The Skinny on Media Leftinistas

I admit to occasionally watching CNN, but only so you never have to. I also have a part time therapist for it. Kids, don’t do that. Well, all their antics are not new except they are upping them to another level. Hey, it’s what they do.

Hard to believe though that 6 months or a year ago, resistance to the president — as taboo as it was even to say then — was everything liberals were against. Suddenly, they are certified experts on presidential resistance, no holds barred. They’ve gone into full-blown government-resistance mode. This from the very people who depend on it most.

So CNN sent reporters out to talk to people in America, which they are now wont to to do. You couldn’t have paid them to talk to the people before. Remember those phony interview narratives with the Tea Party? They could not hide their disgust.

First, reporters ceremoniously went to speak to Trump supporters. You know, just to gawk at their mistaken nature, perhaps to blame them, and probe their election conscience for signs of second thoughts. Then to mock them, in the media way, finally in editing. Then portray them like zoo animals. (which supporters are fully aware of, but don’t care)

To compliment that, CNN had on air interviews with JD Vance, author of Hillbilly Elegy — cultural expert of working people and Appalachia — in its panel discussions. To paraphrase, ‘We must understand those people, but only so far.’ (wrong as they are)

But in this latest episode it sent a team to California, LA area, Maryland, Baltimore area, then Massachusetts, only this time to talk to the voices of the resistance in blue states. You knew they would get around to the apologists for the Resistance, diehard anti-Trumpers and opposition. They sound just as grieved as the night of the election results. Whaah.

Now Trump is being called unAmerican… so that’s the reason. Oh, we couldn’t say that about Obama. You know, we were mocked even for opposing Obama. Now they are justified to resist everything Trump as a sacred opposition. Actually, they blame Trump for their hatred. Ingenious. Gee, we should have thought of that; we might have gotten further. Maybe limiting Captain O to one term. Yet remember how McConnell was mocked, over and over, just for wanting to make Obama a one-term president?.

The Resistance say as long “as he is in office, they are going to keep fighting at [Trump’s] door.” No hatred there. But hey, at least I am not blaming their bitter hatred on racism because Trump is white. No, they do that themselves, The Left claims they are against white supremacist policies. Who knew law and order and treating everyone the same was supremacist? So they redefine things as they go along. But that is what they do.

When Steve Bannon called them the opposition party, there was a good reason.

RightRing | Bullright

Obama’s preface, in the unspoken

While Obama is still drafting his book, I’ll practice my satire in writing what should be his preface, if only someone slipped him a dose of truth serum. One thing you can count on is that his finished excuse-a-log won’t look like this. (unless you read between lines)

To the reader

After wearing the nom de plume of President of the United States for eight years like no one else ever– because I’ve always been sort of confused about my real name anyway — I feel I owe it to the people, who had the pleasure of putting me in that office, to tell them how right they were to bestow their blind allegiance in me.

They, and you the reader, will be eternally the better for it. Always keep believing.

No longer being able to use that particular POTUS title will not stop me from showing the same arrogance and narcissism that I always… well, that got me this far.

To prove how correct I am, my first big speaking engagement is set at 400 thousand, and the price will only go up from there. My book deal commanded an historic 60 million for my and Michele’s books. And what a bargain they got. I feel obligated to tell you in case you were surprised at the size of the number. I’m projected to be on course to being worth about 250 million in 15 years — by conservative estimates.

It was always my opinion that I should tell you what I think you need to know. And being that I have been entrusted with the sole liberty to write the history of this country, everything else should be ignored. You also should really appreciate the modest price of this book because only I know how much I spent creating it.

Enjoy.

Now that I think of it, his version of murdering the truth will probably be far worse. But his sycophants will lap it up because to admit his allergy to the truth, at this point, destroys the gigantic myth of his entire legacy.

RightRing | Bullright

Trump would beat Clinton on popular vote

Daily Wire [excerpt]

The one consolation Hillary Clinton continues to cling to after her stunning upset at the hands of Donald Trump in November is the fact that she won the popular vote, by about 2 percent (48 – 46), which though ultimately meaningless in the electoral college system, Democrats have attempted to hold up as “proof” that Trump is “not their president.” But buried within a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll is the delicious little nugget that if a rematch were to be held today, Clinton would apparently be stripped of even that moral victory.

The new WashPost/ABC News poll found that while 46 percent of those surveyed said they voted for Clinton and 43 percent said they voted for Trump, asked how they would vote if given a second chance, respondents ended up giving Trump the popular vote win in the hypothetical rematch, 43 – 40.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/12265/obama-admits-trump-caught-him-guard-blames-bubble-james-barrett

So instead of wondering why Trump’s support has not weakened, the winner of the election, why don’t they ask where Hillary’s support has gone? It’s melting, at the time she clearly is  plotting a rematch for 2020.  Where have all the Clinton flowers gone?

Meanwhile, Obama told ABC News that he blamed “the bubble,” or the job itself, for the reason he underestimated Trump and his popularity.

“[T]he bubble is the bubble,” he told Stephanopoulos. “And, I think we’ve done a pretty good job staying in touch with the American people. But at a certain point you can’t help but lose some feel for what’s on the ground because you’re not on the ground.”

The problem was not the job, but the person in that job.

No, Obama, its not losing touch with the American people if you never were in touch with the people to begin with. Yet at the same time, he was clearly delusional in his support for Hillary. He used his job “in the bubble” as the predicate to elect Hillary Clinton — who seems to have her own “bubble” of disconnect.

Of course, Obama has yet to admit that in effect he lost to Trump, because Obama was so invested in his legacy and Hillary’s win. Instead, “the bubble did it”.

But the media all carps about Trump’s low numbers? Yet the Dems have still not realized elections do have consequences.

Susan Rice’s road to fortune

I would like to know why Susan Rice hasn’t been unmasked the same way she did others, like was done to Michael Flynn? Where was all the vetting information on Rice?

She was famous as the go to liar for hire under Obama, a job that paid political dividends but the salary wasn’t close to 7 figures. How come more attention hasn’t been on her, I mean aside from scandals she was instrumental in?

So how did she go from a nest egg of 20 million to 50 million in 5 years? Inquiring minds would like to know. Measly government and a UN diplomat salary doesn’t pay that well. Great work if you can get it, eh?

Rice only spent a couple years in middle management in the private sector. Other than that she’s been “all in” in politics and government — or public service as they like to call it.

So make 30 million in around five years? I thought only Clintons could do that.

See unmasking on Kevin Jackson’s The Black Sphere

Let’s just call her ‘Spreadsheet Suzie’

Report: Susan Rice Ordered ‘Spreadsheets’ of Trump Campaign Calls

by Joel B. Pollak4 Apr 2017 | Breitbart

President Barack Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, allegedly ordered surveillance of Donald Trump’s campaign aides during the last election, and maintained spreadsheets of their telephone calls, the Daily Caller reports.

The alleged spreadsheets add a new dimension to reports on Sunday and Monday by blogger Mike Cernovich and Eli Lake of Bloomberg News that Rice had asked for Trump aides’ names to be “unmasked” in intelligence reports. The alleged “unmasking” may have been legal, but may also have been part of an alleged political intelligence operation to disseminate reports on the Trump campaign widely throughout government with the aim of leaking them to the press.

At the time that radio host Mark Levin and Breitbart News compiled the evidence of surveillance, dissemination, and leaking — all based on mainstream media reports — the mainstream media dismissed the story as a “conspiracy theory.”

Now, however, Democrats are backing away from that allegation, and from broader allegations of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, as additional details of the Obama administration’s alleged surveillance continue to emerge.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/04/report-susan-rice-ordered-spreadsheets-trump-campaign-calls/

Oh no, nothing to see here, media can go back to sleep. Spreadsheet Suzie’s got this!

More on another Breitbart article on Rice’s interview with Andrea Mitchel (lovefest)

“I leaked nothing to nobody, and never have, and never would.”

Rice: “I can’t get into any specific reports … what I can say is there is an established process.”

Well, so there’s an “established process” for surveillance, I take it?
And Spreadsheet Suzie was right on it.

Unnecessary Senate intelligence press conference

The Senate committee announced their ongoing investigation into all things Russia in a press conference. That comes as media and Democrats went on jihad against the Congressional intelligence committee. Certainly no coincidence. Senators Burr and Warner turned on the media charm by taking questions. (or charm offensive)

[CSPAN]We”thought that it was time for our first public update of the Senate investigation into Russian involvement in the elections,” Burr said. Let me just say that we cannot say enough what the mission of the Senate committee is: which is to look at all activities that Russia might have taken to alter or influence the 2016 elections in the United States.

In addition to that, the mission of the committee is to look at any campaign contacts from either committee with Russian government, with Russian government officials that might have in any way influenced shape or form the election process. We take that very seriously, it’s not something that can be done quickly and, when you look at our committee, it is in fact our oversight role that we function in every single day. This is just on a little larger scale.

For those that might think or have suggested that this is outside our expertise, let me remind you that the last public investigation that we did was the Senate investigation into Benghazi. We devoted tree professional staff into that investigation. It took one year and, in comparison to the public hearings that happened in the House, our report [came out] much quicker than what they were and I think are consistent with, in fact, what the House process looked like at the end.”

(Oops, for a minute there I thought he was going to say investigation into Obama. No attempt to upstage the House investigations there. Under the bus they go. )

But what did we learn? Next to nothing. They appeared to be saying “hey, look at us…. we’re the real investigating agency here.” Oh, and then they went into their dramatic prose about how big this investigation event is. Historical. Just the way we like to see an investigation formally kicked off, telling us how monumentally important their endeavor is. Then they praised their own skill and accomplishment — to contrast with the debacle media turned the Congressional investigation into.

Well, I only have one question that supersedes all others. If the Inspector Clouseau’s of the Senate are so good, proper and excellent, then what happened to their integrity and efforts over the last eight years? That is like praising Comey’s credibility — who is doing his own sequestered investigation, which he announced.

I’ll agree that, in the zero-sum game, last week’s coverage over Nunez teed up the confidence coup for the Senate to extort. Like it or not, it is a zero-sum process.

Since we are in a state of Constitutional constipation, and everything is so unprecedented serious and outrageous now, where was all that unprecedented work over the last eight years? I’m still waiting for the investigations into what was going on in the DOJ, IRS, EPA, and the State Department that approved uranium rights to Russia. Time constraints?

Do you smell what the elites in the Senate are cooking?

Now they grandstand on the duties and their self-anointed integrity. “You can trust us.” Well, then Burr went the additional yardage in saying that they would not be doing a witch hunt. So with these great investigators the right couldn’t even manage to provide a decent witch hunt, even for entertainment, in the last eight years. And what they did with/to Benghazi? Forget-about-it. Case closed.

Now we are in prime time Constitutional constipation to restore our confidence in their deliberate and orchestrated processes. (Sigh, dramatic eye-roll) The record be damned, full-speed ahead. Remember during Benghazi, the investigation was the problem. And it did not get widespread cooperation. It’s what the left and media attacked.

And if everyone stretched out Benghazi for so long — through mid-terms and into the next election cycle — how long can they stretch this out?

RightRing | Bullright

MSM meets cable, or the Hannitization of America … or not

CAUTION: this content requires the willing suspension of disbelief.

Ted Koppel gets Sean Hannity on and tells him, and Fox, he is bad for America.

But wait, ol’ Teddy has kind of a habit of doing that
He told O’Reilly he pretty much ruined the country. (very optimistic)

So Teddy does have that going for him. But then, to be fair to Koppel, he delivered similar commentary about Rush Limbaugh and others. Many others.

What is interesting, though, is what he blames. He accuses Rush for starting it, but that his rise(creation) was only because of the absence of the Fairness Doctrine when that ended. Ah, so ol’ Ted has confidence in the Fairness Doctrine being the cop on the beat.

Well, we know how that worked don’t we?

It was used just as much for censorship as for fairness. And MSM personas like him would be protected as knights of the fairness castle. Everything flowing through them. So Koppel would like to put free speech, and press, back in the bottle if he could… but he can’t.

Thus, he now goes on the circuit railing against these opinionators and pundits as the villains of the news media. No, Ted, you did a fine enough job in ruining journalism, media, America, and confidence in media all by yourself.

Sorry Teddy, the 1st Amendment did not include the Fairness Doctrine, and I’ve also checked all amendments since. Nada. But nice try — even if it sounds so official.

If you wanted Pravda, you could always move to Russia where government will gladly be the arbiter of what news media can say. Got that, Ted?

(Instructions… now grasp handle and press downward to flush.)

Note: I will say he has real points on his “Lights Out” book on a cyber attack and grid concerns. Yet his lights already seem to be out on news channels and media.

(**correction: Koppel interviewed Hannity at length, and chopped it to about 2 minutes)

Seeing is not believing, St Patrick’s snipe

I’m seeing the Dems and media in a frenzy daily to find something, anything, to blame on Trump. This is proof that seeing does not always equate with believing.

The media calls itself adversarial press. That would be an understatement, and probably require redefinition as hostile.

But even St Patrick’s Day cannot pass without a chance for MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell to take a swipe at Trump.

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell: Irish-Americans Working for Trump ‘Disgrace Their Heritage’

BY: Alex Griswold — March 17, 2017 | Washington Free Beacon

Irish-Americans on St. Patrick’s Day that they were betraying their heritage if they worked for President Donald Trump.

O’Donnell, who is an Irish-American, tweeted out on Friday that, “The Irish-Americans working for Trump disgrace their heritage.”

O’Donnell’s tweet links to an op-ed from the New York Times shaming the Trump administration’s Irish-Americans employees for being insufficiently empathic towards to the plight of immigrants.

“We Irish are not Know Nothings. We know something important: what it’s like to be feared, to be discriminated against, to be stereotyped,” wrote columnist Fintan O’Toole.

Among the notable Irish-Americans working for Trump are Vice President Mike Pence, White House counselor Kellyanne Conway, and chief strategist Steve Bannon.

Original: http://freebeacon.com/politics/msnbcs-lawrence-odonnell-irish-americans-working-for-trump-disgrace-their-heritage/

Well, Lawrence, mission accomplished. One day Rachael Maddow makes a non-bombshell tax revelation, and then along comes O’Donnell to wrap in Irish immigration.

No more shamrocks for you, Lawrence. And lay off the caffeine Maddow, it won’t pump up your ratings.

Ying and Yang on Obama vs. Trump

At this point, all reporting by mainstream media must be questioned. There is no benefit of belief. Disbelief is the instinctive reaction for much of the public.

No wonder Trump took a pass on the WH Correspondents’ Dinner. Good move.

Just over a week ago McCabe told Reince Priebus that reporting on Russia was wrong. Remember they raised questions about Priebus even asking the FBI or Comey to help correct the record about the claims.

But James Comey and the FBI said they could not or would not do anything to correct those reports. And they said they would have no comment about it.

Here is a subsequent NYT report (Feb 23) on the details

WASHINGTON — White House chief of staff Reince Priebus asked a top FBI official to dispute media reports that President Donald Trump’s campaign advisers were frequently in touch with Russian intelligence agents during the election, a White House official said late Thursday.

The official said Priebus’ request came after the FBI told the White House it believed a New York Times report last week describing those contacts was not accurate. As of Thursday, the FBI had not stated that position publicly and there was no indication it planned to.

The New York Times reported that U.S. agencies had intercepted phone calls last year between Russian intelligence officials and members of Trump’s 2016 campaign team.

Priebus’ discussion with FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe sparked outrage among some Democrats, who said he was violating policies intended to limit communications between the law enforcement agency and the White House on pending investigations.

“The White House is simply not permitted to pressure the FBI to make public statements about a pending investigation of the president and his advisers,” said Michigan Rep. John Conyers, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. …/

The FBI would not say whether it had contacted the White House about the veracity of the Times report.

Forward to Trump’s accusations of Obama’s administration wiretapping the Trump Tower. The president suggests it, then they demand proof in unison. Yawn.

So they have no proof of collusion with Russia over hacking into emails, ostensibly to “influence our election.” But they go on talking about it as if it were so.

Then we have these reports on the surveillance and investigation of Trump over many months now. Yet as soon as Trump questions that it is dismissed as if there is nothing there. We know it was going on. There was an ongoing investigation, right?

For media, how can they complain that there is no wiretapping surveillance issue at the very time they don’t question the existence on the Russian claims. Now Clapper goes out to say there was no FISA warrant and no evidence of collusion, of Trump’s campaign, with the Russians. Why are we still investigating and taking the collusion as if it were established? Yet they decline to take seriously the wiretap, surveillance claims. Really?

As to Comey, he cannot correct media reports about the collusion claims. But as soon as wiretap claims were leveled, he demands DOJ correct them, then does it himself. His reason was to protect the integrity of the FBI. Again, really? He says he is “incredulous” at the accusation. Within weeks he does two completely opposite things.

Apparently he doesn’t care about the integrity of the presidency. I can’t imagine that going on under Obama. I suppose, in that case, the public would have a right to know. He did come out to make statements clearing Hillary. Now, we don’t have a reason to know that a presidential campaign or members of it were under surveillance. When is it illegal to speak to Russians or their diplomat anyway?

In NRO Andrew McCarthy states about wiretaps that:

A traditional wiretap requires evidence amounting to probable cause of commission of a crime. A FISA wiretap requires no showing of a crime, just evidence amounting to probable cause that the target of the wiretap is an agent of a foreign power. (A foreign power can be another country or a foreign terrorist organization.) Read more

All right, how would they investigate the Russian connections (or lack thereof) without some sort of surveillance? Couple that with a former CIA chief back in August endorsing Hillary Clinton. He used his intelligence credentials to brandish this op-ed claim:

“In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.”

Coincidentally, that is the same definition used in a FISA court that a person is either a foreign power or agent of a foreign power.

He closed with this prescient note: “My training as an intelligence officer taught me to call it as I see it. This is what I did for the C.I.A. This is what I am doing now.”

He lent his expertise and experience as the justification for saying this about Trump and endorsing Hillary. Using that word “agent” of Russian Federation is significant. When have you ever heard a candidate called that, with no proof? All based on his professional career, so he claimed. That was a few months before the supposed wiretap.

They use the bio: “Michael J. Morell was the acting director and deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2010 to 2013.”

The same Mike Morell equated the Russian hacking with the 9/11 terrorist attacks. And as Breitbart reported, he now works for Philip Reines, longtime Clinton aide and loyalist. Let’s also remember that Morell was involved in the writing of the Benghazi talking points.

The investigation report on Benghazi determined, in contradiction to Morell’s and Obama officials’ claims, “the talking points were “deliberately” edited to “protect the State Department” — whatever Morell claimed.

“These allegations accuse me of taking these actions for the political benefit of President Obama and then secretary of state Clinton. These allegations are false,” Morell said.

So the report directly contradicts what he said in testimony.

He recently told a reporter in December that:

“To me, and this is to me not an overstatement, this [Russia hacking] is the political equivalent of 9/11. It is huge and the fact that it hasn’t gotten more attention from the Obama administration, Congress, and the mainstream media, is just shocking to me.”

Then they also injected the story about a dossier of BS that threw in all kinds of claims. That made its way into presidential briefings, of Obama and Trump, claiming it involved blackmailable info. So they back fed an unsubstantiated report (political op-research) into intelligence, with the help of McCain dropping it on FBI’s doorstep. Then it was surfaced to the top of intelligence, into the PDB.

Think, the Obama administration had wiretapped (*correction: subpoenaed phone records) James Rosen and his family’s phones. So far, many officials have said there is nothing showing proof Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians. Yet nothing prevents Democrats and some in the media from saying that Russia hacked or interfered with the election, when there is no proof of either. Then insinuating that it is connected to Trump.

RightRing | Bullright

Goose and gander: Obama vs. Trump

Okay, “Russians interfered in our election” is the talking point. I get it. It’s the outrage of the decade, sure. Interference in our elections or policies is offensive. That’s the big issue.

Then why is Obama’s former presidency trying to sabotage the new sitting president somehow not a problem? Not a concern? How could you ignore that if you were so worried about the sovereignty of something like elections and the stability of our government?

News flash, elections were never really threatened. If you cannot weather some secondary outside probing, then your election system is really frail and in trouble. Hearing them say "our Democracy was at risk" is a huge leap. Russia could have destroyed our democracy. Then why is sabotage and undermining by the former administration not a threat?

RightRing | Bullright

Paid Obamascare trolls swarm web

Obamascare: 60% of online Obamacare defenders ‘paid to post’ hits on critics

By Paul Bedard • 2/25/17

A majority of online and social media defenders of Obamacare are professionals who are “paid to post,” according to a digital expert.

“Sixty percent of all the posts were made from 100 profiles, posting between the hours of 9 and 5 Pacific Time,” said Michael Brown. “They were paid to post.”

His shocking analysis was revealed on this weekend’s Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson, broadcast on Sinclair stations and streamed live Sunday at 9:30 a.m. Her upcoming show focuses on information wars and Brown was describing what happened when he had a problem with Obamacare and complained online. [more]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obamascare-60-of-online-obamacare-defenders-paid-to-post-hits-on-critics/article/2615774#.

Funny how media all care about Russia trying to influence the elections and politics but don’t pay any attention to dopey Obama trolls trying to manipulate public opinion. They do care about what conservatives do though. A real grass movement… of green.

Blocked and Rolled Media – Press

You know it’s a bad day for media when they have to report that they’ve been blocked by WH press dept.  You know,  this may be the kind of prohibition that I could get behind.

[NYT] WASHINGTON — Journalists from The New York Times and two other news organizations were prohibited from attending a briefing by President Trump’s press secretary on Friday, a highly unusual breach of relations between the White House and its press corps.

Reporters from The Times, CNN and Politico were not allowed to enter the West Wing office of the press secretary, Sean M. Spicer, for the scheduled briefing. Aides to Mr. Spicer allowed in reporters from only a handpicked group of news organizations that, the White House said, had been previously confirmed to attend.

Organizations allowed in included Breitbart News, the One America News Network and The Washington Times, all with conservative leanings. Journalists from ABC, CBS, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, and Fox News also attended.

More: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/us/politics/white-house-sean-spicer-briefing.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0

Crying and whining media is offended. They ought to check their press privilege.

ABC tries to quell Shadow fires

Well, apparently ABC has taken on its wings the task of fact-checker, and accusation debunker. So move over liberal Snopes, Fact-Check, ABC wants a piece of the action.

Case in point: they are now chasing accusations conservatives have long proposed and bandied around that Obama will run a shadow government — feeding a potential coup of Trump’s White House. But those are more than rumors.

Now I would not go into all the reasons for the support of the shadow idea. Obama is certainly doing nothing to put out the accusation fires. No, in fact, he feeds them. The more you see his old guard politicos or officials out in the media, while the burrowed-in Obama loyalists leak from within the state, the more valid you have to take these charges.

Obama continually lectured people to stop believing what they see, only pay attention to what he or his media sycophants say. It worked at least on 30% of the people.

Here is ABC lecturing us not to believe the stories of a shadow government and its coup underway. What other reason would there be for the shadow entity existence, but to undermine the sitting president and his administration? A lot of work for nothing.

No, former President Obama isn’t planning a coup against President Trump

By RYAN STRUYK — Feb 22, 2017 | Abc News

A fake news story making the rounds on Facebook claims in the headline that Congress is concerned that former President Barack Obama might make a “treasonous coup attempt” against President Trump — and that they’re taking steps to stop him.

It’s not true.

Though the headline screams “BREAKING: Congress Moves to STOP Obama’s Treasonous Coup Attempt Against Trump,” only parts of the story are based on facts. It’s done by seeding the story with quotes that are true, but are twisted out of context.

The original version of the article, posted on a website called Angry Patriot, has 38,000 shares. And since this fake news story’s text has been posted more than two-dozen times on other webpages, its false headline has been shared even more on social media networks.

One of the other sites, Trump Media, has a disclaimer page: “All the information on this website is published in good faith … The Trump Media does not make any warranties about the completeness, reliability and accuracy of this information.” Neither The Trump Media nor Angry Patriot sites responded to requests for comment from ABC News…./

The key point is that there’s no tie between the leaked information from U.S. intelligence agencies and former President Obama, as this fake news headline suggests.

[much more]

More: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-obama-planning-coup-president-trump/story?id=45665594

Notice the story they are worried about is the mere accusation of a shadow government, not what it is doing. Its actions are not the story, only our interpretation of them — or what Obama’s allies do to disrupt and obstruct Trump.

Add to this the protest roll out of the “Indivisible” movement — started by 3 former Congressional Democrat staffers. Now credentialed by media as the beauty of democracy in action. (opposed to “tea-baggers,” remember?) All under a guise of Resistance.

I don’t know about you but simply stating it is not true just does not do it, at all, for me. To believe Obama is not going to take advantage of every speck of power and opportunity he can pilfer under a rock ‘requires the willing suspension of disbelief’.

This is no longer the lamestream media pretending to be objective but allying itself with deep state and all the various political operatives on the left, in the way it only dreamed it could do before — for a common end But since they share common allegiances, generally to Obama’s legacy, well, all hands on deck now. ‘We are all agents of the shadow state now.’ Shorthand, we are all Obama now. And they are all radicals now — fellow radical subversives, hell bent on undermining the administration and its goals and agenda.

Yet we are asked to believe all the accusations about Russia involvement in the Trump campaign/administration. But a lack of evidence for all their charges only adds fuel to their accusations. They attack away. So in their elite view: it’s one big Russia and Trump conspiracy, that is the problem. But Obama’s and the left’s shadow state working to undermine the administration is just a big bogus theory? Right.

RightRing | Bullright

Enemy within: Media War on the People

Two statements made news over the weekend. And they were set off by a Trump tweet which you’d think spoke for itself. Maybe these people are not even smart enough to read a tweet and comprehend it.

McCain adds his two cents. You’d never catch him putting it in a tweet.That’s beneath him. He’d much rather run to the Mainstream media wolves to vent.

“A fundamental part of that new world order was a free press. I hate the press. I hate you especially. But the fact is we need you.”

“I am afraid that we would lose so much of our individual liberties over time. That’s how dictators get started.”

“When you look at history,” McCain said, “the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press. And I’m not saying that President Trump is trying to be a dictator. I’m just saying we need to learn the lessons of history.”

He tried to clarify that he was not saying Trump is a dictator. Just referencing it.

Senator Graham cracker has upped the flame by declaring in Germany that 2017 will be “the year Congress kicks Russia in the ass.” (…will they go Obamacare on Russia?)

MSM had its view, from CNN to Chris Wallace on Fox, that they don’t like that talk. Oh, too bad! Get a grip on yourselves. Why is it when the people say something, it’s either disturbing or outrageous? Then when Trump says it, it is downright “dangerous.”

Just look at media, or the press. Adversarial press is the word they like to use. But they’ve gone from biased to adversarial, to opposition, to cheerleaders for obstruction. They are in protest of Trump every day.

Then there is the “I am a Muslim too” protest. Followed by the “Not My President’s day” — impeach him protest. In Britain, elected officials are in protest against Trump receiving a state visit in UK. No state visit for you, Donald! Stay away from our Queen. People in the UK are actually betting how long Trump will last as president?

So President’s Day for Trump means national protest day. Well, every day is protest day for Trump. We have sports’ and Patriots-players’ protests. Pope Francis had more criticism for our domestic and immigration policy. Francis, tear down your wall!

Now getting down to the crux of that media’s war on the people. That is basically what it comes down to. Media doesn’t like that being said or that language? Oh well. Stop acting like the enemy of the people then. Even before Trump won, the media and liberals began attacking Trump’s supporters. It’s a typical leftist tactic to blame and ostracize the supporters — as a basket of deplorables and irredeemables.

Why is media the enemy of the people? Well, this their seventh year of really proving it. Where was this adversarial press for the past eight years? Where was Media mafia on Benghazi.We still don’t know what Obama or officials were doing?

Did they ask probing questions about the Iran deal? No.Did Media care the IRS was targeting Obama’s political opponents. Did they cover Fast and Furious? Did they cry outrage when Obama’s campaign talked to Iran before getting in office? Or call for an independent consel-investigation? Did media pursue Obama’s Russia flexibility?

Did media sympathize with or cover Tea Parties? No, they attacked them relentlessly.

Media despised anyone who was not onboard with Obama; they mocked and probed them and kept reminding everyone that Obama is the president.

Adversarial press? Hardly, they were his biggest cheerleaders. Now press is just more the loyal opposition and the middle man between boycotting, dissenting politicians and the Resistance — which are all really the same thing. Rrah-rah!

They went from Obama’s sycophant press to just the unabashed enemy of the people.

RightRing | Bullright

2008: Obama campaign talks to Iran — and ghost of Ted Kennedy

Get ready for a short trip in the way-back machine to 2008.
Obama’s campaign had a series of communications with both Iran and Syria.

Obama Held Secret Talks With Iran, Syria Weeks Before Election

Malkah Fleisher, 02/02/09 | Arutz Sheva
U.S. President Barack Obama employed representatives to hold secret high-level talks with Iran and Syria months prior to his election as president.

United States President Barack Obama employed representatives and experts to hold secret high-level talks with Iran and Syria months prior to his election as president, organizers of the meetings told Agence France Presse on Monday.

Over the past few months, Obama campaign and election officials, as well as nuclear non-proliferation experts, had several “very, very high-level” contacts with Iranian leaders, according to Jeffrey Boutwell, executive director for the U.S. branch of the Pugwash group, a Nobel Prize-winning international organization of scientists. Former defense secretary William Perry, who served in Obama’s election campaign, also participated in some of the meetings, which included discussions on Iran’s nuclear program and the Arab-Israeli conflict. …/

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad affirmed the reports Monday that Obama officials had repeated contact with his country for some time prior to the U.S. elections. “Dialogue started some weeks ago in a serious manner through personalities who are close to the administration and who were dispatched by the administration,” Assad said. ../ Read more

So guess who was talking to Iran months before taking office? I don’t even want to get on the Iranian Valerie Jarrett off-ramp. No SNL skits, only a “thrill up the leg” to media.

Hearings, investigations, wire taps, outrage, Independent Counsel…. don’t be silly.

While we are in the way back machine, let us go a few decades back to 1983. Good ol’ lion of the Senate, Mary Jo Kopechne killer, Ted Kennedy made his grand invitation to the Soviet’s Communist Party, and Yuri Andropov, to come intervene in our election. A quid pro quo. Senator Kennedy was trying to challenge Reagan and needed an edge.

American Thinker

The Democrats are desperately diverting attention away from their rigging the nomination fight by charging that Russia is interfering in our election. But there was a time when going to Moscow to help defeat the other party didn’t seem to disturb Democrats. In fact, with the help of friendly media, the entire incident has been sent to the memory hole. Once upon a time it was revealed, but nobody outside of the conservative ghetto remembers.

So he promised Soviets wide access to the American media to make their case. But how would he assure Soviets of such unprecedented access? Well, Ted won’t be talking, nor anyone else either. Maybe we could ask his media friends? Investigations? FBI probe? Logan Act? Surely you jest.

Gen. Mattis has heavy lift

Seems Pentagon needs its own purge clean out. Lots of resistance in certain places remains, loyal to Obama, to deal with in fixing the military and budget.

Mattis Being Obstructed By Pentagon Traitors Loyal To Obama, Not America

Posted on February 17, 2017 by Rick Wells

Secretary of Defense General James Mattis knows that there are huge problems facing our military after eight years of neglect and deliberate sabotage by the Obama anti-American globalists. He knows that we have a serious military readiness problem, exemplified in a report last week by The Vice Joint Chiefs of Staff which highlighted our serious lack of military readiness.

House Armed Services Committee chairman Mac Thornberry expressed his distress on Thursday, saying, “I am concerned that … to fix these problems [it] is going to take a lot more money, and yet a lot of the folks who are coming up with the budget to fix them are the same people who have been fighting every step of the way against our efforts to fix these problems.”

http://rickwells.us/mattis-obstructed-pentagon-traitors-loyal-obama-america/

After thinking about this Obama plague on our government, I would compare it to a work slowdown. They can be debilitating on a workforce and mission. All you need is an obstructive minority to slow it down. And radical one with Obama supporters.

Seems the General is dragging some intentional dead weight. Resistance, soft coup, insurrection or whatever you call it. Makes Reagan and the air traffic controllers look like child’s play. This should not be tolerated any more than they were. Defining times call for defining measures. Their dress rehearsal was gov-shutdown under Obama. Remember those games? Obama’s politicization of government was only a trial run.

Stuff A Sock In It Media

One basic rule for Trump should be: if a question is on a matter pending further investigation, then NO comment or answer should be given. When in Rome….

Don’t like that? Then take it up with Obama. No comment was the widely accepted and understood gold standard for the last 8 yrs. Why change policy now?

Since they have most of Trump’s first three weeks and campaign under investigation, well, suck an egg media. You want investigations? Fine, then you cannot have both.

While we are on the subject, Supreme Court nominees do not have to answer a question on something that may come before the High Court in the future. It’s the standard, stupid.

So all those questions about Russia and Russophobia, take a hike media. Besides the narrative is getting a little old. And questions relating to Trump’s campaign? That was the campaign, we’ve all moved on. We’re past the campaign now, do try to keep up.

I actually heard a CNN anchor say that Trump should never reply to something with “I won the election.” Wasn’t that Obama’s popular tag line? They didn’t complain then. Let’s face it, they don’t want Trump to have any answers to questions because they will fill in all the blanks just fine by themselves. They already do anyway.

RightRing | Bullright

Rantzilla on having a new President

Buckle up I have a rant for you, if you are interested. What a difference a few long months makes?

The National Coalition of Trolls (DNC et al) has kicked off their newest operation, fashioning itself as a Tea Party type movement. Hey, I’m not writing their script, only commenting about it.

Seven years after the popular Tea Party rise, Democrats are imitating the movement. Wait, they spent all that time mocking, attacking, ignoring, and calling them racists etc.; but now say they are following in their footsteps. Media spent 7 years attacking it, trying to marginalize and discredit them.

Whatever they say.

Wait, the Tea Party was set off by government intervention in healthcare, bailouts, stimulus, arrogance of power, and taxagedon to grow government and its control by dolling out goodies to people. Yet Liberals and Democrats say they are following Tea Party’s lead? The original call for Tea Parties was led by Rick Santelli on CNBC saying enough is enough, announcing the idea of Tea Party, hearkening back to the days of patriots dumping tea in Boston Harbor to protest taxes and the King’s control schemes. Everything about that is contrary to the modern Left, and any movement it started.

Tea Parties also had strong overtones about freedom of speech, religion, the Founders and the Constitution. Not necessarily what we see in today’s left. They do call themselves progressives but the new term, coined by others, is regressive. They are about shutting down speech of others or labeling different views hate speech. Still, they continue their imitation narrative.

Never mind that the left is also caught up in their civil disobedience and violence agenda. It is basically nothing like what conservatives or Republicans did. Tea Parties had a respect for law enforcement and kept the demonstrations neat — even though they were grassroots organized. Not the Left. Tea Parties were bottom up grass roots, even resisting the intervention of some Republicans who wanted to commandeer it. The Left is always organized top down, by those in power, or close to its power center. (George Soros et al) But it is staged to seem grassroots — Move On. It’s their business model.

Here is an interesting tangent to liberals.

I have a theory involving market forces and the Left’s willing gullibility to believe in all these things they do, so easily. I figure if you can find a way to target that segment of people, it would be a goldmine. How so? Just think about it. Obama ran on a faith-based message and they all bought it: lock, stock and barrel.

I mean if you have people who are that easy to sell anything you want, then you have a powerful market of buyers or consumers. They demonstrate a willingness to believe in things based on little proof. And once they do, believe in it, you can hardly even talk them out of it. That, my friends, is gold to any marketing agenda. That’s the utopia salesman have searched for. Think about that slogan, change you can believe in. Then think about Obamacare and all the lies. You couldn’t even tell them they were lies, even after Gruber came out admitting it. Even after it was proven to be lies, they still believed it.

So that is the secret, getting them to believe it. That isn’t hard, they are an easy pitch. But once they do, they remain loyal even if results are not what they expected. Now that is the kind of people any marketer wants to find.

Whether this quote is from James Carville or not, it is true from the standpoint of reality. And Obama constantly proved it.

The Democratic constituency is just like a herd of cows. All you have to do is lay out enough silage and they come running. That’s why I became an operative working with Democrats. With Democrats all you have to do is make a lot of noise, lay out the hay, and be ready to use the ole cattle prod in case a few want to bolt the herd. — credited to James Carville.

So couple their mentality with the herd mindset and you have a powerful consumer base. You could sell them anything. And they create the demand all by themselves. What could be wrong with that? And then, once sold on it, you could not talk them out of it.

All you have to do is look at the last election. Bernie scored big with Dems, some say he could have won. He promised them free healthcare, free college and a 15 per/hr minimum wage. They believed and remained loyal. Just what they wanted to hear. You couldn’t talk them out of it. They sent in their five box tops and sat there waiting for it to arrive.

Wake up and smell the crazy.

Democrats discovered a new phenomena called Voter Rage. And it is catching on in the media. They like this movement, of course. Remember all the attacks at Tea Parties? Not so with the perpetual protestors, which are nothing more than re-branded Occupiers, who re-branded themselves Bernie’s base, who re-branded themselves as the Resistance.

Something happens they don’t like, take the rage to the streets. Mix it with anarcho-commies, it gets very colorful. They weaponize rage and hate as tools.

What we have with the Left is the biggest case of projection I have ever seen. They lost the election but now think they can project themselves right back into majority power, or at least a potent minority one. Their perception is supposed to become everyone’s reality.

Democrats have that other time-worn weapon. If they don’t get their way, they take to the streets and protest. That is a powerful force for them to get more stuff, or promises. See how this cycle works? Once they believe, they’ll do anything for that cause whether they understand it or not. It makes no difference. People wonder how so many people can be self-claimed socialist? My opinion is they aren’t all socialists — many are Me-ists. As long as they think it benefits ‘Me’ they’re fine with it. If it is not, then cue the rage.

RightRing | Bullright