California voters sent Dianne Feinstein to the U.S. Senate in 1992 when she won a special election to fill the seat vacated by Pete Wilson, who left the Senate to become California’s governor. At 85 years old, she is currently the oldest-serving member of the Senate. Running for reelection in 2018, she has already won five previous contests for the high office of senator and is expected to win a new six-year term.
A hardcore leftist, Feinstein can be counted on by socialists and liberals to support legislation that ignores the Constitution she has so frequently sworn to uphold. During the recent confirmation hearings for Judge Brett Kavanaugh for a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, Feinstein made several statements that were simply not true, even termed deliberate lies by some. Had a conservative senator issued similar, or even lesser, falsehoods during a confirmation hearing for a leftist judge, the mass media would have screamed for his scalp, and used the falsehoods to harm his prospects for the seat on the high court.
What were Feinstein’s falsehoods? She sought to create the illusion during her questioning of Kavanaugh that she was responsible for an “assault weapons” ban that “essentially prohibited the transfer, sale and manufacture of assault weapons.” The fact is that her so-called “ban” did not impact the spread of assault weapons as she claimed. They continued to be purchased and owned by millions of Americans.
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
While seeking to characterize Judge Kavanaugh as being unconcerned about armed attacks occurring at America’s schools, Feinstein pointed to “hundreds and hundreds of school shootings” in our nation. Yet, there have been nowhere near even one hundred such shootings. Judge Kavanaugh laments each of these attacks while Senator Feinstein sought to paint him as being unconcerned about any such shootings.
Not satisfied with her falsities regarding guns and their effect on safety at schoolhouses, Feinstein issued grossly distorted misinformation about abortion prior to Roe v. Wade, claiming: “Deaths from illegal abortions in this country ran between 200,000 and 1.2 million — so a lot of people died from illegal abortions during that period.” The truth, as countered even by the abortion rights supporters at Guttmacher Institute during 2003, estimated that 200,000 to 1.2 million illegal abortions, not deaths, occurred in the 1950s and 1960s. Quite a difference! And Feinstein failed to mention the 60 millions infants slaughtered in the womb in the aftermath of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision she so intensely supports.
During many of her years in the Senate, Feinstein served as the chairperson of the Senate Intelligence Committee. During 20 of those years, she had a Chinese spy serving as her driver. He could have overheard and later reported conversations she had while in the car. If she chose to leave her phone or laptop in the vehicle while attending to legitimate business, the driver could have downloaded whatever those devices contained. Also, as a close aide, this relatively low-level employee would have likely possessed access to her office or residences into which he could have left a listening device. The possibilities of this individual gaining important information and sending it on the Chinese government are virtually endless.
For 18 months, a Special Counsel has been eagerly looking for evidence that the Trump presidential campaign colluded with Russia to defeat Hillary Clinton’s run for the White House in 2016. He and a large staff have found no such evidence. But, if they were instead tasked to look into possible Chinese espionage related to Senator Feinstein, they wouldn’t need 18 months to find some. Feinstein has even acknowledged the infiltration of a Chinese spy into her employ, though she quickly downplayed the significance of such a potential breach of security.
If Feinstein were an anti-Establishment Republican, the entire nation would have been told of the breach. And if she were a conservative questioning a liberal judge with lies and misinformation during an official hearing, the uproar from the Establishment-controlled mass media would have been enormous. All of this clearly shows that liberals and socialists are protected. The Establishment — call it the Deep State, as many have begun to do — protects its assets and targets its foes.
