This is a faux scandal invented by the leftists and their media to distract from the fact that they aren't legislating, and to look for another excuse to impeach, after their 2 years of repeating the debunked Russian Collusion narratives fell apart.
Biden is caught on tape, admitting he did a criminal act and getting payola for his Son. Trump asks the Ukrainians to investigate whether that happened. The Democrats assume that's a high crime.
I saw some silliness about how the current bull market has nothing to do with '45 (Trump). That to me is as dumb as giving him all the credit. Presidents can either (a) create headwinds on growth (raise taxes, regulations, energy costs) (b) put tailwinds on growth (decrease taxes, regulations, and lower energy costs through encouraging drilling/pipelines). That can be swamped by other factors, but they are a known variable in the equations -- and they do have SOME ability to influence markets.
I don't care how people vote, or who they like or not. Love or hate Trump anyways, whatever. But I do care about the truth, and the truth is that Trumponomics has done more positive for the economy than Obamanomics did.
Trump:Animal-gate - Fresno County Sheriff Margaret Mims complained about the violent gang known as MS-13 (Mara Salvatrucha), and Trump replied to that with "These aren't people. These are animals." So the NYT and other far-left Press outlets reported this as Trump said illegal immigrants are animals (and removed the context). It was a stellar example of FakeNews and far-left bias.
The Democrats misremember the History of Obama as "those evil Republicans started obstructing Obama from the day he took office". Then they decided that was an excuse for them to behave far worse towards Trump, to set the example for the future (which they'll blame on the other side as well). This is the timeline of their efforts to destroy the current and future treatment of leaders.
The summary and timeline of the Russian Hacker invention seems to be the following:
2009.03.06 - Obama admin (via Hillary Clinton) gives Russia a mis-translated “reset button” because relations had chilled since Russia had invaded Georgia.
2011 - Putin blames Clinton for fomenting mass protests in Russia after disputed 2011 parliamentary elections that challenged his rule
2015 Summer - a spear-phishing campaign (the least sophisticate hack known to man) sends a fake email to over 1,000 government agents gets the smartest man in the DNC (Leon Podesta) to give up his password, in a social hack worthy of a 14 year old or Nigerian Prince.
2016.06.14 - WaPo publishes an article claiming that two agencies (who may be tied to the Russians), had attacked the DNC for over a year. It was scoffed at by security researchers.
2016 Sept - Julian Assange and his allies explained that these were leaks not hacks: a person inside the DNC gave them the emails.
2016.12.11 - Assange/allies go further and explain that the Obama administration has brutally persecuted whistleblowers and hackers through extradition, but in this case, while the CIA claims to know who tried to subvert an election, it’s not worth the effort to try to extradite them for prosecution in the U.S. to set an example?
2016.12.15 - Julian Assange went on to Sean Hannity to emphatically repeat it was not the Russians, and Hillary and the Obama administration is making this crap up.
2016.12.16 - NSA Whistleblower agrees with Assange that it was an inside leak (and not the Russians)
2016.12.16 - The Hillary/Obama campaign starts speaking about how the election wasn't her fault
2016.11.03 - Foreign Ministry spokeswoman (Maria Zakharova) of Russia says, "the “public bickering with Russia” before the US election is probably a “smokescreen” to draw the voters’ attention away from serious domestic issues”
2016.11.25 - Obama Admin Officially Told the NY that the elections "Were Free and Fair" — and went on "The Federal government did not observe any increased level of malicious cyber activity aimed at disrupting our electoral process on election day. As we have noted before, we remained confident in the overall integrity of electoral infrastructure, a confidence that was borne out on election day. As a result, we believe our elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective."
2016.12.29 - The Obama administration gets the NCCIC (DHS & FBI) to release a political document on "Grizzley Steppe” — codename for some investigation which admits the hack was caused by a 2015 phishing campaign with no hard evidence of ties to the “Russians” and contains no useful content or details (or anything looking like evidence of the Russians as the source of the hacks, let alone of the wikileads info).
2016.12.29 - The Obama administration retaliates against the Russians by throwing out 35 diplomats
2017.01.04 - WaPo invents that the Russians were also responsible for a PowerGrid attack — and the story is soon debunked as FakeNews
2017.01.05 - Ali Watkins of Buzzfeed exposes that neither the FBI nor DHS (nor any other government agency) had bothered to investigate the DNC servers which were compromised by Grizzley Stepp. Also, they had done no investigation of their own on the topic, but had relied on a private firm (CrowdStrike) hired by the DNC.
Trump's sexual assaults - List of women who claimed that Trump sexually assaulted them: E. Jean Carroll, Jessica Leeds, Kristin Anderson, Jill Harth, Cathy Heller, Temple Taggart McDowell, Karena Virginia, Melinda McGillivray, Rachel Crooks, Natasha Stoynoff, Jessica Drake, Ninni Laaksonen, Summer Zervos, Juliet Huddy, Alva Johnson, and Cassandra Searle. Most of them are not credible, and the media that reported them were reporting on FakeNews to try to swing an election (as proven how differently they write about Democrats sexual assault accusations, or how many stories they suppressed despite more evidence).
Don't even get started on this canard, it doesn't end well for Democrats. Immigration is a highly complex issue, and not everyone against more of it, is racist or a xenophobe. Being anti-refugee isn't racist. Trumps position is too extreme for me, but protecting Americans of all races against mass immigration (which hurts the people on the bottom of the economy), or reduces migrants from places where they've stated they want to kill us (and we can't properly vet them), isn't racism. You don't have to agree with the policy, but at least admit Americanism/Nationalism isn't racism -- and if it is, the Dems are a lot worse than Trump on this one.
Trump v. Tranny Brigade - Here's my opinion on Trump's trans-army ban. I'm not a fan of that action, but it is blown way out of proportion, it was mostly the Democrats fault, and of all the things to get irritated with him on, this doesn't make the top 10. And the more hysterical the left gets about this, the more I flip from being opposed to his stupidty, to being more pissed about theirs. Keep balance and perspective. This goes into why.
These nothingburgers are examples of fake scandals, or things the Press had histrionics over that either turned out to be exaggerated, false, or things that the Democrats have been worse on.
💩 covfefe - when a typo in a tweet becomes a reason to mock Trump (or anyone you don't like), you know the opposition has nothing more material to bitch about.
💩 Russiagate - this long lingering fake news story is all over the place. It started with Clinton/Democrats colluding with and paying Russians for a fake dossier, then claiming Trump was colluding with the Russians to do what the Clinton's or Kennedy actually did (which isn't a crime by the way). They used that to spy on the Trump campaign -- then said Trump was lying when he said he was spied on. Then they parlayed that into a fake investigation that uncovered nothing but the Democrats abuse of power, and the deep state working with them.
⬆ Got us out the Paris Climate deal, that was a fraud all along. The Press admitted it was a nothing burger, but made a stink because Trump got us out. Then quietly admitted he was right all along: it did nothing for the environment, cost us a fortune to stay in it, and leaving gave us more leverage than staying. 
💩Stock Market Destruction - None other than the economic oracle of the left, Paul Krugman, predicted that if Trump won, that markets would crash and never recover. If you make a public proclamation, I expect a public apology.... still waiting. 
💩Trump a racist? - almost every story about Trump being a racist is bullshit. First the media exaggerates his sloppy comments against ILLEGAL immigration into hating all Mexicans, or his America First policies into xenophobia. Being insensitive to everyone is not racism.
💩Trump is a homophobe - almost every story about Trump hating gays is deluded. Trump openly hires gays, welcomes them in his administration, he even had prominent gays at the Republican convention. That doesn't mean gay activists have to agree with every policy, or that Trump is for every implementation of a progressive idea to divide us (based on identity politics) like Trans bathrooms, or the military paying for sex changes, and so on. But there's a vast difference between disagreeing on LGBTQ policy, and being homophobic! The media showed themselves to be the opposition party, and not journalists.
💩 Trump insulted a disabled reporter - if you believe that Trump mocked a disabled reporter, then you prove the media duped you. The informed know that Trump caught the media lying about history and something he said, and they distracted by pretending a gesture he'd made on many other occasions was mocking a reporter who lied about him.
⬆Taking down the Clinton (and Bush) Dynasties. Whether you like him or not, Hillary was the establishment (as was Jeb Bush). Despite Clinton's money, marketing machine, deep state and establishment support, more money, corrupt Democrat party, dirty tricks, smear campaign, and allies in the media, she lost. Beating the Clinton and Bush dynasties alone, should give anyone hope that America is not run by a corrupt cronyism.
💩Trump: Resist Obstruct Delay timeline - I might not have voted for Trump, but I didn't vote for Hillary either (I disliked them both). Trump could get on my nerves, if the other side wasn't getting on my nerves more. Every time they overstate something, pretend that Trump is Hitler, have Pussy-Hat protests or do other stupid things, they turn me against them. I warned early that the Trump haters should keep their powder dry, and go after him when he does overreach, but they're so busy trying to scream up every minor offense, that they'll be the boy who cried wolf when anything serious comes along.
Trump is Hamilton - The left hates Trump, but loves Alexander Hamilton (the play and the man), which is ironic, since Hamilton is Trump's doppelgänger. Here's a list of a few ways they are similar.
This is a fake news story about how Trump knowingly mocked a disabled reporter. The true story is the Trump administration exposed the media getting caught spreading fake fact checks about 9/11, and they desperately needed to change the narrative, so they took an out of context frame of video, doing a gesture he'd done many times before, and showed it next to a reporter Trump claims he didn't know (but he may have met 30 years ago), all to distract from their original lie about what happened on 9/11.
Trump Rally Violence - There's claims that Trump advocated violence at his rally's -- but that's not the whole context. Here's the facts: Hillary and the Democrats paid violent protestors to go to Trump Rally's and make scenes or beat people up. Trump said in his sloppy ways that if one of his protestors punched a guy in the face (who had first assaulted other people) or roughed them up on the way out (after they had assaulted other people) that he'd pay their legal bills. Fake News and Fake Fact Checkers omitted the context and claimed that Trump urged violence at his rally's. No, he urged defense and counter-violence against paid violent thugs that the Democrats put in his rally's, and omitting that context is a lie of omission. Defense against paid antifa thugs, isn't advocating for violence, and it isn't racist since the majority of them are white.
Trump FakeNews - Here's a few highlights (64 of 100's) where the leftist media has gotten stories about Trump wrong. The Press enjoyed and abused their monopoly on the megaphone. There's an old adage, “never argue with a man who buys ink by the barrel.” The Press resents that Trump is willing to argue, and win. They resent being called Fake News because they know they've gotten caught: lowering standards, using lies of exaggeration, lies of omission, bias, and outright falsehoods. And so they take his bait, and more often than not, prove him right. They aren't journalists anymore, they're DNC propagandists -- and Trump is the one pointing out that the emperor is lacking clothes.
Trump wins the election: some people are shocked, some are not. Normally, we try to learn from the ones that aren't. This article is about the polls, how they're wrong, and how many of us knew they'd be wrong, and why. This is nothing new, 1968, 1980, 2000, whenever the Republican wins, it's a huge shock that no one on the left could have foreseen, except all those who foretold it. Those with their heads in the sand (or elsewhere) are traumatized by their own gullibility at listening to the polls and pundits that told them what they wanted to hear.
Just like the left had alternate histories about Bush and suffered from BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome), Reagan with RDS (Reagan Derangement Syndrome), or Nixon, they do the same with Donald Trump with TDS. Instead of learning from their mistakes, they're getting worse. This varies from fear mongering, inciting violence against Trump and his supporters, to outright delusion, but you can't have adult conversations with people that are screaming Hitler, or want to pretend that everyone who disagrees with them is a racist. Of course that's what they want, because if you can discuss the topic rationally, you might find what while he's a bombastic jerk, he's done none of the things they predicted.
Trump is either a communications genius, or the media/left are complete idiots to be outclassed by a self gratifying dolt. Look at the basics of the latest histrionics over (1) the Racist attack on fab-four: Trump shit-tweets how radical the most fanatical 4 in the far left party, "The Squad" are. The left has to defend them (defining themselves as like them), or admit he was right. (2) The next week it is about Baltimore: Trump shit-tweets the truth about how bad Elijah Cummings district is. The left and the media can admit truth, or make fools of themselves calling him a racist and denying reality: they choose the latter.
The far-left and their media keeps going with "anything Trump says is wrong".... so he keeps saying, "the sun is bright" and they keep saying, "no it is NOT, that's racist!" And the sane public remembers the abrasive truth of Trump, and the foolish dishonesty of the media/left. And the Democrats think they're winning? Either he’s intentionally baiting them, as part of his plan, or they’re so incompetent that they can’t beat a bumbling buffoon and his shit tweets. So if Trump's an idiot, they are dumber. Or he's been using the left's constant under-estimation of him, to bait them into shooting themselves in the foot. (They win the little fight, by losing the bigger one). And the #resistance can't stop falling for it. Either doesn’t bode well for the left.
Spygate - There is no doubt that the Trump administration was spied on during a Presidential election, by the Obama administration. But there is room for debate on whether it was justified, how far it went, and whether it was criminal. There is also no doubt that the media reported it, then were outraged when Trump repeated it, and they denied it was spying, then they reported a few examples where it happened. In fact, once Attourney General Barr reported that he was investigating how bad it was, the left/media went nuts trying to destroy his reputation, because they know that their side (the left) behaved at least unsavory, if not outright criminal, and they want to do damage control.
Democrats leaked to the Democrat Press (WaPo), that Trump used the term "Shithole" to refer to a few countries (that are shitholes), while in the immigration debate. Then both hypocritically made a stink about a nothingburger for many many days of 24/7 coverage, while ignoring all the important points. There's deeper issues here, but the mocking of the term (or the defense of it), just divided us on partly lines because making stink over Trump's style (and what the Dem side did too), isn't going to persuade anyone who doesn't already hate Trump of anything. The thinkers will be outraged at what's went on behind the curtain of FakeNews and histrionics.
Sean Spicer: Press Secretary for an unpopular administration means he's the victim of repeat yellow journalism and hatchet jobs. It's not that he doesn't say dumb things, he does. He just does it less often than the other side of the aisle, and when caught saying the same dumb things they did, the Press makes 10x the sink out of his mistakes. This lists a few examples.
School Lunches - Democrats (Michelle Obama) decided to make socialized federal nutritional mandates ("Smarter Lunchrooms") as her cause, used debunked junk science to do it, and removed nutrition and flavor to the point where (a) kids ate fewer school lunches: lower utilization (b) threw more of it away: higher waste (c) and ate out of vending machines instead: ate worse. When Trump tried to fix it by allowing smarter states to opt-out, #resist States decided to sue to protest us from allowing anyone else to offer better choices for their students than they were.
Scampeachment - This impeachment (scampeachment/shampeachment) is
Congress takes a vote on whether to impeach, and it loses 364-58 (+2 Democrats hid and voted "present"). Since voting on it would make Democrats accountable, Pelosi sets up a system to go around that and not have another vote, they invented the unprecedented idea of an impeachment "inquiry", which is impeachment without the process of impeachment (presumption of guilt, and no rules/norms).
This is similar to the scam of making Nixon an unnamed co-conspirator, so that the Democrats could slander him and he couldn't cross examine witnesses or mount any defense against the slurs against his name.
Prior impeachment hearings you had a special counsel that was appointed by the department of justice who oversaw this phase of the impeachment, since the Democrats have refused to name a crime/scope the President is guilty of, or even vote on an impeachment, the DOJ can't/won't create a special counsel. (You are barred by law and oath of office from just fishing for crimes).
The problem is that when the Democrats put their "witnesses" up, they get eviscerated as the partisan deep-state frauds that they are (like happened with Mueller), and they don't hold to scrutiny. So Pelosi played politics, as she always does, and created this process so they would have no accountability for slandering the President in a non-impeachment impeachment (e.g. scampeachment).
While others impeachments had a defined scope in writing, this does not.
The others had established rules and procedures, named in advance, this does not.
The others tried to have credible process, people running it, and look non-partisan. This was the antithesis of that with partisan hacks like Schiff running part of it after he was caught lying a few dozen times about having irrefutable evidence on Russia that he was did not.
In the past subpoena power was granted to both parties, not in this case.
In the past, counsel could cross examine witnesses and present evidence, or hear what was being said. Not in this case.
So this is about never trumpers making a mockery of the prior process (and looking for excuses why the rules don't apply to them), because the constitution doesn't specifically stop them. So they are going to rape the spirit of the law, and all precedent, because they can. It's a scam that violates all prior norms, and something that we should not tolerate from elected officials.
None of the fiction makes any sense to those that pay attention to the logic:
(a) we have no good evidence provided by any government agency that the Russians hacked the DNC: since the FBI never investigated the hack, and is just taking the word of a DNC hired private security concern, the claim seems specious. See: Good Evidence
(b) even if the Russian did hack the DNC, that’s not proof that the Russians were the source of the Wikileaks material (especially since the FBI, Russia, Julian Assange, and a UK intelligence asset all agreed that Wikileaks was done by a DNC leaker and not the Podesta email hack).
(c) And no one (least of all "intelligence sources") ever provided a good motive for why Russia would want Trump over Hillary.
(d) people that voted against Hillary or for Trump didn’t have the leaks as their primary motive: they had decided long before, and over other issues
(e) letting out the truth about how the Democrats had manipulated the election (both primary and general) is more a public service than a violation of our democracy. In order for it to be a problem, you have to show that what they said was incorrect, and no one has demonstrated the emails were false. If telling the truth delegitimizes an election, then what does that say about our election in the first place?
(f) If the Russians were hacking and they really wanted to harm the Obama or Clinton campaign, they could have done us a far bigger service (and more damage to the administration chances) by just releasing any of the following. So the argument that they were trying to manipulate the election means they either weren’t very good at hacking, or weren’t trying very hard to manipulate the election.
(g) most Americans believe Trump would have won without the hacking
(a) some of the malware touched a Russian email service that a company once used, that once contracted for the Russians (Fancy Bear)
(b) one of the hackers used the handle "Iron Felix", a famous Russian secret police force founder
(c) some Russians said they "felt good" about the results of the election
(d) WaPo ran editorials about the sophisticated Russian hack.
Counter to that was Security experts (including self) laughed off the evidence as weak sauce:
The server (which was never released to the FBI to investigate), showed that the download was too fast for an internet connection (and looked like a thumb drive copy)
Wikileaks said it was a Democrat insider (they've never been caught in a lie: their credibility is critical to their existence)
When Seth Rich was killed, Wikileaks implied that he had been the leaker, and offered a reward for catching his murderer
The FBI director had internally closed the investigation months BEFORE interviewing Hillary, and the FBI got caught offering a Russian Hacker a deal (money, free apartment, citizenship), if he'd falsely confessed to being the source of the hack, and many of the agencies that were credited with agreeing with national intelligence, said they never saw the evidence or signed off on anything.
So far, no one has come up with evidence of a hack.
The Russian hacker thing seems to be a great system for separating the rational and skeptical, from the rest. Despite CNN and other FakeNews sites repeating that the Russian hacked the election (at Hillary campaigns behest), that Russians collaborated with Trump, that they manipulated the election, the only "evidence" they had were vaporous claims from anonymous sources that never materialized or pass scrutiny. While there was hard evidence of Hillary and Democrats colluding with Russians. So Dems/their Media just created this attack as an excuse to distract away from their actions in rigging the primary, fumbling the election, and then gaslit anyone who would question their narrative.
Russiagate has been a fraud created by Hillary Campaign, Barack Obama, the DNC, their political appointments in the "Deep State", and perpetuated by their allies in the media. Every time one aspect is debunked, they just invent a different revelation to chase down, until that one is debunked as well. This gish gallop of dinsinformation flim-flams the FakeNews watchers because the revelations (really unsourced allegations) are front page, and the corrections/retractions come days, weeks or months later and are back page: so many low-informed people think there's cumulative circumstantial evidence. But the deeper you look, the more it's prestidigitation (smoke and mirrors), and the only hard evidence is of Democrats and the media behaving badly. If you can read the following FAQ, and discover facts not-in-evidence in the media (and mentioned often), then it proves that there's either incompetence or collusion to rig an election (the last or next one).
The three things (Russia, Trump and Wiretapping) are intricately tied together, in ways that reflect poorly on the mainstream media, and those who believe that media. Remember this sequence:
Trump: I was "wire tapped"
NYT/CNN/WaPo: Haha. That idiot @realDonaldTrump thinks he was wiretapped.
..Six months later...
NYT/CNN/WaPo: Trump was wiretapped.
We know that: Paul Manafort and Carter Page were both illegally wiretapped: those wiretaps were illegally gotten based on the Obama Administration cronies lying to the FISA Courts by claiming the FBI/CIA had vetted the material, and not revealing that it was all based on the Hillary paid-for Dossier. Those warrants were then used to spy on the Trump Campaign, and the information they gathered was then used to charge Paul Manafort with crimes unrelated to Russia Collusion/Obstruction, and also used to illegally unmask American Citizens, and illegally leak that information to the public'. Right before this happened, Obama had changed the rules for seeing this top secret information (unmasking) information, which made it easier to leak these secrets and harder to track who did it. Top candidates with access were Obama appointees John Brennan, Susan Rice, or Samantha Power. We do not know how much criminal sharing was going on (back and forth), but we do know Obama lied in saying that he wasn't following the investigation, and some clandestine communication was happening (from private texts from Peter Strzok and Lisa Page). We also know that Bill Clinton got caught lying about an "impromptu" clandestine tarmac meeting (that was later shown to be pre-planned) with the Obama's DOJ (Attorney General Loretta Lynch), where they said they just "talked about grandkids" during the hight of Hillary's email investigation. Uh huh. CNN or the NYT have either avoided as much of that context as possible, or actively attacked anyone that questioned the motives or actions of these impeccable sources.
Robert Mueller is leading the witch hunt into non-existen Trump Russian collusion. He and others have implied as much... but Mueller will be seen as a failure if his investigation doesn't find anything, so they've been picking off people around Trump for things completely unrelated to his charter (Russian Collusion or Obstruction of Justice with regards to Russian Collusion).
Trump insults the fab-4 of Anti-Americanism: the far left progressive caucus that's going to get him re-elected. His quip against their (freshmen Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley) constant dishonest rants about how bad America is, and how great everywhere else is, is the age old comment, "you should go fix there first", only he added "and then come back and show us how it's done". Idiots like AOC pretended that this was about race and that Trump didn't know where they were from and was telling all people of her kind to get out. It was more personal/targeted than that. FakeNews outlets like CNN propagated the lie in their headline and omitted key context. But anyone who read his tweets knew better, which is why CNN intentionally didn't link to the source. CNN's pundits made the same claim about Melania, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio (before and after Trump): proving either CNN is racist, or this kind of attack is normal fare in politics and on CNN. Only when Republicans do it, it's racist. Pelosi escalated to try to create a resolution condemning these xenophobic tweets (rolls eyes), this is all to cover for the anti-American sentiments of the freshman democrats.
NO! Being rationally skeptical is called critical thinking. So as Reagan said, "trust but verify". If the evidence supports the case, and they're being open? Sure. If they're not being open, and the story doesn't add up, then "of course not". The FBI is normally about telling the truth, but the CIA's job is to lie. And both the top of the FBI and CIA, in this case, have been caught lying, politicking (against this administration), the top leadership has been fired and are being investigated. Thus the media and democrats that have been telling us since Vietnam to never trust the CIA, are suddenly saying we should trust unnamed agency sources without evidence (and without question)? That doesn't sound political to you?
Pussy Protest - There was a pussy march on Washington (their words), marching down the street chanting, “we’re here, we fear, and we can’t get over it”. Really it was about two things: the hate of the leadership, and the gullibility (fear) of the followers. The leaders convinces the rubes that Trump was the new Hitler, he was going to create death camps for minorities, he was going to take away abortion, he was going to institute racism, and so on. When you can't argue reasonably, you need to convince people to think with their emotions.
Trump withdrew from Obama's non-binding agreement (either that unconstitutional treaty). And agreed to consider future ones, if there's a better deal. This was because anyone that glanced at it, knew it wasn't a good deal or about climate but wealth redistribution (from America and American businesses/jobs). And of course the left/media that disliked it under Obama, suddenly loves it, lies to its base about what it means, and their followers are in hysterics about something that did no good, a lot of bad, and since they can't argue on the merits, they use fallacies and lies to tell each other about what a big deal this is. This article covers the details.
This can be summed up as the left doesn't like Trump because he's a Republican that stands up to them. It's not because of the things they claim, and we know that because they excuse their side doing worse:
Not because he's a caustic/abrasive New Yorker, they love far worse Polemic Democrats on their side, including Bloomberg, Clinton, Cuomo, de Blasio, Schumer, not to mention FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, and other loudmouthed New Yorkers from history.
Even if they are misinformed by their echo-chamber to believe he's a Is Trump a racist?, or a Homophobe, insulted a disabled reporter, it's not really about any of that: they excuse their side for dressing in blackface and telling off color gay jokes, and worse.
No, they hate him because he's a traitor. He's a Democrat, that uses all their favorite techniques, and still stands up to them. They want to control the language, and he ignores their hand waiving and just calls them on their bullshit. Now I've said that if the left didn't have Double Standards they wouldn't have any standards at all. So they keep inventing scandals to create an echo chamber, that he's the worst President ever -- while ignoring that their side is doing worse. They are the least introspective people since the vampire went into a hall of mirrors, and they don't even realize that they hate him BECAUSE he is a reflection of everything they are.
Obamanomics v Trumponomics - Democrats and their media hate history, because history is so seldom on their side. When you can't win with the facts then you need to either: (a) attack the source (b) distort the facts (c) change the subject (d) or just find an excuse to go away. A perfect example of this is comparing the economics of Obama versus Trump. During Obama, the economy was resoundingly bad that Obama and the Press both blamed Bush for it, or cooked the numbers to try to convince you it wasn't as bad as it seemed. After 8 years of malaise (with a few warm years in the middle), Trump took office, and the economy took off like a rocket, exactly like he'd predicted. Since the Press can't let the facts stand for themselves, they trying to revise history to pretend that this is because of Obama. Let's dive into the facts...
Michael Cohen was a bit of a "fixer" for many famous people, but since Trump was a client, Robert Mueller did some investigation on highly questionable grounds, and was able to find enough evidence to hand it off to the NYC District Attorney to try to get Cohen to either sing (tell facts) or compose (invent them) on Trump, for a reduced sentence on things completely unrelated to Trump, Russia, Collusion, or election rigging. It turns out it worked, he was a dirtbag, and did many illegal or unethical things, and was more than happy to lie (we know of many). We just don't know if he is telling the truth or lying about Trump.
Mean Trump kills Jimmy Al-Daoud - The tweets and headlines seemed to imply "Jimmy Al-Daoud, a Chaldean Christian who lived in US since 6 months old and diabetic, was deported to Iraq by @ICE in June. In Iraq he was homeless and didn't know the language. He just died on the streets of Iraq. This is complicity in genocide." Many pointed to Trump and his policies. The facts? Jimmy was schizophrenic, a repeat violent felon (20+ convictions), and an illegal, and the crimes were why he was deported. Oh, and this following the law signed by Bill Clinton, that was also enforced by Barack Obama, so is nothing new. We can argue whether we should be the mental institution for every violent schizophrenic in the world -- but the point is the way the story is presented is completely dishonest. Taking refugee status from violent people is going to mean some of them come to violent ends, but the alternative is they commit violent acts here and hurt innocent Americans -- so the issue is far more complex than you get from FakeNews outlets that reported this.
Make America Great Again - Make America Great Again is Donald Trump's campaign slogan (MAGA) that had an immediate brand recognition and a strong signal to reverse Obama's slide toward progressive pseudo-socialism, and to free up markets and people. It was also used by Ronald Reagan ("Let's make America great again") to reverse the malaise, stagflation and moral slide under Jimmy Carter. And even Bill Clinton used it in campaign speeches 1992, and Hillary Clinton used it in her 2008 Presidential Primary Campaign. But under Trump, it's racist. The left invented that it was a secret coded language for oppressing minorities and reversing diversity efforts, then used that as an excuse to attack/assault anyone who supports the real meaning of the term, under their guise of "punching a Nazi in the face".
The Whitehouse responded to a teacher about her questions on Parkland and shooting, and she miscorrects him to try to prove that he's an idiot. Only her lack of research, and erroneous corrections showed who the idiots are: her and those who repeated her miscorrections without noticing they were wrong (and fit the same style that Obama and Clinton used). But if your base is partisans, things like facts won't matter. When you can't debate the merits of the facts, you can at least distract by attacking the people doing it, or their punctuation. It plays well with the gullible and partisan, while the other side recognizes it for what it is (stupid partisanism). Hey, if Democrats could grow, then the party would have ended with Andrew Jackson and the Indian Massacres.
Trump tweeted the truth (obnoxiously, as always), the left lost their minds. Just another day in the upside-down.
I have no problem thinking Trump is a big-mouthed bombast, that's going to respond to every provocation. But that's a duh! He's a realityTV star, with a NY-attention-hog personality. So not liking the style is fine... just remember, that's just style (not substance). But now let's use our thinking brains and dive into the realities of this.
Kathy is a whiney, rude, shock-jock of comedy. Not quite as bad as many of her ilk: Sarah Silverman, Rosey O'Donnel, Samantha Bee and such. But still a generally caustic and not very funny human being.
I'm not a Judge Arpaio fan or foe. Some of his ideas about justice aren't horrible. Some of his implementations definitely were. But the thing that matters in his Pardon is none of those biases or activities that others want to bring to the table, but just whether he was being treated fairly in this case or not.
Jerusalem became the capital of Israel about 1000 BC, when King David captured the city and made it Jerusalem (the City of David), and center of the Israeli state. In 1995 a Bipartisan Congress nearly unanimously passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act which recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and Clinton, Bush, Obama all called Jerusalem the 'capital of Israel' and promised to move our embassy there, then failed to live up to their campaign promise. But on Dec. 6th, the Trump administration announced we were moving our Israeli embassy to Jerusalem, and the left/U.N pretended this was end of days, and passed an amendment condemning the U.S. And Trump Administration stood firm, showing what leadership looks like. (It's not doing what's popular, but what is right).
So the Democrats can hang their hat on what a great, upstanding, career G-man he was. But his time in the sun is almost over: he will be a failed and fired incompetent and corrupt politico that was working in D.C. and did more to harm the FBI reputation than any other man in history. Except maybe Mueller, and the Democrats that supported them for their political agenda (of undermining the Nation, as long as Trump was in charge).
Is Trump racist for building a wall? - A: It could be, depending on your motives. If your motive is that you think all latinos are inferior to whites, and that's why you want to keep them out, then it could be racism. When FDR started it, or Bill/Hillary Clinton's campaigned on it (calling it a fence), or Obama demanded better border security, the Democrats didn't call it racism. In order to show it is racism, you'd need to show that Mexicans are a race, and that Trump doesn't like the entire Mexican people. But racists don't usually hire, hug Mexican voters, and celebrate lowering latino unemployment. Anyone who cares, knows that Trump is fine with legal immigrants (though probably less so than I am), just not illegal immigration. So unless you have evidence against the more likely scenarios, assuming the worst shows the bigotry of the accuser more than the accused. But that won't stop/slow the media left from doing it. This article going into some of the hypocrisy and history of "building the wall".
Let's start by reviewing what words actually mean:
Racism - ray•se•zem. noun: the belief that ALL members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
Not-racism: Racism isn't dating, employing and marrying foreigners, or being a loudmouthed douche, it's not insulting an individual because you don't like them (even based on race, or something they said/did): that's just a personal attack. Those might be insensitive, but words have actual meanings. Mexicans aren't a race. Islam is not a race. The border wall or getting tough on illegal immigration isn't racism. It certainly wasn't labelled that when Bill and Hillary were for it. It's not winning awards for racial inclusiveness, hugging and hanging out with celebrities of other races, nor celebrating other races with monuments. So there's actually no real evidence of his Trump's racism, but lots of evidence of the self-deluded bias of his detractors, and the gullibility of their followers who repeat accusations without understanding them..
Like most things Obama did, he fucked up negotiations with Iran. He signed a shitty deal, in the worst way possible, and Trump fixed it by wiping the slate clean and starting over, and Obama had his usual impotent tantrum over that. Obama didn't even require the Iranians to sign the deal, and he didn't ratify it through the senate (it was no treaty). While I'm not sure if throwing the whole deal away was the right move, it's easy to see why keeping wasn't, and why signing it was a disaster. And anyone that claims Trump hurt the U.S.'s credibility by not following the terms of a non-signed deal, that wasn't in our interests, is completely clueless about what all those words mean.
there was rampant anti-Trump bias at the FBI by at least 5 different people that should be investigated for that bias (not counting Comey). Hillary was guilty of multiple crimes, leaked national secrets, her servers had been compromised and secret documents stolen, and her investigation was corrupted: the FBI under Comey's leadership went completely off book to protect her and her cronies from prosecution (and gave out immunity to obstruct justice). The FBI had hid evidence from Congressional investigators (newly discovered Strzok texts that had been redacted).
Obama lied to the public about Hillary's emails in that he was aware of her private server all along, and he lied to the public in that he was kept aware of her investigation (while he claimed he wasn't because of Obstruction of Justice) -- so Obama did, what the Dems accuse Trump of doing.
Comey was an obvious partisan Hillary supporter, he and his staff had doctored his statements on multiple occasions to protect her from justice, he was so clueless that he didn't know that Anthony Weiner was Huma Abadin's spouse, and the only reason he revisited the Weiner emails and they admitted trying to stall the clock (until after the election, if ever) -- was that they panicked when the NY AG asked about the laptop -- so the reopening was trying to protect Hillary's legacy and not sabotage her election. Since there was a rampant incompetence and insubordination by Comey (he deliberately concealed his plans for the July Press conference to exonerate Hillary, based on overwhelming evidence against her)
Trump was right, his detractors wrong with regards to Comey's firing: it was justified, thus not Obstruction of Justice. And while overstated, he was also right (his detractors wrong) with regards to whether the "Deep State" was working against him and for Hillary.
The biased media (CNN, MSNBC, NYT and others) tried to spin the report by focusing on Horowitz’s measured response of saying while they didn't find the smoking gun of anyone admitting in writing that they were doing partisan things for partisan reasons, the media flipped "we couldn't prove it", into the delusion that, "it was free from bias", by ignoring all the examples of that bias, and glossing over everything damning in the report. Other than the complete corruption of our most powerful police agency and DOJ, to manipulate the public during an election year, there's nothing to see here at all.
E. Jean Carroll Rape - An Elle advice columnist (E. Jean Carroll) wrote a book, and decided to include tales of how in the mid 90's, President Trump raped her in a high end department store (Bergdorf Goodman) lingerie dressing room. However: (a) she's a non-credible witness (b) she claims he didn't rape her (c) she's got an absurd story full of incongruities (d) she'd fantasized about the same thing, in the same place, in print, a few years before the incident (e) suspicious timing and ulterior motives (f) she claims to have evidence (a soiled dress) but doesn't want an investigation or to press charges (g) Bergdorf Goodman claims they have no video evidence supporting her claims. This whole things smells funkier than the summer dumpster behind the fish market.
The media/left was titillated when an elementary school librarian rejected Melania Trump's gift of several Dr. Suess books with a condescending letter claiming it was, "racist propaganda". The same hypocrites forgot that President and Michelle Obama read these books to children... on multiple occasions. Jesse Jackson did the same. The librarian had no authority to reject the donations, and was told by the school district to stop political grandstanding. The rejection was national news, these corrections weren't newsworthy... and that tells you all that you need to know about the media's credibility.
Donald Trump - A list of articles on Trump, his scandals (real and imagined). My goal isn't to cheerlead or slam, but I am anti-establishment and have the most interest in the parts of the story that the media/left has omitted, and giggle at cry-bullies getting their comeuppance. That's probably too much nuance for many, as anything but rabid attacks make many think I'm a Trump lover. While I wish he was a better behaved champion and didn't get in the mud with the pigs, but if he didn't, he'd be Mitt Romney and he'd likely lose. So they despise him for doing what they do back to them. I don't like either of them, but I like the one fighting for individuals more than the ones fighting to oppress them.
The left has lost their nut over a fake controversy. Donald Trump Jr. took a meeting with a Russian lawyer (Keyser Söze) who implied she had information on one of Hillary Clinton's many crimes in Russia. Being curious if they really did have evidence of those crimes that the media has had no interest in looking into, he took the meeting, as anyone would. Not only was this not a crime, but no info was exchanged -- instead the Russians talked about their quest for a repeal of the Magnitsky Act (a law passed to punish Kremlin associates because of the death of Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky). No information was exchanged, there was no crime or attempted crime was committed.
Those Russian lawyers, were working with Fusion GPS... the same firm the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign paid to make up “evidence” of Trump and Russia collusion, and had invented now-disproven stories about a secret server communicating with Russia in Trump Tower, or that gave Democrats’ money to former British spook Steele, who gave the money to alleged or former Russian intelligence agents to create the infamous and discredited Trump-Russia dossier. If there's anything ugly and sinister, it seems like the Democrats behavior was far worse than Don Jr.'s.
DACA - Do you love the Constitution and Rule of Law, or do you prefer a corrupt political tyranny (where the President has the powers to write/nullify law)? Pick one. If you support DACA then you aren't compassionate, you just picked the latter.
Context matters. While in a fraudulent lawsuit over Trump University, against a law-firm whose principals maxed out their donations to Hillary Clinton, and paid the Clinton’s hundreds of thousands more in speaking fees, Trump's lawyers proved a point that should have ended the case right there. But an Obama Appointed Judge (Gonzalo Curiel), who is involved with many latino advocacy groups/causes, and was involved with the opposing lawyer in the past, refused to recuse himself. Then decided the lawsuit should go-on anyways. Trump's lawyers are livid over the, "manifest disregard for the law", and Trump is later forced to settle (to eliminate the campaign distraction). While this is still ongoing, Trump was asked about it by Jake Tapper (CNN), and Trump mentioned the judges latino/background as possible motivation for the bias, and the left goes nuts. To the left, your heritage has nothing to do with it... unless it was Obama lawyers arguing against Judge A. Ashley Tabaddor (and they forced her to recuse herself from all Iranian immigration cases, because she was Iranian), or when Obama and the left are using race as an excuse for ignoring questionable rulings of Sonia Sotomayor. Back then they argued that of course heritage / cultural bias exists, but it is necessary to get that balance on the Supreme Court. So once again the left wants to play it both ways -- when their side is saying there's cultural bias, it's fine -- but when the other side does it for more cause, why it's racism.
The AP (Administration's Press) did a comedy piece, playing a DNC water carrier, poorly disguised as fact checking. It's embarrassingly bad journalism, and really just an op-ed piece by a Clinton supporter.
If you look at the actual facts, Trump was materially correct in all of them. But since saying that, wouldn't fit the meme, they picked nits, changed topics, filled it with fluff or side topics, or had a wonky standard that will never apply the same way to Hillary.
The AP (Administration's Press) did a couple of comedy pieces, playing a DNC water carrier, poorly disguised as fact checking. (WaPo, PBS, ABC, Yahoo, and a few other places ran these pieces, so they own that bias as well).
The idea appears to have been to cherry pick the worst 11 things Trump said, and play pedantics to make them look worse, while ignoring 57 things he said that were correct facts. Then compared that to the 11 best things Hillary said (with a few sacrifices to look objective), then excusing most of them, while ignoring 60 things they could have criticized her on, if they were measuring her by the same yardstick as Trump. Michael Moore couldn't have done it better.
The article's below summarize each of the two speeches and "FactChecks" to show not only how they use selection bias, standards bias, and other techniques within each "fact check" -- but also how massively obvious the bias is when you compare them side-by-side. (Assuming you believe that both side's politicians lie equally).
There's always two sides to History, that of the informed and the other side. The latter may be well intentioned, but if they don't know why something is happening, then their anger, frustration and venting is all misdirected at the wrong thing. Hate is taught, and the left is being taught hate through the media (disinformation). Just about everything the left has raged against (in Charlottesville) shows which side they're on, and it isn't truth. Especially the charade that the Trump is a racist and praised the Neo-Nazi's when he actively denounced them in his first Press Conference.
Carpe Donktum - A twitterer (Carpe Donktum) summed up the state of Twitters leftist outrage mob by imagining Trump tweeting the picture of a horse, and how various outlets would respond:
MAGA: This is the most beautiful Horse that was ever created
LIBS: You Should Be in Jail, the Horse Deserves Better
CNN BREAKING NEWS: President Trump tweeted a horse that was probably thinking bad thoughts, our panel discusses after the break.
MSNBC: President Trump tweeted a picture of an Arabian horse, clearly a dog whistle to his Islamophobic base
Feminist Twitter: Why does the horse have to be a male? This is just another example of Trumps war on women.
Huffington Post: How Stallions are hurting transhorses
The Daily Beast: Trump's "Horse Picture" linked to Antisemitism, here is the horses address and social security number.
The New York Times: SOURCE says the Horse is the power behind the throne, Trump sits in his office watching gorilla channel all day.
Cagegate - Does America break up families, keep kids in cages, and abuse illegal immigrants? Obviously, not enough or there would be far fewer illegal immigrants. (They're far more looped into the risks than the average Joe). The facts are this is rare, temporary, this has been done forever (and under the Obama and Clinton administrations), and the idea that criminals shouldn't be separated from their kids is absurd. Under the Democrats reasoning, for domestic crime, it is fine to separate families. But for foreign invaders and perpetrators should get special exceptions. But a nation without laws is no longer a nation. And a media that omits context and biases their stories, like NYT and NYMag did on this one, are no longer journalists.
Alabamagate - (This is also called Sharpiegate, but is much broader than that). Anatomy of FakeNews would look like this:
Trump tweeted on Sunday (Sept 1st) to be careful, and God Bless everyone, be sure to evacuate, and warned that because Hurricane Dorian was cat 5, and could hit the states hard (including Alabama as the last of the 5 states mentioned). Then went on with his logorrhea about the economy and a dozen other things.
A never Trump'er at the National Weather Service tweeted that no effects would be felt in Alabama as the storm was going to stay east.
The DNC media, trying to cover for Biden (or other DNC) Gaffes or the embarrassing 7 hour Climate battle of the dimwits (infomercial for the uninformed) that CNN was running, decided to invent the FakeStory that Alabama was never on the threatened list for the cone, and that Trump was an idiot for tweeting that, since the storm had stalled and was turning away. CNN even did a dishonest map where they mislabelled Alabama as Mississippi.
Trump doesn't let the media revise the truth about him... so after 4 days of FakeNews (Wed), he did a little mini-News Conference, where his people had created charts and checked the facts, and it showed the original track of the Hurricane and where broader effects would be felt.
After a dozen attacks by Iran, Trump killed a really, really bad guy (that ran their terror operations). OrangeMan is bad (to the far left and their media). Thus this was a bad thing that was going to cause WWIII, and it was all our fault. Whether intentional or through blind bias/incompetence, those that railed against this action demonstrate that they are anti-American trash that would rather see America burn, or our enemies thrive, than admit Trump did something right.
2019.10.22 Lynchgate - Trump tweets the secret tribunal Scampeachment that violates all historical norms (doing it without a formal vote, not being able to confront/cross-examine witnesses, behind closed doors, etc), is a political lynching. The wokescold Democrats are outraged, other than half a dozen Democrats (including Joe Biden) saying that (or worse) about Clinton's more above-board and justified impeachment, on the house floor, and the Democrats media using the term (or worse) when it suits them, this time is different... because a Republican used it... with more justification. If Democrats didn't have double standards, they wouldn't have any standards at all.
The fires in the Amazon this year (2019) are nothing exceptional (2004 was like peak deforestation and we're down like 80% from then), and most of it is farm land and not forest that's being burned. (Normal crop burns, with a few getting a little out of control). But CNN and Hollywood got to use the Global Warming scare mongering, often using old photos from back in 2004, or even this was Trump's fault: seriously (idiots). It's a catastrophe don't you know? "Over 20% of the world's Oxygen comes from there. We need to fix this NOW" For those with a clue? They're idiots. If we burned the entire biomass of the earth less than 1% of the world’s oxygen would be consumed... most of our oxygen is collected over millions of years, most of the rest comes from water based photosynthesis, and we don't need to worry about a lack of Oxygen. So this is just this years chicken-little alar or Ozone hole scare. }}
Trump floated the idea of buying Greenland. Denmark said, "it's not for sale". And Trump cancelled a visit to Denmark, saying that basically freed up some time on his schedule. The #NeverTrumpers all raged that this was disrespectful to an ally and assumed the worst of Trump. The problem is that we don't know the context, and the FakeNews never did their jobs to try to find out. I can believe Trump was just having a hissy about being rebuffed... but it seems at least as likely that NYT/CNN/WaPo were going off half-cocked, again, and there might be more to the story (like "Hands up, don't shoot"). My left of center friends all raged at what a dumb idea it was, because CNN/NYT/WaPo told them so... not one of them was informed that Russia and China had both made plays for bases there in the past, and that would make a new Cuban Missile crisis on a much bigger scale. Or that it has many great natural resources that make it valuable, and under utilized.
One of the perfect examples of FakeNews and the left losing their mind, and causing distrust and contempt by their informed readers is an OpEd in the Boston Globe asking whether Trump has a single redeeming quality, and answering "no". Which shows how out of touch the author is, and more than that, the Globe Editorial staff to think that this was News and to fail the fact checking on the error ridden hate-piece. 55 different lies is the best that the Globe can manage as impartial journalism?
2019.06.13 Dirt from Foreign Government - Donald Trump took an interview from ABC FakeNews’ George Stephanopoulos (mistake #1), and he told the truth that any other politician would do (mistake #2). When asked if Trump would take dirt on his opponent from a foreign government, Trump told the truth and said, "I'd listen", then maybe go to the FBI. The Democrats and their Press that has never complained about Hillary not only using foreign intelligence but planting it to subvert an election (via the Steele Dossier), suddenly thinks this behavior is outrageous.
2019.03.22 Mueller Report - The Mueller Report is out. I don't care if you like/dislike President Trump, I care whether people will defend the truth or perpetuate a lie. Soon we will be able to read the full report, but the summary is a smackdown: (a) there was no hint at collusion by Trump or his team, in fact they rebuffed attempts by the Russians. (b) without collusion there couldn't have been obstruction, but even if there had been, Trump wasn't close to obstruction (c) the media narrative has been a fraud (d) the media wasted 2,284 minutes, and 533,074 articles (245 million responses) to coverage of the fake narrative. The media doesn't admit their mistake and apologize to Trump and the public are not journalists following the facts, but polemics mad that someone shined the light of truth on their deception. And right on cue, a bunch of FakeNews, Democrat politicians, and Hollywood sheep try to spin this as it, "stops short of exonerating on obstruction", or shifting the narrative to Mueller's competence, Trump's guilt on something else, or anything other than their 2-year fraud. But all the outlets that championed it as the end of Trump, or shown for frauds. Expecially when they won't just apologize.
2019.02.05 SOTU - The State of the Union speech was a little late (thanks to Nancy's shutdown), but it got delivered. Trump took the high road, Nancy/Dems took the lower one. Trump got a 76% approval, and higher ratings that 2018 or Obama, on a longer and deeper speech . But FakeNews NBC called it a "Theater of the Absurd". And the Fake FactCheckers at NYT, Politico, NPR and WaPo all proved their bias in their counter-factuals.
2019.01.20 Covington Catholic High School - 💩The New York Times published an article “Boys in ‘Make America Great Again’ Hats Mob Native American Elder at Indigenous People’s March,” and many other outlets (CNN, WaPo, etc), piled on without verifying. OrangeMan is so bad, that just wearing his hat makes you a racist. Only, the details leaked out that it was the Catholic teens minding their own business (on a class trip) when the Native American demonstrator/activist (Nathan Phillips: not a Vietnam War Veteran as WaPo and other claimed) marched up, beat drums, push into center of student group, call teens names, and then accused the kids of surrounding him and saying racist things, all false.
2019.01.17 Impeachment - Buzzfeed released an article that said Trump had ordered his Attorney (Michael Cohen) to lie to investigators, which set off the Democrats impeachment Tourettes again. ("Get the noose!") Nevermind that: it was implausible, from an unreliable author and publication, with anonymous sources, and made no sense -- the left and their media was all over it, and Congress was already demanding an investigations: which forced Mueller to release an unprecedented statement (during an investigation), that said the story was bullshit. And the left-press was crestfallen over the truth.
2018.07.31 Avoiding Reporters - The media rightly accuses Trump of being an attention hound. Since "he's damned either way", Jeff Zeleny (WH Reporter for CNN), tweeted Trump had not taken questions from reporters in at least a week. (Something they never complained about under Obama). Then the facts/corrections came out that Trump had done a press conference (with Q&A) the day before. No retraction, apology or consequences for the mistake. This is CNN.
2018.07.02 Fake Immigration Story - WaPo used flawed analysis to count only half of immigrants, and conclude that Trump's policies are suppressing Muslims. Only the rest of the data changes the story. The problem isn't just that WaPo is bad at math/logic, it's that they haven't retracted and apologized.
2018.06.19 Space Force - In response to China's increased militarization of space, and Russia creating a Space Force, Donald Trump announced that he wanted to split the Air Force Space efforts into a separate agency. The Democrats and their media attacked the idea, because Orange Man Bad! ABC news spun it as racist because he used the phrase it would be a "separate but equal" agency to the Air Force (so they talked about civil rights and Plessy v. Ferguson). MSNBC and other outlets just mocked the idea and omitted context and balance in the discussion. The real news was suppressed: whether this was a good response to our frenemies actions or not.
2018.06.06 Melania Conspiracy Theories - Where's Melania? After undergoing kidney surgery, Mrs. Trump took a month off of public events. CNN fed the fire with stories about how, "she hasn't been seen in 24 days", "Where's Melania", on the station, twitter and in newsletters, and propagated FakeNews about her "plastic surgery", "she left him" or "moved back to NYC". Their defense was they were just repeating what they read on Twitter, as if that's where their journalistic line is drawn.
2018.05.03 Cohen Wiretap - MSNBC/NBC broke the story, "“Feds tapped Trump lawyer Michael Cohen’s phones,” -- and later altered the story to say, "Feds are monitoring, not listening to Cohen’s calls”: Instead of a wiretap, investigators obtained what’s known as a pen register warrant, where they get to see a log of calls made and durations, not audio of what was said.
2018.04.13 Cohen in Prague - McClatchy claims that Cohen was in Prague, which confirms part of the Steele Dossier, and contradicts Cohen's statement that he wasn't. Only no other outlet believes that, and a few mocked McClatchy for publishing it.
2017.12.08 Trump Jr. (Wikileaks) - CNN (Manu Raju) had a "bombshell" report that Donald Trump Jr. had early, secret early access to hacked DNC emails from WikiLeaks, 9 days before they were public. It turned out wrong: he only had access to the info the day after Wikileaks went public and no special access had been given. CNN eventually quietly revised their story, but never apologized or admitted how they got the dates wrong.
2017.12.04 Trump Bank Records - Failing to learn of ABC's Flynn fiasco, only a few days earlier, Bloomberg broke a story (based on an anonymous source), that Trump's Deutsche Bank Records were subpoenaed by Mueller: the noose was closing. A few days later, admitted it was Trump, just people he might know. (WSJ had regurgitated the story, and also had to retract).
2017.12.01 Flynn Fiasco - ABC (Brian Ross) falsely reported that former national security adviser Michael Flynn was prepared to testify that then-candidate Donald Trump ordered him to make contact with the Russians. The stock market dropped a few hundred points immediately, and ABC scapegoated (Suspended) Brian Ross for their failure of quality control.
2017.11.06 Japan fish-feeding frenzy - CNN got caught deceptively editing a reel to make it look like Trump made a fish feeding blunder by dumping the box of food in the Koi pond, and turned it into a big story... after omitting that PM Abe did the same thing first. Then they deceptively edited a joke on where the Japanese should build more cars in America (they played it as if he didn't know they already did). CNN's author did later issue a correction for the second FakeNews fabrication of the day.
2017.10.19 Weinstein is Trump's fault - Seriously, CNN blames Trump for Harvey Weinstein. After CNN buries 24 other sexual scandals by Democrats, and there were hundreds more, as you can see in my Gropegate list, the single biggest factor on whether CNN will cover it or bury it, is whether there's an (R) or (D) after the persons name. And even when it's obviously a Democrat, they try to think of excuses why that's really the Republicans fault.
2017.09 Hurricane Maria - While the FEMA preparation and response to Hurricane Maria was fantastic, but the Democrat controlled Island Government failed to distribute those supplies, turning a disaster into a catastrophe. While Puerto Rico’s own governor, Ricardo Rosselló, was praising Trump’s attention and response to Hurricane Maria, CNN was spinning FakeNews as this was Trump’s ‘Katrina', (and kept beating on that meme for a year)... trying desperately to point blame towards the President for the failure of Democrat controlled Puerto Rican infrastructure. (Texas and Florida had no such problems, despite similar hits).
2017.08.31 Manafort 'Donations' - NBC News hyped as a “bombshell” last week, that the, “Manafort Notes From Russian Meet Contain Cryptic Reference to ‘Donations'”. This could be pay-to-play and impeachment. Then they issued a confusing correction (same day) that they meant to say "Donor". Only that didn't appear in the original either. And WaPo slammed NBC for trashy journalism.
2017.06.16 only Democrats prayed for Scalise - After Bernie Sander supporter and left wing activist (James T. Hodgkinson) shot Republican Steve Scalise practicing baseball, CNN misreported that (a) Trump had not visited Scalise: he had. (b) only Democrats prayed for Scalise and his recovery: it was both teams. (c) I'm not even getting into all the omitted/erroneous details on Hodgkinson's background or motives, and getting gun details wrong (including in this case). All of which is tweeted/retweeted as fact, by the gullible.
2017.06.13 Cillizza FakeNews fiasco - After mocking leftist (CNN) Trump conspiracy theories, Chris Cillizza joins CNN's ranks, and reverses course. He whines about Trump's accusations of FakeNews with a challenge to offer specific examples... which results in a tidal-wave (thousands) of twitter responses (2,400+ examples).
2017.06.06 Trump was under Investigation - CNN's argument for 3+ month had been that Trump would be impeached for Obstruction of Justice, because he fired Comey, over Comey not stopping an investigation. That's at least 3 pieces of FakeNews in one:
🔥 CNN claimed Comey is going to testify that Trump lied ("multiple times") when claiming that Comey told him "he wasn't under investigation". Comey instead confirms Trump's version (Trump was not under investigation). CNN forced to retract.
🔥 This crushes CNN's claims that Trump fired Comey because he wouldn't stop the investigation, if there was no investigation then he couldn't have fired Comey over it.
🔥 This also crushes CNN's claims that Trump firing Comey was obstruction. No investigation = No obstruction!
2017.06.06 Reza Aslan firing - CNN said they should be viewed as “the one nonpartisan cable news network"... which backlashed, when (after a year of prior obvious bias and slander) people used that claim to force them to reluctantly prove it and fire Reza Aslan (their "religious scholar") after he called Trump a piece of shit. This happened right after one of their favorite contributors (Kathy Griffen) beheaded the President in effigy, so the optics were too bad to sweep it under the rug.
2017.05.25 NATO - Trump criticized NATO (as he has during his campaign) for bearing the brunt of NATO costs (true), and intimidates them into living up to their obligations and coming up with more money. The leftists, their Press and their fact checkers all pretend this is end of days and proof that:
Demanding more defense spending (against Russia) makes him a puppet of Russia.
That him claiming the U.S. pays 70-90% of NATO is a lie. It's true... depending on what you mean.
He "shoved" Montenegro Prime Minister.
That he's alienating our allies and going to break up NATO.
A year+ later, the head of NATO admits that his tough talk got NATO contributions up by over $100B, and it is stronger than ever, thanks to Trump.
2017.05.11 Trump to fire Spicer - Starting in May, CNN was saying they had great information that Sean Spicer was out and going to be fired by Trump (any day). He wasn't. Spicer was unhappy about the appointment of Scaramucci, and at the end of July he resigned, while Trump asked Spicer to stay, and he did until August. This was the opposite of what CNN had been saying.
2017.05.04 Rape and Violence - CNN Says Trump changes to ACA will make Rape and Domestic Violence a Pre-Existing Condition. Even left of center PolitiFact, had to admit that one was FakeNews, "the bill does not change what is or is not a pre-existing condition; the health insurance companies write those definitions for themselves". No correction from CNN.
2017.05 James Comey Firing - For 6 months the media and Democrats had demanded the firing of James Comey. Trump waited until an FBI report cited evidence of gross misconduct, and then the AG fired Comey after consulting with Trump. The Democrats and their Media (NYT, WaPo, Politico, CNN, MSNBC), switched sides and screamed that this was illegal, obstruction of justice, proof of Russia collusion, and other things that were all later debunked.
2017.04.21 Carter Page Colluded with Russia - CNN claimed many times that Carter Paige colluded with Russia (wrt Trump Campaign), and spread the myth amongst their viewers for a year. It turns out that Carter Page was a victim of Obama Administration using National Intelligence to lie to federal judges, to spy on the Trump campaign during an election. After tapping his phones and so on, nobody has been able to find anything to tie him to Russian collusion.
2017.04.11 Spicer: Hitler didn't use chemical weapons - Sean Spicer (WhiteHouse Press Secretary) while talking about Assad (Syria) use of chemical weapons, misspoke (said something completely true but inartfully worded) and corrected himself (clarified that "as a tool of war" and not talking about gassing civilians) and apologized all in the same news-conference. Far left outfits like CNN, CBS, MSNBC, Snopes, Politifact, all ignored the correction/clarification and used the gaff as a way to attack Spicer and Trump, and spin a non-story into evidence of why they were a bad administration. They also ignored many cases where others on the left had said the same truth. Lies of omission, and sensationalism, are evidence of propaganda/FakeNews.
2017.02.24 Shut-out over facts - CNN whines (after getting shut out of a Press event after running the Fake Dossier) that it was retaliation because "this is how they retaliate when 'you report facts they don't like'. We'll keep reporting regardless". There's at least 4 pieces of FakeNews in that one line:
🔥 the Dossier wasn't "facts" it was lies (debunked): germaphobes aren't into watersports you morons
🔥 thus if they were shut out of over the Dossier, it wasn't because they told "facts", it was because they repeated a lie (and refused to correct it)
🔥 They weren't shut-out over just the Dossier, but over: Dossier, Russia, and dozens of other FakeNews stories listed in this section.
🔥 At the same time, Project Veritas showed a senior CNN producer (John Bonifield), admitting the whole Russia meme was bullshit, they had no evidence, and they'd been on a witchhunt, and they knew it was a lie all along: just like the President said. .
🔥 CNN had to fire 3 people and pull more off the Russia fraud and FakeCollusion (a couple months later). But they never corrected, clarified or apologized for the prior year of misreporting. That would be too much like journalism.
2017.02.15 Russian Contact - CNN repeatedly claimed Trump had "constant contact" with Russians during campaign. Only Trump didn't appear to have any direct contact. And it is normal for their campaigns to have some, but Trump's had less than normal and certainly less than Hillary's campaign (with the Steel Dossier). And many investigations have not found anything to hint that he colluded with the Russians to fix a campaign. Or that the Russians did anything to successfully change the outcome of our election.
2017.02.10 Akie Abe - FakeNews story that Melania Trump blew off Akie Abe (Japan PM's wife) during the PM's visit. Photos show Donald and Melania with her at the time. No apology or retraction.
2017.02 Trumps ExecOrder cause a Woman's Death - CNN's Erol Lewis pushed a false story that Trump’s Executive Immigration Order caused Michigan Woman’s Death, after the story had already been disproven. If they retracted and apologized, they might not be known as FakeNews.
2017.01.31 Hardiman Decoy - CNN falsely Claims Trump Brought Judge Neil Hardiman to DC (and setup a fake twitter account) as Supreme Court Nominee ‘Decoy’, and that's why they were mistaken. Hardiman wasn't in town, wasn't a decoy, it wasn't his twitter account, and if they fact checked, they'd have known that.
2017.01.23 Wall of Sacrifice - CNN (Jim Sciutto) insisted Donald Trump didn’t “say anything” about the CIA's wall of sacrifice behind him during his speech to employees at the Central Intelligence Agency - proven false.
2017.01.20 Scrubbed Climate Change and LGBT - ZOMG: Minutes in, and Trump is purging the Government (White House Website) of LGBT and Climate Change info: OrangeMan Bad! Only, this normal operating procedure to archive the old White House pages and start fresh (it happened under Clinton->Bush and Bush->Obama). No retractions, corrections or apologies given.
2017.01.20 Nancy Sinatra - Nancy tweeted a joke about her late father’s song “My Way,” being used at Trump’s Inauguration. She tweeted, "just remember the first line of the song", which is, “And now, the end is near.” CNN used that to invent a FakeNews story that she was “not happy” about Trump using her father’s song at the Inauguration. To which she replied, "That’s not true. I never said that. Why do you lie, CNN? What a rotten spin to put on a harmless joke.”
2017.01.20 MLK Bust - Time/Examiner - Trump pulled the MLK bust out of Oval Office. Never mind, it was moved in the same room, and the Churchill bust that Obama removed was brought back. Lesson: don't shittweet before factcheck!
2017.01.10 Fake Dossier - Most media outlets (besides BuzzFeed) avoided the salacious Steele (Pee Pee) Dossier. But once it ran, plenty (NYT, CNN/Evan Perez, MSNBC, NBC, etc), republished it and/or jumped on board to talk about it, and not refute its abusrdity, or clarify its provenance as a dirty/corrupt election trick (created by the DNC) and used to get illegal warrants and undermine our democracy. Instead CNN/BuzzFeed used it to infer that Trump had Russian ties (collusion), or was compromised and other FakeNews.
2017 Republicans funded the Dossier - If you heard that Republicans funded the Steele "Pee Pee" Dossier, you're a victim of FakeNews. Many Democrat operatives are guilty of repeating the lie: New York Magazine (Jonathan Chait), CNN (Brian Fallon), MSNBC’s (Velshi & Ruhle and Rachel Maddow), NBC (Christina Ginn), AP, New York Times, even James Comey. AP issued a correction, NYT clarified in later articles, but most others let the lie/confusion stand, or underplayed the truth: that it was bought and paid for by the DNC and Hillary campaign, and used to get illegal warrants and put a paid spy in the Trump campaign.
2017 Obama Wiretapping - In March, CNN and other far-left outlets denounced Trumps claim that Obama had wiretapped phones in Trump Tower as a “flat-out lie.” (Despite the fact that Trump was quoting the NYT on that). By September they admitted that Carter Page and Paul Manafort were both wiretapped (while in Trump Tower). Not only don't they offer a retraction/apology, they still mock the idea that there was wiretapping, long after they admitted that it was proven true.
🔥 CNN claimed Comey wasn't granted more resources for investigation: False
🔥 Trump is going to live tweet during Comey hearing: False
🔥 Comey is a Boy Scout and apolitical: False
🔥 Trump fired Comey over investigation (the Dossier was getting close), not for incompetence or violation of ethics: the FBI's report showed that was False.
2017 Melania - Double-standards are FakeNews. Compare how CNN, NYT, and other media outlets fawned over Michelle Obama (or Jackie O) and her ugly fashion sense. While they snub or the only time they comment on Melania (the best looking and best dressed of our First Ladies ever), is to question her fashion choices.
2017 - 17 Intelligence Agencies - The Hillary Campaign Talking Point was that "17 intelligence agencies" agreed that Russians had hacked the election. The NYT printed it and CNN repeated it for years. James Clapper admitted in front of congress that was bullshit and that he only had 3 (or 4) agencies under his purview, and that 2 of them had disagreed until pressured. CNN repeated it long after it was debunked, and never retracted or corrected the record, which is why their viewers still think it's true. NYT and others at least offered corrected versions later.
2016.12.31 Russians hack our power grid - Amid rising tension over the DNC's fake Trump Russian Collusion narrative, WaPo (Ellen Nakashima and Juliet Eilperin) invented that the Russians were also responsible for a Vermont PowerGrid attack. The Utility denied the claim, and WaPo tries to blame them, and claims they'd contacted them, and rewrites the story... but botches the rewrite as well. And it appears that they lied about trying to contact the power companies, and hadn't done their due diligence.
2016.11.08 Trump Loses - "Trump has no path to 270 - he can't win", "This race is over!", "Hillary has >90% chance of winning." -- CNN, WaPo and others were wrong on everything. Not only that he could win, but which states and groups he'd carry.
2016.10.24 Stock Market Crash - CNN predicts a Trump win will crash stock markets 10-15%, but a Clinton win would be great. The stock market responded to a Trump win by leaping upward, and continued to break records for a couple years, before having a normal correction. In fact, it when ABC spread Fake rumors of Trump's tax plan getting blocked, the market did panic (not the other way around). The point is not that CNN is often wrong (they are), but they sound more like DNC than news.
2016.06 Anthony Scaramucci - CNN published a story (based on one anonymous source), claiming Anthony Scaramucci was being investigated by the Senate into the Russian Direct Investment Fund. They had to retract it, and admit it wasn't up to their editorial standards, and three reporters had to resign. It's like Journalism, without the standards.
The FBI/CIA and finally James Comey testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee that the New York Times (and other reports) that accused Trump associates of “repeated contacts with Russian intelligence” was “almost entirely wrong" or “just dead wrong". There's no evidence of Trump collusion. For over a year the media still reports/misreports the Russian collusion: CNN and others still quoting from the debunked NYT report.
While the FakeNews was harping on the issue for a year, the only real evidence of collusion was of the Hillary campaign and DNC paying for the Fake Dossier (what real collusion looks like), the FakeNews outlets ignored it (lie of omission).
Finally, it ended with 3 of CNN's reporters getting fired. But no apology or correction issued for the prior year of FakeNews.
1990.03.29 Mic Drop - When CNN does ambush journalism, Trump drops the microphone and walks off. They of course edited up this clip, so you can't see the entire context, as part of their "journalism". Same old CNN.