There is No War on Masculinity, Move Along

Wherever would you get the idea that masculinity is going through an existential crisis in the West? I mean, that’s just totally absurd!

The Daily Mail reports that Britain is becoming the cuckoldry capital of the West:

“Sales of ‘secret’ paternity tests are surging, according to suppliers of DIY home kits.

The DNA tests, which can be carried out with simple cheek swabs, are leading to growing numbers of men discovering they are not the biological father of children they had been led to believe were theirs.

AlphaBiolabs, the leading British home test supplier, says up to 30,000 paternity tests are being performed in this country every year – and that the figures are rising by ten per cent per year.

‘Of these, around 20 per cent of men will learn they are not the father of the child they are testing,’ says the company’s director, David Thomas. He added that in some regions the figure is higher, including the North East, where it is 30 per cent.”

If there’s not a war on men and masculinity, then explain this.

The only reason men get cucked is because they are weak and cannot satisfy their women. That’s the only reason.

Weak men get cucked by stronger men.

Western men are now as weak as they have ever been, while Western women now have more options–socially, professionally, sexually–than they ever have.

This is not a good mixture.

If we are to have #Strong #Independent women, then men have to be stronger than ever as well. But they’re not. In fact, they’re weaker than ever.

No matter what women say, the reality is they want strong, assertive men. They are hardwired to be attracted to alpha males. It’s biology.

At some point in the past few decades, women said they no longer wanted strong men and instead preferred weak men who are “in touch with their feelings.” Plus, traditional masculinity was deemed “toxic” and incompatible with modern society, and oppressive to women to boot.

So lots of Western men got “in touch with their feelings” and grew weak. And they felt bad about oppressing women with their “Toxic Masculinity” and mansplaining and manspreading on the subway.

Part of this isn’t entirely the men’s fault. Part of it is they’ve been brainwashed by popular culture to want to become Weak Beta Males:

1_bteztrcwwm_2qda-grirqq

And, on top of this, a record number of boys are being raised in feminine environments, between the disastrously-high number of single-parent households and the female dominance of public education:

https://twitter.com/PoliticalKathy/status/1083912113519767554

It’s no wonder there’s such an abundance of weak men.

But the bottom line is, women never actually wanted weak, submissive beta males.

They just wanted less competition for high-paying jobs.

Now, our #Strong #Independent Western women resent their weak beta male boyfriends and husbands, and so they have affairs and get impregnated by strong alpha males behind their beta men’s backs.

On top of this, they get their beta men to unknowingly raise their alpha lovers’ children.

This will ruin us if we don’t turn it around.

How to Handle Accusations of Racism 101

The master himself:

Nobody has better instincts than Trump.

And that’s what this is: instinct.

He wasn’t prepared for this question, he just goes by his initial instinct, and somehow he almost always happens to be right.

It’s uncanny, really.

America: Banana Republic

This is no longer the country we thought we lived in, and which many millions of Americans of past generations actually did grow up in.

On Friday night, the New York Times reported that the FBI launched an investigation into President Donald Trump after he fired James Comey.

The FBI justified this investigation by claiming Trump’s completely lawful firing of Comey indicated Trump might be working for Russia.

Because the New York Times and virtually the entire Democratic Party are subservient to the Deep State, they all thought this FBI story was Awesome As Hell and totally proved that Trump was corrupt. NYT ran this story believing it painted Trump, rather than the FBI, in a bad light.

The Times and its NPC readers believe the FBI to be unquestionable and unassailable, so in their view the FBI never does anything malicious or corrupt–if the FBI launches an investigation into someone, that investigation is automatically legitimate and warranted. Therefore, Trump has to be a criminal, otherwise there’s no way the FBI would be investigating him! After all, Obama was never under FBI investigation!

But to the rest of us who realize what’s actually going on, the FBI investigating Trump is not an indicator of Trump’s guilt, but rather of the FBI’s staggering corruption and total politicization. How do we know this? Nine paragraphs into the NYT piece, the “reporters” mention that the FBI found absolutely no evidence to support its claims against Trump.

The FBI didn’t launch an investigation into Trump because Trump is corrupt; it launched an investigation because the FBI itself is corrupt and out of control.

Remember: the entire reason for the Trump-Russia Collusion suspicion was and remains the fraudulent, Clinton-funded Steele Dossier.

Andy McCarthy, who is usually spot-on with his analysis of the ongoing Trump v. Deep State war, reiterates this but ultimately misses the point:

“On Friday night, the New York Times published what was clearly intended to be a blockbuster report that, following the firing of FBI director James Comey on May 9, 2017, the bureau formally opened an investigation of President Trump. But in truth, the only thing the story shows is that the FBI, after over a year of investigation, simply went overt about something that had been true from the start. The investigation commenced during the 2016 campaign by the Obama administration – the Justice Department and the FBI – was always about Donald Trump.

We have to remember: The FBI believed the Steele dossier – the collection of faux intelligence reports compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, who was ultimately working for the Hillary Clinton campaign. The Justice Department on four occasions brought surveillance applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), in which the FBI swore that it believed the dossier allegations.”

McCarthy still has some faith in the FBI in saying “the FBI believed the Steele Dossier.” In McCarthy’s view, the FBI is not acting willfully malevolently, but rather out of misplaced faith in a fraudulent, Clinton-funded oppo file.

No chance. The FBI has known all along where the Steele Dossier came from. They weren’t duped by it. I refuse to believe the FBI was/is simply operating under the false impression that the Steele Dossier is legit.

The FBI was not fooled by the Dossier. The FBI is many things, but it is not naive.

The Steele Dossier was their justification for going after Trump. They knew it was fraudulent and dirty all along. They knew where it came from.

But they needed to have some ostensibly legitimate reason to go after Trump, and the Dossier sufficed. Portraying the President as a likely-compromised agent of a foreign enemy was the perfect excuse to take him down.

Trump’s genuine desire to seek and achieve better relations with Russia contradicts the military industrial complex’s institutional and financial priority of permanent war footing with a nuclear-armed power. This was and remains intolerable to our unelected Deep State overlords, and so they resolved to smear Trump as a traitor and a criminal, with the ultimate goal of removing him from power.

That’s what’s going on here.

This tweet does a great job of placing what’s happening in America in perspective:

deepstatecoupredux.jpg

If this were happening in any other country, the US Ministry of Truth would be reporting on it from the perspective of presumed Deep State Corruption.

The FBI has a mind of its own. It is completely out of control. It now asserts the right to launch politically-driven investigations into whomever it wants, including the President of the United States. It believes itself, rather than the President, to be the ultimate authority in matters of foreign policy. It is accountable to no one.

The FBI is more powerful than the President.

Think of it this way: for his entire presidency, Trump has basically been playing defense against the FBI/Deep State’s attempts to destroy him. The FBI can launch investigations into Trump, but what can Trump do in return? What has he done in return?

He fired Comey, but that only further mobilized the FBI against him.

Even the DoJ Inspector General’s 18-month-long investigation of the Comey-era FBI concluded that it was not tainted by political bias. It amounted to little more than a slap on the wrist for the people that oversaw perhaps the most blatantly corrupt and thuggish FBI conduct in American history.

Trump’s own pick to head the FBI, Christopher Wray, defiantly maintains a siege mentality and insists the FBI is both beyond reproach and accountable to no one.

How do we know the FBI is more powerful than the president? Because we all know the FBI is corrupt and out of control, yet nobody can do anything about it. Open, brazen corruption is an indicator of true power. Think about how Harvey Weinstein got away with being a depraved sexual predator for decades even though everyone in Hollywood knew about it. That’s true power: when everyone knows you’re corrupt and yet nobody can or will do anything about it.

The US “media” not only runs cover for the FBI but actively does the FBI’s bidding by repackaging leaks from high-level officials into seemingly legitimate “news reports” which are intended to reflect negatively on the Bureau’s enemies, namely Trump.

Does this method of governance have any basis in the Constitution?

Is this what the Founding Fathers intended for our country? Could any of them have foreseen our vast, sprawling, 16-agency intelligence community?

Is this in any way congruent with your idea of what America is and ought to be?

This is not America.

We have become the type of third world banana republic we often read about in the news. We’re there.

It’s a tough pill to swallow, and I can see why people like McCarthy are reluctant to admit it, but it’s the truth.

What Were Once Conveniences Are Now Leveraged to Control Us

The conveniences and comforts of modern life are now being leveraged against us to control out political behavior.

Example: for many years, social media made it easier to keep in contact with one another, now the companies that own the platforms are proactively policing speech and political expression.

At first social media was a novelty, then it became essential to our daily lives. Life takes place online nowadays; you need to be on social media in order to stay connected. And that’s especially true if you are in the political sphere. Politics takes place on social media. That’s where the debate is.

But now, previously benign social media platforms, which used to simply sit back and allow virtually anyone to say basically whatever they wanted, are beginning to proactively enforce Uniparty political dogma on social media.

Social media companies realize how important they are to our daily lives, and the political debate in particular, and are leveraging their importance toward political ends.

There are strings attached now. If you want to use and benefit from social media, you must have the correct politics now. It wasn’t this way at the start, but now that the big tech companies have us hooked on their platforms, they are trying to control our thoughts and opinions–otherwise, you can kiss your Twitter and Facebook goodbye.

But now major American corporations are taking it a step further: it’s not just big tech that is using its power to play the role of Thought Police.

Now, it’s big payments processors “financially blacklisting” political dissidents:

“Can you imagine how scary it would be to live in a world where your livelihood depended on having the ‘correct’ politics? It’s the sort of thing you might expect of totalitarian regimes – Baathist Iraq under Saddam Hussain; everywhere that has ever tried communism; increasingly, Xi’s panopticon China – but definitely not of any liberal democracy in the 21st century.

That dystopian future, though, may be much closer than you think. I only properly appreciated this recently when the podcast I’ve been doing for the last few years was mysteriously dropped by my regular employer, forcing me to seek funding sources from elsewhere.

If I were impeccably ‘progressive’, this would be a doddle. I could monetize my content through ads on YouTube, I could crowdfund donations through Patreon, I could promote my work with regular appearances on CNN.  But if you’re snarky and irreverent and you won’t play the virtue-signaling game then your options are much more limited. Any deviation from the path of ‘woke’ righteousness – even just a misjudged joke or a remark taken out of context – can get you branded a ‘far right’ extremist and your audience won’t be allowed to pay you even if they want to.

This is what happened last month to the blogger/vidcaster Carl Benjamin – aka Sargon of Akkad – whose long-form meditations on everything from Brexit and feminism to Islam and video game politics have won him nearly 900,000 subscribers on YouTube. Benjamin’s primary funding source was Patreon, a website which enables donors to support projects they love with monthly contributions. But when one of Benjamin’s critics unearthed some audio of intemperate remarks he’d made in the course of an obscure interview where he’d been defending himself against neo-Nazis, Patreon de-platformed him for breaching its ‘terms of service.’

Instead of simply providing a neutral platform for creators of all stripes to get paid by their audiences, Patreon has decided that only those with the Correct Views can get paid for their work.

It would be one thing if these platforms like Patreon, Twitter, Youtube and Facebook were actually only trying to remove genuine violent/dangerous extremists. But they’re not. They’re simply labeling everyone who challenges Uniparty orthodoxy as a “right-wing extremist” and using that false label as justification for deplatforming them.

“Benjamin’s defenestration needs to be understood in the context of a much wider ongoing purge of right wing voices by Silicon Valley, which now likes to see itself as the world’s liberal bulwark against the dark, populist forces supposedly unleashed by Donald Trump.

Superficially, this might sound reasonable. As even our conservative tabloids are wont to ask, ‘When, oh when, are social media giants going to do more to combat hate speech?’ The more important question is, though: ‘Who gets to decide what is hate speech?’ From YouTube and Twitter to Facebook and Patreon, Silicon Valley’s answer seems to be: the kind of Social Justice Warriors who think any viewpoint to the right of Bernie Sanders or Jeremy Corbyn is literally Hitler.

“Combating hate speech” is merely the pretext, the fig leaf to provide some moral justification for waging war against free speech.

See, the American Totalitarians still want to maintain their delusions of moral superiority. They want to have it both ways: they want to silence anyone who disagrees with them, but they don’t want to feel like fascists while doing so. So they pretend the people they’re silencing are all Literal Nazis who need to be silenced, or else they’ll eventually start waging another genocide or something.

But it’s not just Patreon enforcing political orthodoxy. It’s much worse:

“Among those riding to the defense of Benjamin were two of Patreon’s leading beneficiaries – author and academic Jordan Peterson and vidcaster Dave Rubin. They are trying to launch an alternative crowd-funding platform to Patreon – one untainted by political bias. But this may not be easy because the rot goes much deeper than Patreon. The real pressure, it seems, comes from the payment providers – Visa, Discover, PayPal, especially Mastercard – which have taken to using financial blacklisting as a way of enforcing progressive ideology.

There isn’t space here to discuss why they are doing it. It is simply an observable fact that, as Breitbart writer Allum Bokhari puts it, ‘it has become increasingly difficult for individuals engaged in controversial yet lawful speech to fund their activities online.’ Even liberals are starting to worry. Banks and credit card companies, says the left-leaning Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), have become ‘de facto internet censors.’

Patreon is small-time compared to the big dogs Visa and Mastercard.

Payments processors and banks made life easier for us, now they’re leveraging our reliance on them to control our behavior:

IMG_3577.jpeg

Better think twice now before you use your Visa or MasterCard to legally purchase guns and ammunition. They got us hooked on their products because of how much easier they made our lives, and now they’re saying, “Either you readjust your political views or you no longer get to enjoy our now-essential services.”

And of course if you don’t like it, then go start your own global payments processing business. At least that’s what the True Conservatives™ will say.

If you think this will stop with social media companies and payments processors, you are wrong. Eventually hotels will start refusing rooms to dissidents. A judge in New York said bars are allowed to kick Trump supporters out.

We won’t be able to get loans from banks.

We will eventually be blackballed from commerce altogether.

The New Fascists will not stop until conservatives are completely excommunicated from American life altogether.

They want to make regular Americans conclude it’s simply not worth it to challenge the Uniparty establishment. Too much trouble. It’s about demoralizing dissidents.

They want us fired from our jobs and denied the ability to make a living–in addition to wanting us dead and our homelands overrun with Third Worlders.

The Ben Shapiros will say, “That’s absurd! Muh Free Market will prevent this! These companies will lose so much money discriminating against conservatives!”

Apparently the companies don’t care.

They’re willing to sacrifice profits to enforce Uniparty dogma.

Virtually every major multinational corporation will soon be an enforcer for the Uniparty Establishment.

And, of course, Teachers Pet do-gooder 30-year-old “journalists” at the New York Times are applauding it all.

IMG_3578.jpeg

They’re the same people telling us democracy dies in darkness and that they’re protecting us from tyranny.

They are the tyrants.

The fascists are completely convinced beyond all doubt that they are the good guys doing the right thing.

When the history of this era is written, they will be the bad guys. But not only are they unaware of it, they are so utterly certain that the complete opposite will be true; that they’ll be the Heroes and Good Guys.

No. No chance.

Sooner or later, the truth comes out.

Would You Pay $68 Billion to Sleep With This Woman?

Jeff Bezos, the founder and CEO of Amazon and currently the world’s richest man, is divorcing his wife of 25 years, Mackenzie, for Lauren Sanchez, the host of Good Morning LA, and apparently a longtime friend of both he and his wife.

Sanchez is pictured above. Here’s the question: is she worth the $68 billion Bezos will eventually have to pay out to his ex-wife in the divorce?

Screen Shot 2019-01-13 at 10.38.53 AM.png

That’s a big no from me. A lot of botox and lip injections. Plus she’s already been married twice and engaged to a third guy in the past.

Apparently Bezos is in love with her. Check out some of the texts he sent her:

“I love you, alive girl. I will show you with my body, and my lips and my eyes, very soon,” the online retail giant’s CEO, chair and founder wrote to Lauren Sanchez in an April 2018 text message, according to the National Enquirer.”

“Alive girl”? What does that mean? Is that his idea of a compliment?

He also sent her a dick pic:

“The racy messages — which reportedly included a snapshot of Bezos’ junk — were revealed a day after the richest man on the planet announced he was divorcing MacKenzie Bezos, his wife of 25 years.”

C’mon, man.

“Jeff Bezos, 54, sent a picture of his private parts and several shirtless shots — including one where he’s wearing just a towel and a grin — to Sanchez, 49, months before they supposedly started dating in “the fall” after separating from their respective spouses, the Enquirer reported.

A source close to Bezos has claimed to The Post he and MacKenzie Bezos, 48, a novelist, separated last year “and then Jeff and Lauren started dating.”

But the Bezoses were spotted celebrating their 25th wedding anniversary in Miami in September, sources say — while the raunchy texts published in the Enquirer date back many months before that.”

So apparently they’d been carrying on this affair for a while.

“On May 13 last year, he messaged her, “I want to smell you, I want to breathe you in. I want to hold you tight.… I want to kiss your lips…. I love you. I am in love with you,” according to the tabloid.

Three weeks later, he sent her a shirtless photo with another romantic declaration.

“You know what I want? I want to get a little drunk with you tonight. Not falling down. Just a little drunk. I want to talk to you and plan with you. Listen and laugh,” Bezos wrote with the photo on June 1, according to the Enquirer.

“I basically WANT TO BE WITH YOU!!! Then I want to fall asleep with you and wake up tomorrow and read the paper with you and have coffee with you.”

Good Lord, man. Have some self respect.

In one exchange, he reportedly told Sanchez that her “energy and ideas and competence and spirit turn me on.”

Jeff Bezos #RespectsWomen.

He also texts her like he’s giving her an annual business performance review.

“You make me better. You’re meant for me. I know it more clearly than I’ve ever known anything,” Bezos gushed, according to the Enquirer.

Another message reads like a veritable love poem.

“I love everything about you. I love that your last pic takes me completely out of my head. I am crazy about you. All of you. I need to smell and touch you. I want to hold you. I know you’re right for me. I know we fit,” he wrote, according to the paper.”

Seems like puppy love, or mere lust. Bezos will probably regret the hell out of this once the initial euphoria wears off.

Come on, Jeff: you’re the world’s richest man, and this is who you risk it all for? Nothing against Lauren Sanchez but Bezos could do so much better. Hordes of beautiful women probably throw themselves at him on a daily basis and he chooses her?

The thing is, since Bezos got married in 1993, before he founded Amazon and well before he made his billions, I’m not sure he got a prenup with Mackenzie.

So now Bezos’ future ex-wife will join the ranks of the world’s richest people, but as yet another woman taking her place on the list solely due to either inheritance or divorce.

But we live in an Evil Patriarchy Society that is egregiously unfair to women.

Mackenzie Bezos now becomes one of the most eligible bachelorettes on the planet. Rams running back Todd Gurley wants to shoot his shot:

Screen Shot 2019-01-13 at 10.50.37 AM.png

Who wouldn’t be interested in the $68 billion woman?

She’s not the best looking gal in the world but I can overlook a lot for $68 billion.

Screen Shot 2019-01-13 at 11.21.20 AM.png

Get in line, fellas.

Anyway, screw Jeff Bezos. I do hope he gets taken to the cleaners in divorce court. This guy bought the Washington Post in 2013 and turned it into a fetid anti-Trump fever swamp. Plus he’s almost single-handedly killing retail and mom-and-pop stores.

No single company better embodies the soul-sucking globalism of the 21st century than Amazon. No single person has done more to sell his country out for Cheap Chinese Shit than Jeff Bezos.

He certainly can spare $68 billion. He’ll be just fine after the divorce.

But still: screw him. He needs to take an L.

Lindsey Graham GETS IT

Nuff said:

That’s really the bottom line: the Democrats are not negotiating in good faith.

That’s it. Forget ’em.

Build the wall in a state of emergency.

It is a national security matter of the highest priority.

It’s sure as hell a greater priority than all the foreign wars we got ourselves into in the name of “national security” over the last few decades.

The most important thing about Graham saying this is that the Congressional GOP appears to be on board with building the wall by any means necessary, or at least getting there. Trump needs their support to do this: because the Dems are going to go ballistic, he needs to have the Republicans backing him.

This truly is a bit of a surprise because until Graham said this I, and I’m sure most of you, basically wrote off most Hill Republicans as secretly open borders on behalf of their Super Important Corporate Donors. I figured Trump would have to either go it alone or seriously twist their arms to get them to support the wall.

But I think it might just be dawning on the Republican Party that it has literally no national future if we don’t get the border under control.

As hard as it may be to believe in 2019, California was once a solidly Republican state for decades, voting for the Republican presidential candidate in every election but one from 1948-1988. But since 1992, it has gone Democratic–more and more so with each passing election–every for years, a streak of six straight elections. The state is almost unanimously Democrat at every office from Governor down to dogcatcher and the legislature has Democratic supermajorities in both chambers.

This is virtually all because of immigration.

And if we don’t get a handle on it soon, eventually the whole country will be as blue as California.

Hillary Donor Ed Buck Has Killed Another Gay, Black Prostitute

President Trump is evil and immoral“! he proclaimed as the body of the male prostitute he had injected with crystal methamphetamine lay lifeless on his floor.

“Democratic Party megadonor Ed Buck faces new questions this week after Los Angeles County sheriff’s detectives opened an investigation into the second death of a man — identified by a medical examiner as 55-year-old Timothy Dean — at Buck’s home in less than two years, and a third man came forward with an account of what he described as his drug-fueled interactions with the well-connected Californian.

Deputies in West Hollywood responded early Monday morning to a report of a person not breathing at Buck’s home, and county firefighters pronounced the man dead. The cause of the death will be determined by the coroner, according to Nicole Nishida, a spokeswoman for the sheriff’s department.

But, critics are questioning whether Buck’s race — both men found dead were black — or if his wealth or political ties to the Democratic Party influenced an initial investigation of the 64-year-old who has donated tens of thousands of dollars to a slew of liberal causes and candidates over the years, including Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and a who’s who of top California politicians.

“He definitely has not been cooperative, as his attorney says. He refused to answer any questions when I tried speaking with him,” Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Homicide Investigator Quilmes Rodriguez told Fox News via email Wednesday night.”

Apparently Buck has a thing for getting these male prostitutes hooked on crystal meth. Now he’s killed two of them via overdoses.

Here’s more on the first death at Hillary-donor Buck’s apartment:

On July 27, 2017, a male escort named Gemmel Moore died in his apartment. Paramedics found Moore naked on a mattress in the living room with a “male pornography movie playing on the television,” according to a Los Angeles County coroner’s report. A spokesman for the coroner’s office, Ed Winter, said Buck was inside his Laurel Avenue home at the time of Moore’s death and that drug paraphernalia was recovered from the scene. Police found sex toys, syringes and “clear plastic bags with suspected methamphetamine in a tool box roll-cabinet in the living room,” 24 syringes with brown residue, five glass pipes with white residue and burn marks, a plastic straw with possible white residue, clear plastic bags with white powdery residue and a clear plastic bag with a “piece of crystal-like substance.” The death was investigated by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, and prosecutors declined to charge Buck on July 26, 2018.

I don’t get it. How does this guy get away without a single criminal charge?

They could have at least gotten him on possession of meth, no?

Must be nice to be a Democrat.

You can literally kill people and nothing will happen to you.

The Daily Mail ran a story of another young black man who was lured into the disgusting pervert Buck’s apartment and injected with crystal meth:

“EXCLUSIVE: ‘I thought I was going to be the next to die at Ed Buck’s house.’ Man tells DailyMailTV how Democratic donor paid him $250 and injected him with meth after ‘fetish’ sex sessions in white long johns – as police probe TWO black men’s deaths

Jermaine Gagnon, 28, told DailyMailTV how he narrowly escaped death when Edward Buck injected him with crystal meth at his sex-toy filled apartment. 

Gagnon said Buck, 63, paid to fly him from Minnesota to Los Angeles, drugged him with a substance dissolved in Gatorade then injected him with crystal meth. 

The 28-year-old shared photos of Buck, wearing white long johns, crouched over him on a mattress during one of their nights together last year.

Gagnon shared images of sex toys Buck had for their encounter, saying: ‘He had this red and black toolbox with all types of fetish toys, like c**k rings, sex toys’.

He added: ‘He gave me some Tommy Hilfiger tighty whities, a muscle t-shirt and some long johns. White knee-high socks’. 

Gagnon said during one encounter Buck offered him a drink he suspected had been spiked, feeling woozy and weak shortly after drinking it.

He took my phone. I was so scared. I felt death walk into my soul. I called my mother. I said, ‘I feel like he’s going to kill me, I think I’m going to die’.

Buck is now under investigation over the deaths of two black men, including one man who died of an apparent overdose at his apartment on Monday.

These people are our betters.

Got that, you immoral Trump-supporting BIGOT?

They are better people than we are! They are our moral superiors.

dsfgdfgsgdfs.PNG

 

Seattle “News” Channel Caught Editing Trump Speech Footage to Make Him Look Like an Idiot

Have a look at this short clip and see for yourself:

For one, Q13 News at 10 cranked up the orange to the max.

Then, at the end, they made Trump stick his tongue out like a slobbering fool.

Q13 News issued a statement when they were called-out:

“In a statement, Q13 noted that the video editor responsible has been placed on leave pending an internal investigation.

“We are investigating this to determine what happened,” said Q13’s news director. “This does not meet our editorial standards and we regret if it is seen as portraying the President in a negative light. The editor responsible for editing the footage is being placed on leave while we investigate further.”

No, you regret getting caught.

The question now is how many times the media has done this kind of thing and gotten away with it. This can’t be the first time.

Enemy. Of. The People.

A Step Closer to 1984

This is military-grade gaslighting from the Washington Post:

dsafdsffdsdsfsfdsafsf.PNG

Um, a President making a political argument isn’t “propaganda.” It’s politics.

We need to establish an Iron Law: whenever the “media” accuses our side of some offense, they, not us, are invariably guilty, and egregiously so, of that very thing.

They’re the fucking propagandists.

It is pure gaslighting and full-on psychological abuse to accuse Trump of propagandizing. He’s the President. Every President since the invention of the television has gone on TV to make his case for his preferred policies.

The difference now is that Trump is the first one to actually pose a threat to the Uniparty’s grip on power.

A couple more points about this headline:

  1. It’s in the “Style” section?
  2. “The Washington Post: Democracy Dies in Darkness.” The article headline directly below it: Smother this President’s message in darkness. But I guess “Democracy” for them is a subjective term: only certain groups and politicians qualify for it.

But the most important takeaway here is that they are now comfortable with floating the idea of censoring President Trump so that he cannot get his message to the American people. They want to leverage their power over our televisions. It won’t be long until they actually do it.

It will probably happen before the 2020 election, honestly. They can’t take the risk that Trump is reelected, so they’ll go full 1984 on him in order to stop him.

They’re claiming this is to prevent Orange Man from “spreading misinformation” and “propaganda”–because they’re the only ones who get to do that!–but it’s obvious they want to “edit” and censor him because he’s too effective at making the case for his policies and worldview, and against theirs.

The Uniparty Elite cannot simply allow a guy like Trump to undermine them and all the power they have amassed over the past several decades simply because Trump had the audacity to get elected President.

They had a good thing going for a long time, and Trump is ruining it. So now they’re openly floating the idea of silencing the President of the United States.

This is nothing new, either: they’ve wanted to ban him from Twitter for a while.

And now a Washington Post writer thinks the networks should decide what a President can and cannot say to the nation:

“After Tuesday night’s debacle in the Oval Office, television network executives should be spending the day in their spacious offices practicing a simple word: No.

No, Mr. President, you may not break into prime-time programming to fundraise and mislead.

They’ll need to practice because you can be sure that the request will come again. And again.

Let’s be clear: There was no — zero — news in President Trump’s address to the nation last night.

There were high-drama quotes: “crisis of the soul.” There was fearmongering: “I’ve met with dozens of families whose loved ones were stolen by illegal immigration.”

But there wasn’t anything of substance that we haven’t heard many times before.”

If they had their way, Trump would never be allowed to say what he wants on TV. He would never be allowed to make his case for his preferred policies. The TV networks would overrule him. They’d say, “No, Trump, you’re not allowed to say this on our network. We don’t believe there is any substance. The nation does not need to hear this.” And then he would be banned from Twitter so he couldn’t make his case there, too.

The bottom line is that they want to regain control over the messaging. They want to cut him off from the American people.

They want him entirely silenced, and it’s because he’s too effective. It is absolutely not because he lies so much. It’s because they lie so much and cannot allow the American people to hear the truth.

I’m done pretending any of this is motivated by honest political disagreement, too.

This is a ruling oligarchy desperate to crush all dissent. Nothing more.

Other liberal fascists like Don Lemon have promoted the idea of putting Trump’s speeches on tape delay so that The Networks, who know what’s best for us, can decide what the we see and, more importantly what we don’t.

Don’t worry, they’re going to just censor out All Of Trump’s Lying Lies because they don’t need them clouding our perfectly molded and programmed minds. They’re just going to show us the highlights–only the stuff that’s relevant and deemed appropriate!

I, for one, appreciate the Ministry of Truth’s looking out for us. They have our best interests in mind, not their own!

Big Brother Loves Me Back!

Y’know, it would probably be best if they just censored Trump out of our lives entirely.

They Know Best.

Got that?

John Sexton brings up a great point:

“Wasn’t it just a few weeks ago that the media rallied around Jim Acosta to ensure he wouldn’t lose his press access to shout things at the President? Now the same people want to take the public microphone away from the President himself. And they expect us to believe partisanship has nothing to do with it.”

If Jim Acosta loses his White House Press pass and can no longer freely shout partisan talking points over the President, it is the greatest crisis of human rights in the history of Western Civilization.

But it is Responsible and Good for them to censor the President and determine what he can and cannot say to the nation over the airwaves.

Enemy. Of. The People.

***

More and more each day I’m convinced this country is already past the point of no return. There is no reasoning with people who are this malevolent and controlling.

The political divide is not between two competing but equal sides, left and right. It’s between the ruling class and the subjects.

It’s dominant culture vs. counterculture. The People vs. the Deep State.

You might disagree with your neighbor on healthcare or what the marginal tax rate should be, but ultimately you’re going to be on the same side when the shit hits the fan because at the end of the day, you’re both Subjects of the ruling class.

Right now in France, left and right have basically converged in their mutual disgust and discontent with the government: the Yellow Vests come from across the political spectrum. The movement has transcended politics and become a popular rebellion against the ruling class.

That’s what the future holds in America. It’ll be top vs. bottom, not left vs. right.

Can We Afford the Wall?

President Trump is requesting $5 billion out of a federal budget of over $4.4 trillion to build the wall.

Democrats have a variety of excuses they like to trot out for why we cannot under any circumstances have a border wall, all of which are complete bullshit:

“It’s immoral.”

“It won’t work.”

And the most pathetic of all: “We can’t afford it.”

But can we really not afford the $5 billion for the wall?

This is what $5 billion looks like out of $4.4 trillion:

ssdfgsdfgdsfg

It’s the little red part. That’s the $5 billion to secure our border.

It’s 1/880th of the total annual federal budget.

That red box is one out of 880. That’s how much of the federal budget it would take to build a border wall.

It’s 0.0011%. ($5 billion divided by $4.4 trillion).

But we just can’t spare it!

The reason we cannot have a border wall is not because of the cost, but because illegal immigration is the modern Democrat Party’s holy grail. It is everything.

As we’re finding out now, there is nothing they will fight for harder and more ferociously than illegal immigration.

There is nothing they will fight more passionately against than border security. And it’s not because the wall is “immoral” or won’t work, but because it will work.

A wall will stop illegal immigration and bring rates down to nearly zero.

And this is why we can’t have a wall.

To understand just how important it is to Democrats to flood the country with illegal immigrants, consider the fact that Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi will allow hundreds of thousands of federal government employees to go without pay in order to keep the border unprotected.

If the shutdown goes on long enough, not only will federal employees start missing paychecks, but food stamp payments might not go out anymore.

And the Democrats will not bat an eye: poor people must starve if that’s what it takes to keep the border unsecured.

A border wall will prevent drugs from flowing across the border and devastating American communities, but Democrats want more deadly drugs in the country.

A border wall will help American workers and protect them from low-wage competition, but Democrats do not want Americans employed and making decent money.

A border wall will keep Americans safer from foreign criminals like the one that killed Molly Tibbets, the one that killed Kate Steinle and the one that shot and killed police officer Ronil Singh, but Democrats want more Americans killed by illegals.

The Democrats must flood the country with illegals by any means necessary. The demographic transformation of America must never be impeded. This is Democrats’ hill to die on above all others. This is their Helm’s Deep.

Illegal immigration is the one issue they will go full 300 Spartans on and defend as if everything they hold dear and sacred depends on.

They intend to import a new electorate and create a “new America” because the old one just doesn’t vote for them reliably enough. They’re already doing it.

A border wall will prevent them from importing new voters who are more receptive to their agenda, and that’s why we can’t have one.