deserve to be known as "Easter worshippers." They should be known by the Christian faith they gave their lives for. Decent politicians need to call the tragedy in Sri Lanka what it is — a vicious attack on the Christian faith.

Patrick Hauf (@PatrickHauf) is a writer for Young Voices and Vice President of Lone Conservative. His work can be found in the Washington Examiner, Townhall, FEE, and more.