Friday, June 30, 2017

James O’Keefe Video: CNN Associate Producer Calls Voters ‘Stupid as Sh*t’

A new video released Friday morning by James O’Keefe and his Project Veritas shows a CNN associate producer mocking President Donald Trump and declaring that American voters are “stupid as sh*t.”

The video is the latest that O’Keefe and Project Veritas have dropped this week targeting CNN, as the embattled network struggles with diminished credibility and wide perceptions of anti-Trump bias.
The producer in question is identified in the video as Jimmy Carr, who apparently works on CNN’s morning show, New Day. It is not clear when or where Carr’s statements were recorded, but on Project Veritas’ hidden camera, he is shown disparaging Trump as a fraudulent candidate who does not believe in, or care about, the principles he espouses.
Carr is also recorded telling a Project Veritas journalist that his anti-Trump views are shared by the vast majority of people he works with at CNN.
“On the inside, we all recognize he is a clown, that he is hilariously unqualified for this, he’s really bad at this, and that he does not have America’s best interests … We recognize he’s just f*cking crazy,” Carr states in the video.
He adds: “90% of us are on board with just the fact that he’s crazy.”
The Project Veritas undercover journalist also asks: “Would it be fair to question the intellect of the American voter?”
Carr responds: “Oh, no. They’re stupid as sh*t.”
Later in the video, Carr goes on to disparage Trump’s campaign manager, and White House adviser, Kellyann Conway: “She looks like she got hit with a shovel.”

The video is the fourth part of Project Veritas’s “American Pravda” series. The first reveals a CNN producer disparaging the network’s running story on purported collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign as “mostly bullsh*t.” The second video appears to show left-wing CNN commentator Van Jones calling the Russia controversy a “nothing burger.” In Part 3, O’Keefe claims in a tweet that CNN CEO Jeff Zucker refused to respond to his questions about CNN’s coverage of the Russia story.

Caddell: Media ‘United in Their Hatred’ of Trump, Can’t Handle Him Hitting Back

Pollster and analyst Pat Caddell joined Breitbart News DailySiriusXM host Alex Marlow on Friday to discuss the media’s freak out over two tweets yesterday by President Trump.

While not endorsing the tweets, Caddell pointed out that the criticism of Trump from the media has been “relentless” since he took office, adding, “The press, remember, they are united, they have been united in their hatred of him since before the election,  after the election, and every day since. They gave him no breaks, whether it was Inauguration Day, nothing. He’s ‘Hitler’ on MSNBC because of his inaugural speech and whatever.”
“None of this has stopped and it is in itself poisonous,” added Caddell.
Caddell said that the media is especially upset because it is one of their own that was attacked and don’t like it that Trump hits back while also saying that media has never gotten over Trump’s going around them to the American people to get elected despite their hatred of him.
Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.




UNHINGED – Chris Matthews Suggests President Trump Murder Jared Kushner (VIDEO)

Another Liberal Dipshit in the media trash talking Trump but he's not supposed to respond??

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews once again compared the nepotism in Trump administration to 3rd world dictatorships but this time he suggested that President Trump murder Jared Kushner.  
Chris Matthews was discussing the reported tension between Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and President Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner when he began to complain about the nepotism.
Chris Matthews: “One of my opinions is that nepotism is a bad thing in government. It just is. You put Uday and Qusay in your government and you’re gonna have problem with everybody else in the government because nobody can fight with them. Nobody can challenge them.
In the end, the son-in-law is always right…”
Chris Matthews brought up Jared Kushner’s so-called ‘tunnel’ to Moscow in order to circumvent the State Department.
“You know, one good thing Mussolini did was execute his son-in-law,” Matthews continued.
So the leftists in the media can viciously attack President Trump and his administration day in and day out, but him sending out a mean, yet honest tweet is the end of the world. The left is a violent political faction and they must be stopped.
TGP previously pointed out that JFK made his brother Robert ‘Bobby’ Kennedy Attorney General and the main complaint was that Bobby was a little inexperienced. So when the Democrats hire family it’s Camelot; when the Republicans hire family, it’s a 3rd world dictatorship. Got it.
Video via Tea Partiest YouTube:


New York Times: Turns Out ‘17 Intelligence Agencies’ Was Fake News

The New York Times placed a bombshell of a correction at the bottom of a pessimistic piece on President Donald Trump Thursday.

A previous version of Monday’s story by Maggie Haberman, titled “Trump’s Deflections and Denials on Russia Frustrate Even His Allies,” made reference to the “17 intelligence agencies” that have supposedly all concurred in the assessment of Russian hacking in the 2016 presidential race.
Despite the mainstream media and the political left making constant reference for months to the “17 intelligence agencies” agreeing on Russia’s actions during the campaign, this has repeatedly been debunked. The single released report on the matter from the American intelligence community was produced by only three intelligence agencies – the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the National Security Agency (NSA).
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper confirmed in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the “17 agencies” line was fake news. While there are 17 American intelligence agencies and none, to his knowledge, objected to the CIA/FBI/NSA report, none of the other 14 agencies have published any independent confirmation of its claims.
The phrase “17 intelligence agencies” seems to have entered the public discourse after Hillary Clinton used it in her second debate with Trump. Despite its demonstrable inaccuracy, it continues to feature in articles from across the mainstream media. For example, an Associated Press wire story that Breitbart News carried last week uncritically uses the 17-agency figure.
For its part, the New York Times felt compelled to issue a correction after using the same phrase. The following was added below Haberman’s article:
Correction: June 29, 2017
A White House Memo article on Monday about President Trump’s deflections and denials about Russia referred incorrectly to the source of an intelligence assessment that said Russia orchestrated hacking attacks during last year’s presidential election. The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.

Note: The figure of four agencies is reached by including Clapper’s office in addition to the three agencies that compiled the published report.

Why Do Democrats Think The Only Way To Win Is To Lie?

I have a chapter in my book, “Ramblings of a Right Wing Bible Thumping White Guy’ called. “Why do they have to lie to win?” I always feel that if the issue or product you have is true and good then it will stand on its own, don’t lie about it.
Democrats are talking about how bad this new healthcare plan is and that 22+ million people will lose insurance. And, of course, the end of humankind as we know it will be along shortly thereafter!
Democrats now blame Republicans for the coming failure of Obamacare. It seems that all the misinformation and fear mongering by Republicans has caused many insurance companies to lose millions of dollars and ultimately pull out of the program. Hold up a minute.
Maybe it’s all the failed promises and misinformation by Obama and his gang about Obamacare. Remember, the Democrats banked on the fact that young people would sign up for this in large numbers, not because it was good for them but because they would be penalized for not signing up. Dems thought that was a good thing!
Then there was the 20 million who would sign up in the first 2 years. It too was a “you can keep your doctor” promise that fell flat. You see, the 19 million they claimed ran to Obamacare because it was so great never really happened, unless you use Democrats’ new math.
Over 6 million policies that were being offered by small businesses had to be cancelled because they didn’t meet Obamacare requirements, like not offering birth control for men and other CRAZY unnecessary benefits! Those people had to go to the exchanges to sign up. The Obama administration took credit for these “new” signups under Obamacare. But they would not take responsibility for the higher monthly premiums, deductibles, and co pays that came with the new “affordable” care act.
Some people even found that their prescription copays tripled! Remember, the secret word is “affordable”! I say secret because no one yet has found the affordable version.
Another 11 million people have been “forced” to go through an exchange to get on “Medicare,” a program that was supposed to be for Americans over 65 who couldn’t afford basic doctor visits, medications, and healthcare.
The first National healthcare program was floated by Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican. Lyndon Johnson decided we needed to cover more people with Medicare so he made provisions to allow people under 65 with certain conditions.
By 2015, over 55 million Americans are on some form of Medicare. This number accounts for over 14% of our national budget.
President Nixon added provisions for people with disabilities in the 1970’s. All through the 1980’s new provisions were added for hospice services, catastrophic care, medical gap insurance, and provisions to allow states to “buy in” their citizens who might be just shy of qualifying.
All this was done under Republican Presidents Reagan and Bush. Those uncaring SOB’s!
The Affordable Care Act was a failure from day one. Some would say it’s good because now they have insurance and that makes it ok under any circumstances. Really? So if you personally have insurance now, but 20 thousand others don’t because their premiums are too high and they can only pay the penalty, are you REALLY ok with that? You’re don’t mind getting subsidies from the government to cover your health insurance, while those who make just over the allotted income can’t get subsidized insurance. Now they pay the penalty and get no insurance. But you’re OK with that. How “equal” of you! So much for equality. So much for helping out your fellow man.
Young Americans were a critically needed piece in order for Obamacare to succeed, and that’s a BIG problem. Young Americans can stay on mommy and daddy’s healthcare plan until age 26. That usually only adds only a few hundred dollars to their parent’s premiums. Yet if they go out on their own, their premiums can be from $488 to $1100 dollars depending in the subsidy (aka: the amount of other people’s tax dollars you get to pay for your medical premiums!) So, even though they were needed for the ACA to work, they were kind of written a pass.
ObamaCare was a scam from day one!
In case you think I’m making all of this up, the guy who framed it and sold it to the American people, Jonathan Gruber actually said on video and in writing that, and I quote, “The Stupidity of the American voter and the ability of the Obama administration to take advantage of them allowed the bill to pass.” He said they purposely mislabeled it and didn’t call it a tax so it would go through easier, even though they always knew what it was.
He was denounced by major Obama loyalists like Pelosi, and others but again in a “If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor” moment we found out they were lying. They knew who he was what he was doing and they actively helped him sell it.
Gruber boasted about how the Obama administration fooled Americans into paying to cover the uninsured by using sleight of hand, focusing on their concern over rising health costs. He states “Barack Obama’s not a stupid man, okay? He knew when he was running for president that quite frankly the American public doesn’t actually care that much about the uninsured. . . . What the American public cares about is costs. And that’s why even though the bill that they made is 90 percent health insurance coverage and 10 percent about cost control, all you ever hear people talk about is cost control.”
Again I say, why lie to win?
Even more proof that Democrat legislators have been acting like Obama/Pelosi drones, some of them knew there were issues, major issues, with the bill but voted for it anyway. Senator Max Baucus, one of the Chief drafters of the bill, said he didn’t read all 2700 pages because it would have been a waste of time. Why? Because, according to him, only the experts could understand it. Then HOW did he write it?
Now, let’s get back to today. There are 3 options.
Single payer: NOPE. That would bankrupt this country and be a nightmare. Just look at the VA if you want to know what a single payer system would look like. Our government already has a track record, and it isn’t good.
Let ObamaCare fail!: It’s going to. ALL the experts say it will, and soon. That would definitely leave many uninsured and although Democrats should get full blame, they won’t. Why? Because they do a great job at spewing misinformation on how the “fearmongering” of Republicans is causing the ACA to fail. Maybe Gruber and Obama and Pelosi are right. Maybe Americans are stupid enough to buy this. I think not.
Repeal and replace: If they give the states more power over insurance and Medicare and buying over state lines, it will get better.
Democrats are telling you many will lose their insurance. Well, technically, yes. But not really. You see, you will actually get a choice when buying insurance. You won’t be forced to. You can actually buy the product you want. You can chose the deductible and services you want. And Medicare will be out back in the hands of the state rather than the federal government in DC that is so out of touch with so many Americans.
Don’t be fooled. Don’t fall for the Democrats’ lines being spewed that 22 million Americans will lose their insurance.  According to the CBO report the vast majority of those are young people will drop coverage on their own because they didn’t want coverage in the first place. And as far as throwing granny off the cliff, without Obamacare, granny would be getting Medicare anyway….Please don’t be what the Obama administration called you… Stupid Americans.

Julian Assange Explains Russia Obsession is Dooming Democratic Party

Julian Assange Explains Russia Obsession is Dooming  Democratic Party

I go back and forth regarding what to think about Wikileaks’ Julian Assange. On one hand his leak of Jon Podesta’s emails before the 2016 election was a public service–it informed voters of Hillary Clinton’s true attitudes and policy plans. On the other hand publishing documents supplied by Bradley now Chelsea Manning, exposed Americas military secrets and may or may not led the deaths of Americans or American-allies. But his latest release does not reveal political or military secrets, instead  it is an Op-Ed explaining why the Democratic Party may be doomed.  He argues that the self-destructive party is void of any kind of message. Instead, they it puts all its eggs in the Russian collusion basket.
Here is are the points Assange gives for the Dems downfall:
Why the Democratic party is doomed 
By Julian Assange
1. The Democratic establishment has vortexed the party’s narrative energy into hysteria about Russia (a state with a lower GDP than South Korea). It is starkly obvious that were it not for this hysteria insurgent narratives of the type promoted by Bernie Sanders would rapidly dominate the party’s base and its relationship with the public.
Without the “We didn’t lose, Russia won” narrative the party’s elite and those who exist under its patronage would be purged for being electorally incompetent and ideologically passe. The collapse of the Democratic vote over the last eight years is at every level, city, state, Congressional and presidential. It corresponds to the domination of Democratic decision making structures by a professional service class and to a shocking decline in the health and longevity of white males, whom together with their wives, daughters, mothers and sisters comprise 63% of the US population (2010 census). Democratic campaigns have conspicuously promoted racial and sexual identity politics (for everyone but whites and males).
This delineated and alienated white and male identity grievance classes, pushing these majorities into the arms of GOP dog racial and sexual dog-whistling (53% of all men voted for Trump, 53% of white women and 63% of white men according to PEW Research). Unlike other industrialized countries US male real wages wages (all ethnic groups combined) not have not increased since 1973.
2. The Trump-Russia collusion narrative is a political dead end. Despite vast resources, enormous incentives and a year of investigation, Democratic senators who have seen the classified intelligence at CIA HQ such as Senator Feinstein (as recently as March)are forced to admit that there is no evidence of collusion. Without collusion, we are left with the Democratic establishment blaming the public for not liking the truth about what Hillary Clinton said to Goldman Sachs and blaming their own base for not liking what they said in their own emails about about fixing the DNC primaries.
3. The Democrat establishment needs the support of the security sector and media barons to push this diversionary conspiracy agenda, so they ingratiate themselves with these two classes leading to further perceptions that the Democrats act on behalf of an entrenched power elite. Eventually, Trump or Pence will ‘merge’ with the security state leaving Democrats in a vulnerable position having talked up two deeply unaccountable traditionally Republican-aligned organizations, in particular, the CIA and the FBI, who will be turned against them. Other than domestic diversion and geopolitical destabilization the primary result of the Russian narrative is increased influence and funding for the security sector which is primarily GOP owned or aligned.
4. The twin result is to place the primary self-interest concerns of most Americans, class competition, freedom from crime and ill health and the empowerment of their children, into the shadows and project the Democrats as close to the DC and media elites. This has further cemented Trump’s anti-establishment positioning and fettered attacks on Trump’s run away embrace of robber barons, dictators and gravitas free buffoon’s like the CIA’s Mike Pompeo.
5. GOP/Trump has open goals everywhere: broken promises, inequality, economy, healthcare, militarization, Goldman Sachs, Saudi Arabia & cronyism, but the Democrat establishment can’t kick these goals since the Russian collusion narrative has consumed all its energy and it is entangled with many of the same groups behind Trump’s policies.
6. The Democratic base should move to start a new party since the party elite shows no signs that they will give up power. This can be done quickly and cheaply as a result of the internet and databases of peoples’ political preferences. This reality is proven in practice with the rapid construction of the Macron, Sanders and Trump campaigns from nothing. The existing Democratic party may well have negative reputational capital, stimulating a Macron-style clean slate approach. Regardless, in the face of such a threat, the Democratic establishment will either concede control or, as in the case of Macron, be eliminated by the new structure.
While I disagree with his characterizations of people like Mike Pompeo, most of Assange’s criticism above is right on

The True Meaning of Socialized Medicine

(Spoiler Alert: If you find slavery or infanticide disturbing, you may be too squeamish to read further.)
A perfect crystallization of the full heart and soul of socialized or "single payer" health care is on display in the story of Charlie Gard, a ten-month-old infant with a life-threatening genetic condition, and his parents, Chris and Connie, whose desperate efforts to save their child have been diverted, and finally thwarted, first by the British government and now by an entity with the perfectly Orwellian name "European Court of Human Rights."
The parents of terminally-ill baby Charlie Gard are ‘utterly distraught’ and facing fresh heartbreak after losing their final appeal in the European Court of Human Rights.
Chris Gard, 32, and Connie Yates, 31, wanted to take their 10-month-old son – who suffers from a rare genetic condition and has brain damage – to the US to undergo a therapy trial.
Doctors at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London, where Charlie is being cared for, said they wanted him to be able to ‘die with dignity’.

Charlie Gard and his parents
So in the name of "dying with dignity," Charlie has been denied his last hope ofliving with dignity, not to mention his last chance to live in the loving care of his parents, who have obviously put themselves through hell -- above and beyond the hell of watching their child die at the hands of a tyrannically impersonal "medical system" -- to try to save him. Meanwhile, his parents themselves are denied the dignity of taking responsibility for their beloved child's well-being and sacrificing everything to save him, as parents are (or used to be) wont to do.
So whose dignity is really at issue here? "Death with dignity" is the health care euphemism to end all euphemisms. What it really means is murder with dignity -- the state's dignity. Death with dignity is Marxist medicine's theoretical self-absolution for committing the ultimate heresy against the traditional concept of health care, i.e., forsaking life in the name of saving money, saving bed space, and saving face.
The doctors in Britain have decided, in their state-decreed omniscience, that "nothing can be done" to save this dying boy. So, having decided to do nothing, they are determined -- and supported in this determination by the full weight of Europe's progressive authoritarian regulatory apparatus -- to make sure no one else gets a chance to prove them wrong by saving Charlie's life after all.
What is the ultimate lesson in all of this, for all of us living under one degree or another of socialized medicine, throughout the allegedly civilized world?
No, it's not that a baby's life is less valuable to progressives than maintaining the necessary illusion of the State's infallibility, although that is true.
No, it's not that the wishes of parents who love their child are less important to the progressive State than the desire of the State's "experts" to make a problem (their failure) disappear, although that is also true.
The ultimate lesson, apparently a difficult one for some people to understand, is that what socialized health care means, above all else, is that the individual human being is property of the State.
The right to property carries with it the right to the use and disposal of what one owns. This is why property rights are so essential to any coherent concept of individual liberty, and why any clear theory of property begins with the right of self-ownership. And self-ownership is precisely what socialized medicine denies outright. If the government determines what can and cannot be done to preserve your life (short of harming others, of course), and furthermore has the final authority to decide when your life is no longer worth fighting to preserve, then all questions of who owns the individual citizen are answered unequivocally: the individual -- his living body, his human existence -- belongs to the State.
Under socialized health care, you are government property. The State may allow you some measure of proprietorship over your daily existence, in order to lull you into the sleepy compliance of the contented slave. But there is no doubt who holds the deed. Socialized or "single payer" medicine, a pillar of Marxist political philosophy, establishes the collectivization of the individual human being more clearly than any political structure imaginable -- except compulsory government-regulated schooling.
Together, those two political transformations -- government ownership of your spiritual development and your physical preservation -- establish the firmest and most comprehensive foundations of tyranny. All the rest of progressivism's panoply of hyper-regulation and micromanaging paternalism are mere baubles once the soul and body have been legally removed from individual and familial control -- removed both symbolically and, as Charlie Gard's unfortunate parents have just learned, removed in horrifyingly literal fact.
Chris and Connie wanted to save their baby's life, and were willing to do more for him than the government thought "worthwhile." That the government should have any place in determining what is worth doing to save this boy's life is absurd. That the government's judgment should be used as a billy club to beat back the parents' desperate efforts to give their last ounce of love to their baby, is as clear an indictment of progressive ethics, progressive politics, and the progressive mind in general, as can be conceived.
Charlie Gard, were he to be saved by the near-miracle his parents are willing to fight for, would probably live his whole life with brain damage. As a result, he would probably never be granted the right to vote. By contrast, millions of Britons and hundreds of millions of their counterparts throughout what used to be the modern world happily walk into voting booths and cede their and their neighbors' lives and liberty to progressive authoritarianism on a regular basis. And almost nobody blinks or wonders whether people that mentally deficient should be granted the vote.
Godspeed, Charlie, Chris, and Connie.


So who is 'presidential'?

For the last several years, if you disagreed with President Obama or the Democrat agenda on immigration, gay marriage, gender bathroom rights, climate change, higher taxes, more regulations, you could be called xenophobic, sexist, racist, homophobic, and stupid.
Or to put it in brief form, as Hillary Clinton did, "irredeemable" and "deplorable."
If you dared disagreed with anything in the climate change agenda, you were called "a denier," and the public was told that you shouldn't be listened to.
Members of the Tea Party were compared to domestic terrorists.

And these days, if you dare try to fix the rapidly collapsing Obamacare, you are said to want people to die.
It has been shown that CNN and other media outlets have been willing to just make stuff up to go after Trump just to improve their ratings.  Most positive things President Trump has done on energy, regulations, immigration, NATO, trade, and the Veterans Administration are virtually ignored.  The New York Times intentionally targeted former Alaska governor Sarah Palin through false news reports after a congressman was shot.
Morning Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski have compared President Trump to Stalin and Hitler.
But Trump tweeted some negative stuff out about Joe and Mika, and the media decided that that needed massive coverage, and it is Trump who is described as "unpresidential."
We Americans know what incivility is.  Trump's tweets don't even measure up to what we Americans have been through.



President Trump is changing the norms that empower his media antagonists

As usual, President Trump is outraging the political-media establishment, who all assume that his early-morning tweets yesterday zinging the Morning Joe odd couple, "hitting back ten times as hard," as wife Melania once characterized his tactical doctrine, were the result of some form of derangement.  They are not equipped to understand the strategy that lies behind his tweets.  Like fish unaware of the water in which they swim, they operate on the basis of unconscious beliefs.
President Trump understands that the current informal-but-very-real rules of the game have allowed Mika and Joe (and the rest of the media-political world as well) free rein to savage him and his family, while he is supposed to be a gentleman and just take it while they get support for attacking him.
That's what President George W. Bush did, and it cost him dearly, unto this day.  His suffering may be noble, but that form of greatness does not seem to interest President Trump.
Trump understands that the culture governing D.C. and the media has to change because it systematically favors his opponents.  They set the rules, and those rules give the media the ability to call the shots, and the media overwhelmingly oppose him.  Media criticism cows Republicans into submission and boosts the causes of the left.

So President Trump, who is a doer, is actively working to change that culture by violating its norms.  Norms are the key to the way behavior is actually regulated in the workplace (and other social groupings).  Norms are the informal rules, the shared understandings, the proper way things are done in a particular group.  The best way to think of them is as a shared sentiment that begins with the words "people ought to..."  People within a specific culture almost never question their norms and, in fact, are unaware that they exist...until they are violated.
As a matter of fact, I spent two decades as a scholar and consultant working on modifying corporate cultures to adapt to new challenges, and I did this research in and consulting for a number of the largest corporations on earth, here and overseas.  (The subtitle of my doctoral dissertation at Harvard was "Strategy, Structure and Culture.")  It led to a lot of academic and consulting opportunities.  When a company that started in one national culture becomes a global corporation, the ways of doing things back home and the assumptions that underwrote them no longer work everywhere the company operates.  Smart managers recognize the need to reshape the unconscious sentiments, assumptions, and perceptions their members carry around.  It isn't easy.
When an organization confronts a norm that has become dysfunctional, the concepts attached to it can be so ingrained that even rules to the contrary can be worked around by members of the organization.  There is no alternative in some cases but to force unpleasantness upon a situation and force adaptation.
The Progressive left has been exploiting the basic strategy for over a century, attacking the norms of Western cultures.  The most immediate example is the normalization of homosexuality, a process that consistently displayed provocative behavior and then allowed the resulting outrage to be mocked and eventually suppressed.  The concept of "street theater" often uses violation of norms as a means of attacking them.  It is a stage of the change strategy.
Right now, we are at the outrage stage, with various degrees being expressed by both the left and the right.  It is clear that some of the outrage is genuine, not simply political, on the part of D.C. conservatives, such as Charles Krauthammer, who believes that Trump has revealed a defect in his character.
Of course, President Trump's supporters are comparatively few.  And right now, it is only the conservative commentators less respectful of norms who are willing to forcefully state his case, such as the colorful Ace (hat tip: Instapundit, Glenn Renolds).
How can the flailing old women of the Nominal Right huff themselves up so much to pretend outrage that a guy being attacked by the media everyday decides to occasionally attack them back?
I understand the leftist media's interest in pretending that they're behaving normally and haven't rewritten the professional code of conduct to allow attacks on Trump which would have been near-hanging-offenses on Obama.
But what is the interest of the sissified Nominal Right over defending the media and pretending along with them?
We are not in a normal situation. Why do the sob sisters and pearl-clutchers of the Pretend Right insist on pretending the media's behavior is normal and that it's only Trump who's guilty of "norm-breaking"?
How much are we supposed to pretend to satisfy these sissies' demands that we pretend we're all Good Friends so that their delicate constitutions aren't too discombobulated?
Can anyone argue that "pretending we are all Good Friends" when the other side doesn't works to Trump's (or conservatives') best interest?  The norms associated with it need to change.  There will be unpleasantness along the way.  President Trump is setting about it in his own way and in his own style, which almost always occasions outrage, as it did in the presidential election.  It turns out that the norms of the Beltway elite are not universal, and that a culture far larger than the media-political elite also has a voice in the end.





Maxine Waters Says 700 Billion People Are About to Lose Their Healthcare

This Clueless Dumbass apparently opens her mouth before engaging her Brain

        Image may contain: 2 people, meme and text

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), a leader of the "resistance," hasn't been doing too well lately. She told MSNBC's Chris Hayes that, if the Republican healthcare bill is passed, "700 billion" people will lose health access. Keep in mind that our planet has about 7.3 billion people living on it. We knew the GOP proposal was ambitious, but not quite that ambitious! Maybe there should be an ongoing senility test for congresspeople?

Maxine Waters Forgot How to Say 'North Korea'





Another Racist DoucheBag  opens her mouth