A belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
A policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
Hatred or intolerance of another ace or other races.
Good to see that racist blacks are tolerated and not held to answer for their bigotry and prejudice.
First a female black racist from MSNBC, Joy Behar, as documented by FoxNews.com:
Anti-Trump MSNBC host Joy Reid thinks rural Americans are ‘core threat’ to democracy
by Brian Flood
MSNBC host Joy Reid thinks that rural Americans are “the core threat to our democracy” and pointed to a series of tweets by liberal author Jared Yates Sexton that claimed Trump supporters “do not believe in the Constitution or any founding principles unless they’re advantageous” as proof of her far-left theory.
Who lives in rural America? Tons of minorities? No, as she well knows. Mostly Caucasoids and that’s precisely her point. She knows full well that she’s speaking not about blacks or other “minorities” in the fly-over states. That phrase itself illustrates the ignorance and blatant arrogance of Leftists.
Here is her Tweet.
Reid said gerrymandering reform and “the abolition of the Electoral College would be a start” when engaging with followers on how to fix the issue.
Again, this is massive ignorance involving our founding documents, the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. She and other Leftists and American Media Maggots have no concept of these documents nor are they interested in learning. They have no concept of the phrase “checks and balances.”
I know precisely what Reid means and what she wants.
Black Lives Matter Plans To Block White-Owned Businesses On Black Friday
by Amber Randall
Black Lives Matter and other groups plan to block white-owned Chicago stores on Black Friday to bring awareness about police shootings, economic issues and alleged racism.
Local churches, Black Lives Matter and the Chicago Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression will block stores along Michigan Avenue and prevent customers from entering stores for the second year in a row, reports Crain’s Chicago Business.
But hey, advocating against spending in any store owned by a specific race isn’t by definition racist, right? I mean, not if it’s done by blacks against Caucasoids.
A big part of the protest is to force on people that it’s important to shop at businesses that aren’t owned by white men, Kimberly Veal, a leader of Black Lives Matter, said. It’s not yet known who owns the businesses that will be targeted as part of this effort.
Yesh, well, why let something as silly doing some research for facts get in the way of some good, classic racism?
One of the protest organizer hopes that this year’s protest will have a larger turnout.
Was the protest successful? Was it larger than the year before? Uh, no.
Indiana ‘Night Nurse’ whose tweet about white women sparked investigation ‘no longer’ with hospital
A nurse at one of the largest hospital systems in the nation who sparked an internal investigation after posting a controversial tweet reportedly “is no longer an employee” at Indiana University Health.
Taiyesha Baker, a nurse at the hospital, allegedly posted a tweet Friday under the account “Night Nurse,” saying that white women are raising sons who are “rapists,” “racists” and “killers.”
In a statement Sunday, a spokesperson for the hospital said “A recently hired IU Health employee tied to troubling posts on social media this weekend is no longer an employee of IU Health,” Fox 59 reported.
Taiyesha Baker, of course, is a black female.
It would seem that incidents of this nature are increasing.
One final note for perspective: in California ol’ BZ is a statistical minority.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes created a firestorm when he released information earlier last week which tended to confirm that members of Donald Trump’s team had been surveilled and names unmasked for political purposes. Please see my two posts about the event here and here. Sotto voce, I’d care to point out this is the same Devin Nunes who, in May of 2013, revealed, as I wrote here:
Congressman Devin Nunes: the DOJ tapped phones in the House gallery
Fornicalia Congressman Devin Nunes of the 22nd district spoke on the Hugh Hewitt show Wednesday afternoon, and revealed a bombshell: not only did the DOJ tap the phones of reporters, but Nunes indicated the DOJ tapped the telephones of the House of Representatives in the gallery area — where not only reporters use the phones, but various DC politicians.
That said, here is Chairman Nunes’s initial revelation regarding the surveillance of President Trump, made on March 22nd.
This led to various products by Crane and Summit being pounded out of Demorat and American Media Maggot sphincters nationally, initially bent because Chairman Nunes dared to do his job and notify President Trump of his findings before the rest of the committee. This did not sit well with Adam Schiff, Little Chuckie Schumer, Nancy Pelosi et al.
Simultaneously, someone began to actually pay attention to a broadcast made on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” roughly a month ago, which included a revelation so large that it had been hiding in plain sight for some time. Please listen to Evelyn Farkas, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense in the Obama Administration, “out” that administration regarding the Trump campaign.
What she said was essentially this: the Obama administration ensured the leakage occurred and then tried to hide both the source of the leak as well as how the information was being shipped to “the hill,” otherwise known as the AMM.
There was only one purpose: political. The obvious intent was to damage the Trump campaign as much as possible and then undermine, minimize and block the president-elect’s ability to conduct the business necessary to assemble his team and move forward.
I can think of no other words than this: a conspiracy.
Fmr. FBI Asst. Director: Farkas Exposed ‘Conspiracy Cabal’ on Trump Surveillance
by Brendan Kirby
Law enforcement experts say Obama official must testify on ‘unmasking,’ may have admitted crime
The discussion with MSNBC host Mika Brezinski on March 2 focused on a New York Times story that appeared the day before under the headline, “Obama Administration Rushed to Preserve Intelligence of Russian Hacking.”
The story quoted unnamed former government officials who described efforts to “leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators.” The information included evidence passed along by U.S. allies of meetings between Russian officials and Trump’s associates, and communications — intercepted by American intelligence agencies among Russians — among Russians discussing contacts with Trump officials.
The spice must flow and the evidence must be preserved. Why?
“It was more actually aimed at telling the [Capitol] Hill people, ‘Get as much information as you can and get as much intelligence as you can before President Obama leaves the administration,’ because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior people who left,” she said. “So it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy.”
Read this once, and then read it again, more slowly and deliberately.
“The Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about the staff, the Trump staff’s dealings with Russians, that they would try to compromise these sources and methods, meaning we would no longer have access to that intelligence,” she said. “So I became very worried because not enough was coming out in the open, and I knew that there was more.”
She added, “That’s why you have the leaking. People are worried.”
She knows there’s a leak, the reason for the leak, the means of the leak and its justification. Which led to this little joust between Sean Spicer and a journalista.
Of course, this is nothing more than fetid navel-gazing on the part of the Republicans, right? The people subject to “unmasking” were no more plain civilians than Jello is a food group, right? This has nothing to do with privacy, right? Wrong.
Joseph diGenova, who served as U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia under Ronald Reagan, said Farkas and the former administration officials she referred to should be questioned under oath.
“Ms. Farkas made a major blunder and, in fact … probably confessed to a crime or knowledge of people who committed a crime,” he said. “It was a remarkable interview and amazing it went unnoticed at the time.”
We can only hope; but we know that with all of the Benghazi hearings under Trey Gowdy no one was fired or breathes air behind bars today.
But here are questions that, as per normal, no one — and I mean no one — in the American Media Maggot queue is asking.
James Kallstrom, a former assistant director of the FBI, told LifeZette it is troubling that Farkas even knew about the intelligence reports that she urged officials to spread to congressional staffers.
“How does somebody who’s not even in the administration anymore, who’s in civilian life, have access to this information?” he asked. “What kind of conspiracy cabal is this?”
What indeed? Let’s go to Circa.com for this news story.
Obama’s rule changes opened door for NSA intercepts of Americans to reach political hands
by John Solomon and Sara Carter
As his presidency drew to a close, Barack Obama’s top aides routinely reviewed intelligence reports gleaned from the National Security Agency’s incidental intercepts of Americans abroad, taking advantage of rules their boss relaxed starting in 2011 to help the government better fight terrorism, espionage by foreign enemies and hacking threats, Circa has learned. (More on this below.)
Dozens of times in 2016, those intelligence reports identified Americans who were directly intercepted talking to foreign sources or were the subject of conversations between two or more monitored foreign figures. Sometimes the Americans’ names were officially unmasked; other times they were so specifically described in the reports that their identities were readily discernible. Among those cleared to request and consume unmasked NSA-based intelligence reports about U.S. citizens were Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice, his CIA Director John Brennan and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch.
I hope you read that quite closely. Who could unmask American names? John Brennan. Loretta Lynch. Susan Rice. Remember that.
Today, the power to unmask an American’s name inside an NSA intercept — once considered a rare event in the intelligence and civil liberty communities — now resides with about 20 different officials inside the NSA alone. The FBI also has the ability to unmask Americans’ names to other intelligence professionals and policymakers.
Stop. That power exists within, to my estimation, roughly all 17 alphabet agencies in the American intelligence community. Because I have not yet done so, I enumerate those agencies now and here:
Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Central Intelligence Agency
National Security Agency
Defense Intelligence Agency
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Department of State – Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Department of Homeland Security – Office of Intelligence and Analysis
Drug Enforcement Administration – Office of National Security Intelligence
Department of the Treasury – Office of Intelligence and Analysis
Department of Energy – Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence
National Geospatial Intelligence Agency
National Reconnaissance Office
Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
Army Military Intelligence
Office of Naval Intelligence
Marine Corps Intelligence
Coast Guard Intelligence
All that’s missing is your local dental board’s intelligence unit. “You sir, slowly put down the amalgam.” Shh. Keep that one under your hat.
The ACLU, an ally of Obama on many issues, issued a statement a few months ago warning that the president’s loosened procedures governing who could request or see unmasked American intercepts by the NSA were “grossly inadequate” and lacked “appropriate safeguards.”
Put on your thinking caps. Ask: why would Obama do this? And why only two weeks from the end of his second term?
Nunes, as well as Trump supporters, will be trying to determine if that access was warranted or a backdoor form of political espionage by an outgoing administration trying to monitor its successor on the world stage.
Any proof Obama aides were using NSA-enriched intelligence reports to monitor his transition on the world stage could embolden the new president. But perhaps the most consequential outcome of the new revelations is that it may impact the NSA’s primary authority to intercept foreigners: Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is up for renewal at the end of the year.
Ah, wait. A touchy subject for the intelligence community. Because who holds the purse-strings? Congress. Circa then nails it with this revelatory paragraph.
For years, the NSA has been required to follow strict rules to protect the accidental intercepts of Americans from being consumed or misused by other government agencies. The rules required a process known as minimization, where the identity and information about an American who was intercepted is redacted or masked with generic references like “American No. 1.”
The number of senior government officials who could approve unmasking had been limited to just a few, like the NSA director himself.
Wait. This conflicts with what we know now.
And in his final days in office, Obama created the largest ever expansion of access to non-minimized NSA intercepts, creating a path for all U.S. intelligence to gain access to unmasked reports by changes encoded in a Reagan-era Executive Order 12333.
The government officials who could request or approve an exception to unmask a U.S. citizen’s identity has grown substantially. The NSA now has 20 executives who can approve the unmasking of American information inside intercepts, and the FBI has similar numbers.
And executives in 16 agencies — not just the FBI, CIA and NSA — have the right to request unmasked information.
Thank you ever so kindly, Barack Hussein Obama. Stellar decision. Smashing. Brilliant.
“This raises serious concerns that agencies that have responsibilities such as prosecuting domestic crimes, regulating our financial policy, and enforcing our immigration laws will now have access to a wealth of personal information that could be misused. Congress needs to take action to regulate and provide oversight over these activities,” ACLU legislative counsel Neema Singh Giuliani warned in January.
Even when an American’s name isn’t included in a report, the NSA’s intercept information could be so specific that it identifies them.
I think you see both the problems and the reasons. CNN insists, however, that Farkas revealed nothing and the GOP has nothing.
Better yet (sorry for the poor audio), Farkas takes back her words and than attributes their repetition to — you guessed it — fake news.
I frequently have to remind myself that I inhabit the planet Earth, and not Zephron.
It’s interesting to note that Fred Fleitz, a former CIA officer, said:
He also questioned why so many in Washington regard as “established fact” the conclusion of U.S. security agencies that Russia meddled in the election in order to help Trump and hurt Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. He said he does not think Russia believed Trump could win.
Fleitz pointed to reports that Russian agents tried to hack into the computer systems of both major parties but succeeded only with the Democrats.
“Maybe all they did was exploit the fact that the Democrats left the barn door open,” he said.
Fleitz said the Obama administration did little to counter cyber threats, not just from Russia but from China, as well.
FOX: Trump Surveilled Before Nomination, Agencies with Info Blocked Nunes for Weeks
by Michelle Moons
A Friday breaking Fox News report on surveillance of President Trump’s team that began before he became the Republican presidential nominee claimed a very senior intelligence official was responsible—as well as for the unmasking of the names of private U.S. citizens.
The report cited sources which also indicated that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) knew of the existence of the information in January, but one or more intelligence agencies blocked him, and there were only two locations where he could view the information that he called “very troubling.”
On Thursday, the New York Times began reporting what they claimed were the identities of two White House officials who were the sources of the information disclosed to Nunes.
Nunes met with sources on White House grounds on the day before he announced to reporters striking news that he had seen new and disturbing information indicating intelligence officials under the Obama administration “unmasked” the names of Trump team members who were incidentally surveilled.
Who might this “very senior intelligence official” be? Mike Cernovich writes:
Susan Rice Requested Unmasking of Incoming Trump Administration Officials
Susan Rice, who served as the National Security Adviser under President Obama, has been identified as the official who requested unmasking of incoming Trump officials, Cernovich Media can exclusively report.
The White House Counsel’s office identified Rice as the person responsible for the unmasking after examining Rice’s document log requests. The reports Rice requested to see are kept under tightly-controlled conditions. Each person must log her name before being granted access to them.
Upon learning of Rice’s actions, H. R. McMaster dispatched his close aide Derek Harvey to Capitol Hill to brief Chairman Nunes.
This reporter has been informed that Maggie Haberman has had this story about Susan Rice for at least 48 hours, and has chosen to sit on it in an effort to protect the reputation of former President Barack Obama.
Who is Maggie Haberman? She is a political correspondent for the New York Times. To whom is Susan Rice married? That would be ABC Executive Producer Ian Cameron, since 1992. He left ABC in 2010. He, of course, kept his links to news and newsrooms. She was Obama’s US Ambassador to the UN and finally his National Security Advisor. She also carried Obama’s heavy water when she went of most every Sunday show possible following the Benghazi attack to claim it occurred because of a video made in the United States when, in fact, Hillary Clinton and others — as well as her daughter, Chelsea Clinton — knew and had information that was not the case at all. She knew that very night.
Here, Susan Rice speaks at length to MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell and both hedges and commits to nothing.
Perfect. But perhaps I should just defer to my fallback experts: Trey Gowdy and Tucker Carlson. Think ”wiretapped” vs “surveilled.”
Please note that at no point did Trey Gowdy — or has anyone trustworthy — denied that the NSA is not Hoovering every bit of digital take available in the US and abroad. If for no other reason than to make it available to certified authorities when requested.
You can’t request it if it isn’t there.
Judge Napolitano — now back on Fox News — weighs in as well.
Don’t forget, the spying of Donald Trump actually began back in 2011. Why would that be? Because Donald Trump was seriously considering running for president in 2012. Trump was causing headaches for Obama because of the birth certificate issue and became involved in opposing Obama’s policies. Trump spoke at CPAC in 2011; that’s called a clue.
The issue was so important to Barack Hussein Obama that he decided to attend the May 1st, 2011 White House Correspondents Dinner where Donald Trump would be in attendance, in lieu of monitoring the assault and capture of Osama Bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan the same night by SEAL Team 6 — of course, a singularly-important event. Obama spent most of his speech at that dinner attacking Donald Trump. Jack Posobiec indicates that Obama had, at that time, Donald Trump under surveillance as a private citizen for political purposes only; no security issues were involved.
2011 was a significant year for the Obama administration overall because he was simultaneously spying on Angela Merkel and other world leaders. This is also, 2011, when Obama changed the rules of intercept material by the US government. You see how this all ties together.
But here’s the bottom line, in my opinion. What started out in the Grand Scheme of Life under the Imperial Obama as an intent to link Trump and his assistants to Mother Russia in order to delegitimize his entire presidency and keep him from conducting the business necessary to enable his goals, Obama and his sniveling jackanapes may have inadvertently laid a path of digital and oral wreckage right back to themselves which could yield depositions, subpoenas, grand juries, indictments and perhaps even criminal prosecutions.
In other words, his little arrangement of mines and minefields may have supremely backfired.
BZ
P.S.
Michael Flynn requesting immunity? Let us not forget that he was chucked under the proverbial political bus just a few minutes ago. He’d be a DC moron not to lawyer up. Let us also not forget how many persons in the Obama Administration requested either immunity or invoked the Fifth Amendment.
First, 5 million illegals were granted immunity under Obama.
1. Jeff Neely, the former Pacific Rim regional commissioner for the General Services Administration, pled the fifth on April 16, 2012 when Congress asked him to testify about overly-lavish spending on GSA conferences. He was eventually sentenced to prison for fraud anyway.
2. John Beale, a former official at the EPA, pled the fifth on October 1, 2013 when Congress probed into Beale’s theft of nearly $900,000 worth of salaries and bonuses from his own agency.
3. John Sepulveda, a former VA official, pled the fifth on October 30, 2013 after Congress subpoenaed him to testify as to why the department spent $6 million on conferences in Florida.
4. Diana Rubens and Kimberly Graves, two senior officials in the Department of Veterans Affairs, each pled the fifth before Congress on November 2, 2015 when asked to testify about $400,000 they had allegedly milked out of a VA relocation expense program. They were eventually given back their jobs.
5. Greg Roseman, a deputy director of the IRS, pled the fifth on June 26, 2013, after Congress asked him to testify about why the largest contract in IRS history was awarded to a close friend of his.
6. Patrick Cunningham, chief of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona, pled the fifth when Congress asked him to testify about Operation Fast and Furious, which trafficked more than 2,000 guns along the U.S.-Mexico border.
7. Lois Lerner, an IRS director in charge of tax-exemptions, pled the fifth numerous times during Congress’ investigation into the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups.
Proving that she and the rest of the American Media Maggots very much believe that Barack Obama’s book was correct; it’s about the Audacity of Hype.
All of the American Media Maggots embraced hype regarding the northeast’s Snowmageddon, then proceeded to embrace Rachel Maddow’s hype regarding President Trump’s Taxmageddon.
Rachel Maddow did her level best — not her goal, I’d wager — to prove herself and her shabby MSNBC network imbecilic and, simultaneously, helped elevate President Donald Trump. Please watch the segment I call “Let’s Laugh At Leftists.”
A startling revelation, yes? A literal bombshell of information? Revelatory beyond words, beyond human ken? Something that left America gobsmacked and reeling?
Not quite. What we discovered is that the two pages of a 1040 document with Trump’s name on it indicated — as diametrically-opposed as possible to what Hillary Clinton claimed in the presidential debates — is that in 2005 Donald Trump made $150 million dollars and subsequently paid $38 million dollar in taxes. We also discovered this:
It took Rachel Maddow 23 minutes to actually get to the point of “revealing” the documents, so much time in fact that the Trump White House actually scooped her with this Tweet.
What occurred on her show was, well, nothing. She possessed two pages of a 1040 tax document which, by the way, is illegal to acquire by way of 26 USC 7213 and 26 USC 6103, both federal felonies, absent permission of the person named. How did Maddow receive the documents? From a man named David Cay Johnston, who stated he “found” the documents in his mailbox. He now says he thinks Donald Trump himself may have sent them. If so, both Johnston and Maddow and MSNBC took a large bite out of a shit sandwich camouflaged as a tasty burger.
As a result of this Nothing Burger, the internet proceeded to mock and destroy Rachel Maddow from all sides; please check the articles here and here, just for starters. And when you find fellow Leftist Stephen Colbert mocking you, well, you’ve lost your chops.
This just in: Stephen has acquired a special joke. He’s going to share it with the world. Shortly. Keep watching. #LSSCpic.twitter.com/miSmB3ZYEw
You’ve also lost it when avowed Communist Van Jones think you pooped in the punchbowl.
The New York Times also took a proverbial hit, continuing to prove its official Fake News status, from the DailyCaller.com:
NYT Eats Crow After Trump Tax Return Proves Major Story Wrong
by Alex Pfeiffer
The White House released President Trump’s tax return from 2005 on Tuesday, which showed that he paid $38 million on $150 million in income. This disproves the premise of a major New York Times story in the lead-up to the November election.
The Oct. 1 Times story was headlined: “Donald Trump Tax Records Show He Could Have Avoided Taxes for Nearly Two Decades, The Times Found.” The New York Times reporters wrote: “Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, a tax deduction so substantial it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying any federal income taxes for up to 18 years, records obtained by The New York Times show.”
But what of the actual issue of legality, privacy, the deep state? Sean Hannity from Fox News had this to say:
Hannity spoke about NBC because, of course, MSNBC is an arm of that network, which is owned by NBCUniversal, all of which is owned by Comcast. All of which leads to some very important dot-connecting as laid out by Tucker Carlson.
Ladies and gentlemen, the American Media Maggots continue to bleat that they and only they can be the one, the true, the honest, the forthright and trustworthy purveyors of news in the United States of America. No one else can be consigned with such a weighty responsibility; only the Fourth Estate can carry out this monumental task with regularity, efficiency and veracity.
Except that, they continue to prove, serially, that they really are Fake News themselves by serially pulling bonehead moves as with all of the preceding. They are pissed, they are frightened, they are hemorrhaging both readers and cash, and they are quakingly desperate because they are also losing this all-too-important element: POWER. The power to make you fear their might, the power to lord it over you, the power to restrict and craft and fundamentally determine what is important across the United States.
The American Media Maggots are scared, they are desperate, and it shows.
BZ
P.S.
This is why you pay me the big bucks, ladies and gentlemen. To put it all together.
The American Media Maggots — like defense attorneys who, faced with the facts against them shift into personal ad hominem attack mode — have decided the only choice remaining to them is to double down with stunning celerity on cheating, scapegoating, minimizing, hiding, obfuscation, ignorance and, now, labeling. Time to re-brand and, moreover, stigmatize news sources other than their own.
Let’s start with some refreshing truth and, unfortunately, regress from there to the lies, ploys and Alinsky-like deception crafted to push the Leftists’ narrative of control.
Do you hear ANY of these examples trotted out by the American Media Maggots in their campaign of control? Of course not. They cannot abide truth. The last thing the “fake news” bleats are about is truth. Cognitive dissonance of the Left.
Welcome to the new normal. Aided and abetted by the Standard Leftist List.
The AMM are losing control. They don’t care for it one bit. The election, of course, told them so. The faces of the American Media Maggots were slammed into the hard and textured concrete sidewalk of reality, receiving completely unanticipated bloody injuries and broken facial bones.
The facts don’t lie. Print ads diminished by 15% during this third quarter at the largest newspaper publisher in the United States, Gannett — producer of USA Today and over 100 other brands. Revenues were down 17% at McClatchy (where I used to work in the 70s, having met Eleanor McClatchy herself), 19% at the New York Times and a massive 21% at the Wall Street Journal. Newspapers tried to make up revenue in the digital domain but that was no panacea because — you didn’t see this coming? — Millennials don’t like to pay for online entertainment (such as music and videos) and as far as they’re concerned, newspapers were entertainment. Who would pay for newspaper content when they could get everything they wanted from John Stewart or Steven Colbert?
I’d suggest that another of the reasons the American Media Maggots and social media happen to find themselves in this critical situation is due to their both manufacturing fake news and deleting real news.
Paul Watson explains.
The same media that gave Hillary 98% chance of winning & hoax rape stories is lecturing us about “fake news”
The American Media Maggots and social media are doubling down with censorship and the denigrating of non-major news sources. If it’s not ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, the New York Times, LA Times, etc. — then it’s not real news they say.
Witness, most recently, the major social platforms’ tsunami-like predilection towards censorship regarding “extremist content.” Who determines “extremist content” you ask? Well, if you have to ask the question you already grasp the answer. When you declare “fake news” you also inherently declare censorship and the elimination of free speech.
The AMM believe they have few options left because, even with the all-out 24/7 assault against Donald Trump, “their” candidate didn’t win. Part of the loss includes the realization that people were not paying sufficient attention, in their minds, to the so-called “mainstream media.” In other words, that the MSM was the only game in town.
Mark Zuckerberg outlines Facebook’s ideas to battle fake news
by Abby Ohlheiser
A week after trying to reassure the public that it was “extremely unlikely hoaxes changed the outcome of this election,” Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg outlined several ways the company might try to stop the spread of fake news on the platform in the future.
“We’ve been working on this problem for a long time and we take this responsibility seriously. We’ve made significant progress, but there is more work to be done,” Zuckerberg wrote in a Friday night post on his own Facebook page. He then named seven approaches the company was considering to address the issue, including warning labels on false stories, easier user reporting methods and the integration of third-party verification.
Just who are considered purveyors of “fake news”? That’s correct; mostly right-leaning or conservative sites, listed as Drudge or Breitbart.
But let’s state the obvious about the Drudge Report. It is nothing more than an aggregator of news. Drudge simply recaps various stories, news-sites. His sources are frequently Leftist US media, to include the NY Times, LA Times, and all the Usual Suspects. How in the hell is the Drudge Report “fake news”? That makes no sense whatsoever.
They have lost their “gatekeeper” status and desperately seek to lock it back up. This is what assails and offends the most. CNN’s Chris Cuoma sums it up best with this brief video, which is breathtaking in its arrogance.
Leftists insisted you couldn’t possess those emails. Unless you printed them out, of course. Cuomo could have advised people to read these emails online at Wikipedia. He did not. Additionally, the bulk of Leftists stated the emails were themselves false. But you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Either the emails are fake or it’s illegal to possess stolen federal documents and a violation of the USC. You justified the release of Trump’s tax papers, which was illegal. You didn’t seem much upset with that, NYT.
Fake news polls, AMM? Fake rape stories on any number of occasions, AMM? Cars that tip over, AMM? Dan Rather lying about George Bush? Hundreds of false discrimination stories? Rick Jones? Sharmeka Moffitt? Reza Aslan? Tahera Ahmad? Anti-gay tip receipt? Duke University? Michael Nifong? Oberlin KKK hoax? Tawana Brawley? Grand Valley State University black chick? Joseph Baken? CAIR’s staged videos? CNN interviewing their own cameraman, claiming it was an anti-Trump protester on Don Lemon? “Trumpers violent” when it was in fact Leftists who burned, hit, stabbed, cut, destroyed property around the US? HRC having a “98% chance of winning”?
The “Fourth Estate” exists only as, now, a PR firm for Leftists and Demorats. We’re on to you. You are in fact naked.
How shallow be thy memory, American Media Maggots. Where an anti-conservative meme exists, you jump on it and provide vast amounts of time, headline space and copy inches. Because you have an anti-conservative theme to catch.
And in this process the American Media Maggots have lost their credibility for a myriad of reasons. But the persons and situations responsible for their current plight need go no farther then each and every newsroom around the country, 95% of whom are registered Demorats, Greens or Socialists. This is why, when asked, journalists will never ever tell you for whom they voted in any way. They won’t even own it, hiding under the cloak of “impartiality” which is the last thing they are. Craven cowards all. Like Hillary Rodham Clinton, they absolutely cannot tell the truth. There are no such animals as “impartiality” in today’s newsrooms.
Any old person can report or make the news now. Photos and videos are everywhere. “Real” journalists aren’t required any more — and by “real” journalists I mean those schooled at the feet of Leftist elite universities and subjected to the pathological, intolerant, unrealistic, biased, limited, bitter, moribund thoughts of the Left. “Journalism” is now a wide-open game unconfined by ideology, cash or structure.
More ludicrous is the thought embraced by the AMM — as I briefed above — that Millennials or GenZ’rs are going to PAY for your content. Good luck with that shite. They have no idea what a “newspaper” or a subscription IS.
You want fake news? How about these, to begin? The examples are simply endless.
Leftist journalists believe they are infinitely more sophisticated and enlightened than the bulk of their readers or viewers, and certainly more so than us commoners, groundlings, proles and serfs, the unwashed and unrefined rabble who dare to vote, act, speak, write or advocate against their superior insight and their elitist cultured views. Their Perriers beat our crass and crude Budweisers any day. Just ask them.
In a brief moment of clarity, Kanye West admitted.
Then there was the Washington Post’s loving clasp of “fake news” via TheIntercept.com:
THE WASHINGTON POST on Thursday night promoted the claims of a new, shadowy organization that smears dozens of U.S. news sites that are critical of U.S. foreign policy as being “routine peddlers of Russian propaganda.” The article by reporter Craig Timberg — headlined “Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say” — cites a report by an anonymous website calling itself PropOrNot, which claims that millions of Americans have been deceived this year in a massive Russian “misinformation campaign.”
The odd thing is, PropOrNot.com simply lists sites it considers propaganda and — I sure hope you’re sitting down for this one — most of them lean to the right. Further, it establishes no evidence and fails to release the names of its “editorial board” or any names at all, for that matter. It simply claims that it’s the Russians, the Russians, the Russians. Despite the fact that one month before PropOrNot came out (November 30th), the FBI (via the NY Times) divulged it had no evidence to conclude Russia was behind Trump or the hacking or the campaigns. See my post here.
Leftist Google got into the game by removing “fake news” that per capita black people commit more crimes than Caucasoids (they do, shown by FBI statistics) as indicated by that huge Righty UK organization known as the Guardian. Except that the Guardian does not lean right. Damn. Now that’s inconvenient.
Let’s not forget the “journalists” who colluded with the Clinton campaign as proven by The Telegraph and Wikileaks. They provided an extra crispy chunk of fake news.
Of course, Hillary Clinton had to enter the mix with this.
Hillary Clinton’s answer? Government intervention.
So Michelle Malkin countered logically and demolished HRC’s arguments.
Let’s not forget that Hillary Clinton is a personal purveyor of fake news as she claimed back in 2008 that she landed in Bosnia under sniper fire.
She also claimed that the Benghazi attacks were the result of a “terrible video” created in the US which caused the Libyan natives to go immediately berserk.
That was a monstrous lie, because Hillary Clinton already knew that night — as she wrote to the Libyan president and her own daughter Chelsea in emails — that video had nothing to do with the Benghazi attacks which resulted in the deaths of four Americans; it was instead an “al Qaeda-like group.”
Clinton’s answer: the government should determine what’s “real news” and what isn’t. Excellent. Just like Russian submarines and ships, let’s put a governmental Political Officer in each and every newsroom around the United States. Let’s license bloggers. The answer from Leftists is always to remove freedoms instead of expanding freedoms. Clamp down on free speech when it doesn’t correspond with their world. It’s about banning and censorship.
Even the proven faker Brian Williams got into the mix regarding “fake news.” That the American Media Maggots covered him at all, is that not the ultimate in insanity? An individual who was fired to lying about news given column inches and air time about “fake news”?
Obama couldn’t leave well enough alone and had Rolling Stone create fake news. From BizPacReview.com:
Obama tells ‘Rolling Stone’ Dems lost partly because ‘Fox News is in every bar and restaurant’
by Michael Dorstewitz
In a post-election interview with “Rolling Stone,” President Obama blamed his party’s failure to reach out to blue-collar workers on the proliferation of 24-hour cable news — specifically Fox News Channel.
“Part of it is Fox News in every bar and restaurant in big chunks of the country,” Obama said.
Throughout all of this, however, please note the recurring theme. At no time can fault be laid at the feet of the Demorats or Hillary Clinton for any reason whatsoever. And, of course, Obama is incorrect because CNN or HLN is on in every bar or lounge or waiting area across the nation, period. Obama lies and Rolling Stone helps create fake news.
Hillary Clinton, Brian Williams, the MSM, Barack Obama having the temerity to lecture me about fake news? I mean, honest to God, you can’t write this shite.
Speaking of God, just when you thought “fake news” couldn’t get any more stupid, it got more stupid when Pope Francis weighed in. When you compare “fake news” to coprophagia, you simply look the moron. Note to Pope Francis: stick to God and leave the coprophagia to the AMM.
Let us not forget the biggest, most shameful lies were started by Leftists and then promulgated by Leftist media such as, say, Obama’s insistence that if we like our doctor under the ACA we can keep our doctor whilst, simultaneously, Jonathan Gruber was larfing it up in various meetings and conferences explaining how it was all a massive “ruse for the rubes.” Ben Rhodes reveled in how Obama’s actual anti-Israel and pro-Muslim policies. These are lies of both commission and omission.
If you want a real hoot, read the Kelly Riddell article at the Washington Times entitled “Top 10 ‘real’ news stories that turned out to be fake.” She skewers the shite out of Obama, Ferguson, BLM (“hands up don’t shoot”), the Iran Deal negotiated with “moderate Iranians,” Bowe Bergdahl’s exchange, Benghazi and the video, climate change and hurricanes, Fidel Castro was a great guy with fabulous free Cuban healthcare, cops are killing blacks at an unprecedented racist rate, Steve Bannon is a white supremacist and the biggest LIE of all: Trump will lose horribly to Hillary Clinton.
The bottom line is this: the American Media Maggots are quaking and frightened to their very core. They are now the thing they accused George Bush of being: incurious. They no longer ask questions. They’d rather the government provide their talking points. So now their livelihoods, their credibility (though the vast number of “journalists” in any given newsroom couldn’t likely spell or define the word), their cash flow is on the line. Their very survival.
No one “owns” the truth. Not the Right, not the Left. And like anything else that is consumed, the phrase caveat emptor pervades. If you cannot detect actual “fake news” then you resemble a Stegosaurus: a walnut for a brain and a ganglion of nerves in your hips to make your legs work.
One must be a wise consumer of news. And beware.
Because, American Media Maggots, no one trusts you any more.
First, please watch the video. Joe Scarborough is entirely correct. Watch the Leftist chick on his right, listen to what she says, how she says it, her body language.
Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski on last Monday’s (11-28) Morning Joe on MSNBC.
But because I am “fake news” (and other Conservatives like me), what I display here must be wrong. Ginned up. False. Right?
Unless. . .
It would appear that Joe Scarborough is accurate and Miss Smarmy Pants is bleeding condescension, arrogance, is contemptuous, dismissive, and would rather leave facts behind as soon as humanly possible.
Joe Scarborough dared to speak the truth. You are hated, American Media Maggots, quite precisely because you and Leftists/Demorats are so alike, reveling in your hypocrisy.
That is a major factor for the AMM hemorrhaging readers and advertisers. That is also a major factor in your creation of the “fake news” theme, because you are also losing your gatekeeper status. You are in a fight and you’re assembling more weapons with which to combat those considering abandonment.
SCARBOROUGH: “You still don’t get it. You’re still being hypocritical! You can get it wrong in the primary, that’s fine – you can get it wrong in the general election but you keep getting it wrong!”
You’re losing your fastidious and once-ubiquitous grip.
Racism:Reid said gerrymandering reform and “the abolition of the Electoral College would be a start” when engaging with followers on how to fix the issue.
Taiyesha Baker, of course, is a black female.
Proving that she and the rest of the American Media Maggots very much believe that Barack Obama’s book was correct; it’s about the Audacity of Hype.
It took Rachel Maddow 23 minutes to actually get to the point of “revealing” the documents, so much time in fact that the Trump White House actually scooped her with this Tweet.
What occurred on her show was, well, nothing. She possessed two pages of a 1040 tax document which, by the way, is illegal to acquire by way of 
And as 
The American Media Maggots — like defense attorneys who, faced with the facts against them shift into personal ad hominem attack mode — have decided the only choice remaining to them is to double down with stunning celerity on cheating, scapegoating, minimizing, hiding, obfuscation, ignorance and, now, labeling. Time to re-brand and, moreover, stigmatize news sources other than their own.
Witness, most recently, the major social platforms’ tsunami-like predilection towards 
They have lost their “gatekeeper” status and desperately seek to lock it back up. This is what assails and offends the most. CNN’s Chris Cuoma sums it up best with this brief video, which is breathtaking in its arrogance.
Leftist journalists believe they are infinitely more sophisticated and enlightened than the bulk of their readers or viewers, and certainly more so than us commoners, groundlings, proles and serfs, the unwashed and unrefined rabble who dare to vote, act, speak, write or advocate against their superior insight and their elitist cultured views. Their Perriers beat our crass and crude Budweisers any day. Just ask them.
Of course, Hillary Clinton had to enter the mix with this.