Setting The Barr Low; or, The ABC’s Of Bigotry

abc-logo

from wikimedia commons

Yes, it’s a little late, but time has no meaning to me. Playing DKC on the GBC does that to you.

Oddly enough (to the thinking of some of you in the audience), I do believe Roseanne’s remarks are a little racist. Spot on about the Muslim Brotherhood part, but racist with the “Planet of the Apes” reference. Not that I’m condemning her for anything except lacking awareness about the reprisal such remarks would bring. As I will outline in a moment, we all are entitled to our opinions, to condemn others would be to condemn ourselves (yourselves, liberal, as you will read if you dare).

I should clarify- I meant the reprisal that statements like Roseanne’s SHOULD bring. You see, ABC is lacking some awareness itself. Here are some folks ABC still supported wholeheartedly, fervently, and partisanly despite similar remarks to Roseanne’s- or worse, real attitudes they hold (which should always be the measure).

  • The Presidential Candidate that they lobbied very hard for, that they were disappointed lost, once made a racist joke about Indians and participated in a faux pas related to the African American community… make that TWO (and it’s amazing how forgiving media outlets such as ABC and Democrats were over Hillary’s superpredator remark when and how they voted for her- and don’t say too much time passed, ABC went after Steve Scalise with the rest of the media wolves over a fake racist incident that would have been 12 years old if it had really happened- yet when President Trump refers to MS-13 gang members as animals Democrats and media outlets like ABC suddenly decide that all gang members are divine creatures who cast down bullets of love upon us, who are merely filling women with love when they rape them, who merely are spreading the word of peace when they put a knife into us a hundred times, as opposed to VOTING FOR Hillary Clinton when she said much the same thing about African Americans) (ALSO, listen again to the Gandhi clip. You hear the people laughing at Hillary’s remark? It’s clearly a racist joke, yet your party of tolerance that has called Trump a racist more times than a pulsar will emit a beam of EM radiation in its lifetime is sitting there LAUGHING at a racist joke!)
  • ABC’s buddy Joe Biden once said Obama was the first mainstream African American candidate who was “clean” and “articulate”. Joe Biden ALSO picked on folks of the Indian persuasion, so I guess since he became Vice President after he said that and Hillary Clinton was almost President after mocking Gandhi, that means Democrats are perfectly ok with being racist towards Indians. That kinda takes the wind out of the sails of their anti-Apu movement.
  • ABC’s buddy Harry Reid once said Obama had “no Negro dialect” (something ABC didn’t let others get away with) and made an Asian joke that ABC decided wasn’t even newsworthy. (ABC also failed to mention when Harry Reid said “why would I want to do that” in response to being asked if he’d fund children’s cancer research, so there you go.)
  • ABC’s buddy DNC Deputy Chair Keith Ellison was/maybe is an anti-semite (note how he had issued a statement as Wolf noted saying his association with Farrakhan is long ended, admits to being associated with Farrakhan in that clip, but says he has always forever and ever opposed anti-Semitism despite his admitted association with Farrakhan)
  • ABC’s party of choice, the Democrats, standing behind anti-Semitic hate-monger Farrakhan (Hillary Clinton allegedly called her husband’s campaign manager a “Jew bastard” so in its love for Hillary, ABC already established its forgiveness of anti-Semiticism if it comes from a Democrat. Because as we know from the Associated Press still claiming Steve Scalise spoke at a white supremacist rally 16 years ago when that is factually untrue and was disproven 3 years ago, journalists like you’d find at ABC won’t let the truth get in the way of a good slur if it’s against a Republican)

Why so many Democrats listed? What do they have to do with ABC you ask despite the links linking them? Read the chart.

journalists-wiki-tw

ABC is well-represented on this list of journalists working with someone who has a history of making racist remarks, who is involved with a Party that has a history of racism, one which still appears today as evidenced throughout this piece.

And of course, ABC itself currently has, or had, other racists/bigots/misogynists/folks of ill-repute in their employ who were not canned. ABC’s choices of news and programming arguably support much the same thing.

  • ABC’s Joy Behar dressed as a black woman for Halloween, and shared the picture with the cast of ABC’s The View on ABC one morning, saying she looked cute when dressed in blackface. (so while Roseanne simply made a throwaway remark on Twitter to her relatively small following, Behar was proud of having dressed in blackface and showed millions how happy she was about it on ABC’s network, and yet Behar kept her job)
  • ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel (and Joy Behar) smearing Christians (without at least equal time to other religions, not one joke or attack directed at Islam has passed their lips, what do you call it when you single out a group because of certain stereotypes about them but let another arguably worse group get a pass?)
  • ABC ignoring Farrakhan’s history while praising an event featuring him (he praised Hitler, for example, but that was never mentioned by ABC)
  • ABC supporting sexism by not exposing links between sexual assaulters and Democrats
  • ABC’s very feminist act of ignoring an alleged rape because the accused were illegal immigrants rather than white frat boys
  • And then of course ABC’s programming consists mostly of hateful diatribes, keeping in line with the personalities it hires. (guess I shouldn’t be surprised about some of this, after all, ABC news folks were happy to call America sexist and seemingly agree with Hillary’s ‘deplorables’ remark)
  • Don’t forget to consider just about any time ABC airs anything by Spike Lee, whose least-racist quirk is glaring at interracial couples

It’s perfectly fine, if you are a liberal, to be bigoted or to support bigots (we’ll even throw the Left’s favorite playbook at them- why didn’t ABC denounce Farrakhan 55 times while praising his rally? Why has ABC never denounced the New York Times or Esquire over their association with a racist?) is perfectly acceptable. Party of tolerance indeed!

Maybe They Just Didn’t Like Her

It’s readily apparent that ABC simply hated Roseanne. Her show was a ratings smash, but not with the right regions (New York, Los Angeles. You’ll notice that the networks tend to promote shows that resonate with them, as they’re the top ad markets in the country. Suburbs of a big city, apartments in a big city, nerd scientists in a big city, singing a pure propaganda song about your big city on New Year’s with millions watching while said songworthy big city makes cesspools look like mountain springs, crimes in a big city. Big city nights! The suburbs and rural areas are full of crooked rednecks and people killing each other. What’s the backdrop painting for the late shows? A cityscape. And by the way, where do all the journalists live?).

ABC was champing at the bit to find an excuse to cancel this politically toxic (to them) show, like with Tim Allen’s “Last Man Standing”. Tim Allen’s show was ABC’s second-highest rated series, but the first excuse they found (production costs) they dumped it because they hate anything that appeals to anyone who is not already waving a Soviet flag from their Brooklyn apartment window. Want more evidence for this? What does ABC replace the Trump-country appeal of the Roseanne revival with? A spinoff that takes it to the Left.

Or to put it simply- Roseanne didn’t embody “New York Values”.

Boss_Tweed_Nast

Just one example of New York Values, from wikimedia commons

The Big Apple Didn’t Fall Far From The Tree

  • ABC’s parent company hiring misogynist Keith Olbermann.
  • ABC’s parent company not bothering to release Jemele Hill over her racially charged remarks (which tended to be anti-White, and tended to be almost anything she said)
  • ABC’s parent company not even punishing Bomani Jones after he said all American sports fans were racists

Just To Be Clear…

I’m not saying ABC doesn’t have the right to hire and fire who they want, if they want 24/7 bigotry and misogyny that’s their business. I’m saying it’d be nice if they weren’t so openly biased and applied their rules equally. Oh well, what do you expect from liberals? Typical. They can’t even play by their own rules because they know they’d lose. You know, their “rule” that says we should all be tolerant and open-minded. Their other rule that states such things as were said by the above folks are racist/sexist/bigoted/etc. Clearly, that only applies to people they hate, not to themselves.

Just For Fun…

Let’s end with some more bigoted liberal quotes (Liberal leader Al Sharpton sure didn’t seem like an LGBTQ buddy in the one at that link!). A quick glance into the world that ABC wholeheartedly supports, the world of Democrats. Maybe Roseanne was just a token sacrifice so that no one will question ABC’s liberal ethos when it supports the below intolerance. (NOTE: ABC has yet to apologize for or denounce or otherwise distance themselves from the below remarks, nor from the above incidents, aside from Roseanne’s statement… whereas if even one Trump supporter is shown as a racist the President must answer for that individual’s beliefs as if they were his own according to ABC and the media’s playbook, interesting how when a Muslim jihadist attacks it’s never Islam’s fault yet every indication of racism from a Trump supporter reflects that entire side of the aisle)

  • “Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them.” – Mary Frances Berry, former Chairwoman, US Commission on Civil Rights, someone thinks this is an inspiring quote. So is her quote about accusing Republicans of racism to distract from real issues.
  • “(I get to) kill all the white people… How great is that?” – Jamie Foxx discussing his Django Unchanged role on NBC’s Saturday Night Live, a statement made to a cheering crowd.
  • “(Blacks and Hispanics) are too busy eating watermelons and tacos to learn how to read and write.” – Mike Wallace, CBS News 1982
  • “White people shouldn’t be allowed to vote. It’s for the good of the country and for those who’re bitter for a reason and armed because they’re scared.” – Left-wing journalist Jonathan Valania
  • “I want to go up to the closest white person and say: ‘You can’t understand this, it’s a black thing’ and then slap him, just for my mental health.” – New York City Councilman, Charles Barron (who also said we attacked Libya for oil… just like Iraq I suppose because we never got any from Libya either!). His full quote was about him saying that blacks needed reparations in part because they paid for facilities under segregation they never could use. So did whites. And yet he was happy to impose Obamacare on people so that people who object to abortion would be forced to pay for it. Typical. Also, Barron, I have a question: if a white person can’t understand certain aspects of being black, how the hell does a black understand what being white means? Does your race have this magic ability to see beyond its skin color simply because you think it’s superior?
  • “We got to do something about these Asians coming in and opening up businesses and dirty shops. They ought to go.” – Former DC Mayor Marion Barry who was busted smoking crack with a prostitute
  • “The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn’t. But she is a typical white person…” – Barack Obama, who is known for not being a fan of whites.
  • (Obama’s) a nice person, he’s very articulate this is what’s been used against him, but he couldn’t sell watermelons if it, you gave him the state troopers to flag down the traffic.” – Dan Rather, CBS Evening News
  • “A few years ago, (Barack Obama) would have been getting us coffee.” – Bill Clinton to Ted Kennedy
  • “Hymies.” And “Hymietown.” — Jesse Jackson’s description of New York City while on the 1984 presidential campaign trail (Jesse used “Hymie” as an anti-Semitic slur. Hey, remember when the Left went after Ted Cruz for being an anti-Semite because he said “New York values”? Why does the Left still love Jesse Jackson after his Jew-hatred was revealed like a mushroom cloud over the Nevada desert?)

And of course, the patron saint of welfare himself-

wp-1473803210459.jpg

Advertisements

Phony Comey Wants You To Give His Book A Look

James-Comey-CNN

An appropriate picture, as for both sides of the aisle Comey is the face of the DOJ and FBI. Except if you look at the reasons you’d wonder what universe the other side of the aisle was in. Image from CNN

Former FBI Director James Comey either lied to Congress or the American people, so naturally he’d call Trump a liar and say “facts really do matter”.

Ironically, his statement on facts was when discussing a leak he executed, one of his memos to a friend. He said that since it was an unclassified conversation it wasn’t a leak. Facts matter Mr. Comey, as you said. Maybe that one incident you spoke of was unclassified, but at least two of the memos you leaked to your buddy contained classified information. On top of that, the FBI claims that your little “diary” as you called it is really government property. And remember when you tried to punish your agent who leaked details of the unclassified meeting between then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton? So while you’re free to promote your book, others have been jailed for similar crimes, and the FBI itself UNDER YOUR WATCH tried to punish an agent for a similar leak.

Then again, facts also didn’t matter with Comey when he told Congress that Trump said “I hope” the investigation into Flynn would be dropped. Comey decided that this statement meant that Trump was ordering him to drop the investigation, thus committing obstruction of justice, but under examination Comey denied that Trump ordered him to drop the investigation and couldn’t come up with any instances where someone was charged for obstruction for hoping something. Of course Comey forgot about this embarrassing examination and sticks to his obstruction story.

So Comey is saying that because of how he chose to interpret a statement Trump made, an interpretation not based on any words Trump used as mentioned in Comey’s testimony, Trump is guilty of obstruction of justice, because facts matter or something. Ok, fine. If that’s the measure for a crime, then I say Obama is just as guilty of obstruction of justice for when he said Hillary was innocent of any charges before the investigation had even interviewed her!

Oh, by the way, Comey also lied about Lt. Gen. Flynn. Because facts matter. As it turns out, the agents that interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn was lying. Comey overrode them and went after Flynn. Flynn of course had to plea guilty because he didn’t have the money to defend himself. Since we know Comey lied multiple times already, including about Flynn to the point Flynn was in legal jeopardy over it, and since Mueller seems inclined to believe Comey’s account as you’ll see below, it’s no wonder Trump’s legal team believes the Mueller Probe’s desire to interview him is a perjury trap, like what happened to Flynn.

Peas And Carrots

georgewbush

Certain other events also led the media to believe that George was lying when he told them about the rabbits after they’d done a bad thing.

What Comey did here is a typical liberal argument tactic, so it’s no wonder he’s now a media darling. Someone says x. You decide that they really mean y even if they never said it. Then when enough time passes and everyone forgets that x was said, or if someone never knows x was said, you say that particular someone said y. This is what liberals did to the Bush Administration when they claimed the Bush Administration said the invasion of Iraq was connected to 9/11 (a fallacy which some liberals still believe). NO ONE in the Bush Administration said anything like that. But after enough time passed, the mainstream media started attacking the Bush Administration for tricking the American people into supporting the invasion of Iraq in part by saying Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11. When the media were confronted by the fact that they invented that narrative, their reaction was to say it’s what the Bush Administration wanted them to think. MIND TAKING! BOOOOOOWEEEEEOOOOO!

So the media claims that their own stupidity and rabid partisan fervor was in fact a deliberate manipulation by the Bush Administration. And after lying about this, they continue to lie about WMDs being found in Iraq because guess what, THEY WERE according to the New York Times itself (and for you hair splitters who say that these weren’t the active WMDs we were promised, Obama’s intelligence chief believes those went to Syria, so what are you going to do, criticize Obama?)!

And of course by pointing all of this out, the Left will say I’m attacking the First Amendment (because an attack on the press is only an attack on the First Amendment when a liberal is the victim, none of these Lefty journalists attacking Trump complained about Obama’s crusade against Fox News) and don’t want a free press. A free press would be nice, yes, and it’s too bad we don’t have one in this country.

This is about Comey though.

Ball-less little lyin’ pansies like Comey, who was never an FBI agent in his life but was chosen by Obama to lead the organization, don’t have any respect for rule of law, nor do they have the guts to actually confront their opponents (without the security of a court room and government protection anyway). It’s ironic that Comey prosecuted the Gambino crime family, they actually HAD integrity and honor when compared to Comey. Can it be declared a mistrial if the prosecutor is more of a scumbag than the defendants?

obama_stern-face

Comey’s next book will be a romance novel about his… “intimate” knowledge that rumors of Obama’s sexuality are true. Image from evil.news

So you ask why Comey would leak his memos? Comey said he did so because he wanted a Special Counsel to investigate Trump for collusion with Russia or obstruction of justice or pretty much anything. Probably because Hillary lost, since Comey’s family was all over her (and protesting Trump) and Comey himself was in love with Obama. Comey even happily went along when then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch told him to refer to the Clinton investigation as a “matter”, and did not even think of looking into whether that tarmac meeting constituted collusion or obstruction or whatever as evidenced by the lack of followup to it and Comey himself said his only response was to make his July announcement about the investigation.

The pattern around the Comey memo leaks goes like this: the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein recommended that Comey be fired, Trump fires Comey, Comey then leaked his memos to his friend with the hopes of triggering a Special Counsel investigation, then the Deputy Attorney General obliges and appoints Robert Mueller as Special Counsel, with Mueller being tasked with looking into if Trump’s firing of Comey at the recommendation of the Deputy Attorney General was obstruction of justice. So based on this pattern of facts it’s very hard not to conclude (unless you’re Newsweek, who want to dismiss this and the Clinton campaign/DNC paying money to Russia for the Fusion GPS dossier as a conspiracy theory, ie dismissing FACTS, thus indicating the folks at Newsweak aren’t even reliable enough to spell their own name right) that Rosenstein tried to set Trump up for an obstruction of justice charge by suggesting Comey be fired. It’s icing on the cake that Trump refused to hire Robert Mueller again as FBI Director, that Rosenstein knew of this bias but appointed Mueller, and that Mueller did not recuse himself.

What Else Has Comey Done For Us?

Of course leaking isn’t the first issue Comey’s been a hypocrite on. Naturally I can point out that Comey DID NOT take notes on any meetings with Barack Obama or even Loretta Lynch after he stated he would’ve been suspicious of her motives. Gee, I wonder why he only took notes on Trump?

He attacked Former New York Mayor Giuliani, saying he was a terrible leader. But under Comey, the FBI was decimated as a legitimate institution. Comey and his number two man Andrew McCabe became leakers, and a conspiracy to hurt a Presidential candidate/sitting President was initiated. So uh… about that leadership thing? Comey ought to know that the leader sets the tone at the top. But that’s par for the course for the Obama Administration’s appointees, I guess.

There are other players out right now who have no integrity, in relation to the Comey issue. You know how the Left and the media are praising Comey over his book and his integrity and stuff?  How they’re touting his pronouncements about Trump being unfit to be President because Comey believes Trump is unethical? Here’s what they used to say about Comey:

peas-and-carrots-quora

George Stephanopoulos interviews James Comey while several Democrat politicians, DOJ officials, and members of the media look on. Image from quora

Well, Democrats and I agree I guess on something afterall- that Comey sucks. Comey is a glory-seeking piece of human filth that probably decided to make the Trump memos and make his Hillary email statements so that regardless of who won he’d have a book. No wonder Jorge Estebanlos interviewed him, peas in a pod since they have the same ethical standards. And when talking with George, Comey said he hopes Trump is not impeached because that would “let the American people off the hook”. I personally feel that folks like Comey are best seen on hooks, through their mouths, maybe as some vengeful Gambinos lower him to the bottom of the Hudson with a fashionable summer ensemble consisting of a navy blue three piece suit from Savile Row, alizarin crimson silk kravat, and the latest in cement dress shoes.

Didn’t He Have A Book?

Oh right, I was supposed to touch on the book in here somewhere. Well I never read it. Its title is A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership. I wonder what that loyalty is to- he’s thrown Democrats under the bus and is attacking Trump hard, and he can’t mean higher values given that we’ve established Comey is incapable of telling the truth and lies whenever it suits him (and in general is a terrible leader). I’m not sure on what grounds Comey is declaring that he has the moral authority to attack Trump in his book, or that his book has any moral authority whatsoever. There’s an old saying about casting stones if you live in a glass house. Comey lives in a freakin’ brandy snifter. He’s already well past the point of having enough character flaws to make him an A-Team villain.

California Attacks Islam

Islamic-Crescent-wikimedia

The “C” is for “California”, image from wikimedia

What a salacious headline! Bear with me while I establish the background on AB 2943

I know, I know. You read about this bill on Snopes or FactCheck or Politifact or in your favorite mainstream media outlet, and believe these groups. Despite the fact that they didn’t bother quoting the relevant parts of the bill; the only quotes were merely assurances from its writers. Just like the folks at the San Diego Tribune, who I guess think that the writers and proponents of any piece of legislation should be believed regardless of what the words in the legislation actually say. Well didn’t California’s own Nancy Pelosi once say you have to pass the bill to know what’s in it (you’ll notice that ol’ snopey gives Pelosi the benefit of the doubt, and even tries to interpret her words for her, to the point where they answer “did Pelosi say x” with a “mixture of fact and truth”, as if somehow you can say something but NOT say it, and then they try to prove that! A courtesy snopey does not extend to the other side of the aisle.)?

These Lefty groups want this thing to be made into law, or they simply don’t think they have to do any research because a liberal reassured them. Well, read the bill for yourselves. It’s rather obvious our fact checkers and media are lying once again. Pretty much any time a liberal says some rightwing claim has been debunked, no matter how allegedly respectable the propaganda rag they write for is, you can bet your bottom dollar that they’re lying or their idea of “debunking” is simply to say “it’s not true” without presenting any evidence. Which leads to embarrassing retractions, like when the New York Times said it was a rightwing conspiracy theory that the Palestinians paid millions of dollars in pensions to the families of terrorists. NYT had to issue a retraction for that, even though if the author and editors and fact checkers had engaged for even the briefest of intervals in the act of journalism they would’ve realized that their biased opinion didn’t reflect reality and that statement never would’ve been published.

From now on, when referring to “articles” written in liberal “news” outlets such as Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Huffington Post, CNN, BBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, etc I should refer to the reporters as “authors”, given how far removed from reality their “journalism” is. It’s like they took a cue from Obama, but instead of hiring an egotistical hack novelist who is neither experienced nor knowledgeable about national security to be National Security Advisor, the Leftstream media hired a bunch of egotistical novelist hacks as reporters. Meanwhile, the Left forgets Obama’s choice (and Obama’s pre-Presidential record) and constantly criticizes Trump for being inexperienced and picking inexperienced people. Psychologists call this “projection”- “humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.”

A Step Into The Left’s Mind

russdem

Jackasses. Image from wikimedia commons

You see, to the Left, anything they say is the truth. That’s the rationale behind the protesters, whether it’s David Pigman or Sharpy Sharp And The Dull Bunch. Whether they’re protesting Trump’s victory or protesting the idea that people here illegally who had 6 years to register themselves with no penalty should’ve done so by now. Or a protesting mob of scientists who think faked data is grounds for worldwide communism and population control (I wonder what standards the Left will use to determine who lives or dies in their model, probably the same standard of who should be arrestedwhen legitimate, respected liberal thinkers start sounding like Bond villains you’d think that the Left might realize how far out they are, but nope, they simply double down and fight harder… guess that mentality explains all the nameless henchmen the Bond villains have). Doesn’t matter, liberalism today is about imposing your self-made factless reality on the rest of the world. That’s why we are told science is sexist because it deals in absolute truths. That’s why everyone gets their own truth that outweighs reality. In their minds, they might not actually be lying to you deliberately. Maybe the fact checkers and liberal media actually believe that if a liberal tells them something it must be the truth because liberals don’t lie. I mean, most women are liberal and we already know women can do no wrong, according to the feminists that liberals support. Lying would be included in that list of wrong things women can’t do.

 

''Panzer!''-AN-Ep06

The Left lives in a world just as magical, but a bit more trippy. Image from http://mahouka-koukou-no-rettousei.wikia.com

This denial of reality goes into why they are so violent towards anyone who opposes them. They KNOW they are right. They KNOW they are smarter than anyone else. If they truly believed there was another point of view, that would shatter their myth of superiority (so they want to ban anything that challenges how right they are, basically admitting that their worldview CANNOT hold up to scrutiny). Which is why they’re atheists too, by the way, they can’t tolerate the idea that they’re not at the top of the pecking order. But it’s also why they don’t listen- if they’re right, then you MUST be wrong if you disagree. For a group that supports more gender types than episodes of Star Trek that I’ve seen, they are EXTREMELY binary when it comes to worldview. You’re either with them, or against them. And you must be evil when you oppose them, because they know they are right, so if they’re right and YOU claim to be right too, that must mean you’re a liar, and since everything a liberal stands for is good, that must mean you stand for evil because you oppose them. That really is their worldview. Just ask. And there certainly aren’t any facts opposing my claim, in fact every day there is more support to my assertion that this childish reasoning is all they have. Diversity of flesh, but not diversity of thought, to the point that you are judged by the color of your skin rather than the content of your character… unless you have the appropriate skin color but DON’T think appropriately.

Or Maybe I Misjudged The Case Here

The other alternative of course as I mentioned is that the fact checkers read the bill, and LOVED what they saw, but that again goes towards the whole “we have our own truth that we’re imposing on you” thing. In the Left’s mind, religion is a blight on society (just read the comments section for any given YouTube video touching on religion). It’s the sole cause of wars and the Dark Ages and what holds everyone back from being peaceful communists living together. Ok, that’s overgeneralizing, CHRISTIANITY is a blight on society. Just ask Senator Cory Booker (D), who unilaterally did the very unconstitutional thing of giving a Trump nominee a religious test, and attacked his beliefs later… but seems fine with having an Islamic Deputy Chair. You know, Islam, the religion that’s usually MORE oppressive than Christianity. Liberals are cool with every religion* except Christianity, and also aren’t cool with a Jew that’s pro-Israel. Or rich. Or… ok, they hate Jews too but not as openly. They see Christians (and Jews) as ignorant savages and see religion as an oppressive force so naturally any bill that attacks it gets a pass, like say the bill I start this article with.

*for you Shintoists in the audience who might note that I only mention 3 religions above, the Left ignores your existence unless someone in your group runs counter to their ideology, much like how it treats Asian Americans when they talk about the prejudices they face– see the section above on skin color for more details on this pattern

They don’t see the bill or similar items as an attack; they see it as a means of educating the population, a means of suppressing misinformation (afterall, like everything else in the liberal world, religion is just caused by some outside condition, akin to their reasoning for why whites are always privileged and blacks are always oppressed). Which makes me wonder now if people in China and North Korea genuinely believe that “re-education” camps are merely learning institutions, because if liberals pulled that same thing here you can bet anything from dollars to navy beans that Snopes would believe whatever they’re told about the camps as long as the source was a liberal.

To The Bill At Hand

So I’ve established that the bill can be used in an extremely anti-Christian way if you read it rather than listen to its leftwing advocates, as the fact checkers and our allegedly free press did, and I explained why the Left wouldn’t bother reading the bill itself and just rest with the assurances of its authors, but I have yet to explain how the terrifying headline is anything close to accurate. Well, you see all this evidence about how the language in the bill puts Bibles on the chopping block and makes it so it would be illegal for churches to ask for donations or even be funded, all because of what the Bible says about homosexuals, can be used against Islam too. So let’s see what Imams and the Koran say about gays…

Islamic scholars overwhelmingly teach that same-gender sex is a sin.

The Muslim holy book, the Koran, tells the story of Lot and the destruction of Sodom – and sodomy in Arabic is known as “liwat,” based on Lot’s name.

Men having sex with each other should be punished, the Koran says, but it doesn’t say how – and it adds that they should be left alone if they repent.

The death penalty instead comes from the Hadith, or accounts of the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad. The accounts differ on the method of killing, and some accounts give lesser penalties in some circumstances. “

Noble Verses 26:165-166, 27:55, 29:28-29 were sent to me by brother Bassam Zawadi, may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:

“Would ye really approach men in your lusts rather than women? Nay, ye are a people (grossly) ignorant!  (The Noble Quran, 27:55)”

“And (remember) Lut: behold, he said to his people: “Ye do commit lewdness, such as no people in Creation (ever) committed before you. “Do ye indeed approach men, and cut off the highway?- and practise wickedness (even) in your councils?” But his people gave no answer but this: they said: “Bring us the Wrath of God if thou tellest the truth.”  (The Noble Quran, 29:28-29)

Also, Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said:

‘Abd al-Rahman, the son of Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, reported from his father: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said:  “A man should not see the private parts of another man, and a woman should not see the private parts of another woman, and a man should not lie with another man under one covering, and a woman should not lie with another woman under one covering.   (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Menstruation (Kitab Al-Haid), Book 003, Number 0667)” “

Gee, under this bill you wonder how anything Islamic involving the exchange of money wouldn’t be banned. And no, that part about gays repenting is NOT enough to let Islam get a pass if it were treated equally, because if you’d read the sources you’d know that the bill dealt with anything that attempts to say homosexuality is wrong. Repenting is the act of admitting you are wrong. (I’m going to love reading the comments that say my use of Koran quotes means I’m a bigot for explaining this detail about Islam in its own words. As if liberal Marie Harf dictating what a group of Muslims believe contrary to what the group itself said wasn’t bigoted. And as for repenting, California already has a bill that makes it illegal for heterosexuals who were molested by someone of the same sex to obtain psychological treatment for any homosexual feelings that may have come from that trauma, so it’s rather obvious California wouldn’t look kindly upon repenting either)

So Where Are The Outraged Muslims?

hijab-american-getreligion

Intersectionality works because Muslims have a thing called “taqiyya“- they can lie to infidels and pretend to have beliefs which they really don’t so long as it advances Islam. Kinda explains Linda Sarsour, either that or she is functionally illiterate. Image from GetReligion

Well, this is where we get into something called “selective enforcement”. There are way too many laws on the books to enforce against everyone who violates them. Due to the amount of regulations on the books, we’re all guilty of a crime whether we know it or not. We all probably commit one every day whether we know it or not. Your kids aren’t safe either, 12 year olds in the U.S. have been handcuffed for eating french fries. Heck, I bet none of you reported your eBay purchases to the IRS this past tax day. That leaves the government with a disturbing option- all of its opponents are guilty of something, so go after them while ignoring the violations of its friends.

 

The Muslims know that the Left is their bestest good buddy. Muslims won’t bite the hand that feeds them. Not yet. Remember- the Left claims slavery is freedom when it comes to Islam. The Left declared Islamist Linda Sarsour, who believes in an oppressive version of Islam and called for a jihad against Trump, to be a feminist celebrity. The Left almost fetishizes the oppression of women under Islam, claiming that symbols of such oppression are symbols of liberation (contrary to the opinion of people who had live with said oppression, but the Left loves dictating what people should think from its guarded fantasy world). Heck, liberals think so much of Islam that they cheered Palestine’s flag being waved at the Democratic National Convention, whereas no American flags were even present. At first, but the physical ones wheeled in were kind of off to the side in the shadows. Liberal anti-Israeli protesters did bring an Israeli flag too, but they burned it. They burned American flags too.

More importantly and pertinently to the “selective enforcement” argument, consider this: how many Muslim bakers have been forced out of business over discrimination? None. How about Christian ones? Get the picture?

And of course we have the liberals Europe, the ones that the Left tell us we should be more like, letting the Muslims get away with rape gangs that had thousands of victims, blaming the victims of said rapes, because the police and government are too scared of being labelled as racists. In fact, they’ve even said that people reporting on these crimes were racist and gave the rapists lighter sentences because they were not white and their victims were. UK’s government believes that rape is not a serious crime if the victim is white and the rapist is not, that is what their own internal conclusion is. Germany took the approach of siding with the Muslims and saying the rape victims were responsible for what their attackers did. So Muslims know that if the Left literally will let them get away with raping the Left’s own kids (or let a Muslim get away with assault because in the Judge’s mind, a judge who threatened the victim, Islam takes precedence over the First Amendment… and for you women out there, even in America those liberal activist judges I alluded to think a Muslim should be allowed to rape you), then they’ll certainly give the Islamic faith a pass when it comes to this bill.

peace-symbol

So I guess Democrats and Islam have something else in common- peace is so old school for both of them.

You’ll notice I didn’t distinguish between “radical” Islam and ‘regular’ Islam. That’s because I’m trying NOT to insult the Muslims. I’m not Muslim, so I have no right to make that distinction. The whole sectarian struggle in the Middle East is about what version of Islam is extremist and which is not. I can say I like certain brands, but I’m not going to decide which one is radical because quite frankly if you ever read the Koran ALL THE WAY THROUGH and the hadiths too you’d notice that ISIS is acting mostly as an adherent to the rules (later, violent sayings and stories overrule older and peaceful ones, so Islamic scholars of Islam currently and historically said- this is called “abrogation”), whereas if you stopped reading while Mohammed was still in Mecca you’d think that the peaceful Westernized vision was the true way. Me saying “radical” here is no different than if a Muslim were to say Protestants had it right and Catholics were the radicals, from a Christian point of view.  I don’t want to encourage certain groups by saying “radical” Islam is bad, because to each group there’s another group that IS radical Islam (even non-Muslims disagree on what “radical” is, with the SPLC saying someone who is against “radical” Islam is in fact a “radical” Islamic extremist), so instead I’ll encourage them all to clean house and get their defecation consolidated by lumping the bad and good together as simply Muslims, much like the Left always does with Christians.

The point is: if this bill is passed, there will be legal grounds to attack your religion, Mr.-or-Mrs.-Muslim-what-reads-this. Once the Right is gone, if you think the Left’s not going to put up a fight against you, you’re very naïve. Just like any liberal who doesn’t think that the Alliance To End Republicans (or Hulkamania) will fall to pieces once that common enemy is obliterated. I mean come on, do you seriously suspect that your whole intersectionality idea will hold you together with all those ideologies competing against each other? The only glue holding you together is your common hatred for certain groups, so you will desperately try to find one boogeyman after another to hate against in order to maintain your power. That’s probably also why the only emotions we see from you are hate-based: if you didn’t spend every minute of every day filling your mind with hate for your common enemy, differences between you and your allies might just enter into your mind.

I’ll cover what happens with that in another piece, but Harvey Weinstein was just a preview, as was the mention of Asians earlier. You can also look at how your side treats blacks from Africa to see the state of your so-called tolerance. You see, apparently there was an “African Holocaust” in the U.S., and according to the Left and the few african americans who claim to suffer from said holocaust (obviously they feel black Americans are superior to Jews or anyone else who experienced a real genocide), folks from Africa are wealthy (compared to the holocaust-stricken  African Americans) and never had any problems. Ever. So I guess these conflicting worldviews that will come to blows once there isn’t a common enemy are what happens when we each have our own truths, like African Americans who think they’re worse off than folks in Darfur (and liberal women who think Islam is a model for achieving a feminist utopia).

If You Still Believe The Bill’s Authors And Media, Even Over The Language Of The Bill Itself

And for those on the Left, who would be glad the above lies were told and see no problem with them nor the results of the laws that came to pass because of these lies, I present the below so that you may have empathy for my position:

You don’t believe Trump, you claim he’s a liar, well I just outlined how YOU TOO are a liar, so why would I EVER believe the assurances of your lawmakers on this matter, ESPECIALLY when the freakin’ BILL ITSELF says the opposite of what its writers and your “fact checkers” are telling us! “Fact Checker” is now an Orwellian euphemism, they belong to the Left’s “Ministry of Truth”. This bill does not target Christians/Muslims, chocolate rations are up 20%, and we’ve always been at war with Eurasia (a terrifying example of life imitating art thanks to the DNC’s sudden anti-Russian-warmongering furor, and remember: it’s been nearly 2 years and we STILL don’t know if the Russians hacked the DNC! And no, 17 intel agencies DID NOT say that Russia did it no matter how much liberals want to memory hole the truth. Read the news sometime! And ask the DNC why it destroyed evidence if it’s so eager to show Russia is behind its hacking, and ask why the DNC ironically set itself up for being accused of the crime of destroying evidence by claiming that hacking its servers was a criminal act by Trump and Russia).

 

dnc-hq-dailybeast

CRIMETHINK
    Minitrue mark article doubleplusungood crimethink.                         Miniluv remake goodthink fullwise.                    Image from DailyBeast, doubleplusgood bb duckspeak friend

BREXIT Day: An open letter to the British People

Congratulations!! You are finally on your way to being free from the dictatorial tyranny of the EU. Many people have fought hard for this day and it was hard fought indeed. In a clear show of spite, many have tried to stop this even after a democratically held election showed the desire to leave. And many people will try to sabotage this process as time goes on. Even now the EU council is trying to extend the process to 3 years so they have time to continue to lob political attacks at 10 Downing Street. But I know you will pull through this even with those inside your own country trying to stop you. This day is an affirmation, a show of gratitude for every soldier who fought so that Britan would be free 70 years ago. Many died or risked their lives then to make sure that Britan has the right to determine their own rights.

Somewhere along the line, the promise came that the European Union would ensure economic prosperity, and Britan joined that bloc not knowing what they were getting into. And gradually as time went on and more power was taken away from Britan quietly, the youth of the country began to forget about those sacrifices and take them granted. They were fed the idea that they could not live without that EU. Many became dependent on the monster that took and took from Britan without realizing what kind of Demon they were dealing with.

Finally, somewhere at some point, somebody cried out into the dark at the injustice and hypocrisy and the movement for your freedom began. With your own government working against you the right to hold a referendum was secured. And then despite being told you wouldn’t win you campaigned and voted. And on that glorious summer day in June of 2016 history was made when Great Britan Voted to throw off the oppressive yoke of the European Union. And even though the fight has not stopped since then, your momentum and overwhelming love for your own country have all but guaranteed victory.

You have made your voices heard and it is brilliant. In the face of lies and intimidation, you have won and you keep winning. Truly my grandfather who was stationed in Britan with the US Army during the great war would be smiling if he were alive today to see this. Many angry people are claiming that you are taking yourselves out of Europe, but this is untrue. Britan will always be part of Europe as it always has been, you are now just taking a step forward to secure your own future in a world that will soon remember the EU as a brief mistake of history. In your darkest moments, remember this song that my grandfather admired for its show of the strength and optimism of the strong British people:

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

When Britain first, at heaven’s command,
Arose from out the azure main,
This was the charter of the land,
And Guardian Angels sang this strain:

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

The nations not so blest as thee
Must, in their turn, to tyrants fall,
While thou shalt flourish great and free:
The dread and envy of them all.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

Still more majestic shalt thou rise,
More dreadful from each foreign stroke,
As the loud blast that tears the skies
Serves but to root thy native oak.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

Thee haughty tyrants ne’er shall tame;
All their attempts to bend thee down
Will but arouse thy generous flame,
But work their woe and thy renown.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

To thee belongs the rural reign;
Thy cities shall with commerce shine;
All thine shall be the subject main,
And every shore it circles, thine.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

The Muses, still with freedom found,
Shall to thy happy coasts repair.
Blest isle! with matchless beauty crowned,
And manly hearts to guard the fair.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves!
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.

The (Not) Russian (Not) Hackers Story

94307-004-b97ff416

The Facade of the United States Supreme Court. Image from britannica.com

Editors Note: This post was originally Scheduled for 3/15/17, however, I have moved it forward because of an extremely dangerous situation that is currently emerging. In January of 2017, 3 Individuals filed a Writ of Mandamus to ask that the entire 2016 election be nullified because of alleged Russian Hacking. It was assigned docket number 16-907. Instead of throwing out this trivial and ludicrous claim, the court decided on February 21st, 2017 to distribute this petition among the justices and schedule a hearing for March 17th, 2017. You can read more of the details and why this is so alarming by clicking on this link here. This is a direct threat to our democracy. The fact that the justices even decided to hear arguments on this writ is extremely distressing since it means they are taking it seriously despite the extreme lack of real evidence which I will be explaining in this article. I am aware to some readers my articles are too long winded and wordy for them to digest but since expressing the actual facts of this case is extremely important, I will quickly summarize the points of this article so you can read the critical pieces of evidence that prove these claims are false:

  • Both Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange and Former British Ambassador turned Wikileaks Operative Craig Murray have repeatedly stated the DNC and Podesta Email leaks did not come from the Russian Government. Craig Murray states that they were DNC insiders and that he actually met one of them while picking up documents to be leaked in a Washington DC Park.

 

 

  • The report was authored in the Final Days of the Obama Administration. It has been proven that many times during his administration Information was altered by his agencies to fit the White House narrative. Two examples are the CENTCOM Scandal and Obama’s Unemployment Numbers. He and his party made no attempt to hide their visible fury over the Election of Donald Trump which accompanied by the facts listed above and recent revelations that he has remained in DC to coordinate efforts to get President Trump impeached makes it very hard to believe any information that was put forward under his Administration or by his Appointees.

The combination of these facts means the claim put forward by the plaintiffs has no legal merit and should have been immediately thrown out. This is why the hearing on March 17th is extremely alarming and should greatly concern the reader. Please contact your state’s Senator and House Representative to share your concern about this, or write to the Supreme Court in The District of Columbia. And please read my article for more information on why these claims of Russian Hacking are not just false but dangerous, and what motivation there was to spread this narrative. 

 

Editor’s Note 7/1/17: Last week another huge hole was punched into the fake Russian Hacking Narrative. First, on Monday, June 24th 3 CNN reporters were forced to resign after CNN had to retract a piece they wrote falsely connecting Hedge Fund Manager and Trump Ally Anthony Scaramucci to a Russian Investment Fund under investigation by the Senate. Then on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday admitting that the Russian Hacking Story has no validity and that they push it for ratings among other reasons. The Friday release also confirms that CNN has a hard left bias, and also features the subject of the sting admitting that CNN thinks American voters are “Stupid as Shit”. This is a huge development and will hopefully lead to the final death of this fake news tirade and punishment for those pushing it.

 

Last year’s election cycle was a real mess and has uncovered a lot of dishonest sore losers. I mean there have been protests, riots, calls to abolish the electoral college cause they don’t like it (of course there was nothing wrong with it when Obama was elected twice), attempts to legitimize violence against anybody even slightly Right of Left, boy if you name it we have seen it since November 9th, 2016. But the most dangerous tantrum, however, has been an irresponsible campaign of falsehood that has only demonstrated that US Intelligence and the Mainstream Media are acting as the obedient exemplars of this nation’s political left. It only serves as another in a long line of dishonest attempts not only to try and undermine the legitimacy of the presidency but to cover up the misdeeds of the Left. I am of course speaking of the factually inaccurate claims that the damaging email leaks which revealed the severely dishonest behavior of the Democratic Party and which ultimately cost Hillary the election, came from Russian Government Hackers.

This claim is on its face ridiculous. There is nothing to corroborate the claims, there is, in fact, plenty of evidence to the contrary. But of course, a little thing like the truth has never gotten in the way of the Media and the Left. They firmly believe that if they scream their false claims louder then they will somehow become true. Sadly in the minds of their dependent followers and the eager war hawks, this really happens.

The first leaks that started with the DNC emails happened on July 22nd, 2016, 3 days BEFORE the Democratic National Convention. It is important to remember that as it will come up later in this article. In any case, the documents leaked revealed among other things that the DNC and the Media had cooperated with the Clinton Campaign to not only actively rig the convention against Bernie but also smear the reputation of the Senator and his supporters. So there is inconsistency #1, the group that would have gained the most by leaking the Clinton Emails would be Senator Sanders Supporters working inside the DNC who would have been pissed to find out what had been going on. This has actually been pretty much corroborated by Wikileaks operative and former British Ambassador Craig Murray which by the way is inconsistency #2 in the Left’s narrative.

craig-murray-uk-ambassador

Former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray. Image from theneedleblog.wordpress.com

 

Of course, after this happened there was a 2 or 3-week tirade by Hillary and the left about how it was Russian Hackers. This was not only to deflect responsibility for her malicious rigging of her party’s primaries but to give her a bogeyman style figure to harp on about in an attempt to gain support by stirring up fear. Remember, just like with all parties of Fascism, the Democratic Party relies on both fear and propaganda. Still, though, after 2 or 3 weeks it died down and she shifted her shrill lying tongue to the sexual assault allegations against Trump that would later be proven entirely false as well. And of course no real investigation was done since the administration not only knew at the time that it was a false allegation, they felt no need to validate its authenticity with fabricated evidence, since they were convinced Hillary would win with the help of her Media Cronies making an effort to manipulate what information the public saw. (just a hint, we were not supposed to see ANYTHING negative about Hillary if they could help it.)

Pretty much the same thing happened with the Podesta leaks when they were incrementally leaked starting on October 7th, 2016. These, of course, being closer to the 8th, they focused their fury not on the imaginary Russian hackers but rather on Donald Trump. It is interesting to note these emails revealed more dishonest and potentially illegal behavior not just by Hillary but by President Obama himself. The leaks revealed things that ranged from outrageous to simply amusing. Among other things, it was revealed that Obama was well aware of Clintons Homebrew Email server and helped in the undertaking of a coverup, discussion about Obama committing voter fraud in 2008, the Clinton Campaign received debate questions in advance from former CNN correspondent Donna Brazile, illegal efforts by the Clinton Campaign to actively coordinate with a SuperPAC, and how the Clinton Campaign intentionally worked behind the scenes to boost “pied piper” candidates like Trump for the GOP Primaries. There were also the equally horrifying personal views and remarks of campaign workers that were revealed such as how John Podesta wished the San Bernadino Shooter had been white, how Clinton Staffers made disparaging remarks about Catholics, and many other embarrassing remarks. Also, let’s not forget that his email account was secured with “password” as the Password which made it so easy to hack a 14-year-old could have done it.

Anyway there was again no effort put into finding the so-called Russian source of the leaks because the administration not only knew it was a false claim, they were also still 100% convinced Hillary was going to win despite the FBI investigation into her improper use of a private email server during her tenure at the state department, and I submit this as Inconsistency #3 in the Left’s narrative. But we all know just how wrong they were. It is after this, after the calls to overturn the electoral college, after the protests. Only after the disastrously failed recount attempt that Jill Stein was put up to starting at the behest of the Clinton Campaign who didn’t want to look like the hypocrites they were. Only after all of this did these fake claims come up again with the ironic addition of claims that Julian Assange is a Russian Spy, and only then did Obama instruct the intelligence community to “investigate.”

its-funny-how-julian-assange-was-a-hero-to-the-5189209

This Funny Meme pretty much sums up the Left’s 180-degree turn on Julian Assange, another example of transparent left wing hypocrisy. Image from onsizzle.com

By investigating I mean that they were to put together a flimsy set of data that the Joker in Cheif could throw around to impress the impressionable. Now before you accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist I have to point out this isn’t the first time Barak Obama instructed his agencies to manipulate information for him. Besides Obama’s totally false claims that he was leaving with only 5% unemployment which Gallup quickly debunked, there was a huge scandal revolving around CENTCOM rejecting information that didn’t reflect the administration’s narrative on how the battle against ISIS was going well. It is unsurprising to me then that the “Intelligence” Report that was supposed to be “Evidence” Russia was responsible for taking those emails only mentioned Russia 3 times, had multiple disclaimers, and didn’t make any mention of Wikileaks or Podesta. Even former House Intelligence Chairman Pete Hoekstra expressed extreme skepticism not only of the validity of the report but also of the motivations behind it.

220px-pete_hoekstra_official_portrait_111th_congress

Pete Hoekstra Image from wikimedia.org

The only people who are satisfied by this report are Democrats bitter over their crushing election loss and Cold War Holdover War Hawks like John Mc.Cain. Even private bloggers have debunked the report entirely. The best one I have read is this one by Zero Hedge in which they prove that none of the over 800 of the ISPs which were presented as evidence of the “Russian Hacking” are related in any way to the Russian Government. No wonder the so-called intelligence agencies which authored this wrote disclaimers and were not willing to stand by their assessment. It will also interest you to know only 3 agencies, not all 17 as is customary, participated in crafting this document which lacked dissenting assessment. This, however, did not stop Obama from writing an executive order evicting 35 Russian Diplomats from the country under accusations of spying that are backed by practically no evidence, which I am pretty sure by the way is a violation of the Geneva Convention.

obama_stern-face

Barack Obama Image from evil.news

Now that I have covered all of the facts of the matter its time for me to connect the dots. I asked you to remember a few key points in this summary because they are important inconsistencies. Even if you don’t buy those when I am done my outline here then you should still employ Occam’s Razor. After all the simpler narrative is always proven to be true over the far-flung ones. The Russian hacker narrative is as far flung as you can get.

The best place to start is with the people who documented the leaks, Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange, as well as Wikileaks Operative Craig Murray both swear that the documents were not given to them by anybody involved with the Russian Government. Say what you will about Mr. Assange, but over the last 10 years he has been nothing but honest in his crusade against government corruption and he makes thorough efforts to vett the documents he receives so he can guarantee their authenticity. In addition, as I said earlier, Craig Murray has said he personally met with one of the leakers, actually picked up documents from him in a DC Park that would later become part of the Election related Leaks. He also said these leakers are inside men that were angry over the fact that Senator Sanders was being screwed, and one would assume also because the Clintons were trying to manipulate the outcome of the entire US Election. So far it looks like the ONLY party trying to manipulate things from behind the scenes was the Clinton machine.

enhanced-buzz-15532-1374157946-6

Senator Bernie Sanders (VT) image from Buttfeed

Another thing to pay attention to is the timing of things. The major contesting claim of the Left is that the Russians wanted Trump in office, but if that is so why would they leak the DNC documents BEFORE the Convention and risk them coming out early enough to cause a wave of outrage against Clinton. That would practically be handing the nomination to Bernie Sanders who was already polling above Trump as Trump was Polling above Clinton in terms of favorability, it is conceivable the DNC would have had to hand it to Sander’s if there had been enough serious protest. Considering the earlier claim then by Craig Murray this reinforces the likelihood that the documents were leaked by angry Bernie Sanders Supporters. They have more to gain from the documents being leaked and would have had easier access to them.

Again with timing, I turn to the actions of the Administration themselves. I can say with 100% certainty that they knew there was no Russian Hacking and that this was a fabrication. If they had suspected there was any possibility of this there would have been an immediate and thorough investigation and Obama would have immediately taken punitive action against Russia. There was none taken though, there was no intelligence assessment made. It is quite clear the claims were made simply as an attempt to distract people from the extensive list of corrupt actions taken by the DNC and Hillary’s campaign which these Email Leaks revealed. And the only reason the claims were resurrected was to serve as a way to undermine the legitimacy of the incoming president and cover up possible crimes by the outgoing administration which made very little effort to hide their disdain and bitterness over the defeat of their preferred candidate.

Okay guys, so I have totally dismantled their “Intelligence” with proof that the list of IP addresses in their report is not connected with Russia, and also the fact that they broke procedure by excluding the assessment of 14 US Agencies who should have been consulted. I have destroyed their fabricated motive they claimed Russia acted on by proving the timeline doesn’t match up. I also showed you the Administration knew there wasn’t a security threat. I have given you evidence that points to a different set of perpetrators with a more solid motive that fits the timeline. And I have further established a motivation to tell the lie and commit to it.

Occam’s Razor Time Guys!! The simplest explanation backed by solid evidence is always the correct answer, so tell me which of these two scenarios sounds more probable to you. The first is that Russian Government Hackers spent untold amounts of money so they could Hack and Leak documents from the DNC and Podesta in order to put Trump in office before they could even be sure he was the nominee, thus influencing and undermining our election. The second is that a DNC Staffer who supported Senator Sanders got wind of the plan by Hillary and her backers to influence both parties primaries and angry at learning about this he/she and a few other supporters of Senator Sanders came together and acquired the documents which they would readily have had access to, then having acquired them they leaked them to Wikileaks hoping to damage Hillary for sabotaging their preferred candidate. I dunno guys, which one of these scenarios seems more likely and less batshit crazy to you?

035be426a7fe84ed42dc9a3ed177ed04

Hillary Clinton and Bat Boy Side by Side. Image from pinimg.com

My Thoughts on the recent Scandal surrounding Milo Yinnopoulos

wp-1481405724063.jpg

Recently there has been a lot of controversy surrounding Milo Yinnopoulos. On February 18th it was announced that Milo would be a Keynote speaker at the Conservative Political Action Conference. This decision was made with some protest from certain members, but he was invited because of the UC Berkley riots as well as his work before that exposing Liberal Thuggery on college campuses. On February 19th however, a Twitter group called The Reagan Battalion posted a video that apparently shows Milo attempting to justify pedophilia. Despite Milo’s statement that the videos were heavily edited and that he, in fact, did not condone pedophilia; on February 20th CPAC disinvited Milo. The very same day Publisher Simon & Schuster canceled the publishing of Milo’s Autobiography entitled “Dangerous”, Citing the leaked video from The Reagan Batallion. The Next day on the 21st amid calls for Breitbart to terminate his employment, Milo held a press conference where he announced that he was resigning from his position at the media outlet.

Pedophilia is a reprehensible act. It is, in fact, one of the few criminal acts I feel should come with a mandatory death sentence for the adult criminal. There is no excuse for it whatsoever. I understand Milo comes from Britain where the age of consent is 16, that is all fine and well. Still, though, the age of consent in my home state of Maryland is 16 too but I could never engage in sexual relations with or date a 16 or 17-year-old much less anyone younger. I have a hard enough time as is trying to show interest in anybody under the age of 20 who pursues me even if they are extremely nice. “Why”, you ask? There is a clear difference in maturity as well as life experiences and besides the huge effort they would have to make to convince me of their maturity, the fact remains that at the end of the day we have very little in common for the most part and I feel much more fulfilled in a relationship where I can reminisce about the good ole’ times with my partner rather than one where I tell my doe-eyed partner stories about the good ole’ times. Relationships where there is an immense age gap, are rarely healthy, it’s a simple as that.

I personally have not seen this video nor do I intend to. Considering the reaction of Milo’s peers I have heard all I need to hear. Even heavily edited his remarks were reprehensible. However, considering the mitigating factors, I cannot condemn Milo. I also cannot defend him. He made his own bed and he now has to sleep in it, that is the sum of it all.

I can, however, condemn and criticize his detractors. Starting with the actions of The Reagan Battalion which claims to promote traditional conservatism. Their Guerrilla tactics stink of the same kind of sabotage that Social Justice Warriors employ against their opponents minus the veiled Homophobia. No, The Reagan Battallion indeed displayed outright Homophobia indicative of the Bible Thumping Fundamentalists that are nearly killing the Republican Party and the conservative movement. This cannot even be called righteous outrage on their part, if indeed it was they would have released this months ago however they waited until Milo’s  crowning moment to release it causing the most damage because he was gay. A newsflash for these Soros-funded bigots, you did just as much damage if not more to the conservative movement you claim to fight for. But that’s exactly what your Nazi master Soros intended right? These morons deserve a good portion of disdain as well as Milo since they enabled the downfall of a prominent conservative figure during a critical moment for our movement, giving the left-wing media something to gloat over.

There are also the Hypocritical Celebrity and Media detractors of Milo. While the Press celebrates with their smug and gleeful victory lap they prove once more that they are to be despised as the peddlers of fake news that they are. How are they doing that in this instance you ask? I ask you, isn’t inconsistency and the withholding of facts fake news just as much as a totally fabricated story? As Bill Maher and George Takei gloat in unison with the Media let us not forget how there has been total silence about George and Bill’s past promotion of Pedophilia.

It is a huge mess indeed, and there are guilty parties on all sides. Who are the real victims though? If you thought for a second I would say, “Milo”, then you don’t know me too well. The victims first and foremost are young gay men and victims of Pedophilia. Now that second one is easy to explain, any victim of pedophilia who is aware of being a victim will surely feel pain over such things. Hearing someone justify your victimization causes the worst emotional pain whether you were a victim of rape by someone much older than you or a victim of police/judicial corruption, hearing someone try to justify or trivialize something that has caused you a kind of pain you can’t put into words is like a punch in the gut.

This hurts gay men as well as the conservative movement too. Milo represented a new way, a new ideal. He was proof that contrary to the fascist indoctrination of the regressive liberal LGBT community, not all gay men (or women either actually) had to believe the same things politically or all act the same way. As the LGBT community attempted to shame guys who preferred fit guys and masc guys over fem guys and fat guys Milo attacked that supremacy they tried to exercise with his flamboyance and shocking statements. I don’t agree with everything he says (for instance I am an advocate for trans people), but when I first learned of him I was at a time in my life where I felt like I was a one of a kind aberration and there was nobody remotely like me out there in the world.

Yes, even though he also combatted toxic feminism and politically correct fascism on university campuses his most significant contribution was being that beacon of individuality. He represented the hope for young gays who didn’t agree with the hypocritical ideas they were taught gays were supposed to believe in. The very act of him, a gay man, standing on the stage and espousing ideals contrary to those of the LGBT Community sent a message that there were others out there just like us who were different and that there was some hope.

I know this first hand because despite kind of knowing I was gay since the age of 13 I was not even able to accept that I was attracted to men till I was 21 and I was not able to accept I was gay till shortly before I was 23. I spent my teenage years afraid to be who I really was not because I had a Catholic Family (Who with the exception of my grandmother readily accepted me when I did come out), or because people were less accepting of gays where I was from when I was a teenager; I could not accept who I was because I saw how selfish, ridiculous and irrational gay people acted back then and I was afraid. I didn’t know some of the decent gay people I know now and I didn’t know any gay conservatives, so I was afraid that if I accepted being gay that I would become just like the image of gay people that I saw back then and the thought of being that way frightened me and made me feel sick. I have come to accept who I am later in life than most and so I will always regret that lost time of my teenage years, but what hurts the most is that I now realize if there had been someone as prominent and well-known as Milo to show me I didn’t have to fit a cookie-cutter mold that I may have been able to accept myself a lot sooner and not miss out on all of the passionate romances and fulfilling relationships I could have only had as a teen. That’s who Milo may have hurt in the long run, conservative gay youth.

A few groups too will be affected but less drastically. In the short-term, college republicans will lack an energetic rallying point to encourage them to push back against liberal fascism in academia. The conservative movement will also lose another beacon of the diverse makeup of our ideology (one that has conservatives of every color, conservatives of many religions, LGBT conservatives, even  Conservative Environmentalists). Milo’s words, as well as the despicable actions of The Reagan Battalion, have set our movement back. Despite this, however, the movement as a whole is still going strong. But unless someone steps into Milo’s Gay Conservative shoes and shows the world there are gays who can be individuals, it’s young men a lot like I was who will suffer the most because of this.

Finally, before I wrap this up I have a personal message for Milo in case he ever reads this for some reason:

Milo, I am very disappointed in you. I can never say I looked up to you but I did admire what you had accomplished. Your downfall does not please me at all and what The Reagan Battallion did by sitting on this information till you were at the peak of your popularity and releasing it was wrong, but you did bring this upon yourself. A few words may have toppled all of the good you have already done and could have done. There is no coming back from this though. As much as it pains me to say this the fact remains that if you want to do the least amount of damage to the causes you care about then it would be best to let yourself fade into anonymity. I sincerely hope a charismatic conservative speaker who is also gay can come in to fill the gap you are leaving (I myself have considered trying to go for it), but even if one doesn’t you will do more damage now if you try to remain in the spotlight than you could do by just fading away. I am so sorry to see this happen Milo but what’s done is done and it cannot be changed.

The “Proof Hillary committed a Federal Crime” starter kit (Special post.)

So really a quick story, I was essentially accused of lying by a misinformed friend of mine today when I said Hillary committed a crime. This was in response to the email scandal. He said she was merely accused of a crime. I tried to explain to him Comey admitted she committed a crime as described by the Espionage Act of 1917 so she was indeed guilty of a crime many people before her have been jailed for, but she was let off the hook for being a Clinton. He then deleted the comments and accused me of falsehood. (he didn’t use my name but it was clear he was referring to me.)

I’m not one to let a sleeping dog just lay there especially if the sleeping dog is the truth. So I rebutted him with these easily obtained sources. And now I’m going to share them with you to save you the 5 minutes it took me to find all of these.

First is FBI Director Comey’s Statment when he recommended not prosecuting Hillary.

Next is the 1917 Espionage Act. Be sure to draw their attention to Title 1, Section 1, Article E.

And finally to put the nail in the coffin link them to this article which has a list of 10 times people were punished for the less incompetent handling of classified documents than Hillary.
If they can deny the truth after that then I can’t really advise you any further on how to handle that. The most you can do is spread the truth with evidence to back it up and let people come around on their own. Ta ta now. 🙂