Room with a view and Acosta is in it

No word yet from Babs Streisand if Tuesday was considered a win for her, or if she’ll make good on her promise to flee to Canada.

Though you can pretty much doubt anything they tell you because of the Left’s motivation for saying it in the first place.

It is the same way with media spinoids and liars. Always consider their motives. They hate Trump so much they will do or say practically anything to validate their boiling hatred.

What it is they hate so much, I don’t really know? But leave it to someone like Jim Acosta to make a total spectacle of himself in front of a national audience, as intended.

He was so hyper-obsessed by the use of the word invasion that he nearly collapsed under the sheer emotional strain. So it is the use of a term or word that really bugs him.

The same word that is used in the Constitution. (Art I, II, IV) Bad founders. It is something for our government to be concerned about. Not in Jim Acosta’s book. He’s worried about Russia and its subversive actions yet can dismiss a caravan of thousands, and hordes of people, aimed at overwhelming our border as some peace offering to us.

At what point, how many caravans, how many thousands of people, and how many repeated attempts at crossing the border does it take to get serious about it? But someone calls it an “invasion” and he goes into a frenzy.

Then Acosta also relies on their stock talking point, “we are not an enemy of the people”. How is fake news and CNN not an enemy of the people? They defend an invasion and then discount the whole idea of border security as tyranny.

Who do you want controlling the border, really? Should thugs and hordes of people from Latin America, or wherever, control our border and set immigration policy? Have we turned that power of control over to masses of lawless people outside our country?

Who really controls that border, us or them?

But it is just the word “invasion” that really bothers them and rattles their cage.

Or is illegal invasion now a pre-existing condition we have to protect?

Right Ring | Bullright

Advertisements

All Fired Up

Seems like folks are fired up to finish the job. No one can steal that away from us.

Does Pelosi think the people who elected Trump might not vote in this election? Funny.

If the fake news media does not want to be called “the enemy of the people,” then they should stop acting like the enemy of the people.

Sorry, Obama’s economic failures cannot be considered pre-existing conditions.

“The people are coming, the people are coning!”

Everyone should stop appropriating liberal culture because they don’t like it.

Right Ring | Bullright

Most Americans Believe Media Is More Divisive

Poll: Majority of Americans Believe Media Is More Divisive than Trump

Western Journal

By Randy DeSoto
November 2, 2018

A new poll found that Americans believe the news media is more to blame for the nation’s current divisive political climate than President Donald Trump.

Sixty-four percent of respondents to the Politico/Morning Consult survey published on Thursday said the media have done more to divide the country, while 17 percent said they have done more to unite it.

By comparison, 56 percent felt Trump was more of a divider, and 30 percent thought he was more of a uniter.

The sentiments of those responding, unsurprisingly, fell along party lines.

The vast majority of Democrats, 88 percent, as well as 54 percent of independents, found Trump divisive. …/

More at https://www.westernjournal.com/poll-majority-americans-believe-media-divisive-trump/

Where were all these ‘Uniter or Divider’ polls under Obama? MIA. Then, both media and Obama were allied in dividing America along any lines they could. 8 long years of it.

Now Trump is the bad guy? He’s to blame for stuff long before he came to office.

Get you some of that media and CNN. Of course, like Obama, they are intentionally doing it. It is a central part of their national political strategy.

Did Hillary let the cat out of the bag?

In an interview Friday with Recode’s Kara Swisher, Hillary was asked if she wanted to run for president again.

Astonishingly, the answer was no, no.

But then she added that she would “like to be president”.

Well, she doesn’t want to run for president but she very much wants to be president.

Far as I know, the only way she could be president is by running for president.
So she has a problem.

I think she has a bad case of Oval Office Fever.

The Culture of Investment

I went on a thought journey to explore what it meant to be the person I am and noticed some things that tie in politically these days. You may have discovered the same things.

The first thing noticeable today is those who support Trump are given a dichotomy. On one hand you see yourself being targeted and villainized by a concerted effort of institutions, media, Deep State interests; while on the other we are actually winning. We are changing an old guard and its way of thinking. They do not like that, hence a resistance.

But as this back and forth continues, we are actually winning because we are having the battle at all. The battle itself is evidence of victory. A taboo and forbidden battle.

Well, media or pundits keep asking the same tired questions of Trump supporters, “at what point will you abandon Trump, when will you denounce him? Does this do it?”

The problem of course is that you can denounce something he did or said or how he reacted, while at the same time not denounce what he has actually done. Get it? That is clear to me. But what media or elites want is a total and absolute condemnation.

If something is critical enough to criticize, it still does not erase what he has done. It does not cancel due credit he deserves. In that respect, does it really matter that one does not like a statement or two or his tweeting habits — which are only communications?

Investments

What does that have to do with investments? Put it this way, if I was to write a full defense of why I supported Trump and think he is the right man in the right job, I would have to cover the last 15 -20 years to make a substantive case. That would be a monumental task. So short of that let me just say I am sufficiently invested, heavily, in Donald Trump. By no monetary means or connections but in a philosophical and political way.

I feel invested in that the way anyone invests in what they feel is important, such as education, a career, family, where they live, financial investments. All of those help to shape who we are. Trump also represents a part of who I am, not the total sum.

Not like I just bought something on a whim thinking “I can always take it back.”

We may differ on certain things but there are commonalities that surpass those. Listing all those wouldn’t even make the case. But since I do, in a way I can see and live vicariously through his presidency. There is a personal investment. And I believe that is what has been missing in the last 4 presidents – a personal connection.

People may have thought they had that with George W Bush for a short time but it wasn’t real and did not last. We saw the differences with his priorities to ours and a few hallmarks of those were in nominating Harriet Miers and in the amnesty immigration scheme. There were certain other red flares that he was not really one of you. At any rate, even at the beginning I was not personally invested the way I am with Trump.

That was what was missing. Barack Obama had support, yes, but were people personally invested in him the way people are in Trump? I’d say not. Though Democrats were invested in him. And it was just like most of what the left does — it was deception, lies and an illusion. There was a huge illusion constructed around Bill Clinton. And that illusion carried over to Hillary both times she ran. They were not real. Sure Democrats believed them but they were lies like everything else the Left does.

Here we have Trump, with all his flaws, and there is a realness that was never present in any of the others. Campaign promises were not just campaign promises. He did not have years in the government sewer to provide an air of legitimacy. In fact, it was his detachment from government that gave him credibility.

I am at the point where I am tallying my investments that I have made and ones I did not. Though this one, supporting Trump, crosses so many personal areas that it is a natural fit. It is almost uncanny how it relates to other areas. So the idea I would have some moment to say I was all wrong, or the whole thing was a wasted effort, is as close to impossible as me going to Mars. I don’t know how many other people feel that way. I’m sure some do. (probably more than anyone realizes or media cares to think)

It takes us back to those other presidents’ legacies. There was a steady prevailing vacuum. It may not have been intentional but there was a void and disconnect with the very people who elected them. Regardless what they said, their interests and priorities were not aligned with the peoples. They did not care about the same things. When George W Bush tried to ram through amnesty on illegal immigration, with all it involved, with the gangs of, despite the will of the people, it was a lighthouse moment.

When the people finally did rise up in Tea Parties, the reaction everywhere only confirmed this national insult that had gone on as long as I remember. Not only did the critics not care about American citizens or real people but they were actually lined up opposing the public. And there is no way you could compare that moment of revelation to what the Resistance is all about now. It is not the same thing. In truth, they are the anti-Resistance.

It’s a little like this analogy. Say you originally found a good investment that fit for you. It worked and made you profits. It did what it was supposed to do. Then came a time where it fluttered or stalled out, or maybe lost a few points. Would you condemn the whole thing and say you should not have have bought it in the first place? Would you say it was all a complete mistake? I doubt it. See you cannot deny that it worked and got you the effects you were looking for. Nor can you deny the profits. (unless you condemn them too)

It is the same way with other investments in life. Do you denounce the family because it is not everything you think it should be? Do you denounce you education because one day it does not seem to benefit you how you want? The same works in the faith areas of life. Do you throw out your faith because one day it was not benefiting you? That seems to be a pretty selfish and materialistic way to look at everything. I’m sure some people do apply similar formulas: today I don’t like that, yesterday I did. No, people usually accept there will be bumps and hurdles. You don’t throw out all the work, time and energy you gave it because you are not presently satisfied with something.

Regardless of what new and stunning things media or the establishment may throw out at us, it does not change what progress has been done. Just as nothing changes all the damage those critics have done. I won’t turn my back on that. And I won’t deny it.

Well, short of running through my 15 years of reasoning and experiences that brought me here, this is my attempt to explain it. I also do not throw away, dismiss or deny all that experience long before Trump came along. But they are now joined in a way I could not have predicted. It’s a personal investment. I can denounce the resistance, mostly because it is not real and only more deception. Imitation is flattery except when it is a mockery.

Right Ring | Bullright

A Word From Alternate Reality

In an alternate reality, there is room for this story.

It is so ridiculously Orwellian. Why the whole thing seems like a mindless projection.

So the tagline for this fiction is that somehow Democrats are not “ruthless” enough. Therefore, they lack something of a serious radical strategy. Can you imagine?

People that continually engage in behavior that threatens to shut down the very government they love to control, are not ruthless enough.

Politico has the scoop. (consensus according to the leftbots)

“They [Republicans] are more ruthless,” said Jennifer Palmieri, who over a quarter-century has served as a top aide to Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. “And I don’t want to be like them. … The answer can’t be for Democrats to be just as cynical.”

Finally, it did admit that: “Whatever factors fueled Kavanaugh’s victory, it was hardly that Democrats were too nice to attack him personally.” — Surely not the problem!

But never mind all that. It contends Republicans just stick together better.

Begala said part of the explanation for this divide lies in Democratic psychology, citing Bill Clinton’s saying that, “Democrats want to fall in love; Republicans want to fall in line.”

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/10/07/kavanaugh-confirmation-democrats-anger-221089

Really? Anyone buy that blather? Then they launch into the popular vote in presidential elections should be the gold standard mantra. Where do they think we are, Disney Land?

I’m not going to blame Politico because it is the message Dems desperately want to send. But it is nonsensical how anyone could take it seriously…..i.e. the Alinsky-ite Dems just aren’t tough enough. The radical party of Lockstep Is Us, whatever the issue.

And the second part that Repubs are the stronger with staying in line and fighting. Beam me up. Projection. Well, until now Republicans hadn’t even shown a unified spine. Democrats have institutionalized the word fight into every campaign and message.

I now return you to the gravitational planet, where physics still applies anyway.

News, email, and this and that

Has Twitter suddenly made email obsolete? You might think so. If you think that the public form of twitter is a substitute for private email, then you don’t understand technology, culture or the dynamic of it all.

It seems the trend is on using Twitter. But until recently it was so limited by character count that it would render it worthless for serious communications. Yet that is probably what some people would like about it, being limited.

But of course it could be an excuse to eliminate email which some people do not want to bother with anymore. I’d like to add that Twitter never will be a replacement for email. And email has not gone the way of the dinosaurs, yet. Too bad if people don’t like to use it or read them. It’s so old fashioned since the social media explosion. Poof, you don’t need email.

Isn’t it interesting that the major news or media centers all prefer everyone use Twitter as a contact method? But these and other businesses are also the same ones who like to use email for news letters and updates — for your convenience of course. But if you want to get in touch with them, they want it on Twitter.

What’s up with the contradiction, Fox and all the rest?

BTW: Fox will be launching its Fox Nation project later in the year. They want you to sign up on the email list for updates. It will be a new subscription service for their viewers. Oh dandy, another avenue of access to their content from most of the same people. But it is subscription-based.

“Fox Nation reveal: Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Tucker Carlson among stars on streaming platform ….Content you love, voices that matter.”

Now if your voice mattered to them at all, why scrub the email option?

Okay, if they really have a new product, why don’t they complete that newness by having some new faces? One of the headliner newbies showcased is Tomi Lahren. How new is she and what expertise does she bring? Born in 1992, maybe that’s what they mean.

I sort of thought having a new format they should have some regular folks. I don’t know, like everyday conservatives or viewers of their content over the years. People that have an opinion and view. There are plenty out there. I see people all over the internet and social media who would add spark to an otherwise recycled format. Fresher than Lahren.

While I think of it, I also remember when Town Hall was rolling out its new model that would shake the earth to its core. It was all hype. Indeed, that was about having a forum of conservative, like minded people writing their own stuff and their collective friends it would bring, along with other news centered content.

Well, it lasted a while and morphed into what you see as Town Hall today. (some here remember those days) Why is it that it is always the everyday normal people that are the problem? No, we need mouthpieces like famous spouters of conservative opinion to tell us what really matters. Sure we do watch because there is nothing else to watch.

“Tweet me, text me, hit me on Instagram,” they say, “or find me on FaceBook.” What if I don’t want to? I just want to email you. Well, it has become a problem. Right about now I am starting to feel like Andy Rooney. Oh, few people would remember who he was.

Maybe I am finally just old or old fashioned?

Still, if you listen now, you can hear the same undercurrent of criticism about Twitter among those same on air personalities starting all over again. ‘The scourge of contacts and feedback.’ The same things you used to hear about bothersome emails.

Someone else doesn’t like or appreciate getting our emails. Congress. Funny that liberals never seem to have that problem. They shout into an elevator and voilà, instant reaction.

Right Ring | Bullright

Proper Apathy: a case for it

Inevitably in every recent election, one word always seems to pop up usually close to the election. That word is apathy. There is almost an obsession.

Always mentioned as a negative and normally connotes a warning about bout being complacent. Not caring or not caring enough to vote, along with not caring who to vote for. It sets off a red flare about priorities. It is meant to shame and even inflame citizens.

So let’s take a look at the definition. According to Merriam-Webster:

1 : lack of feeling or emotion : impassiveness drug abuse leading to apathy and depression

2 : lack of interest or concern : indifference
i.e. political apathy

First if all, I empathize with the passion or appropriateness of using the word. But again, it is always considered a negative. Is there a positive use for it? Maybe there should be.

For a change, I wondered about using some of that righteous apathy toward our allies and European friends. What could be wrong with that? Now just hold on there, lilly liberals.

So take the textbook definition of apathy (#2) and apply a good healthy dose of it toward them, basically the whole lot, allies included. Lack of interest or concern, indifference to them. But wait, isn’t that treatment what we already receive from them and have for a long time? I mean they do treat us that way. When was the last time they made domestic or foreign policy based on what we Americans or the US thinks, or will think of it?

Get it? It seems to work fine for them.

I see a good apathy, liberally applied. Why should it always be a negative? Why not put it to good use? It is not like we get something different than that from them. If people have practiced their apathy, then why not sharpen it a little to where it is appropriate?

I can hear the liberals screaming on both sides of the Atlantic now. Except can they give a valid reason why not? I don’t think they can. Yes, I know all the standard talking points about allies and treatment of how we want to be treated. And all that gimmichery about what’s in our interest is what is in their interest too. Sure we have common desires. But this is only a one-sided thing, you do realize. Each of those countries gives us no consideration on what actions they take. They look out for themselves.

Yes, we share some values and technology and security issues. But where is the reciprocation, as Trump calls it, from them? We’ve certainly been doing this for a long time now. When was the last time they took our advice? Oh, right, we restrain our advice. Though they freely give us unsolicited advice, don’t they?

Here’s one illustration: CNN regularly has pundits, academics or intellectuals, commenting and lobbying our policies and politics from Birmingham (UK), London and Belgium. They are some of the biggest critics of Trump and the administration. But we have enough of those critics right here. Do we tell them what they should do at home? We don’t need their pontifications. What should we care what they think, let alone provide a platform for it.

Sure we just want to show them we care. Again, what does that matter when it comes down to it? What do we get in return? Maybe it hasn’t been such a great idea to consider the impact on them in our every move. I mean they have leaders and governments to represent their interests, and they do. In most cases quite well.

Why are we always thinking about sensitivities of others? It baffles me. Was this in the founding of America? No, we had our hands full thinking for ourselves about ourselves, looking after our interests because no one else on earth will. Do we now think all these countries look out for our interests? Hell no. They expect us to do that ourselves.

What happened to “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations-entangling alliances with none?” We’ve self entangled our dream with their selfish realities.

Washington instructed in his Farewell Address:

” In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur.
…/
“As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”
…/
“The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns.”

…“Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation [as ours is]? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?”

The other sweet spot factor liberals always point to is human rights. We need to influence that or this. But we don’t need to make our decisions based on our desires for them.

What I’m saying is that the reality is more stark. We have gone so far over to the international, globalist, bent over backward (and forward too) for people who generally 1) don’t appreciate it, or in some cases don’t want our help and; 2) aren’t considerate at all of us. And we don’t expect it. Shouldn’t the latter have changed if it was going to change?

What I am also saying is that it was never started out this way. Now I do hear critics of America’s every policy about a big footprint of US imperialism. I don’t agree with much of their emphasis but there is something to this one sided, lopsided, foreign policy (if that is what it is). The problem is it is not just in foreign policy but in domestic policy too, that we are influenced by their concerns.

No, I don’t buy the America is the big bully and aggressor argument. We bend over trying to make our policy based on their whims and desires, for or about us. We have to stop empowering those who never had our best interests. You know the Obama lesson on being an appeaser or slave to our enemies, empowering them and weakening ourselves.

However, we never see any signs of this consideration returned from abroad. They only have their hand out to receive not respond in kind.

This is not a case for protectionism or “isolationism”. But the affect may be protectionist.

I’m not sure what an official policy of apathy would look like or what it would do. But I dang sure know what our default doctrine has left us with. What did we get?

I wouldn’t mind being accused of it from across the globe. I might consider it a compliment. And maybe they would stop dishing out their helpful advice to us, too? Incidentally, applying some indifferent apathy to our friends and allies might also decrease the popular use of it in our election process. Apathy gets a pretty bad rap.

Whether consciously or not, we haven’t been making decisions on our own merits for our interests. They’ve been parsed down to p/c and sensitivities about what others think. Others have become proxies in our decisions. We could be a little apathetic, even rude.

Or in other words: quite frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn!

Right Ring | Bullright

Serving News for Fools Daily

Serving up the news of the day, dishonesty is the media and journalists’ modus operandi. Dishonesty is their specialty, they work very hard at it. Increasingly fooling no one.

Remember when it was always common perception that media-journalists were just looking for the truth and want to report it, no matter on which side the axe falls? No more, their purpose is deception. It’s their objective.

See how they work in concert with progressive politicians and other allies, in unison?

And when they find someone who is a problem for them and their political narrative, or political allies, then ‘by any means’ becomes their mission theme.

In reality, the MSM don’t really value their readers much — you know, the one’s they claim they “are doing all this for?” They might do it for their diehard progressive groupies that also spread it, who don’t really care about the truth anyway. Not for us.

Two great current examples are, the story I just mentioned on Steve Emerson, the terrorism expert; the other is the Russian collusion narrative they just can’t let go. Because it is central to their mission. Regardless of their reasons to deceive the public viewers or readers, and drive their political narrative, people have not accepted it at face value.

Hard as they try to ruin Emerson’s reputation as a expert terrorism analyst people know where the real lies, bias and hate are coming from. Where they have been coming from the last eight years under Obama.

Now there is hard evidence mounting that the people also know the truth about the Russia collusion narrative. A new Gallup poll shows how the people feel about the narrative being foisted on them from MSM and the Democrat echo chamber, hour by miserable hour.

“A lot of Americans have kind of dismissed the idea that [Trump] colluded to the extent that he did something illegal,” summarized Gallup editor-in-chief Frank Newport during an interview with The Hill.

The numbers back him up. A poll released last week showed that a relatively small percentage of people — 29 percent — think that Trump illegally teamed up with Russia to influence the presidential election. [CT]

If inquiring minds want to know, anything, then MSM wants to force feed them what it wants people to know – or believe they know. Now deception is business as usual.

It is all clear by looking at that poll. But the jig is up, I don’t think anyone can really deny it anymore, unless they are one of the proud card carrying disinformation believers and truth deniers. Not that they just don’t want to know the truth, they just plain don’t care. The leftists believe what they want. Damn the truth or evidence to the contrary. They can’t be bothered with that, the narrative is too important to be shattered by anything.

Here’s another served up on a hotbed of lies, media reports Trump is happy about victims of Hurricane Florence. Imagine? That one is reverberating in media the way you would expect a great lie to do. They love a fictional story, especially on Trump. Who sticks around for the truth? No one reads corrections. Sensational headlines are never retracted.

For a bonus, even Ruth Bader Ginsburg is sick of Democrats’ grandstanding on Kavanaugh hearings, admitting the circus has gone too far. You know the saying when you’ve lost RBG, you’ve lost the country. No, I say that. LOL Dems are burning their bridges.

Right Ring | Bullright

The Art of Media’s Character Assasination

H/T to Emerson, for pointing out the article. Notice how media follow and repeat the original assertions.

Character Assassinations by New Jersey’s Star-Ledger

by Noah BeckThis article originally appeared in The Algemeiner.
September 13, 2018

The Star-Ledger’s smear of terrorism expert Steve Emerson and Arab-American Emilio Karim Dabul is a textbook case of journalistic malpractice, providing the quintessential example of what honest journalism should avoid.

On August 5, the Star-Ledger called for the removal of Dabul, a New Jersey US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office spokesperson, in part by attacking Emerson with a variety of false or misleading claims. At least three other NJ papers then published similar stories about Emerson and Dabul: WNYC (which incredibly sought comment from the Council on American-Islamic Relations — CAIR — but neither Emerson nor Dabul), NorthJersey.com, and MSN.com. Adding to the damage, La Opinion ran a similar piece in Spanish. The Hill also ran an article inspired by Star-Ledger’s August 5 article, but promptly removed it after hearing Emerson’s objections.

The Star-Ledger’s attack was severe enough for Emerson to involve his attorney, Richard Horowitz, who, on August 9, demanded that Emerson be afforded “an opportunity to respond” and submitted a letter to the editor by Emerson. The Star-Ledger published Emerson’s response on August 24.

In the interim, six New Jersey members of Congress, all Democrats, wrote a letter to ICE, demanding that Dabul be fired, claiming that he “edited and wrote for anti-Muslim hate groups,” as alleged in the Star-Ledger’s op-ed trashing Emerson.

Furthermore, the paper’s editors refused to publish Emerson’s response unless he agreed to the removal of key details.

Emerson asserted that the Star-Ledger’s editors made no attempt to contact him or verify any of the facts assumed by the paper’s allegations, but those important points were deleted from Emerson’s response by the Star-Ledger’s editors, presumably to avoid exposing their unprofessionalism.

Similarly, Emerson’s response tried to set the record straight about the Star-Ledger’s materially false suggestion that Emerson blamed Muslims for the 1993 Oklahoma City bombing — an allegation that he says has been “manufactured and peddled by radical Islamic groups” — but the editors deleted that as well.

Thus, the edited version of Emerson’s defense produced by the Star-Ledger’s editors effectively extended Emerson’s character assassination, while whitewashing the paper’s journalistic malfeasance.

For the sake of setting the record straight and exposing the extent of Star-Ledger’s journalistic negligence, it’s worth reviewing the many problems with the paper’s August 5 op-ed. [Please see the rest at the IPT]

https://www.investigativeproject.org/7619/character-assassinations-by-new-jersey-star-ledger

Sure there are reasons for this hit and there is an agenda behind it. More on that later. Or as Alinsky said, personalize the attacks. In this case, smear one expert that says things they don’t like. But what a concerted effort. They don’t smear, they do character assassination hits. Then they put it into their media echo chamber to drive it home.

Who are these hatchet men. You all know the Muslims have many working at all levels in media and within government (something Obama excelled at placing) Then they have their allies of SPLC as the designated smear merchants. By the time it’s back washed in a few days in media, it is hard to know exactly where it came from, which is the point.

Do you think anyone out there is saying, “let me read today’s corrections and clarifications in today’s paper”? No, they do the drive by and screw even cleaning up the mess. The mess just makes their message that much harder to ignore.

Press Freedom — unchain their souls

Maybe a post script is needed to my last post on a media cabal in their defense of press hay day. (or their D-day as I’m calling it) Was it too Fake News challenged?

There were some who declined the opportunity to elaborate on the “war,” as some call it, claiming that they do it everyday. Like Seattle Times, who passed on the offer.

So maybe press is not as united as you thought? Don’t bet on it. They just don’t want to make a special national day of it, which they fear may only provide Trump with more evidence of a press conspiracy against his presidency. Surely, some of it will.

However, this sounds more like not wanting to poke Trump — or the people by extension — in the eye while he is already on a tear against the press. A successful one. Not that they are not actively engaged in an effort to undermine and question his legitimacy in every way they can. They are. Just that they do that anyway without a designated day for it.

On the other hand, some are fully engaged in this “war” but they also want to throw ‘shout outs’ to local media for tireless efforts in the press. Lean on the locals for a defense. Yes, noble as local press are, they are not the real issue or problem. That the local media still covers local news and provides a good service never was the problem at the heart of the matter. But should that case even have to be made? Then we have come a long way. So they can wax on their local accomplishments all they want.

Maybe it is a time, though, for press to do a little navel gazing of its own on what their real priorities and goals are. Maybe? But don’t bet there will be lessons learned. They seem far too arrogant for that.

Just as the Seventh Floor was corrupting the greater FBI’s institutional reputation, so is the national press and media diminishing its own credibility. Like the FBI, it was not field agents who did all that, who were the problem. It was leadership. Though the attitudes of leadership do trickle down to rank and file. So too is the case in the national press — all chasing a few stories they consider important. (damn whatever we care about)

We know the stories they want to report, and eventually we know the ones they do not. So do reporters and journalists at large. There are a few good journalists functioning in an against-the-tide way, almost battling against the national media at large. Are they wining? No. They are frowned on or mocked. (as out of line) Their efforts are diminished en masse by their fellow press piers. It’s a shame. The loudest barking dogs get the attention.

Yet with all that said, media wanted a special day to pat themselves on the back for their biases and efforts. Of course they want to broaden the problem and criticism of the press. And they want all members of it to be forced to defend press’s greater national agenda.

Why is it that Republicans always seem to have an active campaign against press, media? Is it good politics? You could turn that around as well, to “why does press always seem to be actively campaigning against Republicans?” And both would be correct. There are decades of mistrust built up on the Republican side. Best to know who your biggest opponents or critics are if you are a politician. Enemies? You’d be a fool to believe press is actively, overtly on your side or even that you will get “fair” coverage. John McCain would be Exhibit A. He wanted to believe it, which only says something about him.

For today’s defense of press day, cue the choruses of anecdotal stories about humanity, drinking water, local crime investigations, or school board decisions. All important, but they were not really the issue. And great as those stories may be — cite them all day — they still do not deal with a collective issue of bias in the news media.

When the local news reports a crime, it can intentionally not mention the race, religion of immigration status of the alleged criminal. Sometimes it matters, yet is suspiciously omitted. Sure press did report the story, but did they reveal all pertinent facts? So we are talking about the editorial positions and control of media, which more often is the problem. In other words, what we don’t see is withheld, or accounts of the story that don’t mesh with events. Citing good local stories can cover some of that but not the volumes of accounts where bias is a problem. How about when there is an error? They stick it in the reserved corrections section later But don’t mention it. Where is the honesty or integrity, or for that matter responsibility, in that?

No, what really got their collective goats in the press were the unfavorable public opinion polls showing lack of credibility in the press. Thus, reporting the great local stories is not the real issue here. Their need to be instinctively believed is the whole issue. Their mission and goal depends on that. So press is even dishonest in framing what this is all about. But the people have known for some time what it is about, being fed a steady diet of deceptive or biased coverage that lacked the integrity or scrutiny of a real free press. Would the founders be happy with what the national, collective media has turned into?

And if those local stories are really the issue here, then let’s have them. I mean tell them instead of drowning them out and spoon-feeding us national interests — and those controlling political interests — by the mainstream collective media. We don’t call it Mainstream Media for nothing. Another term they despise. Tell them all, unedited.

Columbia Journalism Review makes the press defense with a potpourri of snippets.

Washington Post book critic Carlos Lozada read half a dozen “hagiographies” of the president, finding that “some are born Trump sycophants. Some achieve Trump sycophancy. And some have Trump sycophancy thrust upon them—since he’s a star, they let him do that.”

Is that what you got? Better, is that what you really believe? And what are the stages of press degradation? Do we have to diagram that for you?

IPSOS Polls

Returning to President Trump’s views on the press, almost a third of the American people (29%) agree with the idea that “the news media is the enemy of the American people,” including a plurality of Republicans (48%).

I don’t want to tell them what the trend is.

 
Right Ring | Bullright

Meanwhile Press and Media Whine

I’m going to put up this piece from the news association, not because it deserves to be but because it needs to be called out for what it is. I am mean for picking on the press.

They are calling on all press to use their prestigious space to defend the “free press.”
A few hundred have agreed, like a solidarity thing.

RTDNA calls on members to join campaign defending press freedom

August 13, 2018 | RTDNA [*emphasis mine]

The Radio Television Digital News Association and its Voice of the First Amendment Task Force are calling on our more than 1,200 members and their broadcast and digital news outlets to join the Boston Globe and more than 100 other local newspapers across the country on Aug. 16 in a coordinated editorial response to attacks from the President on the media.

“We urge our members to join the effort on Thursday, Aug. 16 by dedicating airtime, publishing an online editorial or sharing information via social media platforms that speaks to your viewers and listeners about the role we play in preserving the public’s right and need to know, in a government for and by the people,” said Dan Shelley, RTDNA’s executive director.

“The President has ratcheted up his anti-press contempt. Journalists are now the ‘disgusting fake news,’ and according to one presidential tweet, we also ‘cause Wars [sic].’ This rhetoric has contributed to many of the president’s supporters lashing out harshly against members of the White House press corps and other journalists. It must stop before more journalists are hurt or worse,” states Shelley.

Today, RTDNA, its members and the other broadcast and digital journalists it represents stand in solidarity with the dozens of American newspapers that have joined the Boston Globe campaign to publish editorials pushing back against the notion that responsible journalism is “fake news” and that journalists are the “enemy of the American people.”

Please contact RTDNA at pressfreedom@rtdna.org if your station plans to participate. For more information on how to explain the public service your news organization regularly provides, please see this list of resources for rebuilding trust with news consumers and this list of questions to consider as a newsroom.

About the Voice of the First Amendment Task Force
RTDNA formed the Voice of the First Amendment Task Force to defend against threats to the First Amendment and news media access, and to bridge the divide between responsible journalists and those who don’t like, or don’t understand, the news media. People wishing to support RTDNA’s efforts may reach out to the task force by emailing pressfreedom@rtdna.org.

About RTDNA
RTDNA is the world’s largest professional organization devoted exclusively to broadcast and digital journalism. Founded as a grassroots organization in 1946, RTDNA works to protect the rights of electronic journalists throughout the country, promotes ethical standards in the industry, provides members with training and education and honors outstanding work in the profession through the Edward R. Murrow Awards.”

Original source

So it is a campaign defending press freedom. Oh goody, a special day for that.

Instead of what they claim, this is a dedicated day to attack Trump, feel free as if they do not already do so daily. So what is the special occasion about this day? That’s what they have done since Trump won.

But my personal issue with this goes much deeper. First of all, when press refers to the First Amendment, they liberally mean “freedom of press.” However, there are other freedoms in the first amendment. Just that to press, this freedom is the only one they really give a damn about. Secondly, it is offensive that they lay claim to the First Amendment as their own. But that is the only part they want people to care about and keep beating us over the head about.

Yes, I understand the need for a Free Press. It is absurd I have to make that disclaimer.

I will take the opportunity to mention another favorite talking point of theirs — meaning the press in general. The claim is Trump declared war on the first amendment. Again, by first amendment they are referring to press. (misleading to say the least.) Or some even say he declared war on the “free press.” What nonsense. I have never seen another president more media friendly than Trump.

This bothers me why? It is mostly this “war on or against the first amendment” mantra that gets me. As the old line goes: “what we have here is a failure to communicate.” With all that is going on, there is not a war on the press or first amendment. It is a battle within the First Amendment. But it has always been there. There has always been some friction within the 1st Amend. The press is only one of 5 freedoms contained therein: Freedom of religion, speech, press, petition of grievance, and assembly. I see press is only one fifth of that. Technically, you can say press may have some tangential influence in others.

As to the “war” as they call it within the first amendment; it is press declaring war on the people’s freedoms. Press has no ownership of or control over the First Amendment.

Despite how I really feel about this brouhaha over the press, I will give them this honored day…… to make a joke out of themselves, as they have done for over 10 years.

What an idea!

We could have had special “defense of the first amendment days” back in 2009-2010. Remember the Tea Parties? But we did not get “special day” kudos for defending free speech. We got the royal condemnation for it, and viciously attacked. For all of our organizing skill and peaceful efforts, we had the long arm of the IRS attack dogs sicked on us. It was labeled traitorous to the US Constitution in media. Talk about Orwellian.

Did we get a special assist or atta-boy from the media/press for standing up and defending the First Amendment? Just the opposite. We were attacked for “hiding behind the first amendment.” But it was press that was doing the attacking. They declared war on free speech and dissent, from both ends of Pennsylvania Ave. and in press and media.

So what does that tell us, other than the fact that the “press” doesn’t give a damn about the first amendment? It tells us they have chosen sides. And they chose to go to war against the American people, just for standing up for their first amendment rights.

So for this dedicated “defending press day” I offer them a peace sign minus the index finger. Of course they really don’t need me or anyone else to stand up for them, they have the power of the press. And chose to use that power against the American people. What were they “standing up” for back then? Oh, it was for big-government, for the power of the White House, the power in Congress. Remember their stories of outrage that people yelled at Congressmen, especially black members, when the Democrat caucus paraded in front of Tea Parties to fabricate fake news about us. Then press ran that narrative lie into the ground. We were also labeled racists then. Media assisted.

Excuse me for not having any outrage that the press is victimized. Give me a break. Again, press made huge choices long ago and declared war within the first amendment, against the people. You didn’t just stand idly by, you were the enforcers. Even Ben Rhodes admitted the Obama administration had media, press eating out of their hand. Because, at that point, free press sycophants, you were no longer a “free press.”

Is it time for a ‘voice of free speech task force’? — at least I’m being honest.
See what they did there: “Voice of the First Amendment Task Force”?

 

Related Ref:
Boston Globe: “200 newspapers join Globe effort on freedom of the press editorials”

[Globe]- The Globe initiative comes amid the president’s repeated verbal attacks on journalists, calling mainstream press organizations “fake news” and “the enemy of the American people.” Tensions came to a boil in early August when CNN reporter Jim Acosta walked out of a press briefing after White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders refused to refute Trump’s “enemy of the people” comments.

‘‘We are not the enemy of the people,’’ Marjorie Pritchard, deputy managing editor of the Globe’s opinion page, told the AP last week.

 
Right Ring | Bullright

Russia, Obama: what we knew

But what media won’t talk about. Yet at a hearing with Peter Strzock, for proof of the conspiracy, media were forced to talk about what they have ignored for about a year.

Obama’s cybersecurity coordinator confirms Susan Rice ordered him to ‘stand down’ on Russian meddling

by Christian Datoc | June 20, 2018 | Washington Examiner

Michael Daniel confirmed Wednesday that former national security adviser Susan Rice ordered him and his staff to “stand down” in 2016 in regard to Russian attempts to meddle in the 2016 election.

Daniel, special assistant to former President Barack Obama and White House cybersecurity coordinator, told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee that quotes attributed to him in the book, Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump, were an “accurate rendering of the conversation” he had with Rice and his staff.

Daniel’s staff reportedly responded to the order in “disbelief.”

Over the past year, the Obama administration has been criticized for allegedly being aware of Russian attempts to influence the election yet primarily remaining silent on the subject.

The Washington Post reported that Obama himself — along with three top aides — was given direct evidence from the CIA of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s cyber campaign to influence the election.

The Obama administration reportedly knew of Russia’s actions for months ahead of the 2016 election, but failed to take retaliatory action until December.

“It is the hardest thing about my entire time in government to defend,” a former senior Obama administration official involved in White House deliberations on Russia said of the administration’s inaction. “I feel like we sort of choked.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/obamas-cybersecurity-coordinator-confirms-susan-rice-ordered-stand-down-russian-meddling-2016-election

I don’t know, but there are words so much more fitting than “choking.” How about dereliction of duty; or treason; or maybe just fulfilling that super-flexibility role, like President Gumby had promised Putin? Media has been busy ignoring it all.

I remember another distant place where standing down was an issue. Oh yeah, Benghazi.

Clown Express: last call to Washington elites for 2018

The increasingly irrelevant George Will may be defrocked but he is still bloviating about his political strategy — supposedly to stop Republicans.

Ed Morrow tore it up in this piece. George Will’s satchel of descriptors

George Will Willfully Wills Defeat

Consider the first paragraph of [George Wills’] recent Washington Post column, “Vote Against the GOP”:

Amid the carnage of Republican misrule in Washington, there is this glimmer of good news: The family-shredding policy along the southern border, the most telegenic recent example of misrule, clarified something. Occurring less than 140 days before elections that can reshape Congress, the policy has given independents and temperate Republicans—these are probably expanding and contracting cohorts, respectively—fresh if redundant evidence for the principle by which they should vote.

“Carnage,” “telegenic,” “temperate Republicans,” “expanding and contracting cohorts,” “fresh if redundant,” and two uses of “misrule”—all in two sentences!

https://amgreatness.com/2018/06/25/george-will-willfully-wills-defeat/

Will, indeed, is laying it on thick. Not content with opposing Republicans in 2016, he is back now opposing Repubs in 2018, counseling you to do exactly that. Sure he can explain his 3-cushion (attempted) bank shot. But why would anyone take Will seriously now?

Russian Election Meddling

Democrats want us to know that Russians tried to and meddled in our 2016 election. Gasp, “Holy Cow, Batman!” … feigned outrage wearing my best Casablanca face, “Shocked!”

This report article is excellent reading and a good resource.

Russia Meddled and Almost Nobody Cared, Until . .

By Steven J. Allen | June 23rd, 2018

Political leaders and journalists are deeply concerned about Russian meddling in U.S. elections. Took ’em long enough.

The Russians have been meddling in U.S. elections for at least 70 years. see

https://amgreatness.com/2018/06/23/russia-meddled-and-almost-nobody-cared-until/

Serving up a heaping helping of care for anyone interested. And the Dems have been in on, colluding in, the meddling about as long. Their cohorts in the media have been right there with them as long.

Which is why Ted Kennedy could have promised the US media’s help to Andropov, leader of the Communist Party, so they could speak directly to the American people in hopes of undermining Reagan. They demurred. But accepted Obama’s flexibility pledge.

That’s another thing that is not new with the left: the traitorous schemes of their commie roots. Now they are outraged? The Left suffers from a severe case of exposure.

Trump’s America: down is up and right is wrong, hate is the rage

I thought it would be fun to list some of the many ways things are now reversed or running backward from the previous 8 years. Maybe it’s upside down in general.

    • The stock market goes up and causes major panic in mainstream media.
    • Any good news is now considered toxic. Bad news is good news and rewarded. Thus leaks of any spec of bad. Progress is undermining gov’t or the Trump administration.
    • Anyone who supports, compliments, or credits Trump for anything is a default target of the Left. Anyone who condemns him in the most vile terms is celebrated.
    • If MSM has to report statistical good news, unemployment, jobs, etc., they must trace it to Obama. Credit Trump with nothing and Obama for everything.
    • The Left credits Obama with teeing up the economy. Well, if teeing up means standing on the throat of the economy. He set us up for growth nicely.
    • They credit Obama for good news when he’s been out of office for a year and half. Look, he had eight years. So why wasn’t he hitting these numbers?
    • Everyone should now, collectively, disrespect the office of the President — or anyone in his administration. Any respect for the office is punished.
    • We went from how could anyone say “no” to a job in the administration to how could anyone say “yes” to taking a job?
    • Being happy about the direction of the country is suddenly a bad thing.
    • Nazi comparisons are very in vogue now. Yes, after years of being taboo, everything in the US suddenly has a Nazi parallel.
    • You get punished or blacklisted for talking well about Trump.
    • Being in the state of resistance or sedition is the only acceptable position.
    • Democrats are resisting democracy.
    • You cannot impeach Obama on any grounds. The first Unimpeachable President. But now you can impeach Trump as soon as he enters office.
    • AG’s now have to be recused from everything; as opposed to being the private partisan wingman for the president and accountable for nothing.
    • The seditious cult of Resistance says Repubs supporting Trump are cult-like.

But you cannot bullet point this:

The Left started this narrative that Trump should be on trial, for what? Special Counsel hasn’t told us. Yet Hillary Clinton was given a pass on clear criminal corruption, and her investigation was a subversion of justice. Self defense became obstruction of justice.

Now the Left’s narrative is that we cannot go after Obama, the Clintons, or any of their loyalist corruptibles because they are no longer in office. They are private citizens, immune from suspicion. But they started the Trump investigation, or inquisition, when Trump was only a private citizen, a businessman and never before held office. Then they want to impeach him for the same trumped up, pre-office reasons.

Foreign relations changed too.

Half the populations of Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, Venezuela, and a good part of Mexico, woke up one morning and decided that they all have a guaranteed right to asylum status in America. An epidemic? All these people are hardly persecuted in their own country, with no viable options.

The Left all claims separating children from their families for their own safety, security and protection is inhumane. CPS and social service agencies across America have been doing exactly that to American citizens for decades and decades. The left called it protection.

I’m all for real solutions. So maybe the US should just annex the whole of Latin America and take over. Sound crazy? What’s crazier, having half their population showing up at our border claiming asylum or that? There is a sanctuary status for everyone in America but Americans. Americans are now second class citizens — at the bottom of the pecking order.

We would be called the evil “US empire” if we invaded Latin America and took over. They invade here and it is some guaranteed right. (which no one can quite explain) And when they do come, we have some moral and legal obligation to support, educate and employ them. So why not go down there and claim it? Might as well; they all want to come here.

Either peace out….or pissed off.

Right Ring | Bullright

Brennan Spells Sedition

In one of his latest rants in the op-ed pages, John Brennan laid out his reasons for opposing Trump so venomously. Or he thought he did, for anyone willing to buy his crazy BS.

Vice President Joe Biden swears in CIA Director John Brennan in the Roosevelt Room of the White House on 8 March 2013. Members of Brennan’s family stand with him. Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the United States Constitution, dating from 1787, which has George Washington’s personal handwriting and annotations on it. (Wiki pd)

Here are a few excerpts from Wa Po:

“Presidents throughout the years have differed in their approaches to policy, based on political platforms, ideologies and individual beliefs. Mr. Trump, however, has shown highly abnormal behavior by lying routinely to the American people without compunction, intentionally fueling divisions in our country and actively working to degrade the imperfect but critical institutions that serve us.”

“His disparagement of institutions is designed to short-circuit legitimate law enforcement investigations, intelligence assessments and media challenges that threaten his interests. His fear of the special counsel’s work is especially palpable, as is his growing interest in destroying its mandate.”

Interesting that a man who claims to want to protect institutions or norms in America so much is the very key culprit in undermining them in 2016-17 — throughout the campaign. The institution of the press, like others, was being corrupted and spoon-fed their own corrosive toxin, which undermined any objective truth in media journalism.

But that guy, John Brennan, is worried about Trump damaging the integrity and credibility of institutions? While he now is fully engaged in sedition, Brennan was even undermining the sacred election process he claimed to be concerned with.

The reason Brennan chimes in on just this topic of institutions was to follow Obama’s twisted and treasonous lead. Obama often rails about protecting sacred institutions from the damage Trump is doing to them. The same institutions that were co-opted in an elaborate Trump opposition and are now incorporated in the resistance. The same institutions that contribute to the Deep State resistance.

Obama wrote in his famous White House exit letter:

“That makes us guardians of those democratic institutions and traditions — like rule of law, separation of powers, equal protection and civil liberties — that our forebears fought and bled for. Regardless of the push and pull of daily politics, it’s up to us to leave those instruments of our democracy at least as strong as we found them.” – [Obama’s exit letter.]

Sounds a lot like the same crutch of criticism Brennan is now using toward Trump.

So Brennan carefully wove a Trump diatribe criticizing his damage to sacred institutions of integrity. Of which we know the FBI, CIA, DOJ and entire intelligence apparatus were a significant concern, along with those who ran them under Obama’s politicized and weaponized government.

Good thing that old reliable arm of the press has given another glimpse into what happened in the 2016 election and ever since.

Are NBC and CNN Paying Off Top Spies Who Leaked Info With On-Air Jobs?

Tablet Magazine

“The first reason, popular on both the left and among the Never Trump coterie on the right, is the assertion that Trump is a dangerous fascist who is on the verge of overthrowing the rule of law in America, an emergency that, if real, might indeed call for extreme measures, like throwing the principles of evidence-based reporting out the window. The problem with this argument being that however obvious and galling the man’s flaws are, no evidence for the thesis that Donald Trump intends to do away with Congress and the courts and rule by his own Trumpian fiat exists, at least not on planet earth. The assertion that such evidence does exist is the province of lunatics, and of people who find it useful to goose them on social media, or take their money.”

“The second reason for the departures from legal, institutional, and procedural norms that propagating a conspiracy theory requires is far more troubling. The lies and misinformation spoon-fed to the press by former high intelligence officials, who are now cashing paychecks from the same news outlets that they partnered with, are part of an ongoing campaign which, if successful, will protect those ex-spy chiefs from the legal consequences of their own law-breaking while in office.”

Chew on that John Brennan. It is hard to ignore countless dark operatives who have migrated from Deep State jobs into the mainstream media. Only last week, Ben Rhodes went over to NBC, as if that was any surprise. Brennan himself got an NBC deal.

“For example, the House Intelligence Committee report found that James Clapper “flatly denied ‘discussing[ing] the dossier [compiled by Steele] or any other intelligence related to Russia hacking of the 2016 election with journalists.’ ” Yet while Clapper may now find himself in trouble for lying to Congress—which he has done before on extremely consequential subjects, like the extent of America’s domestic spying programs, apparently without damaging his credibility as a “news source”—he has carved a new job out of a possible crime. In August 2017, CNN hired him as an analyst, creating the appearance, at least, that the network is now paying him for the information he leaked to them. At the same time, it provides him with a platform to run an offense shielding him from the legal consequences of his actions. Presumably, Clapper will continue to justify his actions as a public official on-air while denying any wrong-doing, and his “analysis” will be presented to viewers as impartial and truthful.”

Also being part of the media organ now shields them of accountability for their covert actions. Remember that leakers are being hunted while reporters who publish it are considered immune. CNN scooped up Josh Campbell, the former assistant to James Comey who bailed out saying he had to leave FBI to speak out in the public square — to protect the institution — also penned a diatribe against Comey’s firing.

These insider additions could be the new avenues for the Deep State ops and holdovers to leak, creating a network for Deep State (and institutions) to channel their latest wares.

Read the article at http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/261158/trump-russia-collusion to see how the sausage is literally made.

“It’s hard to imagine anything worse for a democracy than journalists coordinating with political operatives and spies who are paid by the press to leak information about American citizens. But that’s where we are. We have hit rock-bottom.” [see article]

Right Ring | Bullright

Rhodes to NBC rescue

Former Obama Aide Ben Rhodes Joins MSNBC, NBC News as Political Contributor

BY: David Rutz | June 2, 2018 | Washington Free Beacon

Former top Barack Obama White House aide Ben Rhodes is joining MSNBC and NBC News as a political contributor.

MSNBC’s media relations team tweeted out the announcement Saturday, saying Rhodes would make his NBC debut on Sunday on “Meet The Press.”

Rhodes’ official title in the Obama administration was Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications, and he played key roles in numerous foreign policy decisions. He took heat in 2016 when he boasted in a New York Times profile of creating an “echo chamber” to sell the Iran nuclear deal and mocked Washington, D.C., reporters.

More: http://freebeacon.com/politics/former-obama-aide-joins-msnbc-nbc-news/

Who did not see that one coming? (wonder what the terms are?) Participate in a plot against elections and the US, and you get the analyst armchair at a major network. Right on the heels of Obama and Michele heading to Netflix, while Valerie Jarrett secured a seat on the board.

After Action Report: Russia

One issue of a blog is you can tend to repeat things. But there are times and things that need repeated, maybe often. Such is the case with motives for the Russia, Trump investigation. Subversives have been very, very busy.

I said it before but the profound factor that sticks in my craw is the cause of the Trump investigation. To call it a Russia investigation is really pathetic. They talk about obstruction of justice. That ain’t a Russia issue. In my younger days, one of my most important lessons was it was not enough to know the how but you have to know the why, too.

In this Russia and Trump thing, we are hearing more and more about the how. I think we know most of it. But I notice they stay pretty silent on the why. We have seen the deep dark ways Obamafiles went about things, with dirty hands, and yet the media stays away from discussing why. Well, they speculated on every other related thing. How come they can’t come to grips to question that? At least Joe DiGenova has reminded us that they framed Trump in this entire thing in retaliation for the election. They try to diminish his integrity by calling it conspiracy theory. Oh, but it was a conspiracy, after all.

Obama had a Russia problem, which he could no longer cover up or just ignore. Even his underlings were prodding him to do something. Ala, along came Trump. He made the perfect scapegoat. Use the Russia problem as the reason to investigate Trump. And use it they did. That is the thing, the big lie, that hangs over this whole smoke cloud. The problem was the genesis for investigating Trump. It makes no sense to most people. That didn’t seem to matter. Push a narrative hard enough and it becomes a fact.

But it served the purpose. It got Obama out of the huge hole he had — an action deficit — to do something about Russia. It appeared like the Obama administration was doing something about Russia when its motives were clearly on Trump. It would bury the truth that he failed to respond, some say was complicit, in the Russia problem. It would alter his historical legacy by substituting Trump for the Russia problem. And it would be the perfect cover for investigating Trump and his entire campaign. Bad enough that it was not a last minute thought. It had been built over months. But the time came when he could formerly merge the two, supposedly seamlessly, so you couldn’t see where one ended and the other started — or where his complicit incompetence started or ended. Or where his malfeasance started because it never ended.

Now what we have is the Deep State running things, in the absence of Obama officials. And the Deep State has surfaced at their pinnacle of power in the DOJ. Sure they have ties throughout but where would their power be at its zenith? Of course when in control in the DOJ. Which is all why now Holder is calling on DOJ employees to defy the Trump administration as well as refuse to cooperate with Congress. As Holder explained in a telegraphed statement tailored directly to them, there have to be times when you just “say no” — to requests from outside the department. This of course would render the DOJ a sovereign power answerable and accountable to no one.

This does make it the most powerful department of the government. It will solidify the control of the Deep State and prevent it from being contested or routed out. But that is precisely why it is so important to challenge the DOJ, even if it is not desirable or popular. It was made to order to cover a multitude of sins of Obama’s. And it didn’t take much for the public to follow their (Obama’s and his lieutenants’) lead. People had been led by the string of mainstream media for years. And Media would do Deep State’s dirty work for them. Media had built up suspicion of Trump from the beginning. It was simply a matter of bringing all sides together: the media’s disdain for Trump, the left’s dissatisfaction and grief over the election, FBI and intelligence’s campaign of investigation and a plot against him, with a good old time-honored strategy or plot against their political opponents. It wouldn’t take much to unite them all in a choreographed coup even once Trump took power.

At the point Trump won the election, all efforts had to be shifted to resistance. Russia looked like even a better cover for that purpose. But the real point was that once the dubious Trump investigation began, right on through with their best efforts of broadening it into a huge counterintelligence investigation, along with Obama’s intentional urging, all was set firmly in place to take on a mind of its own. Especially with the absence of Obama officials after inauguration. Obama knew it would go on and on like they always do. The best part is Trump would be enshrined in one of Obama’s greatest failures — to respond to Russia with any substantial credibility. They wanted to saddle then bury Trump with Obama’s treasonous incompetence.

A solution to the Russia problem. It would no longer be his failure but a problem hung around Trump’s neck. It was also a political solution, the kind Obama liked. Better still it would continue on long after he left office. People would no longer complain or point to Obama as a weak link in one of the biggest elections and greatest upsets in history. They would blame Trump. This is how sinister these people are. The Deep State would cooperate without urging, because they would protect their radical czar.

In the process, Obama destroyed the credibility of the DOJ and FBI in his swamp of subversion. But who cares? Which is more valuable, saving Obama’s legacy or the FBI’s? We know which wins and it isn’t even close. Besides. the DOJ and FBI have their advocates to defend their reputations, at all costs, and they will. Mueller and Rosenstein will creatively defend the assault on the country and election by DOJ and intelligence. They can be counted on for that purpose. As usual, if successful, Obama would get away with offloading the entire blame for his treason and sedition onto Trump.

Obama and his vast number of cohorts throughout government suffered no accountability, at least so far. Can history ignore this choreographed corruption? How do you delete this treason, and now sedition, from the record?

Right Ring | Bullright

Ode to McCain

First of all, my compassion and prayers to John McCain and his family for real life experiences he and all are going through. Let me get that out of the way. Sigh.

The recent comments by a White House staffer, Kelly Stadler, said in a staff meeting about McCain — “he is dying anyway” — might be unfortunate, wrong or some degree of tacky. But then she did apologize by calling Meghan McCain. That should do it, no? No, it didn’t.

Meghan McCain went on The View the next day and laces into her. She said:

“”The thing that surprises me most is … I don’t understand what kind of environment you’re working in when that would be acceptable and you can come to work the next day and still have a job.” That’s all I have to say about that, she said.

 

Well, back last year, McCain delivered a scathing “indictment” as it was called by media to a grand audience, while receiving a Liberty Medal award.

“[Lose] the obligations of international leadership, and the duty to remain the last best hope of earth for the sake of some half-baked, spurious nationalism cooked up by people who would rather find scapegoats than solve problems.”

Trump said, after McCain’s remarks back then that:

“Yeah well, I hear it. And people have to be careful because at some point I fight back. I’m being very nice. I’m being very, very nice. But at some point I fight back, and it won’t be pretty,” he told the Chris Plante Show.

Then the View chastised Trump for his measured restraint, by scolding him:

Whoopi Goldberg: “Mr….all I can say is ‘have you no shame, have you no shame, have you no shame?’ Damn!”

During Whoopi’s remarks Meghan McCain was heard saying “no” in agreement. It takes a lot to put the View in agreement with Meghan on anything. Whooppi went on to say “you tweet about the NFL, man, what are you doing? You bonehead!” Meghan chimed in about Trump’s comments:

“Oh my gosh. Listen, I was here yesterday with you guys when this story brake and I hate, I hate this fighting between my father and President Trump because when we were talking about service and things like that, I just find it SO deeply sacred. And this is highly politicized.

My father and President Trump have DEEP disagreements on the future of America, DEEP disagreements on the role of America globally, about the role of the Republican Party… and whom should be leading it. And my father, God love him, at 81 years old fighting brain cancer, is still out there having something to say…and I’m so proud.

There is a complete lack of courage in DC right now on all sides, all sides, all the way around, the lack of courage to go up and stand for what you believe in and for me, I….”

Of course the rest of the View jumped in on that to say it is not Democrats who lack courage, and that they aren’t in control of power.

 

Meghan likes to swim in it when it suits her and her family. However, the lack of courage is what Trump is breaking through. How many people are grateful that he stands up to the same old same old, and all his supporters who found their voice through him?

Up to the current comment at some staff meeting within the White House.

Immediately, now, they are calling for Kelly Stadler to be fired and MSM is stirring the bonfire on The View and in Meghan McCain’s response. “It’s offensive, it’s hurtful,” says Ana Navarro. (self-righteous talking head who claims to speak as some Republican conscience) “She should be fired,” Navarro said.

So this is the John McCain that can say anything he wants broad brushing whole swaths of people, the sitting president, and/or anyone who disagrees with him with pejorative names. Then Ana Navarro called him “graceful”.

Meghan McCain summed up her latest comments about the critics of John McCain: “My father’s legacy will be talked about for hundreds and hundreds of years,” McCain said. “These people? Nothingburgers. Nobody is going to remember you.”

She also commented toward General Mcinerney for his statement on the Haspel confirmation: “torture worked on McCain, that’s why they call him Somgbird.”

Meghan said “At some point when you’re tortured everyone breaks.”

 

So now we are nothingburgers too. I’ll add that to my long list. What I want to know is one simple thing. Why does McCain habitually get to have the last word?

This idea Sen John McCain must have the last word about everything and no one is allowed to say anything is hogwash. I detest that notion. Where does that come from?

I’ve been called an agent of intolerance, a wacko-bird, among so many other things, and am now told to “go to hell” if I disagree with his handling the dirty dossier. It was McCain that injected it into the bloodstream of the government.

But McCain must always have the last word? We have to shut up? We are not allowed to respond to McCain’s hostile attacks on Trump or Americans. I do not accept it.

Notice too how it usually is McCain or his family who stir up and incite this feud with Trump, conservatives, or us supporters. It’s what John does. We’ve been McCain’s whipping post for at least 18 years. Often it is personal invective and sheer bitterness.

Trump is a counter puncher and does respond, unlike some other people. He has said things in response to McCain’s salvos. Then, when someone complains about McCain, or what he has done, he lashes out and media comes blaming us as the cause of consternation. He picks the fight. That seems to be his way of getting publicity or ginning it up.

 

Here is the problem: media and the left look for anything to use as a wedge between McCain, Trump and conservatives. They want to stir Republican feuds. It is no secret McCain is not well liked. He doesn’t like us, it’s common knowledge. So they create or use every chance they get to feign outrage on behalf of poor John McCain. But why does McCain play along? Why does he have to say anything? He can’t let it go….like we’re supposed to. Trump let it pass when McCain called us spurious nationalists and demeaned our motives. Media tried to provoke Trump to respond. And Meghan plays right along.

On top of that the self-anointed word police in the mainstream media make issues over every statement. They are the street cops — considering they openly called Trump a liar among other things. Who appointed them? I’m tired of McCain’s victimhood.

All the things that were said to and about Trump in the last 2 years — hateful personal attacks about his ability or stability — and yet no one in media or “talking head land” has come out to suggest McCain might consider stepping aside, in view of his medical and physical impediments. Wow, just stunning hypocrisy at its worst.

So Let all those media firings begin immediately for their grievous offenses. Hypocrisy.
McCain has brought this on himself, but he squeals at every response from his victims.

McCain now clearly wants to haunt us for years with his memoir, while we are supposed to be unable to respond because he is a hero or some phony, sainted pillar of bipartisanship. Here I thought, I mean it sure seemed like, our response is what he wanted.

~ Agent of Intolerance

Right Ring | Bullright