Showing posts with label Big Journalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big Journalism. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Roger Stone Defends Donald Trump Jr.

WH Correspondent 

Self-proclaimed provocateur and political strategist, Roger Stone, vehemently denied allegations of collusion between then Presidential Candidate Donald Trump, his family, or his campaign, and Russia to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. Stone panned the allegations before a large audience of the D.C. Young Republicans at the Capitol Hill Club on Tuesday night. The crowd erupted with applause as Stone announced, “This is a fairytale. This is a canard. This is a steaming plate of bull***t.”

Stone said that neither the Democrats nor the House and Senate Intelligence committees had produced a scintilla of evidence of collusion between the Trump camp and the Russians. Stone blamed John Podesta, the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Presidential Campaign, for the speculations, saying:
I give John Podesta some great credit because he’s the one who created this false narrative. Why? He had to distract from the fact that he and his brother, Tony, and Bill and Hillary Clinton were making millions of dollars from the oligarchs around Putin. What better way to distract from the fact that there was a Presidential candidate in bed with the Russians. There was a presidential candidate blackmail-able by the Russians. There was a Presidential candidate literally taking millions in speaking fees, contributions, and business deals, and that candidate was Hillary Rodham Clinton.

            Stone took specific aim at the recent allegations that Donald Trump Jr. had nefarious dealings with Russian actors to advance his father’s political career. Stone called the allegations “despicable,” saying:
            Someone credible comes to you and says they have evidence of your opponent’s wrongdoing and that evidence can be documented , then it would be malpractice not to meet with that person and hear what they have to say. In this particular case there was no information that any use and therefore this particular meeting had no result.

After joking with the audience that the next Trump family member to be targeted with allegations of a Russian conspiracy would be the Trump family dog for contact with a Russian Wolf-hound, Stone championed Donald Trump Jr. calling him a “most effective surrogate on behalf of his father and the Trump Pence ticket.” Stone lauded Donald Trump Jr.’s use of twitter to stand against political elites who from the beginning declared that Donald Trump had no chance of winning the Presidency.

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Pamela Geller: Trump Is Right, and He Must Win

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Branden Camp/Getty Images

by PAMELA GELLER15 Jun 2016413

The post-jihad denial that we see in the wake of every Islamic attack since 9/11 has made possible the wild successes of Islamic groups that are waging jihad in the cause of Islam.

After every jihad terror attack, Islamic supremacists and their paid shills in the media unleash relentless, vicious attacks upon those of us who oppose jihad. Never do we hear or see them go after the Islamic texts and teachings that fuel this war.

A case in point was a Salon article published Tuesday: “Donald Trump’s war with Islam: A campaign rooted in pernicious religious discrimination,” by Simon Maloy. Maloy said that the Orlando jihad massacre gave Trump “the opportunity he needed to define the campaign he intends to run: a campaign that casts the Muslim faith and its practitioners – both inside and outside the U.S. – as antagonistic to American interests.”

He accused Trump of running a campaign “that casts the Muslim faith and its practitioners – both inside and outside the U.S. – as antagonistic to American interests.” Trump’s speech in the wake of the Orlando jihad massacre was, according to Maloy, “a relentlessly ugly diatribe that unambiguously embraced the pernicious and anti-American idea that a person’s religious faith makes them a threat to national security.”

The idea that the depraved left sees the murdered nightclub-goers as an “opportunity” for Trump is as vicious as the attack itself. Trump sounded a warning, and he was right to do so. It was not Donald Trump who made Islamic jihad “antagonistic to American interests”; the jihad doctrine itself is antagonistic to American interest and freedoms. How many thousands have to die in the cause of Islam?

In his speech, Trump said that he would “suspend immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we understand how to end these threats.” He is right. After the Boston Marathon jihad bombing, my organization, the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), called for the following:

— AFDI calls for immediate investigation into foreign mosque funding in the West and for new legislation making foreign funding of mosques in non-Muslim nations illegal.
— AFDI calls for surveillance of mosques and regular inspections of mosques in the U.S. and other non-Muslim nations to look for pro-violence materials. Any mosque advocating jihad or any aspects of Sharia that conflict with Constitutional freedoms and protections should be closed.
— AFDI calls for curriculum and Islam-related materials in textbooks and museums to describe the Islamic doctrine and history accurately, including its violent doctrines and 1,400-year war against unbelievers.
— AFDI calls for a halt of foreign aid to Islamic nations with Sharia-based constitutions and/or governments.
— AFDI denounces the use of Sharia law in any Western court or nation.
— AFDI advocates deportation hearings against non-citizens who promote jihad in our nations.
— AFDI calls for an immediate halt of immigration by Muslims into nations that do not currently have a Muslim majority population.
— AFDI calls for laws providing that anyone seeking citizenship in the United States should be asked if he or she supports Sharia law, and investigated for ties to pro-Sharia groups. If so, citizenship should not be granted.
— AFDI calls for the cancellation of citizenship or permanent residency status for anyone who leaves the country of his residence to travel for the purpose of engaging in jihad activity, and for the refusal of reentry into his country of residence after that jihad activity.
— AFDI calls careful investigation of Muslims resident in non-Muslim country who have obtained naturalized citizenship or permanent residency status, to ensure that that status was not obtained under false pretenses.
— AFDI calls for the designation of the following as grounds for immediate deportation: fomenting, plotting, financing, attempting or carrying out jihad attacks; encouraging or threatening or attempting to carry out the punishments Islamic law mandates for apostasy, adultery, blasphemy, fornication or theft; threatening or attempting or carrying out honor murders, forced marriage, underage marriage, female genital mutilation, or polygamy.
— AFDI calls for the U.S. and other free nations to have jihad, as it is traditionally understood in Islamic jurisprudence to involve warfare against and subjugation of non-Muslims, declared a crime against humanity at the U.N., or to withdraw from the U.N. and have its headquarters moved to a Muslim nation.
— AFDI calls for legislating making illegal the foreign funding of Islamic Studies departments and faculty positions in our universities.

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

How many people would be alive today had American politicians heeded our calls? Instead, we are blacklisted, smeared, libeled, and defamed, while pro-jihad groups are feted on Capital Hill.

But Maloy complained that Trump’s focus was “on Muslims exclusively – not radicalized Muslims, but every Muslim person outside the U.S. He referred to the expanded admittance of refugees from Syria as potentially ‘a better, bigger version of the legendary Trojan Horse.’ Per Trump, Hillary Clinton, as president, would ‘be admitting hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Middle East with no system to vet them, or to prevent the radicalization of their children.’ It’s all fearmongering based on lies and prejudice.”

Such idiocy is without peer. ISIS has vowed to send jihad killers to the west via migration. They are coming — why let them in? No, not all migrants are Muslim soldiers, but enough are to cause unimaginable death and destruction. Would you eat from a bowl of M & M’s if you knew two of them were laced with cyanide?

Muslims groups such as the Hamas-tiedCouncil on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) have urged Muslims not to cooperatewith law enforcement. Muslim groups have demanded that law enforcement agencies dismantle counterterror programs. Muslim groups demand adherence to sharia in the language used in counterterror training material: the Department of Homeland Security issued guidelines just days beforethe Orlando jihad massacre forbidding agents from using the words “jihad” and “sharia” in connection with terrorism because doing so offended Muslims.

Maloy is likewise interested in policing language to avoid offending Muslims, saying of Trump’s immigration proposal: “It’s reprehensible, and it’s the kind of language that results in people getting hurt… If your goal is to promote the radicalization of a population within your own borders, having a major party presidential candidate talk about them all as if they’re criminals is an excellent way to go about it.”

No. What is reprehensible is how viciously the lapdogs for jihad blame the victim — led by the scrubber-in-chief in the White House. They call upon the targets to change their behavior, to subjugate themselves to Islam. Maloy is saying that Trump has to change his language or else Muslims will become “radicalized.” Last year, the mainstream media likewise said that the jihad assassination attempt on my free speech event in Garland, Texas was my fault, that I was taunting Muslims. Were the gay revelers in the Pulse nightclub last Saturday night taunting Muslims? Based on that flawed logic, yes. Our very way of life taunts sharia-adherent Muslims.

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Jihad terror attacks present a unique opportunity for Islamic supremacists and jihadis. First, the kill, which is a great victory in the cause of Islam. The successful jihad attack attracts more Muslims and converts to the cause.

Secondly and most importantly, terror-tied groups like CAIR, their lapdogs in the enemedia, and pro-Islamic politicians like President Obama use the slaughter to push, proselytize, lie, deceive, and talk, talk, talk up Islam (while denigrating all other religions) on every major media news channel.

Trump is right. He was wrong about Garland, but he surely gets it now. And this is why he is so wildly popular — because finally, someone with a huge platform is calling out the enemedia and the dhimmi press, and giving them the long overdue, much-needed middle finger they so richly deserve.

Trump must win in order for this nation to survive. Trump must win if we are to prevail in this worldwide war against freedom.

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author ofThe Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the ResistanceFollow her on Twitter here. Like her on Facebook here.

Read More Stories About:

Big JournalismFaithJihadDonald Trump,Islamic StateOrlando Terror AttackSalon,Sharia LawSimon Maloy

Tuesday, May 31, 2016

SiriusXM Announces Suspension of Glenn Beck over Brad Thor Interview Comments

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio
iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Gage Skidmore

by BREITBART NEWS31 May 201614,013

SiriusXM hosts Stephen K. Bannon and David Webb announced on Breitbart News Daily that SiriusXM has suspended Glenn Beck and Webb will temporarily take over Beck’s 9AM to noon Eastern time slot on SiriusXM’s Patriot Channel 125.

SiriusXM issued the following statement:

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

SiriusXM encourages a diversity of discourse and opinion on our talk programs. However, comments recently made by a guest on the independently produced Glenn Beck Program, in our judgement, may be reasonably construed by some to have been advocating harm against an individual currently running for office, which we cannot and will not condone. For that reason, we have suspended The Glenn Beck Program from our Patriot channel for the coming week and are evaluating its place in our lineup going forward. SiriusXM is committed to a spirited, robust, yet responsible political conversation and believes this action reflects those values.


The suspension is in response to the interview Beck did with fiction author Brad Thor last Wednesday, in which Thor likened the GOP’s presumptive nominee Donald Trump to a South American-style dictator who would cause an “extinction-level event” for the country if elected. Thor then declared that in such a case, Congress would not be able to remove Trump from office by “legal means” through impeachment, so Thor asked “what patriot will step up and do that” if Trump oversteps his Constitutional restraints. Beck agreed with Thor’s assessment.

Here is the exchange:

THOR: He is a danger to America and I got to ask you a question and this is serious and this could ring down incredible heat on me because I’m about to suggest something very bad. It is a hypothetical I am going to ask as a thriller writer.

With the feckless, spineless Congress we have, who will stand in the way of Donald Trump overstepping his constitutional authority as President? If Congress won’t remove him from office, what patriot will step up and do that if, if, he oversteps his mandate as president, his constitutional-granted authority, I should say, as president.

If he oversteps that, how do we get him out of office? And I don’t think there is a legal means available. I think it will be a terrible, terrible position the American people will be in to get Trump out of office because you won’t be able to do it through Congress.

BECK: I would agree with you on that and I don’t think you actually have the voices we’ve been talking about and we’ve been talking about this off-air for a while. I think the voices like ours go away. I don’t think we are allowed – especially if things, and I believe the economy is going to go to crap, even if Jesus was in office. It’s going to naturally reset. It has to.


Read the rest of the exchange here.

After receiving criticism for these comments from people who believed Thor and Beck were suggesting or at least implying assassination, Beck offered a lengthy defense of his statements. You can read the full transcript of his defense here.

Listen to Bannon and Webb’s announcement of the suspension below:

advertisement

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6AM to 9AM Eastern.

Read More Stories About:

Big JournalismRadioGlenn BeckSiriusXM

Thursday, April 14, 2016

Human Rights Group Decries ‘Gendercide,’ 200 Million Girls Killed by Sex-Selective Abortions

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Reuters

by THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.14 Apr 201648

The real “war on women” takes place on the battlefield where abortion clinics target baby girls for elimination, according to congressional testimony from Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, a human-rights group.

“Sex-selective abortion is the ultimate violence against females,” Reggie Littlejohn, President of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, told Breitbart News. “Aborting a baby just because she is a girl is the ultimate act of gender discrimination.”

On Thursday, April 14, a congressionalhearing is being held before the House Judiciary Committee to debate the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA) of 2016, a bill aimed at reducing gender-based abortion in America. The bill is being opposed by abortion-giant Planned Parenthood, NARAL and other abortion-rights groups.

The United Nations estimates that some 200 million women are “demographically missing” in the world today due to sex-selective abortion. This number is greater than all the casualties of all the wars of the twentieth century combined.

According to Littlejohn, this is the real “war on women,” despite the fact that it is ignored by many groups supposedly interested in women’s rights, and constitutes “gendercide.”

In China, there are some 37 million marriage-age men without a female counterpart, due to systematic, sex-selective abortions, Littlejohn pointed out. In India, the number is about the same. The growing gender disparity has had a notable effect on human trafficking and sexual slavery as well.

Predictably, the Huffington Post is on record as defending sex-selective abortion and opposing PRENDA, contending that Asian-American women would be unfairly subjected to greater scrutiny than Caucasian women, due to the prevalence of sex-selective abortion in many Asian cultures.

In her HuffPo essay, Miriam W. Yeung, an abortion-rights advocate who described herself as “a proud queer Asian American immigrant woman activist,” discounted the importance of sex-selective abortions, saying that legislative efforts to limit gender-based abortion constitute an “attempt to distract from the real issues at hand.”

Though Ms. Yeung may consider the targeting of baby girls for elimination to be a non-issue, her opinion is far from universal. A 2015 report from Geneva on global violence against women called sex-selective abortion “one of the most shocking crimes against humanity.”

Yeung, who is executive director of the National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum, is among those called to witness at the Congressional hearing Thursday.

Although the problem of sex-selective abortions is most evident in nations like China and India, it is a significant issue in the United States as well.

A 2011 study by Dr. Sunita Puri of the University of California at San Francisco found that 89 percent of immigrant Indian women who became pregnant with girls during the study period had abortions. None, however, who were pregnant with boys aborted them.  The participants identified influence from their husbands and mothers-in-law as “sources of significant pressure” to abort their children, once it was learned they were girls.

Curiously, using ultrasound and sperm-sorting technologies explicitly for sex selection is illegal in India, whereas this is legal in the United States.

This is the sort of atrocity PRENDA seeks to abolish.

Follow Thomas D. Williams on Twitter   

Read More Stories About:

Big GovernmentBig JournalismAbortion,Planned ParenthoodAbortionNARALSex-Selective Abortionsex-selectionMiriam W. YeungPRENDA

Wednesday, April 6, 2016

Ann Coulter: Moonies for Cruz

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

by ANN COULTER6 Apr 20166,914

Congratulations to 

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)

97%

 for winning his fourth primary! Usually Donald Trump wins the primaries — where you go and vote, like in a real election. Cruz wins the caucuses — run by the state parties, favored by political operators and cheaters.

Until now, the only primaries Cruz has won are in Texas (his home state), Oklahoma (basically the same state) and Idaho (where Trump never campaigned).

So now, Cruz has finally won an honest-to-goodness primary. This is great news for him, provided: (1) the general election is a caucus, and (2) the national media universally denounce Cruz’s Democratic opponent the same way the Wisconsin media denounced Trump.

In that case, Cruz should do fine.

The Cruz-bots don’t care. They don’t care that they’re being used as a cat’s-paw by the Never Trump crowd, and that a brokered Republican convention is more likely to end with Bernie as the nominee than Cruz.

The Cruz cultists don’t even care about plain honesty, which I always thought was a conservative value. Republicans used to be appalled by guttersnipe, lying political operators like the Clintons. Now they are guttersnipe, lying political operators like the Clintons.

It’s all hands on deck to stop the only presidential candidate who wants to save America from the cheap labor plutocrats.

Cruz has flipped to Trump’s side on every important political issue of this campaign — which only ARE issues because of Trump. These are:

— Quadrupling the number of foreign guest workers to help ranchers and farmers get cheap labor: Cruz was for it, and now is against it.

— Legalizing illegal aliens: Cruz was for it, and now is against it.

— The Trans-Pacific Partnership deal: Cruz was for it, and now is against it.

— Building a wall: Cruz was against it, and now is for it.

These are all positions Cruz has changed since being a senator — most of them he’s flipped on only in the last year. I’m supposed to believe that U.S. senators can sincerely change their minds about policies it was their job to know about, but a New York developer can never change his mind about pop-offs he made more than a decade ago.

Back in 1999 — 17 years ago — when Donald Trump was considering a presidential run on the Reform Party ticket, he said this when asked about abortion by Tim Russert on “Meet the Press”: “Well, look, I’m very pro-choice. I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject. But you still — I just believe in choice.”

Russert then asked him specifically if he’d ban partial-birth abortion. Trump said, “No. I am pro-choice in every respect and as far as it goes, but I just hate it.”

A year later, Trump wrote in his book “The America We Deserve”: “When Tim Russert asked me on ‘Meet the Press’ if I would ban partial-birth abortion, my pro-choice instincts led me to say no. After the show, I consulted two doctors I respect and, upon learning more about this procedure, I have concluded that I would indeed support a ban.”

Sometime in the intervening 16 years, Trump became fully pro-life.

You can say you don’t believe him — just as you might say you don’t believe Cruz has truly changed his mind on amnesty, the wall, or the Trans-Pacific Partnership, etc. But to claim Trump is pro-choice today — present tense — is what’s known as a “lie.”

But that’s what Cruz says over and over again, including in a campaign ad — and not one of those “super PAC” ads that count even less than a retweet. A Cruz ad plays the clip from that 1999 interview where Trump says, “I am pro-choice in every respect,” repeats it three times, and then cuts to a narrator proclaiming: “For partial-birth abortion, not a conservative.”

These are the kinds of lies that used to drive conservatives crazy when the Clintons did it. Not anymore. All’s fair in smearing Trump.

Trump has said a million times that he’d scrap Obamacare and replace it with a free market system (which, by the way, he explains a lot more clearly than Washington policy wonks with their think-tank lingo). Merely for Trump saying that we’re “not going to let people die, sitting in the middle of a street in any city in this country,” Cruz accuses him of supporting “

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

16%

-style medicine.”

Yes, because Trump is against people dying in the streets, Cruz says that Trump thinks “Obamacare didn’t go far enough and we need to expand it to put the government in charge of our health care, in charge of our relationship with our doctors.” Over and over again, Cruz has repeated this insane lie, telling Fox’s Megyn Kelly: “If you want to see Bernie Sanders-style socialized medicine, Donald Trump is your guy.”

Trump’s alleged support for the kind of national health care they have in Scotland and Canada is another big fat lie. Trump was issuing his usual effusive praise before he drops the hammer — “It actually works incredibly well in Scotland. Some people think it really works in Canada.” Then he continued, in the very same sentence: “I don’t think it would work as well here. What has to happen — I like the concept of private enterprise coming in. … You have to create competition.”

Cruz and his cult-like followers lie about Trump wanting a health care system akin to Canada’s and Scotland’s. They lie about his supporting Obamacare. They lie about his supporting partial-birth abortion. They lie about his ever having been a Democrat. They lie about his campaign manager assaulting a female reporter.

I tried being nice after Florida, when it became clear that Trump was the choice of a majority of Republican voters, nearly choking on a column praising Cruz for his admirable flip-flops to Trump’s positions on immigration and trade. I censored loads of anti-Cruz retweets. But — as with the Clintons — you offer these Cruz-bots an olive branch and they bite off your hand.

The next thing I knew, the Cruz cult was accusing Trump’s campaign manager Corey Lewandowski of criminal battery for brushing past a female reporter. Anyone who claims this video shows a “battery” is as big a liar as the liberals who lined up to say Clinton did not commit perjury when he denied having “sexual relations” with Monica Lewinsky.

If James Carville and Paul Begala had a baby, it would be a Cruz supporter.

They lie about my own tweaking of Trump — I didn’t like the Heidi retweet! — amid a tidal wave of support. Trump is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime who will build a wall, deport illegals and pause the importation of Muslims. He’s the only one who cares more about ordinary Americans than he does about globalist plutocrats. Does anyone really think I’m “tiring” of him because of a retweet?

Apparently, for slavishly devoted Cruz-bots, a normal human making a small criticism of her preferred candidate is unfathomable! That fact alone proves how dishonest they are about their own candidate.

I was under the misimpression that I was dealing with adults and not swine like Carville and Begala, willing to twist someone’s words to win a momentary political advantage. Mostly, I was under the misimpression that honesty was still a conservative value.

COPYRIGHT 2016 ANN COULTER 
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK

Read More Stories About:

Big GovernmentBig Journalism2016 Presidential RaceDonald TrumpTed Cruz,Ann CoulterWisconsin Primary

Monday, April 4, 2016

NY Mag Reveals Why Donald Trump Took on Fox News: GOP Frontrunner Privy to ‘Bombs’ That Would ‘Destroy Roger Ailes’

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty, Frederick M. Brown/Getty

by BREITBART NEWS4 Apr 20161,371

Gabe Sherman writes that Donald Trump “was able to do something that no other Republican has done before: take on Fox News” because he has dirt on Roger Ailes from a former employee.

From New York Magazine:

As early as 1987, Trump talked publicly about his desire to run for president. He toyed with mounting a campaign in 2000 on the Reform Party ticket, and again in 2012 as a Republican (this was at the height of his Obama birtherism). Two years later, Trump briefly explored running for governor of New York as a springboard to the White House. “I have much bigger plans in mind — stay tuned,” he tweeted in March 2014.

Trump taped another season of The Apprentice that year, but he kept a political organization intact. His team at the time consisted of three advisers: Roger Stone, Michael Cohen, and Sam Nunberg. Stone is a veteran operative, known for his gleeful use of dirty tricks and for ending Eliot Spitzer’s political career by leaking his patronage of prostitutes to the FBI. Cohen is Trump’s longtime in-house attorney. And Nunberg is a lawyer wired into right-wing politics who has long looked up to “Mr. Trump,” as he calls him. “I first met him at Wrestle­Mania when I was like 5 years old,” Nunberg told me.

Throughout 2014, the three fed Trump strategy memos and political intelligence. “I listened to thousands of hours of talk radio, and he was getting reports from me,” Nunberg recalled. What those reports said was that the GOP base was frothing over a handful of issues including immigration, Obamacare, and Common Core. While Jeb Bush talked about crossing the border as an “act of love,” Trump was thinking about how high to build his wall. “We either have borders or we don’t,” Trump told the faithful who flocked to the annual CPAC conference in 2014.

Meanwhile, Trump used his wealth as a strategic tool to gather his own intelligence. When Citizens United president David Bossie or GOP chairman Reince Priebus called Trump for contributions, Trump used the conversations as opportunities to talk about 2016. “Reince called Trump thinking they were talking about donations, but Trump was asking him hard questions,” recalled Nunberg. From his conversations with Priebus, Trump learned that the 2016 field was likely to be crowded. “We knew it was going to be like a parliamentary election,” Nunberg said.

Which is how Trump’s scorched-earth strategy coalesced. To break out of the pack, he made what appears to be a deliberate decision to be provocative, even outrageous. “If I were totally presidential, I’d be one of the many people who are already out of the race,” Trump told me. And so, Trump openly stoked racial tensions and appealed to the latent misogyny of a base that thinks of Hillary as the world’s most horrible ballbuster.

It was also thanks to some information he had gathered that Trump was able to do something that no other Republican has done before: take on Fox News. An odd bit of coincidence had given him a card to play against Fox founder Roger Ailes. In 2014, I published a biography of Ailes, which upset the famously paranoid executive. Several months before it landed in stores, Ailes fired his longtime PR adviser Brian Lewis, accusing him of being a source. During Lewis’s severance negotiations, Lewis hired Judd Burstein, a powerhouse litigator, and claimed he had “bombs” that would destroy Ailes and Fox News. That’s when Trump got involved.

“When Roger was having problems, he didn’t call 97 people, he called me,” Trump said. Burstein, it turned out, had worked for Trump briefly in the ’90s, and Ailes asked Trump to mediate. Trump ran the negotiations out of his office at Trump Tower. “Roger had lawyers, very expensive lawyers, and they couldn’t do anything. I solved the problem.” Fox paid Lewis millions to go away quietly, and Trump, I’m told, learned everything Lewis had planned to leak. If Ailes ever truly went to war against Trump, Trump would have the arsenal to launch a retaliatory strike.

Read the rest of the story here.

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism2016 Presidential Race,Donald TrumpFOX NEWSRoger Ailes

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Daily Beast: Glenn Beck’s Defamation Lawsuit ‘Could Blow Up Ted Cruz’

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com


by BREITBART NEWS30 Mar 20162,218
Betsy Woodruff writes in the Daily Beast that Glenn Beck who is “one of 
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
97%
’s most high profile surrogates,” could end up becoming “a rolling PR nightmare” for Cruz when Beck “heads to court this summer for allegedly defaming a victim of the Boston Marathon bombing.”
[Glenn Beck] currently faces a defamation lawsuit—because he doubled and tripled down on charges that a victim of a terrorist attack was actually the real terrorist.
And now, previously unnoticed court filings show his defamation lawsuit might get exciting—and just as the presidential race hits a boiling point. Filings also show that the mediation process, which could have resulted in a settlement, has been terminated.
[…]
The facts of the case are, well, not that surprising if you know anything about Glenn Beck. In the wake of the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing terrorist attack that left six people dead, Beck claimed that one of the victims—Saudi national Abdulrahman Alharbi, who was injured in the attack—was actually in on it.
“You know who the Saudi is?” Beck confidently proclaimed in one broadcast a few weeks after the attacks. “He’s the money man. He’s the guy who paid for it.”
Beck also urged his listeners to alert their congressmen about the matter.
[…]
The problem for Beck? Not every person from Saudi Arabia is a participant in a terrorist plot. Authorities investigated Alharbi and subsequently cleared him of any involvement—but it was not lightning-fast enough to keep Beck from telling his millions-strong audience that Alharbi was a crypto-terrorist.

Woodruff also explains the extent of Beck’s close association with the Cruz campaign:
Beck and Cruz have campaigned side-by-side across the early primary states. Beck accompanied Cruz for the last few days of the Iowa caucuses, where Cruz snagged a game-changing win.
During their Iowa swing together, Cruz could barely control his affection for Beck.
“What an extraordinary, visionary, passionate thinker,” he gushed at one Iowa stop.
In a radio broadcast earlier this month, Beck complained that he has spent a lot of money paying his own way to campaign for Cruz.
“This has cost me about $300,000 to go on the road for as long as I have,” he said, according to the Christian Postreported. “$300,000 out of my pocket. Those are not donations. This is out of what I’ve personally lost because I’m not on the job, so that’s what it’s cost me by not being at the facilities in Dallas. We’ve lost $300,000.”
Beck also stumped for the senator in Arizona and Utah. In the lead-up to that trip, he told listeners that they needed to campaign for the senator because we may be facing divine judgment.
“Ezekiel talks about these times and says basically everyone in their own way, you are a watchman on the tower, you are a watchman at the gate,” he said. And the blood of the people who could have been saved—now think of this—because we’re talking about the rights of all mankind. If America goes down—this isn’t hyperbole any more, this isn’t like a famous Reagan speech that he gave—this is real.”

Read the rest here.
Read More Stories About:

Wednesday, March 2, 2016

Jake Tapper Asks Spinning Marco Rubio: Are You In Denial?

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
by JOHN NOLTE1 Mar 2016333
After getting shellacked by Donald Trump on Super Tuesday with a win in only one state — and let’s be honest, Minnesota is just barely a state — Senator Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) made the cable rounds  hoping to spin his way out of a campaign that is now in very serious trouble. Even Rubio’s super PAC over at Fox News wasn’t buying it. But CNN’s Jake Tapper could hardly contain his disbelief at Rubio’s Rain Man-ian spin.
Near the end of the interview,  Tapper just came out and asked, “I’m wondering if there’s a certain amount of denial that you’re in about this race?”
This was the look on Tapper’s face just before he asked the question.
 —
Tapper: Senator, you keep saying that, and [Trump] keeps winning states, and you’re talking about Virginia and that’s another state that Donald Trump won. I’m wondering if there’s a certain amount of denial that you’re in about this race.
Rubio: No, Jake. We’re in the winner-take-all phase of this. Up you know this is about delegate count. You know in a usual race you’d have a front-runner and people would be saying you need to drop out and rally around the front-runner. What people are saying is fight as hard as you can…

After the interview Tapper said, “Call it determination, call it denial — Senator Marco Rubio.”

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               
Read More Stories About:



Friday, February 26, 2016

Breitbart Reverses Smear: Heckles Ailes, Murdoch, Beck, Establishment in FoxNews.Com Front Page Article

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com

by BREITBART NEWS25 Feb 20161723

Earlier tonight, FoxNews.com covered a segment on Glenn Beck’s radio program where the host likened Breitbart News Network Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. Bannon, also a SiriusXM radio host, is a former Surface Warfare Officer in the U.S. Navy. The article was featured toward the top of theFoxNews.com front page. Breitbart News contributed a comment to the article, which we’ve highlighted in bold:

Conservative talk show host Glenn Beck slammed Donald Trump’s supporters Wednesday on his radio show as “vile” and likened them to Nazis – while accusing Breitbart Chairman Stephen Bannon of doing Trump’s bidding, comparing him to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

[…]

[Beck] reserved his most fiery comments for Bannon, claiming his Breitbart news blog site is promoting Trump’s “lies.”

“I’m telling you that I believe that Bannon thinks he’s either going to be the chief of staff or he’s going to be the next Roger Ailes. And let me tell you something, Bannon whatever your first name is. Um, you’re not going to be the next Roger Ailes. There is not going to be another Roger Ailes,” Beck said, referring to the Fox News chairman.

He continued: “Roger Ailes didn’t answer to anybody. He certainly didn’t take orders from a real estate developer. … By taking orders from a political candidate and reworking your entire site to promote the lies of a specific candidate without any kind of truth behind these things … If that is what your idea of being Roger Ailes is, you are so sadly mistaken. That doesn’t make you Roger Ailes. That makes you Goebbels.”

Reached for comment, a Breitbart spokesman jokingly referenced Beck’s call to fast for Cruz, saying:

“Since Glenn had been fasting, we assume he was simply ‘hangry.’ Either that or this is another example of Beck trying to carry water for the Ailes-Murdoch-Fox News establishment in their anybody-but-Trump crusade.”

The conservative news blog site’s primary financial backer is Robert Mercer, a billionaire supporter of various political causes.


You can read the rest of the story here.

Read More Stories About:

Big JournalismRoger AilesbreitbartGlen Beck

Friday, February 12, 2016

Moderator at Democrat Debate on Live Mic: ‘Oh God’

Morry Gash / Associated Press

by JOEL B. POLLAK12 Feb 2016395

A PBS moderator at Thursday night’s Democratic debate in Milwaukee was apparently caught on a live mic sighing, “Oh, God,” as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) began an answer on foreign policy by referring to the Vietnam War.

Gawker has the catch–though it is not clear which off-camera moderator is speaking.

Sanders had seized on Hillary Clinton’s relationship with Henry Kissinger, the statesman who served as President Richard Nixon’s Secretary of State. Though Kissinger negotiated the end of the Vietnam War–an achievement for which he later received a Nobel Peace Prize–he also has been accused of helping Nixon of secretly expanding the war into Cambodia.

The left has long regarded Kissinger as a kind of war criminal. A year ago, as Kissinger appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to testify about the Iran deal, activists from Code Pink tried to arrest him, prompting Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) to expel them from the room, adding: “Get out of here, you low-life scum.”

One moderator at the Democratic debate, Judy Woodruff, has donated to the Clinton Foundation.

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism2016 Presidential Race,Hillary ClintonWeird NewsBernie SandersVietnamPBSDemocrat debate,dem debatehenry kissinger

Saturday, February 6, 2016

Debate Crowd Boos, Trump Hits Back: ‘That’s All Jeb’s Donors and Special Interests’

by JOHN NOLTE6 Feb 2016157

During Saturday night’s ABC News debate, Donald Trump and former-Governor Jeb Bush got into a feisty exchange on the issue of eminent domain. Bush hit Trump for his use (or attempted use) of eminent domain to enrich his casino business in Nevada. Trump responded by saying, “Jeb wants to be a tough guy tonight. I didn’t take the property.” Boos then rained down on The Donald, who was ready. Pointing at the audience, Trump charged…

That’s all of his donors and special interests out there. So,  that’s what it is. And by the way, let me just tell you, we needed tickets. You can’t get them. You know who has the tickets to the television audience? Donors, special interests, the people that are putting up the money. That’s who. The RNC told us. We have all donors in the audience. And the reason they’re not loving me — the reason they’re not loving me is, I don’t want their money. I’m going to do the right thing for the American public. I don’t need their money. And I’m the only one up here that can say that.


The audience continued to boo throughout.

Sean Spicer of the RNC told Breitbart News that in the audience of 1000, there are 75 donors.

According to sources on two different campaigns, individual candidates received fewer tickets than at any other debate,  just 20.

According to Breitbart News’ Matt Boyle, when you look at the ticket ratio of donors and various special interests, “Way more donors to non-donors ratio this time at debate audience.”

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism2016 Presidential Race,Donald Trump 2016donorsABC News Debate

Thursday, January 28, 2016

‘Love-Fest:’ Megyn Kelly Blasts Donald Trump, Flirts With Michael Moore


by JOHN NOLTE27 Jan 201610,919

Those of us who obsessively observe the media never thought we would see a day like yesterday, a day when someone finally got the better of Fox News and Roger Ailes. The infallible network proved itself fallible with two of the biggest strategic errors in the history of its existence. First, The Mighty Fox fired off a snarky but strategically stupid press release that played directly into Donald Trump’s hands. Then, an obviously rattled Megyn Kelly seeking solace from Trump’s withering spotlight, sought that solace in no less than anti-American filmmaker Michael Moore.

To understand just how big of a blunder this is, we have to step back a few months.

Ever since the first Fox News Republican primary debate took place back in August, Trump has been pounding the cable news network for what he felt was a gang tackle from the three moderators, Kelly, Bret Baier, and Chris Wallace, and there is no shortage of those on the political right who agree with him. Trump’s primary complaint was directed at Kelly, who didn’t so much ask a question as much as she attempted to paint the billionaire businessman and reality TV star as a degenerate sexist.

To put it mildly, Trump took umbrage with the question and for the past six months the two have been feuding. To his credit, Trump has been openly attacking Kelly. Via Twitter and various interviews, he has criticized her directly. Kelly’s and Fox News’s response has been subtler, and some might say dishonest. “The Kelly File,” a primetime cable news juggernaut, is seen by many as a Anti-Trump Organ for Establishment Republicans.

In the lead up to Thursday night’s debate, the final one before actual voting begins in Iowa, Trump has used every opportunity to again express his concerns about Kelly’s return as moderator. Fox News refused to budge on the issue. But Trump obviously found his way into Ailes’s head because Tuesday night the network made an unprecedented strategic blunder by releasing this statement:

We learned from a secret back channel that the Ayatollah and Putin both intend to treat Donald Trump unfairly when they meet with him if he becomes president — a nefarious source tells us that Trump has his own secret plan to replace the Cabinet with his Twitter followers to see if he should even go to those meetings.


When a major presidential candidate is accusing your network of bias, unless you want to prove him 100% correct, this is about as tone-deaf and dumb as it gets.

Knowing he had Fox by the short hairs, Trump waved the snarky press release and further burnished his brand as a leader and fighter by announcing his withdrawal from the debate.

In short: Trump spent a half-year carefully crafting and building the Narrative that Fox News was out to get him, and with one press release, Roger Ailes blundered right into it.

The benefits for Trump are obvious. 1) Just 5 days before Iowa, he will own the news cycle at least through the Sunday shows. 2) The controversy will overwhelm any opportunity his opponents might have had to get their message out. 3) Trump has completely upset any gameplan his rivals had planned, not only for the debate, but as a closing argument in Iowa. 4) The Fox News debate has been diminished into an undercard event because Trump’s competing event will dominate the news cycle.  5) Beating up on Fox News will hardly hurt Trump in a general election. 6) Trump looks like a badass who refuses to jump through the media’s hoops — which is exactly the type of candidate the GOP base has been praying for.

As though the gods smile on The Donald, just a few hours after the world came crashing down on The Mighty Fox, left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore made an already-scheduled appearance on “The Kelly File,” and it was an unmitigated disaster.

After the August debate, I actually defended Kelly’s questioning of Trump. My rationale was that Kelly, unlike the rest of the mainstream media, is tough on everyone — right and left alike. Presidential candidates should be asked tough questions. As long as the questioner isn’t biased in favor of one side or another, nothing should be off-limits.  As Kelly played kissy-face with Moore last night, I started to feel like a fool for defending her.

Moore isn’t some run-of-the-mill celebrity pitching his latest blockbuster. He is an anti-American propagandist, a fabulously wealthy hypocrite, and a degenerate liar. Under normal circumstances, it would be nauseating to watch Kelly giggle, joke, softball, and get all chummy with this cretin. The fact that she did so in the wake of Trump’s charges of bias showed an extraordinary lack of judgment.

Watch for yourself what even the left-wingWashington Post and Salon described as a“love-fest.“:

Is it just me, or did Kelly actually flirt with Lenny Riefenstahl?

For six months Kelly has played it cool. With Trump’s blistering spotlight on her, she’s put on a face meant only to assure the world and her critics that she’s a professional journalist interested only in holding The Powerful accountable. Most of all, Kelly wanted the world to know that Trump wasn’t living rent-free inside her head.

Well, now we know the exact opposite is true because all it took for Michael Moore to play Kelly like a fiddle, to turn her into a giggling Rachel Maddow, was to open the interview by commiserating with her about that awful Donald Trump.

Even the Washington Post noticed the gooey affair:

[A]fter Kelly introduced Moore’s “Where to Invade Next?” — in which, as Kelly put it in an opening that probably made many Fox viewers’ skin crawl, “Moore travels through Europe to highlight what he believes to be America’s shortfalls” — Moore didn’t want to talk about himself. For the man who hounded General Motors chief executive Roger Smith and vilified President George W. Bush, it was all about Kelly and her bold stand against Trump.

“What does this feel like for you?” Moore said. “Because you don’t want to be the story — you’re a journalist.”

Kelly’s rejoinder: “I get to ask the questions here!”

“I feel bad for you,” Moore said. He then wondered why Trump would deprive himself of Kelly’s company: “What’s he afraid of? I’m sitting here. I don’t feel any fear.”

“You shouldn’t,” Kelly said. “I’m a pussycat.”

“You can ask Donald,” Moore said, volunteering to play chaperone for the candidate. “Donald — come down. Come sit beside me. I’ll hold your hand. She’s fine.”

Kelly: “Stop that!”


Somehow it got worse. Moore asked her out, and the Washington Post thinks she may have blushed:

 “I was thinking I was maybe going to have to, like, take you out to dinner afterwards,” Moore said. “We could talk. You could emote … get it out. I’m here for you.”

“I had no idea there was this side to you,” Kelly said.

Maybe this all was a joke. Maybe it wasn’t. But then, Moore got real about Kelly and Trump.

“In all seriousness, let me say this,” Moore said. “… You’ve done something that Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Rubio, Cruz — none of them have been able to do. Which is to, essentially, frighten him.”

“Would you move on from the Trump situation?” Kelly said. But, at least on some laptop screens, it appeared she may have blushed.


In short, Megyn Kelly made a fool of herself, and Donald Trump can now add two more scalps to his collection: Kelly’s and the previously unbeaten Fox News.

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism2016 Presidential RaceFOX NEWSMichael MooreMegyn KellyDonald Trump 2016Roger Ailes

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Pride Goeth Before the Fall: Ailes Calls Trump’s Wife and Daughter

TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP/Getty Images

by BREITBART NEWS27 Jan 20167,434

From Chris Spargo writing at The Daily Mail:

The Fox News and Donald Trump feud is heating up now that the Republicanfront-runner has announced he will not be attending the network’s debate Thursday night over the presence of anchor Megyn Kelly.

And while the network appears to be publicly siding with Kelly, who is still set to moderate Thursday’s debate, the network is also reportedly trying to privately plead with Trump the best way they know how – through the women in his life.

Joe Scarborough revealed on Morning Joe Wednesday morning that Fox News CEO Roger Ailes had been trying to contact both Ivanka and Melania Trump hoping they could convince Trump to change his mind, but that Trump would only speak to Rupert Murdoch.


Read the rest of the story at The Daily Mail.

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism2016 Presidential RaceFOX NEWSDonald Trump

Tuesday, January 26, 2016

National Review Goes Full-Snob: Attacks Donald Trump Voters as Ignorant Bigots

UNKNOWN NATIONAL REVIEW GOES FULL RETARD.

LISTEN TO MILITARY VETERAN TALK RADIO 

IHEART.SMYTHRADIO.COM


by JOHN NOLTE26 Jan 20164533

After the massive belly-flop that was the poorly thought out, very-poorly executedand way-late “Against Trump” diatribe last week, “National Review” is apparently still so bitter that on Monday morning another fatal decision was made — to attack everyday Americans as stupid homophobes.

With conservatives like these, who needs leftists, or the mainstream media?

The National Review Online (NRO) lead piece was written by Thurston Howell IIIKevin Williamson, titled “Our Post-Literate Politics” (the title changed later in the day), and puts forth the theory that Donald Trump is winning because the everyday Americans who support the billionaire businessman do not or cannot read.

[T]he candidacy of Donald Trump is something that could not happen in a nation that could read.

This is the full flower of post-literate politics.


Trump supporters are also bigots:

Thomas Aquinas cautioned against “homo unius libri,” a warning that would not get very far with the typical Trump voter stuck sniggering over “homo.” (They’d snigger over “snigger,” too, for similar reasons.)


The word “insalubrious” is then used, which I had to look up:

Donald Trump is the face of that insalubrious relationship, a lifelong crony capitalist who brags about buying political favors. But his enthusiasts, devoid as they are of a literate politics capable of thinking about all three sides of a triangle at the same time[.]


You have to read the whole thing to believe it. Had this published word-for-word at Salon, no one would blink an eye. In other words, anyone who believed NRO would be circumspect in the face of last week’s backlash was sorely mistaken.

NRO itself has become the very caricature it paints of Trump. All the once-necessary publication has is insults as opposed to ideas — as though pomposity itself is argument enough. Don’t you understand, if the rubes could quote Thomas Aquinas like us snobs, the rubes would know what is best for them!

Apparently it is unforgivable that the hoi polloi are simply too busy going about the business of keeping our world turning to have the time to read “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”;  too busy fighting our wars, unplugging our toilets, fixing our cars, processing our food, delivering our heating oil, and working three part-time jobs.

The Unwashed have, however, read enough to know that Democrats never do this — never attack their own voters like NRO and the rest of the Establishment have this year.

But maybe — just maybe — because they spend all their time in the Real World and not hiding inside NRO’s erudite reading list, the Unwashed also intuitively understand that what NRO and the Establishment have been peddling for five presidential cycles is pure undiluted, self-serving bull shit.

The Unwashed might not have read Shakespeare, but they can read a paycheck.

The Unwashed might not have read “Capitalism and Freedom,” but they have read a pink slip as their job went overseas or to an exploited illegal immigrant.

The Unwashed might not have consumed the same library of Greek and Roman classics (in the original or in translation) but they have consumed years of “Dial 1 for English,” Common Core math problems, terror attacks committed by immigrants, and an Establishment so removed Jeb Bush is being sold as a winner because … he  speaks Spanish.

The Unwashed might not read a publication that still pines for a Real Conservative, no less than the architect of ObamaCare who has already lost a nationwide presidential election, but they can read a country slipping away into a morass of political correctness, identity politics, and a Republican Party more concerned with the trough that comes with treating illegal immigrants better than America’s working class.

NRO simply can’t believe Americans are stupid enough to fall for a slogan like “Make America Great Again.”

Maybe NRO should read more.

NRO appears to have been caught off guard by an electorate that isn’t falling for The Establishment’s snake oil this year.

Maybe NRO should step out of the Velvet Bubble now and again.

The publication that once served up a cup that runneth over with ideas is  now reduced to lashing out with ad hominem — not against the Powerful (like Trump), but against the everyday Americans found in William F. Buckley’s fabled phone book.

Things really have changed at NRO.

Impotent rage is a helluva drug.

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               

My link says Buckley used the “Manhattan” phone book in his famous quote. Twitter is telling me it was “Boston.” The piece has been edited to avoid an insalubrious battle. 

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism2016 Presidential Race,Donald Trump 2016National Review,William F. Buckley

Thursday, January 7, 2016

Nolte: The Cultural and Media Reality of the ‘Cruz Crisis’

Steve Pope/Getty Images

by JOHN NOLTE7 Jan 20161,140

On his radio show Wednesday, Mark Levin called out Breitbart News over the issueSen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)’s citizenship, “[J]ust because [Donald Trump] says something doesn’t mean I have to agree with it like our friends over at Breitbart, who are going all kinds of crazy over the birther issue.” Levin, who knows plenty about the Constitution, believes the debate over Cruz’s eligibility to be president is “stupid.” But he adds, without realizing that this is the only point that matters, “Liberals love this stuff.”

First off, as cut and dried as Cruz’s citizenship issue might be to Levin, the trip to the “cut and dried” is objectively murky. My colleague Joel Pollak, who attended Harvard Law School,  lays it all out here. Pollak doesn’t question Cruz’s eligibility; he does, however, understand modern American politics and lays out a convincing case as to why the issue could eventually become a problem for Cruz.

As of right now, Ted Cruz has a legitimate chance at winning the Republican nomination, and because Levin is 100% correct when he says “liberals love this stuff,” my question is a simple one:

As “stupid” as this issue may be for Levin, do we want to litigate it in front of the American people today or three weeks before the general election, when Cruz is either our presidential or vice-presidential nominee? Because you have to be wearing blinders to believe that will not happen.

If Cruz is on the ticket, you can bet the farm that Democrats and the DC Media have already gamed out an October Surprise centered on creating a political storm over Cruz’s natural born status. Moreover, all it would take is one federal judge to hurl a massive monkey into that wrench.

Exhibit A: The Clintons are the Original Birthers. If they went after Obama over this issue, who doesn’t believe they will go after Cruz?

Exhibit B: High-profile Democrats arealready vowing to sue over Cruz’s eligibility.

Exhibit C: The White House proved yesterday that at the highest levels, Democrats are fully prepared to make this an issue.

Exhibit D: We’re still waiting for independent verification that Cruz’s mother was indeed an American citizen. Wouldn’t now be a good time to drop that shoe, however it falls?

Even if you side 100% with Levin on this issue, tell me how unrealistic it is to imagine a federal judge ruling on October 21, 2016, that Ted Cruz’s citizenship status is questionable. Cruz is running for president. We can’t just take his word on this.

If that happens, just like the phony late-October Casper Weinberger indictment that killed George H.W. Bush’s re-election momentum in 1992, we lose.

Trump is actually doing Cruz a huge favor. In Trump’s defense, he was asked about the Cruz issue, which  doesn’t mean his intentions are not mercenary, but it also means that the net-benefit has been to prematurely explode the DC Media’s planned October Surprise.

Even if it is “stupid,” so was accusing Romney of murder in 2012, of not paying his taxes, of blaming him for Todd Akin. But with the coordinated help of the entire DC Media-complex, that’s exactly what Democrats did. Nobody believed any of it, which was never the goal. The goal was to keep Romney off-message and on defense, and it worked.

How different would the 2000 election outcome have looked had a Donald Trump brought up George W. Bush’s drunk driving incident during the primary?

This may be cut and dried for Levin, but how does his opinion control the actions of Democrats and the media? How does his opinion change the fact that there is no independent verification that Cruz’s mother was an American citizen.

The national debate over Cruz’s eligibility *is* going to happen, and it must happen.

The only question, then, is *when* will this be litigated once and for all in front of the American people.

Who doesn’t think now is better than October?

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism2016 Presidential Race,Mark LevincanadaTed Cruz 2016Birther,Natural Born Citizenbirtherism

Monday, December 28, 2015

Losing Influence: 6 Great DC Media Failures of 2015

by JOHN NOLTE26 Dec 201544

We will never be fully rid of the DC Media. Like the garbage-in/manure-out maggots they are, the DC Media will always be a rancid part of the circle of political life. The political left is, if nothing else, relentless, and they will never fully give up the propaganda perch that is this corrupt institution.

That doesn’t mean that the righteous war to politically-exterminate them should be any less relentless, because it is already resulting in quantifiable benefits. The influence these serial-liars once enjoyed to sway public opinion and set the parameters of the national debate, is evaporating.

In no particular order, here are six battles the DC Media waged relentlessly and handily lost in 2015.

Feel free to point and laugh.

The Annihilation of Donald Trump

Ridicule, dismissal, outright lying, coordinated hate-campaigns… Nothing has worked. Using New Media, social media, and a brilliant understanding of how to manipulate a crooked institution, Donald Trump has used, abused and weaponized the American political media to a point where the Republican nomination is now his to lose.

Moreover, in the most recent head-to-head poll, Trump is only -2 points behind Hillary Clinton; this is after 2 months of the worst press he could imagine, and 2 months of the best press she could imagine.

Trump hasn’t even begun to train his fire on Clinton, and this terrifies a corrupt political media used to Republicans who, for decades, have agreed to play and lose by their rules.

 

Gun Control

Feasting off a pile of dead Sandy Hook Elementary schoolchildren, the DC media was sure they had a two-fer: A propaganda bonanza that would end with law-abiding citizens being disarmed, and a political victory for The Precious Obama.

Ever since, up to and including the San Bernardino terror attack, the DC Media has exploited every opportunity to restrict our Second Amendment civil rights.

With New Media refusing to cave to the emotional blackmail, exposing the madness of gun-free zones and the serial lies told by the gun-grabbers, and reporting the truth about the huge decrease in gun violence as gun sales soar,  fast-forward more than two years and this anti-science propaganda campaign has not only failed, it has failed spectacularly.

Moreover, gun sales continue to soar to record heights.

 

The Washington Redskins

Last time I looked the Washington Redskins are still named the Washington Redskins.

While our delusional left-wing DC Media and their allies in the Democrat Party use this non-troversy to puff themselves up as self-righteous Mississippi Burning warriors (can I still say “warriors?”) , the American people aren’t falling for it.

Because the maggots can no longer bottleneck the truth, the public knows that the people who are supposed to be offended — not white limousine liberals but, you know, actual American Indians — are not only are not offended, but name some of their own high school teams the Redskins.

 

Syrian Refugees

After the Paris terror attacks earlier this year, the common sense call went out to put the brakes on Obama’s suicidal plan to resettle 100,000 Syrian refuges here in America. ISIS has promised to seed this group with terrorists, and did so successfully with at least one of the terrorists in Paris.

Coordinating another emotional blackmail campaign, the entire DC Media Complex banded together to again pretend Mississippi was burning.

“Meet the Press” spent an entire hour comparing us to Nazis.

CNN compared us to anti-Semites who denied Jewish refugees fleeing from the Nazis.

The sanctimonious, self-righteous editorials flowed as one “journalist” after another dropped all pretense of objectivity to smear America as racist.

New Media again fought back with the truth. Not only had Obama’s own F.B.I. Director stated that vetting these refugees would be next to impossible, there was also the matter of the female jihadist responsible for 14 murders in San Bernardino. As it would happen, she managed to slip through the very same federal government vetting program the liars in the DC Media had just assured us was flawless.

This issue is now a major liability for Democrats, including Hillary Clinton.

 

The End of the Rigged Republican Debates

After John Harwood’s appallingly dishonest performance as moderator of the October CNBC GOP primary debate, New Media, the Republican presidential candidates, and the Republican Party rose up and finally said no more.

For decades, the maggots have used Republican primary debates to disqualify our candidates with loaded questions, serial lies, and a premise that says Democrats are right about everything.

The two debates since, including one hosted by CNN, have been professional — have been night and day.

 

The Implosion of the Lying Fact-Checkers

The serial-leftwing liars and propagandistswho pose as objective fact checkers, finally went too far. One phony fact check after another has exposed these frauds forever. Their impact is nowhere near what it was, and continues to dwindle as they are caught time again calling black white and white black, all in service to Democrats.

Watching one Republican candidate after another wrist-flick the very same fact checks that used to put them on defense, is about as good as it gets.

***

As it always will with the American people, the Truth is winning. It just needs to get out there. Nevertheless, the DC Media is just going to keep lying. In return, we need only keep telling the truth. These people deserve zero respect. Contempt, scorn, and truth have gotten us this far.

Let’s use 2016 to double and triple down.

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC               

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism2016 Presidential Racegun controlRedskinsMedia BiasDonald Trump 2016Washington RedskinsSyrian refugeeFact Check

Wednesday, December 23, 2015

6 Times the Mainstream DC Media Ridiculed Children of Republicans

by JOHN NOLTE23 Dec 2015655

One of the biggest lies told by our corrupt and rotting DC Media is the one that states that the children of politicians are off-limits. Unwritten or unspoken, there is no such rule. There is, of course, a strictly-enforced DC media rule about the children of Democrat politicians being off-limits. The children of Republican politicians, however, have always been fair game — and I’m not talking about in the left-wing fever swamps, but in mainstream outlets such as the Washington Post, CNN, NBC News, The Atlantic, The Daily Beast, and Salon.

An excellent example of this double standard occurred almost exactly a year ago when Elizabeth Lauten, a no-name Capitol Hill staffer, took to Facebook to criticize the behavior of President Obama’s two lovely teenage daughters during the President’s annual turkey pardon ceremony.

As documented by the Washington Free Beacon, the DC Media lost its ever-loving mind over this. Network news vans camped outside of the home of Lauten’s parents, the Washington Post  “assigned one of its foreign affairs correspondents to comb through an archive of columns Lauten wrote for her college newspaper in 2006 and 2007. …  Both ABC’s Good Morning America and NBC’s Today show devoted segments to the controversy on Sunday and Monday[.]”

Lauten apologized but still lost her job as a Communications Director for a Republican Congressman. And I am in no way defending her. Children of politicians should be off-limits. They are civilians, bystanders, innocents who should be allowed to live their own lives, enjoy their own opinions, and make their own mistakes without being dragged onto the national stage and used as a billy club against their parents.

It is just a fact that the DC Media do not see Republicans as humans. We are worse than Nazis to them, we are “things” that must be annihilated, grinded into dust, and poured into an active volcano. Make no mistake, these people despise us, and the ongoing attacks against our children are part of a rather ingenious and coordinated DC Media plot to intimidate.

The idea is to make things so nasty and so ugly, no decent Republican will enter politics. Moreover, as you’ll see below, the DC Media is desperate to destroy Republican families that might be appealing to voters. Granted, sometimes it’s just venomous hate, but there is a bigger agenda at work here, and no doubt a coordinated one.

Below  are some recent examples. Again, keep in mind that this is not “Saturday Night Live,” or a comedian, or a partisan talk show host, or some website no one has heard of. These examples represent  mainstream outlets widely accepted as such within the mainstream DC media.

 

Washington Post Ridicules Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)’s Young Daughters a Monkeys

The Attack

The Washington Post not only publishedthis cartoon, Republican Senator Ted Cruz was attacked by the Post for using his own young daughters as “props.” A Post staffer has declared the daughters “fair game.”

Cruz’s daughters, Catherine and Caroline are 4 and 7 years-old!

Keep in mind, as I mentioned above, that this is the same Washington Post that “assigned one of its foreign affairs correspondents to comb through an archive of columns Lauten wrote for her college newspaper in 2006 and 2007,” after this no-name staffer criticized President Obama’s daughters in a personal Facebook post last year.

In the DC Media, Republican children arefair game, but God help you if you criticize the children of Democrats, even in a personal Facebook post.

Consequence

As of now, the Washington Post is doing what it always does: lying. The cartoon has been removed and replaced with an absurdeditor’s note that claims “I failed to look at this cartoon before it was published.” Fine. Maybe Fred Hiatt did not look at the cartoon before it was published, but no one believes the cartoonist has the power to self-publish.

Plenty of WaPo staffers okayed the cartoon, and as of now all of them, including the cartoonist, still have jobs.

 

CNN Mocks Physical Assault On Bristol Palin

The Attack

CNN obtained audio of Governor Sarah Palin’s daughter Bristol reporting an alleged physical assault to the police. If you are anything close to a human being, the recording is objectively harrowing, a frightened young mother describing a brutal physical and verbal assault to authorities.

Before playing the audio, a delighted CNN told its audience to “sit back and enjoy” the audio, and added   that the recording is “quite possibly the best minute and a half of audio we’ve ever come across, come across in a long time anyway.”

The Consequence

We’re talking about CNN here, so obviously there were no consequences. Because the orders to mock Bristol Palin probably came from CNN chief Jeff Zucker, the anchor is still on the air. The network never apologized.

 

 

NBC News Attacks Mitt Romney’s Black Grandchild

Almost exactly two years ago, on its cable news outlet MSNBC, NBC News’s Melissa Harris-Perry mocked Mitt and Ann Romney’s infant grandchild, Kieran Romney. His only sin is being black.

You can hear panelist Pia Glenn singing the lyrics to the “Sesame Street” song, “One of these things doesn’t belong here.” After finishing the ditty, Glenn says, “And that little baby, front and center, would be the one.”

Dean Obeidallah then attacks the child as token, “”I think this picture is great. It really sums up the diversity of the Republican party, the RNC. At the convention, they find the one black person.”


The Consequence

Melissa Harris-Perry still has her own show and Dean Obeidallah’s career took off as a result. He is now a regular contributor at the Daily Beast and an on-air contributor at — where else? — CNN.

 

The Atlantic Serially-Smears Bristol Palin as the Mother of Trig Palin

The Attack

Throughout the 2008 presidential campaign, in order to freak-show Sarah Palin’s attractive, everyday family, The Atlantic launched a vicious and relentless smear campaign that claimed Palin’s daughter Bristol was the mother of Trig Palin.

Trig Palin is Sarah Palin’s youngest child.

The Conseqeunce

None. In fact, while pretending to debunk it, the DC Media gave the conspiracy a ton of play.

 

The Daily Beast Mocks Palin Children

After describing Governor Palin as a “GILF” (Governor I’d Like to F***), in 2008, The Daily Beast went on to mock the names of the Palin children before singling out Bristol:

I was eager to see whether Bristol would follow in her parents’ creative-naming footsteps or pick the kind of mass-marketed name favored by other teenage moms: Kayden, say, or Ashton. Tripp is, well, kind of trippy, and certainly unfortunate in view of his paternal grandma’s recent drug arrest. But it’s a more creative choice than those made by other famous young moms: Jamie Lynn Spears’ Maddie Briann, for example, or Charlotte Church’s Ruby Megan.

Its only real problem may be that it seems less like the independent choice of the baby’s young parents and more like the continuation of an established family dynasty.


The Consequence

Nobody ever faces consequences at The Daily Beast for anything.

 

Salon Mocks George W. Bush’s Daughters as Drunks

The Attack

The 2001 headline, sub-headline, and photo say it all:

The first family’s alcohol troubles

President Bush downplayed his own drinking problem and hid a DUI. Now his daughters are making news for underage drinking. Is there a connection?



The Consequence

Joan Walsh, the author of the attack, is a regular fixture on cable news.

***

If there was a button the DC Media could press that would destroy Republicans and their children, the only fight would be over who gets to press it.

 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter@NolteNC               

Read More Stories About:

Big Journalism2016 Presidential RaceCNN,The Washington PostSalonSen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)The AtlanticCarol CostelloBristol PalinJoan Walsh