No one too important being threatened, just the Republican Senate majority leader.
Another aspect of it is that McConnell posted video of the threats, and Facebook shut down his web page over posting it, and would not allow his page to be reinstated until he took down the post.
In other words, they suppressed McConnell's ability to inform the public of the threats against him. Because the liberal media sure as hell won't report it.
Increasingly, far-left-run social media have been working in unison with the Democrats and liberal media to silence and marginalize conservative opinion and news.
Youtube shuts down accounts of conservatives to prevent them from informing the public through their videos and comments. I'm a personal recipient of this. After 11 years on Youtube without incident, I suddenly received notice that my Youtube account is "suspended", for "violation of Youtube user policy", and I have absolutely no doubt it is for posting pro-Trump views and links to pro-Trump facts and information. I can still watch videos, but I cannot see my user history and comments, or post comments or "likes" to videos. But the Youtube comments of people threatening to kill me, or posting "Jews are a cancer on the earth", or comments by liberals who talk about killing Republicans or wishing they were dead in response to my comments, are still there. But my fact-citing and source-linked responses are all no longer visible. Also at Youtube, I notice that all of a sudden it is harder to find Fox News programs in a Youtube search. For example any Fox News programs such as Tucker Carlson, Hannity, Ingraham, the Five, Greg Gutfeld or Special Report (Fox's flagship 6PM broadcast with Brett Baier), where you used to be able to go back and view programs days or weeks later, now only show for about 48 hours maximum. Specifically, I can Youtube-search "HANNITY Aug 7 2019" and it currently shows this... https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=hannity+aug+7+2019 ...where multiple people have posted the entire program for that date, 35 or 42 minutes or so broadcasts without commercials, some less complete, but essentially the complete show. But 48 hours from now, the videos will still be there, but for the running time it will not show "42:00", it will instead show "00:02", and the program will only show for 2 seconds. Still showing up in the search page, but defacto deleted and unviewable. And every single posted video of the program will be like that, collapsed to 2 seconds, unviewable. But a week or a month or 6 months from now, you'll still be able to pull up any full program for any date of Anderson Cooper or Don Lemon or any program on CNN.... https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=andersson+cooper++August+7++2019&sp=mAEB ...still viewable in their entirety, NOT collapsed to 2 seconds, NOT essentially deleted.
Likewise Facebook. Multiple House and Senate Republicans have had their Faceebook pages shut down or shadow-banned so that no one can see their information. Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, Derek Gaetz, Devin Nunes... just by mere coincidence, the House Republicans who are at the center of exposing the DOJ/FBI/James Comey/Hillary Clinton/ Fusion GPS/Christopher Steele/FISA court abuse that rigged the Hillary Clinton investigation, and set up an "inssurance policy" to cripple Trump's presidency. Just by mere coincidence. A Facebook suspension or shadow-banning "error" that doesn't happen to any Democrat House or Senate member.
Likewise Twitter.
Likewise Google. Google searches have newly created algorithms that are designed to filter out access to conservative facts. And Google represents 90% of all online searches.
A researcher named Epstein has testified that going into the 2020 election, social media manipulation could manipulate and suppress one side of the political debate, and result in a shift of 15 million votes in favor of the Democrats. Short of this kind of a social media coup to thwart the will of the American people, it is clear that for all their demagoguery and incendiary rhetoric and hysterics, the Democrats will lose in Nov 2020, at a level comparable to 1972 or 1984.
Only by cheating with this kind of abuse of their tech power can Democrats possibly win the 2020 election. And they are pumped up for the mission, and moving in that direction, as multiple insiders in the the tech field have voiced alarm about.
Tucker Carlson has stories and guests on this subject almost nightly. As do other Fox News programs. Likewise OANN. CNN and MSNBC... silence. Predictably. Viva la revolucion!
Project Veritas and founder James O’Keefe have scored a scoop from an identified Google whistleblower, replete with video and inside documents. Here’s the Project Veritas headline and story:
Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent “Trump situation” in 2020 on Hidden Cam
The story begins this way:
(New York City) — Project Veritas has released a new report on Google which includes undercover video of a Senior Google Executive, leaked documents, and testimony from a Google insider. The report appears to show Google’s plans to affect the outcome of the 2020 elections and “prevent” the next “Trump situation.”
The report includes undercover footage of longtime Google employee and Head of Responsible Innovation, Jen Gennai, saying:
“Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but she’s very misguided, like that will not make it better it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it’s like a small company cannot do that.”
Said Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe:
“This is the third tech insider who has bravely stepped forward to expose the secrets of Silicon Valley. These new documents, supported by undercover video, raise questions of Google’s neutrality and the role they see themselves fulfilling in the 2020 elections.”
Jen Gennai is the head of “Responsible Innovation” for Google, a sector that monitors and evaluates the responsible implementation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies. In the video, Gennai says Google has been working diligently to “prevent” the results of the 2016 election from repeating in 2020:
“We all got screwed over in 2016, again it wasn’t just us, it was, the people got screwed over, the news media got screwed over, like, everybody got screwed over so we’re rapidly been like, what happened there and how do we prevent it from happening again.
“We’re also training our algorithms, like, if 2016 happened again, would we have, would the outcome be different?”
So with all those investigations into interference by Russians in the 2016 election — will there be a congressional investigation into Google? In fact, Google executive Gennai already has an answer on what happens when Congress requests Google execs to show up for a hearing:
“We got called in front of Congress multiple times, so we’ve not shown up because we know that they’re just going to attack us. We’re not going to change our, we’re not going to change our mind. There’s no use sitting there being attacked over something we know we’re not going to change. They can pressure us but we’re not changing. But we also have to be aware of what they’re doing and what they’re accusing us of.”
The anonymous Google insider, whose identity and voice were shadowed and changed to protect him, also said in his detailed interview with O’Keefe that the Google-owned YouTube has deliberately targeted Dennis Prager’s “Prager U” and conservative talker Dave Rubin for content suppression because they are “right-wing.” Not to put too fine a point on this, but in some real time searching the contents of YouTube and just what the heck is on there one of the answers is — pornography. Lots of it. Suffice to say Prager U and Dave Rubin would seem to be the least of the site’s content problems.
As noted in this space a while back, Google was revealed by the Daily Caller to have blacklisted The American Spectator and several other conservative sites.
Not only is Google about blacklisting, an internal document, found here, makes it plain that basic facts will be manipulated to fit the far left wing’s social justice agenda. The document says this: “If a representation is factually accurate, can it still be algorithmic unfairness?”
The document defines “algorithmic unfairness” this way:
“algorithmic unfairness” means unjust or prejudicial treatment of people that is related to sensitive characteristics such as race, income, sexual orientation, or gender, through algorithmic systems or algorithmically aided decision-making.”
By way of example the document says:
… imagine that a Google image query for “CEOs” shows predominantly men. Even if it were factually accurate representation of the world, it would be algorithmic unfairness because it would reinforce a stereotype about the role of women in leadership positions.
Got that? Facts — reality — are “algorithmic unfairness” if they do not promote the far left wing’s social justice agenda. Identity politics is all.
What we have here with this newest undercover work from Project Veritas is exactly what the Google whistleblower says it is: fascism. Fascism straight up. The Googler compares what’s going on inside Google to the famous George Orwell 1949 novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. Recall that Orwell’s book originated the concept of “doublethink,” defined this way, bold print for emphasis supplied:
The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.
Clearly, at Google “doublethink” is called “algorithmic unfairness.”
All of this kind of fascistic-type behavior is drawing the attention of Congress. Considering the free speech implications, it will have to tread very carefully. But without doubt, this report from Project Veritas will make an impact on a discussion about the clear intent of Google to use its size and massive technology to manipulate the 2020 election.
Whomever this Google whistleblower is, he has done his country a tremendous service. The question now is — what to do about it.
As if eager to prove exactly the point of the blockbuster Project Veritas video that shows Google determined to manipulate the 2020 election [American Spectator article above], the Google-owned YouTube has now banned the Project Veritas video that shows two Google employees discussing just why and how the manipulation will be done.
Instead of letting the Project Veritas video remain on YouTube as an example of Google’s commitment to free speech, with an Orwellian swiftness the video was ordered to be taken down. More Google fascism on vivid display.
As tech giants like Facebook and Google have come under increasing fire from elected officials, a new poll shows the majority of American voters think that the social media giants have a systematic bias against conservative views.
In a new Hill.TV American Barometer survey, 58 percent of registered voters think that social networks are unfair to conservatives, while 42 percent said they believed conservatives were more likely to promote false stories that deserved removal from public circulation.
Unsurprisingly, the poll was heavily divided along party lines.
Respondents who self-identified as Republicans were overwhelmingly likely, 83 percent to 17 percent, to see tech companies as being biased against conservatives. While a majority of Democrats, 62 percent, said that conservative commentators were more likely to spread misinformation, while only 38 percent said they saw social networking sites as being biased against conservatives. A majority of independents, 58 percent saw unfairness while 42 percent said conservatives were more likely to propagate falsehoods.
Republican political figures and activists have increasingly targeted large tech firms for bias as a number of high-profile right-wing commentators have been banned from social media sites. Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, a staunch advocate for President Trump, has been one of the most vocal critics.
The veteran radio host turned up in Washington on Tuesday to lodge complaints against Google CEO Sundar Pichai after the internet giant banned him from YouTube.
"You have to look at the fact that social media has been weaponized," Republican strategist Ed Goeas said Thursday on "What America's Thinking." "And I think they're trying to clean that up a little bit, so I don't know that it's necessarily targeted at conservative or liberal as much as how do we kind of lay down the arms and actually have it serve as a communication need."
Conservative complaints against alleged censorship efforts are an echo of their long-standing complaints against large media organizations, which they have claimed are biased in favor of liberal interests. GOP elected officials have thus far responded in the same way by lodging numerous criticisms but refusing to take regulatory or legislative action.
On Monday, Wired magazine reported that Google has worked closely with Republican officials and activists to promote its interests by appealing to conservative skepticism toward government intervention in the economy.
In August, President Trump threatened Google at a White House event, saying that it was "really taking advantage of a lot of people" by allegedly manipulating search results to be more negative about him.
"I think that Google and Twitter and Facebook, they are really treading on very, very troubled territory and they have to be careful. It is not fair to large portions of the population," Trump said.
Pichai and other tech executives have strongly denied their companies deliberately discriminate against conservatives but privately many have expressed concern that efforts to eliminate fake news and defamatory postings often inadvertently ensnare more legitimate conservative opinion.
In February, Wired reported that Facebook changed its policies to become more permissive toward dubious websites under pressure from Republican elected officials. The report said the changes made it easier for Russian social media trolls to spread disinformation during the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.
A 2017 Harvard University study of millions of social media posts found that several of the most popular websites among conservatives during the last presidential election frequently posted stories that were fabricated or poorly fact-checked.
In response to alleged left-wing censorship, several right-leaning entrepreneurs have started up their own social networks. Thus far, however, they have failed to develop large audiences. Others, such as the Twitter alternative Gab, have been overwhelmed with neo-nazis and self-described fascists.
Progressive groups have disputed conservative claims of social media favoritism, arguing instead that far-right outlets receive greater distribution on Facebook and elsewhere.
The American Barometer poll, which was conducted Dec. 7-8 by HarrisX for Hill.TV, found that members of Generation Z, people born in the mid-1990s and early 2000s, were the only age group that believed social media companies were not biased against conservatives.
Baby Boomer respondents were the most likely to say that Republicans were being unfairly targeted by tech companies. Sixty-two percent of the older age group said they perceived anti-conservative bias while only 48 percent of Generation Z respondents agreed.
The survey, which was conducted among a statistically representative of online users, has a sampling margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
— Matthew Sheffield
I'm less concerned with public perception than with actual facts of conspiracy on the part of tech giants.
But it does show that a majority of the public, even a large ratio of independents and Democrats, as well as Republicans, can plainly see there is a tech/social media bias.
YouTube is purging right-wing and independent commentators in the wake of the Parkland High shooting while admitting that it is mistakenly banning conservatives.
Independent journalist Mike Cernovich reported earlier today that a video he uploaded of left-wing Antifa activists chanting death threats had been taken down by YouTube. The video shows Antifa shouting violent threats at attendees of Cernovich’s Night for Freedom event in Washington DC, which took place on Saturday. Cernovich commented to Breitbart News on YouTube’s removal, saying, “YouTube is censoring honest, unedited reporting about ANTIFA’s actions. This can mean only one thing — they endorse far left wing violence.”
Google, which owns YouTube, has also banned political YouTube star and classical liberal Carl Benjamin, better known by his online pseudonym “Sargon of Akkad.”
Although his videos are still available to view, he has been locked out of his Google account, including YouTube, and is unable to upload new videos. Benjamin was also permanently banned from Twitter last year — Facebook is now the only major social media platform that he can use to get his message out.
In a comment to Breitbart News, Benjamin said the ban, which mirrored that of Canadian academic Jordan Peterson last August, was the beginning of a “platform-wide purge.”
“As James Damore’s lawsuit against Google has shown, the entire company is riddled with a far-left ideological orthodoxy that has taken hold to a radical degree,” said Benjamin.
“Google’s active suppression of individualist ideas within its own ranks has caused classical liberal and conservative commentators to be considered as far-right as Nazis, and are being treated with the same kind of prejudice and ruthlessness.”
Earlier this week, we reported on the censorship of Ashton Whitty, a conservative vlogger and Berkeley student. After Whitty uploaded a video criticizing CNN over their coverage of the Parkland shootings, YouTube took down her video and issued her channel with a “strike.” If a channel receives three strikes within three months, it can be permanently banned from the platform. Although the initial video was restored and the strike removed, the same thing happened to another of Whitty’s videos within a few hours.
The YouTube purge has also hit InfoWars, a popular alternative media channel run by radio host Alex Jones, who interviewed Donald Trump while he was still a candidate. InfoWars’ YouTube channel, which has more than 2 million subscribers, has now been blocked for two weeks over accusations that it posted “conspiracy theories” about Parkland. If it receives one more strike within three months, the channel will be permanently banned.
In a comment to Breitbart News, InfoWars Editor-at-Large and YouTube star Paul Joseph Watson said Google’s unchecked power and influence over civil discourse required regulation.
“Google is a monopoly, and its anti-free speech policies are beginning to erode the sanctity of civil discourse,” said Watson. “We need some kind of constitutional amendment or mass movement, such as the one against SOPA, in order to re-assert the supremacy of free expression.”
“YouTube admitting they made a “mistake” in terminating some accounts and content does offer a glimmer of hope that there are some rational actors within the company.”
“However, this speaks to the wider phenomenon of how society has become so coddled and infantilized, that stridently challenging the views of public figures is now being treated as ‘bullying’ and ‘harassment.'”
Watson warned that the “fury” caused by mass censorship on social media platforms would only increase the same “hyper-partisan tensions” that the big tech companies claim to oppose.
A YouTube spokeswoman recently admitted that some videos were being removed in error, attributing it to teething problems caused by their recent hiring of 10,000 new human moderators.
“Newer members may misapply some of our policies resulting in mistaken removals” admitted the spokeswoman. “We’ll reinstate any videos that were removed in error.”
At a Senate hearing last month, Sen. Ted Cruz called out YouTube’s alleged ideological bias, highlighting Prager University’s lawsuit against the company over censorship of conservatives. Cruz told a YouTube representative that if the platform did not remain politically neutral, they could lose legal immunity for user content under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Without this protection, social media companies would be legally liable for all content posted on their platforms – an existential threat to their business model. _____
Update — InfoWars contributor Jerome Corsi reports that his YouTube account has been terminated.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Former Google engineer Mike Wacker speaks to FOX Business after he was fired for exposing the company’s political bias, just a day after appearing on “Trish Regan Primetime.”
And as cited in the video, Youtube is owned by Google, the two most dominant sites on the internet.
Google, Youtube, Facebook and Twitter are working in unison to silence and de-platform any conservative opinion, news and information. Right before the 2020 election.
Unknown to me before, and just as alarming to me, is that Google/Youtube/Facebook/Twitter are doing the same to conservative political groups in nations throughout Europe. And likely, the rest of the world.
Imagine if Hillary Clinton were president, and there was absolutely no resistance to this power-grab.
Even M E M should be alarmed by this. Because first they come for the Republican conservatives, and then they come after and de-platform and enable the call for violent crushing of any Democrat/liberal faction that breaks the slightest from liberal authoritarian orthodoxy. You're seeing that already, with the targeting of Democrat 2020 candidates these elites are trying to destroy, because they aren't seen by elites as liberal or progressive enough. And you're seeing the exact same vicious total war tactics unleashed on them as on any Republican. The Jacobinist reign of terror will not spare you either.
Senator McConnell's Twitter paage was put back up, without deleting the video of the vulgar mob outside his house screaming obscenities and death threats, that McConnell was pressured to take down by Twitter. Twitter has caved in to pressure, as it has put their unethical behavior in the public spotlight, and that spotlight wasn't going away until they did the right thing. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/twitter-unlocks-mitch-mcconnells-campaign-account-after-gop-fury
The incredible irony and unfairness. Twitter leaves up pages for Antifa making threats and plotting violence.
Twitter leaves up pages for the lawless mob threatening McConnell right outside his house, threatening to kill him, and even enables the trending hashtag, #MassacreMitch
And then ironically, when McConnell simply posts and exposes the death threats and violence and uncivility threatened against him, that Twitter labels as violent content and shuts down his Twitter page! While leaving those threatening McConnell to continue to do so, without any penalty or suspension of their accounts! No Twitter bias toward conservatives. None whatsoever!
It violated their terms of use. Twitter should apply their rules fairly and consistently of course. For Moscow Mitch and others howling with rage about this should consider how unequal our justice system is to non-wealthy people.
It violated their terms of use. Twitter should apply their rules fairly and consistently of course. For Moscow Mitch and others howling with rage about this should consider how unequal our justice system is to non-wealthy people.
That's crap.
Antifa and the intimidating mob outside McConnell's house are literally plotting violent attacks on McConnell and others, and McConnell is "in violation" for simply exposing the threats made against him (using Twitter to expose what CNN, MSNBC and the combined liberal media selectively ignore and don't report)?
That doesn't pass the smell test. Twitter allows violence and threats on their site against conservatives, and then locks down McConnell's page (and pages of millions of other Republican conservatives) in a blatant power grab to silence conservative speech and opinion.
"Moscow Mitch" is likewise incendiary and blatantly false.
You hide the treason of your own party (Diane Feinstein, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Clintons, Joseph Biden and sons, the Steele "Russia Dossier used to obtain illegal FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign, to attempt rigging the 2016 election), by manufacturing absolutely false and outrageously unproven allegations on Republicans.
I shit on the integrity of the Democrat leadership, lying criminal ultra-left America-hating socialist power seizing Bolsheviks, who truly want to destroy this country, and turn it into Cuba or Venezuela.
And you, like a willing zealot of Che Guevarra, are eagerly repeating their lying propaganda. Viva la Revolucion!
CNN contributor and liberal intellectual Reza Aslan is calling for the “eradication” of Trump supporters. In a series of aggressive tweets directed toward the President and those who voted for him, Aslan remarked – in response to the mass shooting in El Paso – that President Donald Trump “is a white nationalist terror leader.”
Arguing that there was “no longer any room for nuance” – words that are remarkably similar to Dayton shooter Connor Betts’ calls for violence on Twitter – Reza openly called for the genocide of Trump supporters.
“The President is a white nationalist terror leader. His supporters – ALL OF THEM – are by definition white nationalist terror supporters. The MAGA hat is a KKK hood. And his evil, racist scourge must be eradicated from society.”
In the same series of tweets, Aslan called Kellyanne Conway ” ’the depraved evil’ we need to eradicate,” following her remarks that America needed to come together in the wake of the mass shooting. The CNN contributor took her call for the eradication of hate and turned it upon her with a call for the eradication of a group of people – Trump supporters – of which Conway is a part.
Aslan also slammed Ivanka Trump’s denouncement of white supremacist ideology, referring her and her entirely family as “white supremacist” despite the Jewish heritage of Ivanka’s husband Jared Kushner and their extended family.
Armed with dehumanizing language, Aslan’s call for the “eradication” of the Left’s political opponents and his characterization of Trump supporters as an “evil, racist scourge” is rooted in the language of Holocaust proponents and other architects of 20th-century genocide.
The term “eradicate,” when used in the context of groups of people, is a call for genocide. An early intelligence record on Hitler’s “Final Solution” was declassified in 2001 under the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act, which contains statements by Axis diplomats referring to a plan for the “eradication” of Jews in Europe.
“The Jewish problem is being partially solved in the Protectorate [Reich Protectorate of Bohemia-Moravia], as it has been decided to eradicate all the Jews and send some to Poland and others to the town of Terezin, whilst looking for a more remote place,” reads an official Nazi dispatch to the Chilean government.
In reference to genocide, identical language is used by historians, journalists, and human rights organizations.
According to a 2007 Clark University study on the deconstruction of hate speech, “Dehumanization is a frequent element of hate speech, and is used to vilify the target. It also has the effect of disinhibiting violence. Thus, dehumanizing descriptions of individuals and groups are an alarming signal of hate speech and the danger of future violence, and its early detection is crucial.”
Reza’s call for the “eradication” of Trump supporters isn’t limited to President Trump and his cabinet. He also made calls for violence against the Covington Catholic High School boys in January.
“Honest question. Have you seen a more punchable face than this kid’s?” Aslan asked. The tweet received over 23,000 “likes” from his supporters. Tweets like Aslan’s set off a firestorm of hatred against the high school boys, including threats directed towards the school and the boys’ lawyer, Robert Barnes.
The tweet remains online.
According to Daily Wire reporter Ryan Saavedra, a Twitter official stated that Aslan’s call to “eradicate” Kellyanne Conway does not violate their policies.
__________________
Ian Miles Cheong is the managing editor of Human Events.
Another New York Times reporter and CNN contributor, who eagerly endorsed the #MassacreMitch trending on Twitter, and then retracted his Tweet later when busted on it.
And then went on CNN a day later to bemoan violent rhetoric!
These are two CNN contributors, and demonstrate this is not a Democrat fringe, but at the heart of mainstream liberal coverage.
And that call for violence and "eradication" of Republican Trump supporters is not diminishing. It is being stoked by the 2020 Democrat candidates, Hillary, and Obama. Not to mention CNN and MSNBC. Which really are de facto part of the DNC.
Note also that any Fox News reporter or anchor who did a fraction of this would be out of a job and never work again. But because these are Democrats on CNN, no rebuke, no suspension, no firing, no mention of his fanaticism, violent intent, partisan bias, and poor judgement. Without missing a blink, he continues on CNN as an exalted authority.
I think "massacre Mitch " is being used in the political sense and not the literal sense. I think it's a good idea to stay away from words like that (see the target thread where you feel differently about the use of the word target). I think Moscow Mitch is okay though and one he's earned.
Apparently you didn't hear the clear death threats in the video.
That's why Twitter didn't want McConnell to be able to post it. Because it makes clear the violent intent of the Bolshevik Left.
Just pointing out, it was only a few months ago that a similar mob swarmed outside Tucker Carlson's home, with his wife and children inside. And were so intent on entering Carlson's house and carrying out their threat that thye broke the front door on his house. I'm sure he had guns in the house, and it's too bad they didn't enter, so he'd have every right to shoot them dead.
Yeah stuff happens on both sides. That stuff is not okay of course but Moscow Mitch became Massacre Mitch because after the latest batch of mass shootings people are blaming him for jamming up gun control legislation. It's a name he's earned imho.
Yeah stuff happens on both sides. That stuff is not okay of course but Moscow Mitch became Massacre Mitch because after the latest batch of mass shootings people are blaming him for jamming up gun control legislation. It's a name he's earned imho.
So you endorse the mob gathering outside McConnell's home at night and calling for violence against them.
As is often pointed out, Obama controlled the House and Senate with supermajorities that could have passed ANY legislation, and never made mass shootings a priority. Obama was also not blamed when mass shotings (Sandy Hook, L.A., Fort Hood, Dallas police officeres killed, Pulse Night club, Aurora CO movie theatre...) happened on his watch. Nor were Harry Reid, or Nancy Pelosi blamed (as yo blame McConnell), or toward the end, then-Senate majority leader "cryin'" Chuck Schumer.
Your hypocrissy is on full display. Any of these people were infinitely more able to pass gun legislation.
But as I've said before, this is all liberal demagoguery anyway. There is no legislation that could have been passed, 8 years aago or now, that would prevent any of these shootings. All these shooters purchased their guns legally and went through background checks. The most visible one was Nicholas Cruz in Parkland, FL, but his school never made an official report of his threats, and police who visited his home for dozens of complaint calls likewise made no official reports that would have prevented him from obtaining weapons legally. So what exactly are you blaming McConnell for, M E M? Not passing legislation that wouldn't prevent shootings, but would take guns away from tens of thousands of law-abiding licensed owners?
When a 20-year-old man reportedly walked into a Springfield, Missouri, Walmart carrying tactical weapons and wearing body armor on Thursday, an off-duty firefighter carrying his own concealed weapon held the suspect at gunpoint until police arrived.
While not preventing shootings, what you advocate would actually take away the guns that prevent more shootings from successfully killing people.
And "stuff" DOESN'T "happen on both sides". Democrats are the ones (Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Cory Booker, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez... ) whose bellicose rhetoric from the very top in the Democrat leadership, and in the liberal media, and as enabled by leftist-run social media platforms Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube, cheer this stuff on and enable the spread of rhetoric calling for liberal violence on Republicans.
In examples like the El Paso shooter or Cesar Sayoc, they are lone nuts, and not even consistently conservative.
In the case of the El Paso shooter, he was primarily a radical environmentalist, and had even voiced opposition against Trump. His primary goal was preventing increased population of the United States, and his main beef with Trump was that Trump didn't shut down immigration completely, instead of just wanting to shut down illegal immigration. Details the liberal media and Democrat leadership don't want to achnowledge. Because the details make clear this guy wasn't inspired by Trump, that his beliefs were formed years before Trump even announced his presidential run.
Hodgkinson, Dorner, and the Dayton shooter, by contrast, were clear in their writings that they were directly inspired by Democrat leaders and CNN and MSNBC pundits. And the Democrats never at any point call for toning down the violent rhetoric from their side. After the Hodgkinson baseball shooting, at least two Democrat advisors and pollsters actually called for more shootings! You don't see that on the Republican side. No way you can make that turd float, M E M.
I think you're the one trying to make the turd float WB. It's just "senseless" and "random" when somebody sends out a manifesto that echoes Trump at a rally who than goes out and tries to kill as many Mexicans as he can. Or the white supremacist who speeds through a crowd a protestors finds himself a lot of Trump supporters acting as unpaid defense attorneys willing to paint him as a victim. You can point your turd all you want but your judgements are empty one sided and silly. Yes both sides do stuff and there are people on both sides who just see the one side. We've gone back and forth for years and years now and you should know I don't endorse mob violence btw.
I think you're the one trying to make the turd float WB. It's just "senseless" and "random" when somebody sends out a manifesto that echoes Trump at a rally who [then] goes out and tries to kill as many Mexicans as he can.
Show me one Republican who endorses that shooting. It's a random lone-nut situation, and you can't point to one thing Trump said that reflects what the El Paso shooter said in his posts or manifesto. It's like saying because I oppose Mexican drug cartels, and the KKK oppose Mexican drug cartels, that if they act out violently against innocent people, that my rhetoric caused the KKK to act. NO! Trump only opposes illegal immigration (not all immigrants, not all hispanics), and accurately cites that the largest sources of illegals are Mexicans (59%) and Central America (15%).
And as I've said repeatedly, the El Paso shooter in his prior manifesto and online posts said that Trump will be blamed for his shooting spree, but that his racist ideology was solidly in place before Trump even announced his candidacy. Trump only wants to stop illegal immgration, while this kid wanted to stop ALL immigration to the U.S., and he was hostile toward Trump for not going far enough.
Your "Trump's rhetoric is the cause" propaganda also ignores that the Dayton shooter and several other shooters were liberals, and specifically Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders supporters. Those are shooters you don't want to talk about!
And that unlike the vaguest similarity to Trump's rhetoric, these liberal shooters openly praise and quote verbatim talking points of Democrats like Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, Kamalah Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Cory Booker, and Maxine Waters.
Originally Posted By: M E M
Or the white supremacist who speeds through a crowd a protestors finds himself a lot of Trump supporters acting as unpaid defense attorneys willing to paint him as a victim. You can point your turd all you want but your judgements are empty one sided and silly. Yes both sides do stuff and there are people on both sides who just see the one side. We've gone back and forth for years and years now and you should know I don't endorse mob violence btw.
Is that a reference to the guy who ran over the girl in Charlottesville, VA? I've cited the video evidence that he was attacked by the Antifa/liberal crowd before he went on the sidewalk. I think he was pressured into a plea bargain so that we will never know the true facts. It didn't look to me like he had any legal representation beyond a public defender.
What I see is that the violence on the "right" side is fringe nuts who aren't acting as Republicans, and are widely condemned by Republicans. And that Republicans in general condemn racism, but are widely characterized by Democrats as racists. That anyone who supports Trump is maliciously labelled by Democrats as a "white supremacist".
YOUR SIDE, THE DEMOCRATS basically call all Republicans nazis, and basically say you have to do everything you can to oppose nazis, intimidation and violence included. That is the mainstream message of your entire party, including the 2020 candidates, Pelosi, Schumer and the rest, and it is only by a very careful parsing of words that you pretend to distance yourself from that [while still supporting them.
I keep waiting for people in your party to say WOAH, this is too crazy, I can't support this. This is where I step off the train. But you never do. Beyond lip service otherwise, you and other Demcorats always remain on board. Despite the corruption. Despite the Nazi demaagoguery. Despite the violence.
Democrat leadership doesn't stop Antifa and other groups who act violently against Republicans, because they feel that violence and intimidation works to advance their agenda and intimdate/weaken their conservative opposition. No ethics, just whatever works.
Just like they did with Obama's IRS targetng conservatives in 2012.
Just like the bureaucrat Democrat loyalists who corrupted the DOJ, FBI, CIA, DNI and State Department, weaponizing those agencies and the FISA court to attempt to rig the election, and ongoing since, to cripple the Trump administration.
You give lip service otherwise, but you're still on board.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
I'm not tight lipped about the IRS scandal. The GOP manufactured the scandal and was able to defund the IRS. It was such a great scandal that you guys didn't pursue criminal charges and tried hiding that the IRS used search words for both sides. As for Trump, he's worked his schtick enough at rallies that I find it hard to believe you don't know of any remarks that could be construed as inflammatory. It was clear what Trump was doing even before he told 4 American women to go back to where they came from. Unlike him they actually won their elections by more people choosing them than their opponents. It truly saddens me that he pushed Israel into banning 2 elected officials entry there. The bipartisan support for Israel is important for both countries. Trump trying to sabotage that is disgraceful and small.
I'm not tight lipped about the IRS scandal. The GOP manufactured the scandal and was able to defund the IRS. It was such a great scandal that you guys didn't pursue criminal charges and tried hiding that the IRS used search words for both sides.
There is absolutely no way, NO WAY you can get around the 150 visits by the IRS leadership to Obama's White House to meet with Obama and his highest inner circle just before the 2012 election. Clear planning and coordination to weaponize the IRS against conservatives to win the election, as detailed by many editors of the Wall Stree Journal. As self-incriminatingly detailed in Lois Lerner's e-mails. There's no way to get around that.
There is absolutely no question the IRS targeted Tea Party and religious conservative leaders and grassroots organizations, prevented them from getting 501-status to fundraise and organize, and subjected many of them to costly harassing audits to intimidate and cripple Republican fundraising and support. Frank Vandersloot alone, for donating a $ million check to the Romney campaign in 2012, was subjected to IRS audits of his business and hios personal tax return, at a cost of $80,000 and months of his personal time just to prove he did absolutely nothing wrong. Plus Tea Party leaders further harassed by other Democrat loyalists in OSHA, ATF, EPA, FBI and other federal agencies. With names given to them by Lerner and Koskinin in the IRS.
I personally know an attorney who was audited for his activity in the Republican party and for his efforts to get John McCain elected in 2008. Prior to that, he had never been audited by the IRS.
Likewise Franklin Graham (son of Billy Graham), his church that had existed for over 100 years was audited the first time in 2012 for their support of Romney. In addition to harassment and stalling and not getting 501 status before the 2012 election.
Originally Posted By: M E M
As for Trump, he's worked his schtick enough at rallies that I find it hard to believe you don't know of any remarks that could be construed as inflammatory. It was clear what Trump was doing even before he told 4 American women to go back to where they came from. Unlike him they actually won their elections by more people choosing them than their opponents. It truly saddens me that he pushed Israel into banning 2 elected officials entry there. The bipartisan support for Israel is important for both countries. Trump trying to sabotage that is disgraceful and small.
I look at Trump's statements as largely humor that you try to portray as inflammatory.
And what is harsh in Trump's rhetoric is not unprovoked, it's justifiable self-defense and simply responding to the insults, slanders, and Bolshevik revolution-level incendiary call to violence and uncivility coming from the Democrat/Left. The Democrats (those inspired directly and verbatim by violent rhetoric of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Ocasio-Cortez, Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, etc.) are burning and shooting up ICE detention centers and offices! They are killing cops! They are violently attacking Republican leaders like McConnell, Scalise, Pam Bondi, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Rand Paul, on and on. They want to set loose tens of thousands of violent criminals! They want to bankrupt the country with tens of trillions in new entitlements, in a nation that is already 22 trillion in debt. They want open borders, no resistance to illegal immigration, no resistance to illegal gangmembers and criminals! How can you not see how insane your party is?
It truly terrifies me that these fanatics hell-bent on chaos and destroying America have any support whatsoever from Democrat voters. They are utterly insane, and dangerous.
And why enable Ilhan Obam and Rashida Tlaib to enter Israel, who have verbally declared war and unleashed hate on Israel for years? Israel finally agreed to let Tlaib in to see her grandmother on condition she wouldn't rally hate against Israel while in-country, and Tlaib slapped away the offer. Israel's policy regarding banning visits by radicals with Tlaib's brand of political hate far precedes the election of Donald Trump. And again, Israel was willing to make an exception for her, but she used her grandmother as a rhetorical weapon to attack Israel. Israel was willing to let her visit, she rejected it, how is that Trump's fault in your twisted logic?
You deciding that IRS visits to the WH means something nefarious was being done hardly makes it true. Russia meeting at the Trump tower anyone? That even involved evolving stories from the Trumps. Your problem is I do know the facts and one of them is that Trump didn't pursue a criminal case. If there was a there there you know he would have. Defunding the IRS in response btw makes sense how?
Israel was all set to let them visit as they have let other critics in the past but did what our President asked them to do. The next time you want to bs about free speech I will now know how it really isn't a principle of yours. If Trump doesn't like it I know you will support him over a democratic principle. And this was about him. Even the conservative lobby group for Israel recognizes this.
You deciding that IRS visits to the WH means something nefarious was being done hardly makes it true. Russia meeting at the Trump tower anyone? That even involved evolving stories from the Trumps. Your problem is I do know the facts and one of them is that Trump didn't pursue a criminal case. If there was a there there you know he would have. Defunding the IRS in response btw makes sense how?
NOT Russia "meeting at Trump Tower".
You don't have the facts, and you're either maliciously lying or brainwashed by MediaMatters. My impression is you want to believe the lies, and are willingly brainwashed.
Of the 20 or so FBI and DOJ people who were ACTUALLY colluding and in conspiracy against Trump and rigging the Hillary investigation, most of those deep state conspirators have either been fired, or resigned before they could be fired. They are facing indictment and jail time. You are delusional to assert otherwise. That all supports the case that Trump was set up.
Despite corrupt officials in both the Democrat and Republican leadership, despite the attempts by vicious partisan deep state agents like James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Loretta Lynch and Sally Yates, despite the attempt to sweep it all under the rug by new FBI director Christopher Wray to try and preserve the reputation of a corrupt FBI leadership (his golfing buddies) even the Inspector General in their own agency is unearthing the evidence of their guilt.
A Fusion GPS and FBI "asset" named Natalia Veselnitskaya lied and misrepresented herself to get the meeting with Trump Jr. (NOT a Russian agent, a fake Russian agent sent by Fusion GPS and the FBI to try and ensnare and trap Trump officials). She met with Fusion GPS before her Trump Tower meeting, and she met with Fusion GPS after her meeting. And there was no business transacted between her and Trump Jr. A few minutes in, he saw she had misrepresnted herself and ended the meeting. NO BUSINESS TRANSACTED, NO "RUSSIA COLLUSION".
If the four federal investigations, including the Mueller report didn't already make that CRYSTAL clear.
And what Rep. Adam Schiff did in a recorded phone call, getting pranked by two actual Russians, where he was eager to get any dirt he could on Trump, writing down everything said on the phone by two high school kids, and trying to set up more meetings with them (he actually called them back repeatedly --recorded!-- before he realized they weren't really going to give him Russian dirt on Trump, Schiff not knowing and clueless that he was being played. That was actual attempted "Russia collusion"... BY A DEMOCRAT.
Why do you deliberately lie and try to shave and misrepresent the facts? There is no Trump/Russia collusion. FOUR investigations: 1) a 9-month FBI intelligence investigation, 2) a House investigation, 3) a Senate investigation, and 4)the Mueller special investigation, ALL concluded there is absolutely no evidence of Trump/Russia collusion.
Everything you try to accuse Trump of doing, Hillary Clinton, the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and key staffers in the FBI, DOJ, CIA, State Department, and DNI, HAVE ACTUALLY PROVABLY DONE.
The IRS is a weaponized arm of the Democrats, and has been since JFK, LBJ and Bill Clinton were president, auditing and harassing the Dems' political opponents. It has to be reformed. Weaponized yet again by Obama in 2012, to narrowly win the election with 51%, by crippling his opposition's ability to organize and fundraise.
See the Spectator article , "The Union that Runs the IRS", in the linked topic above.
Originally Posted By: M E M
Israel was all set to let them visit as they have let other critics in the past but did what our President asked them to do. The next time you want to bs about free speech I will now know how it really isn't a principle of yours. If Trump doesn't like it I know you will support him over a democratic principle. And this was about him. Even the conservative lobby group for Israel recognizes this.
Israel DID OFFER to let Rashida Tlaib enter to visit her 90-something grandmother. And when Israel eased their restrictions against travel into Israel by rabid propagantists like Tlaib and Omar (laws that precede Trump's presidency) SHE (not Trump), SHE declined to enter.
It was all a political show by Tlaib, to beg Israel to let her enter, get them to concede, and then grandstand and slap the invitation back in Israel's face. I don't know how you blame Trump for HER CHOICE not to travel to Israel, as she had permission to.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
No criminal charges pursued in the IRS matter WB. That's how big the scandal was. And again the defunding of the IRS makes sense how? Not sure what your going on about the Trump Tower meeting not being with Russians that were linked to the Kremlin but yes that did happen. As did the Trumps evolving story on what happened.
You can stop trying to bs rationalize about Trump using his office to attack his political foes and stifle free speech. It avoids what Trump did here. She was told she could go as long as she kept her mouth shut. That isn't democracy. Israel was going to let the elected officials visit till Trump bullied them into changing their decision. If you have a problem with a college not allowing controversial conservative/white supremacists speaking than you should have a larger issue with Trump's attempts here to stifle free speech. Also sad is his willingness to try to damage the bipartisan support Israel has with us. Sad and actually evil.
I'm confident a William Barr DOJ would have prosecuted Lois Lerner, where a Jeff Sessions DOJ that dithered on the FBI/DOJ deep state coup for 2 years would not.
I would like to see the case revisited. Even when it was dismissed it was not because they felt Lois Lerner and the IRS were not guilty (there were certainly plenty of self-incriminating e-mails). Those in DOJ (under Sessions) felt at that time there was not enough evidence to prosecute, despite Lerner's guilt and plenty of evidence. And left open the door to re-open the case later. Which I hope they do. Aggressively.
By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Friday, September 8, 2017
The Trump Justice Department has once again cleared former IRS senior executive Lois G. Lerner of criminal liability stemming from the tea party targeting.
In a letter to top Republicans, Assistant Attorney General Stephen E. Boyd said they re-reviewed the case and concluded there isn’t enough evidence to charge Ms. Lerner, who was at the center of the targeting.
Mr. Boyd said the new review included lawyers who only recently joined the department and weren’t part of the Obama administration’s earlier decision.
“After this process, the Department determined that reopening the investigation would not be appropriate based on the available evidence,” Mr. Boyd said. He said if new information comes to light, the decision could be revisited.
Republicans on Capitol Hill called the decision “terrible.”
“It sends the message that the same legal, ethical and Constitutional standards we all live by do not apply to Washington political appointees — who will now have the green light to target Americans for their political beliefs and mislead investigators without ever being held accountable for their lawlessness,” said Rep. Kevin Brady, Texas Republican and House Ways and Means chairman.
He said he respects Attorney General Jeff Sessions, but was “troubled” by his department’s handling of the request to investigate Ms. Lerner “The decision not to prosecute Lois Lerner is a miscarriage of justice,” said Rep. Peter Roskam, an Illinois Republican who was one of the key lawmakers pushing for an investigation.
Ms. Lerner led the division of the IRS that singled out conservative and tea party groups for intrusive scrutiny in their applications for nonprofit status.
Conservative groups say she facilitated the targeting. But a Justice Department investigation under the Obama administration said Ms. Lerner actually took steps to try to repair the targeting when she learned of it.
Look at the photo with that article. The same arrogant defiance on Lois Lerner's face as that of Peter Strzok.
And the fact that she got a free pass in 2013, because some for whatever political reason didn't want to prosecute her, is what bred the hubris and corrupt arrogance that gave us the Russia hoax and criminal abuse of the FISA court in 2016. If they are not prosecuted, it will just embolden this kind of Praetorian Guard-style of FBI/DOJ coup to happen again.
But here I am talking reason with you. The truth is, your side doesn't care about crimes or the rule of law, so long as your side gains power.
You don't care that Tea Party and religious groups were put through hell. You don't care about the slander and attempted destruction of Brett Kavanaugh. You don't care that Scooter Libby wasn't guilty of the crime he was imprisoned for. Or the shakedown plea deals that put a gun to the heads of Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Carter Page, George Pappadapoulos, Jerome Corsi, Sam Clovis, Roger Stone and Michael Caputo.
Men who never would have been indicted if not for malicious prosecution in a kangaroo court, two of whom the FBI looked at 13 years ago and wouldn't prosecute. Just to shake them down and attempt to make them perjure themselves to testify against Trump. Rich men who have been bankrupted defending themselves against baseless Kafka-esque charges.
But like I said, you don't care. So long as your corrupt side wins. Even though your side increasingly looks like the French Revolution's reign of terror. God help us all if your side actually wins. It certainly won't win playing by the rules. Only by a Bolshevik revolution and "power mostly administered at the barrel of a gun." To quote Mao, as Ron Bloom did while serving in the Obama administration. Be careful what you wish for, M E M... you might get it.
Of course your confident about something that didn't happen. The reality is no criminal charges were pursued by Trump. And you can avoid Trump pushing an ally to stifle free speech of political opponents but how Orwellian of you. Remember when you believed free speech was a principle? When did that change? Maybe about the same time it became less important to reduce the deficit?
Of course your confident about something that didn't happen. The reality is no criminal charges were pursued by Trump. And you can avoid Trump pushing an ally to stifle free speech of political opponents but how Orwellian of you. Remember when you believed free speech was a principle? When did that change? Maybe about the same time it became less important to reduce the deficit?
I think for the same reason Jeff Sessions just sat on his hands for 2 years.
There are establishment Republicans that I have almost as much contempt for Trump as the Bolshevik-Left Democrats. I hold equal scorn for them as for the establishment Democrats, because the establishment on both sides are enriching themselves by corrupting and slowly destroying the country, while enriching themselves.
I first became aware of the establishment Republicans that are essentially one party with the establishment Democrats, reading the book Obamanomics by Tim Carney. Both sides are controlled by campaign finance and corporate donors, corporations and establishment leaders of both parties who enrich themselves at the peoples' expense. I became increasingly aware as House leaders John Boehner and Paul Ryan, once each of them were consecutively seated as House speaker, both immediately broke their conservative-Republican campaign promises. Boehner in particular at a party in 2016 was overheard saying he supported Hillary, and that it would be a tragedy if Trump won. Because Trump is a reformer who would destroy the status-quo corporate lobbyist party for the establishment on both sides. Boehner is now earning a fortune as a marijuana industry lobbyist.
Those are the establishment Democrats and establishment Republicans. The Bolshevik Democrats are even more dangerous.
And the only one in either party who has the commitment to truly enact reforms to rebuild the rule of law is Trump.
And if Democrats were willing to deal with Trump, he would actually give the Democrats a lot of what they want, to pass legislation what he wants! But the Democrats are too ideologically rigid, too stupid, to see that. He offered a generous compromise on DACA children of illegals, but in truth the Democrats would rather demagogue Trump for another 6 years than give Trump a political victory, and actually help the DACA kids. Trump is a lot more pragmatic and less ideologically rigid than the Democrats.
And the establishment Republicans, even so-called conservatives like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, more often fold and just posture. Rather than hold to their promises, as Trump has.
And you are full of horseshit trying to flip the table and call me Orwellian. Trump has been about restoring the rule of law.
The "five minutes hate" constant demonization rhetoric by Democrats, rallying the Left to attack every Trump supporter in the streets, that's Orwellian. Virtually EVERY Democrat 2020 candidate, along with Obama, Hillary, Maxine Waters, Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib, Pressley, you name it, are constantly scorching the earth with rhetoric like, "resist", "no peace till we regain power", "get in their faces", and "when you see them create a crowd, step into them, let them know they're not welcome".
Every one of them wants to shut down free speech. More than that, declare war in the street on those who dare to disagree with them.
Likewise, the Democrats' attempt to re-define long-established terms to shut down conservative speech >>perfectly<< mirrors the elimination of words in the Newspeak dictionary, as described in Orwell's 1984. Re-defining words like nationalism, patriotism, wearing a MAGA hat, the Besty Ross flag, any word or symbol that rallies a conservative message. Words and symbols that Democrat leaders, and their Leninist brethren in the liberal media, have re-defined to be some kind of secret code for "racist" or "white nationalist". When in fact Trump supporters just believe the United States is a sovereign nation that should have defended borders, and deport those who illegally break into our country and before deportation, are still given an asylum-claim review in court (that 90% of illegals don't show up for anyway) before they are deported.
Trump is restoring the rule of law. It's the Bolshevik maniacs that YOU support who want to make those laws meaningless, over-run us with illegals, in the name of racism and social justice flood us with released criminals from jails, enact policies that render our military and police unable to defend us, admit millions who hate this country, destroy any enforcement standards that prevent fraud in our elections, collapse our economy with policies that previously crushed economic growth under 8 years of Obama.
All the things your side has done, is doing, to destroy us, Trump has reversed. Long live the republic.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Lol, Trump just bullied an ally of ours to shut down free speech of 2 elected officials so spare me the ridiculous partisan outrage. I no longer believe free speech is something you consider a principle.
Lol, Trump just bullied an ally of ours to shut down free speech of 2 elected officials so spare me the ridiculous partisan outrage. I no longer believe free speech is something you consider a principle.
In your convoluted Newspeak liberal media world, that is how it's portrayed.
That is how your side hides from the true facts. That Israel's laws precede Trump's election, that Tlaib begged Israel to make an exception so she could visit her grandmother in her 90's, that Israel made an exception for Tlaib, and she, not Trump chose not to go for exploitative demagogic political reasons.
i.e., Tlaib hates Israel more than she loves her grandmother.
Israel was set to let them visit. Than Trump tweeted saying Israel shouldn't let them in. It would make Israel look weak. Than Israel changed it's mind and wouldn't let them in. They did change course for the one but it was on the condition that she kept her mouth shut. Those are the facts. Pretending and it is pretending on your part that Trump's tweet wasn't when Israel changed it's mind on not letting the 2 elected officials in is just more ridiculous partisan spin. Trump made the tweet because Israel was originally set to let them visit. You shouldn't be able to twist that logic but your partisan hate just compels you too.
Israel was set to let them visit. Than Trump tweeted saying Israel shouldn't let them in. It would make Israel look weak. Than Israel changed it's mind and wouldn't let them in. They did change course for the one but it was on the condition that she kept her mouth shut. Those are the facts. Pretending and it is pretending on your part that Trump's tweet wasn't when Israel changed it's mind on not letting the 2 elected officials in is just more ridiculous partisan spin. Trump made the tweet because Israel was originally set to let them visit. You shouldn't be able to twist that logic but your partisan hate just compels you too.
We've been through several gyrations of this. I don't buy your propaganda false narrative.
Ultimately, Tlaib was allowed to visit by Israel, but Tlaib made a political grandstand and rebuffed the offer. Anything beyond that is obvious liberal spin and false narrative.
Yes because news or facts you don't like are "false". Trump did tweet what he tweeted though. You can call facts false but that goes to your credibility not mine. Just remember I now know how you really feel about free speech.
Yes because news or facts you don't like are "false". Trump did tweet what he tweeted though. You can call facts false but that goes to your credibility not mine. Just remember I now know how you really feel about free speech.
I stated the facts. Israel made an exception, and would have permitted Tlaib to visit. Tlaib, after begging for an exception, once getting it said to Israel: "Fuck you, eat shit, I don't want your exception."
Regardless of what Trump said, Tlaib was permitted to enter. DESPITE that Israel had laws in place to block evil anti-Israeli demagogues like Tlaib travel entry, long before Trump was even president.
Those are the facts you distort and ignore, to front your lying Democrat talking-points/MediaMatters narrative.
Actually that's what you're doing. Israel is now willing to letting one in but it's on the condition that she would just visit her grandmother. She has to keep her mouth shut. And yes Israel does have a law that was never applied to elected US officials before. Israel hasn't and wasn't going to bar American elected officials though until Trump bullied them into changing course. You're the one distorting. You have no defense or excuse for Trump's tweet.
Only Tlaib, to visit her grandmother. After that offer by Israel was slapped away, I doubt they would permit Tlaib in now.
By "keep her mouth shut", you mean she has to not actively call for the destruction of Israel while she is in their country. Which Tlaib never will be in, now. She had her chance.
I think you've shown your true colors WB. Freedom of speech is something I used to think you actually cared about. I know better now
Insinuation on your part, M E M, with no facts to back it up. I've deconstructed your lying narrative multiple times. Israel's laws pre-date Trump's presidency. Israel made an exception for Tlaib, the moment they did, she slapped the offer down. Only Tlaib is to blame for her not going to Israel.
It was Obama who arrested and intimidated reporters, and tried to permanently shut out Fox News from White House press conferences, and lied that they did so, and were exposed by Judicial Watch as liars by their own gloating internal e-mails.
Obama, Clinton, LBJ, JFK, FDR and Woodrow Wilson were far more of a threat to free speech and Constitutional rights than Donald Trump ever will be. All those listed either shut down newspapers, jailed reporters, used the FBI to intimidate and do surveillance of their political opponents, used the IRS to audit and harass their political opponents, or all the above. Trump has done none of that.
Ohhh, M E M, freedom of speech is something I used to think you actually cared about. I know better now !
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Actually that's what you're doing. Israel is now willing to letting one in but it's on the condition that she would just visit her grandmother. She has to keep her mouth shut. And yes Israel does have a law that was never applied to elected US officials before. Israel hasn't and wasn't going to bar American elected officials though until Trump bullied them into changing course. You're the one distorting. You have no defense or excuse for Trump's tweet.
As pointed out here, Israel was not using the law prior to Trump's effort to bully them into barring them. Right after Trump tweeted Israel made it's announcement. At some point do you have a defense for this not being a freedom of speech issue?
