What really matters is not what actually matters but who decides what matters

This is a twitter stream on Big Brother and Protecting Elections which really is not just funny but also relevant and serious.

And speaking of Facebook, let me also mention this: Mark Zuckerberg’s Fake News Problem Isn’t Going Away. From which:

In early September, Facebook disclosed that it sold $100,000 in political ads during the 2016 election to buyers who it later learned were connected to the Russian government. Richard Burr of North Carolina and Mark Warner of Virginia, the most senior Republican and Democratic members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, have said they’re considering holding a hearing, in which case Zuckerberg could be asked to testify.

Meanwhile, special counsel Robert Mueller has made Facebook a focus of his investigation into collusion between the Russian government and Donald Trump’s campaign. A company official says it’s “in regular contact with members and staff on the Hill” and has “had numerous meetings over the course of many months” with Warner. On Sept. 21, Zuckerberg said the company would turn over the ads to Congress and would do more to limit interference in elections in the future. Facebook acknowledges that it has already turned over records to Mueller, which suggests, first, that the special counsel had a search warrant and, second, that Mueller believes something criminal happened on Zuckerberg’s platform. . . .

On Sept. 14, ProPublica reported that it had managed to purchase ads targeted at users who’d listed interests such as “Jew hater” and “How to burn Jews.”

Well they’ve stopped that now, but only after it was pointed out to them. Every new technology not only changes the way people find things out but also what things they find out. I am therefore a free speech absolutist which is why we should make it illegal for Facebook or Twitter and other platforms of the same kind to prevent people from saying things there that are perfectly legal to say anywhere else.

The more you look at things the more miraculous Trump’s win is

A round-up of the latest non-news on the Democrats, media and crony capitalists in the US.

Behind his [ie Obama’s] political espionage of Trump.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign memoir rests on an astonishingly audacious lie: that the very FBI director who made her campaign possible by improperly sparing her from an indictment doomed it. A normal pol who had mishandled classified information as egregiously as Hillary would have felt eternal gratitude to Comey. Only an entitled ingrate like Hillary would have the gall to cast her savior as the chief thorn in her side.

Nor does Hillary acknowledge another in-kind contribution to her campaign from Comey: his willingness to serve as a cog in Obama’s campaign of political espionage against Trump. Obama’s team of Hillary partisans, which included among others John Brennan, Susan Rice, and Loretta Lynch, wanted Comey to snoop on Trumpworld and he duly did.

It was reported this week that the FBI had until as recently as earlier this year been intercepting the communications of Paul Manafort, one of Trump’s campaign chairmen. This means that Comey, contrary to his lawyerly denial of Trump’s wiretapping claim, had the means to eavesdrop on any communications between Manafort and Trump.

Wiretaps may prove Trump right — and that’s absolutely terrifying

The more we learn about the last eight years and eight months, the more reason there is to believe that something is rotten in Washington.

I don’t just mean the ordinary corruption of the swamp variety. I mean something fundamental, something that suggests major elements in our government believe they, and not the people, are sovereign.

Which brings us back to the ultimate test: Did Obama or somebody working for him put Trump under surveillance during or after the election for the purpose of a political coup?

It’s a frightening question, all the more so because I suspect the answer will be yes — if we can ever get to the truth.

Samantha Power sought to unmask Americans on almost daily basis, sources say

Samantha Power, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, was ‘unmasking’ at such a rapid pace in the final months of the Obama administration that she averaged more than one request for every working day in 2016 – and even sought information in the days leading up to President Trump’s inauguration, multiple sources close to the matter told Fox News.

As Evidence of Election Fraud Emerges, the Media Wants to Keep You in the Dark.

If you have no idea what happened at the second meeting of President Donald Trump’s Advisory Commission on Election Integrity in New Hampshire on Sept. 12, I’m not surprised.

Though a horde of reporters attended the meeting, almost all of the media stories that emerged from it simply repeated the progressive left’s mantra that the commission is a “sham.”

Almost no one covered the substantive and very concerning testimony of 10 expert witnesses on the problems that exist in our voter registration and election system.

The witnesses included academics, election lawyers, state election officials, data analysts, software experts, and computer scientists.

The existing and potential problems they exposed would give any American with any common sense and any concern for our democratic process cause for alarm.

And just think how much else there almost certainly is but virtually no one will report a thing. When you realise a madman is simultaneously developing nuclear weapons along with ICBMs that could incinerate Los Angeles or Sydney and the left/media alliance is still talking about Russia hacking the election you know you are looking insanity straight in the eye.

Is there a bigger pack of fools anywhere on the planet?

And here I am referring to virtually the whole of the entertainment industry.

Television’s glittering Emmys placed politics front and center on Sunday, lavishing “The Handmaid’s Tale” with awards for its bleak portrait of an authoritarian America.

The glitzy ceremony in downtown Los Angeles — the first under the administration of President Donald Trump — was widely expected to have a strongly political flavor, and host Stephen Colbert set the tone in his opening monologue.

“However you feel about the president, and you do feel about the president, you can’t deny that every show was influenced by Donald Trump in some way,” he said.

“All the late night shows, obviously, ‘House of Cards,’ the new season of ‘American Horror Story.'”

Hulu’s “The Handmaid’s Tale” and HBO miniseries “Big Little Lies” were the big winners, with five statuettes each.

“Big Little Lies” cast members Nicole Kidman, Laura Dern and Alexander Skarsgard all took home Emmys, along with director Jean-Marc Vallee. It also won outstanding limited series.

“The Handmaid’s Tale,” Hulu’s acclaimed series based on the 1985 novel by Canadian author Margaret Atwood, won awards for writing and directing as well as the biggest prize of the night — outstanding drama series.

Ann Dowd, picking up her first Emmy at age 61 for her portrayal of brutal instructor Aunt Lydia, spoke of how her award was “a dream” while outstanding lead actress Elisabeth Moss turned the air blue with an expletive-strewn acceptance speech.

“That was the clean version,” Moss joked backstage after the show, describing the opportunity

“I was just trying to remember everybody, and you do have a weird out of body experience.”

Atwood, 77, said “One takeaway would be ‘never believe it can never happen here’ which was one of the premises that I used for the book. And, as I’ve often said, nothing went into the book that people hadn’t done.”

As it happens, I read The Handmaid’s Tale when it came out and was astonished by how moronic it was. I used to read everything she wrote since we are almost of the same generation, both from Toronto and we used to catch up occasionally when we were living in Vancouver back in my hippy day in the 70s. If you liked the book and then the show, you are now officially classified as dull witted, stupid, and fantastically ignorant of everything that matters. It was, in fact, the last thing of hers I ever read so have been free of her idiocies for more than two decades. How do people take such things seriously?

Preventing dissent at its source.

You should read this article that will help explain the problem we face: Google is coming after critics in academia and journalism. It’s time to stop them. These are comments on this article which help explain the points made.

Google isn’t just wanting map and search monopolies. They’re trying to monopolize information itself. The dissemination of information. How people look things up, what results they get, why they look things up, and the actions they take after they do (e.g. buying a product). They collect massive amount of information on all of us whether we want them to or not. There’s no option for opting in or out. No checkboxes to authorize. No agreements to sign on what they can do with that information. If it was government doing this, we’d rebel against a tyrannical collection of information and psychological manipulation. Which leads to a second point: civil libertarians need to begin speaking out as forcefully against monopolists as they do against government. Sure, Rand Paul can filibuster about drones and NSA data collection, but you don’t hear a peep from him about private companies. Cato and other conservative and libertarian think tanks give corporations free reign because they’re not government entities. They’re wrong. We all need to see that freedom isn’t just about the ability to live without government coercion. It’s about the ability to live without any coercion, including from private entities. Increasingly, we’re being spied on, manipulated and have our very freedoms limited because private entities are intruding in on our lives, including our own employers. There has to be a point at which this is unacceptable, not as consumers or liberals or conservative, but as humans with inalienable rights that should not be taken by government or corporations.

Orwell wrote in 1984 that “NewSpeak” would actually make improper thinking impossible. This prevents dissent at its source. This is exactly what Google is doing. By controlling all search results, it becomes impossible to even see an idea Google disapproves of. Once Governments begin paying for this capability, it will become nigh impossible to even understand how people are being manipulated. You can have all the freedom you want, just as long as you are not free. I think that is Google’s real motto. Go nuts with cat searches, but whoa there son, what do you mean you want to research Congressman so and so’s business holdings?

To paraphrase Tim Cook, At Apple, our customers buy the product; to others (e.g. google) you are the product (e.g., the data they glean from your use of what they provide). As has been written about by others, we are at an early stage of beginning to understand what powers the internet has and how slow we are to really understand how they affect us. But this is clear enough: Google behaving this way needs to be called out into the open, and more of their activities need to be called out, too. And, consider boycotts. I have. I use no google products.

There are other, seemingly more “far-fetched” reasons for concern about these tech monopolies, too. I’ve been thinking about that since we began seeing news (not nearly enough of it, IMO) about US companies following in the footsteps of Sweden and microchipping their employees. Her dilemma: do I let my employer microchip me? So while many millennials are extremely gung-ho about getting their hands chipped by their employers as if they were pets, and are excited about the prospect of being able to wave their hand in front of a scanner to travel and buy things and access their medical information, I’m concerned about how the problem of tech monopolies will inevitably fit into all of this. Brick-and-mortar stores continue to be put out of business by Amazon, and Amazon continues moving into traditional markets by offering services like produce delivery and buying up grocery stores. Everyone has an iPhone now and eventually password entry will be phased out altogether as the fingerprint becomes mandatory, which will then be replaced by retina scanning which will supposedly debut in this year’s model. You have to wonder.. how long before the microchip becomes necessary to unlock your iPhone, use an ATM, board a plane, purchase anything, make a payment, access your email, obtain medical care, etc? How long before it’s a requirement for employment…everywhere? How long before newborns get them at the hospital? If just Google and Amazon alone implemented the technology and required it for their services, we’re talking about many millions of young people who would go along without hesitation.

I switched to Duck Duck Go after Google brazenly announced they were the sole arbiters of what is “hateful” and which ideas deserve or don’t deserve to be accessible on the internet. Yeah, no thank you.

It must be made illegal on “social media” to deny service to people who say things that are not illegal to say

I have been meaning to get into this for a while because I keep hearing the same mantra that since these social media platforms are privately owned they can do as they like. Well speaking for myself, I don’t think that at all. People don’t sign up for Facebook or Twitter, or open a blog post on some commercial website, building up their own profile based on knowing the political ideology of the people who set the platform up. They are therefore in danger of having quite a bit of the value they have created stolen from them because of some political preference harboured by the people who run the platform. Once these forms of social communication are established and individuals are asked to join and build their own online presence on these platforms, the law must do as I say in the title, it must make it illegal to suspend or deny service to people because they say things the proprietors of such platforms disagree with but which are not in themselves illegal to say.

So let me choose a couple of recent examples of how things are working out. The Rebel is a Canadian online broadcasting website that entirely devotes its resources to defending conservative positions in the media. Quite large in Canada, and now with a presence in Australia, but hardly at the level of the government-funded CBC. But this was in the news just this week: The Rebel disrupted as it loses its domain provider. The story is from The National Post:

The ultra-conservative online Canadian media outlet The Rebel reportedly went dark in some parts of the world Monday after a technology company stopped directing traffic to its site.

Rebel proprietor Ezra Levant told Reuters he was given 24 hours notice of — but no explanation for — the move.

“If this was a political censorship decision, it is terrifying — like a phone company telling you it is cancelling your phone number on 24 hours notice because it doesn’t like your conversations,” Levant told Reuters. He did not identify the company.

It is terrifying, and if and when they come back online, you may be sure they will be more circumspect thereafter. The voices on our side are being thinned down while those on the other are amplified at every turn.

Then there’s Facebook. People go onto Facebook to keep up with family and friends, and some of those people think and say things that your standard issue modern lefty doesn’t like to hear said. Things that are perfectly legal and legitimate to say, but which many of those on the left do not approve of. Here is the principle that needs to apply: If you can say it on a published printed page you must be able to say it on Facebook, and if others don’t like it, they don’t have to read it. Meanwhile Zuckerberg is angling to run for president in 2020 as a Democrat.

This is from Facebook’s Community Standard on Hate Speech:

Facebook removes hate speech, which includes content that directly attacks people based on their:

race,
ethnicity,
national origin,
religious affiliation,
sexual orientation,
sex, gender or gender identity, or
serious disabilities or diseases.

Organisations and people dedicated to promoting hatred against these protected groups are not allowed a presence on Facebook. As with all of our standards, we rely on our community to report this content to us.

What is an “attack”? And who judges? Each and every time, the adjudicators are from a left, if not a far-left perspective. Two things should therefore happen. First, these tech providers must be open to being sued for suspending and forcibly closing accounts unless the company can prove in court that what was being said could not be legally said in public. Second, these are now part of modern social infrastructure in the same way as banks and hospitals. They must be compelled by law to accept and maintain on an equal basis anyone who wishes to participate in their services. This is not something the market can or will fix. There can be only one Facebook. It only works if everyone can join. If the proprietors of Facebook don’t want to work within the new rules, then they can sell up to someone else who does.

So let’s see how this sort of thing works at the moment. This is from Instapundit today. And note the author of the post self-describes himself in this way:

#Republican candidate for US Senate. Radical philosopher & social critic. Captain, lawyer, agitator, rebel. The most dangerous #Libertarian in America.

That is, a prime candidate to end up banned at Facebook. This is what did it.

Just got banned from for posting this to my campaign page. Not politically motivated at all …

Do you not see a problem that needs to be fixed? Then keep your head in the sand. I’m not sure it can be fixed, but to think the market will self-correct is just a form of self-delusion.

And then there was this: After Charlottesville, Even Dating Apps Are Cracking Down on Hate. From which:

The Silicon Valley companies that make money off social media and online services have started to enact strong measures against extremism, barring white nationalists, white supremacists, neo-Nazis and others who follow creeds they deem racist and hateful.

Facebook and Twitter have developed tools to allow users to report hate speech and harassment. PayPal has blocked hate groups from using its financial services, and the ride-hailing services Uber and Lyft have urged drivers to report unacceptable customers. Airbnb took steps to stop white nationalists from renting rooms through its app before their gathering in Charlottesville, Va.

Most remarkably, perhaps, the efforts have even spread to the free-wheeling world of dating apps, where users have for years been welcome to screen potential lovers based on everything from height to religious beliefs.

And to be more specific OkCupid Banned Me for Supporting Our President by Cassandra Fairbanks.

While on vacation in Florida, I was informed by other Twitter users that my OkCupid account — which is largely inactive — has been suspended. This was presumably due to my open support for President Donald Trump.

On the weekend following the disastrous Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, I had been scheduled to speak at a rally in support of free speech in Boston. Despite many of the speakers being people of color, and the most exciting speaker of the day being Va Shiva from India who addressed the crowd while standing in front of signs that read “Black Lives Do Matter,” the rally was falsely labeled a “white supremacist” rally by the liberal media and the city’s joke of a mayor, Marty Walsh.

Threats and accusations immediately rolled in, from hundreds of people who just blindly follow whatever the mainstream media tells them — and suddenly I was branded a “Nazi” for daring to agree to speak at a rally supporting our most important right. It was exactly what Trump supporters had worried would happen following the “punch a Nazi” meme. All it takes to now be tarred as “literally Hitler,” no matter the color of your skin or actual political beliefs, is support for our president. . . .

I have reached out to OkCupid to confirm that my ban was due to supporting the president — as obviously they will be unable to provide a shred of evidence that I am racist or belong to a “hate group.” The company had not responded by press time.

She then adds at the end what I think is the biggest mistake we make: “I personally believe that companies have a right to deny service to anyone they want.”

Well I do not. Is it illegal to say what these people say? Then you just have to put up with the possibility that if you go on a dating site, you might end up paired with a Democrat. After the interview date you can work out whether you are compatible or not. This categorisation of others by people who are politically and morally clueless in every way is a serious problem and should not be permitted. If you open this kind of service, open to any and all, no discrimination should be permitted by law based on race, religion, creed etc etc or on one’s personal beliefs however repellent they may be to you or to the proprietors of these “social” media platforms.

The laws should be just like the laws that apply to renting out your house.

The Taliban of the modern American left

The American Civil War ended a long long time ago, but the American left has now decided to refight the war when slavery has vanished and racist attitudes in the US are at an all-time low, of course absolutely forgetting that it was only Democrats who were members of the KKK when the KKK was a force to be reckoned with. World War II ended in 1945, but the American left seeks to refight this war as well in its march against fascism which disappeared seventy years ago only to re-emerge during the 1960s among the New Left. The Cold War against Russian communism ended at the end of the 1980s, but the American left has decided to refight the war against Russia now that it is no longer a communist state. And, not to be forgotten is that the slave states were all Democrat, that the left was utterly opposed to entering the second World War until communist Russia itself was attacked by the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, and that during the Cold War the greatest defenders of mutual coexistence with Russia – that is, appeasement – were Democrats. Now they are revisiting these ancient long-settled issues in the midst of our present battles conveniently forgetting which side they were on when these issues were actually current. And what is the big issue of our time right now? Radical Islam. And who are its friends. Why, once again, it is the self-same Democrats who have been the perennial enemies of freedom, as they most certainly are again.

In the whole of the United States at the present time, there would hardly be as many as 100,000 “Nazis” or members of the Klan, who would have about as much political clout as a modern prohibitionist. Their sole value in today’s world are as background props for Democrats to parade themselves as soldiers of virtue, when they are actually America’s greatest danger. Here is an interesting take on it all, from a source who knows, truly knows, where the enemies of today really are. From Criticism grows over Netanyahu’s response to US neo-Nazism.

Criticism grew Thursday over Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s limited response to a US white supremacist rally and President Donald Trump’s controversial remarks about it, with calls for him to speak out against anti-Semitism. . . .

So far, Netanyahu’s only response to the weekend white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia that ended in bloodshed was a tweet on Tuesday that many saw as vague.

“Outraged by expressions of anti-Semitism, neo-Nazism and racism. Everyone should oppose this hatred,” Netanyahu posted in English.

A Facebook post by Netanyahu’s son Yair further raised eyebrows.

He denounced “neo-Nazi scum,” but added that they were “dying out” and seemed to suggest left-wing counter-protesters “who hate my country” were a growing threat.

So where are we now? To show how anti-whatever they are, Next on Liberal’s List for Destruction- Confederate Carvings at Stone Mountain Memorial. Which reminds me of the same deranged mentality displayed by the Taliban in destroying the Buddhist statues of Bamiyan. Sickening vandalism but ruthless displays of an arrogant disregard for anything other than their own will to power.

Who are the actual fascists, the actual brown shirts, the actual Nazis of the moment? They are by close analogy the Democrats and their violent “Antifa” allies. And there are millions who will take their path as they are guided on their stupefied way by our ignorant and historically illiterate modern journalists whose vacuous writings are little different in their truth content and direction than the average weekly postings of Der Stürmer had been in the 1920s.

PDT reveals his soul

I wrote a while ago about being in need of some urgent advice in regard to a high school friend who I was then about to visit who continually sends me anti-Trump material from CNN etc. He is a two-times-over legal migrant, first from the Hungarian workers’ paradise to Canada in 1956, and then second from the Canadian workers’ paradise to not just the workers’ paradise of California, but to Silicon Valley itself in the early 1970s. There he ran his own business enterprise where he would sack willy nilly any excess staff at the mere hint of a downturn in demand but has been successful enough to end up in a $US5 million dollar home, his and hers Mercedes, a Mercedes van so that he can take his sailboard to the coast, not to mention his Porsche which he didn’t actually register for a number of years so that he could evade speed limits on the highways as he powered his way down the road. That is, he is an average and utterly normal member of the Democratic Party. And now he has sent me this which I will share with you in full with no edits: A Trump meltdown for the ages. From CNN, of course, from which everything below the line is found and with nothing left out.

_____

It was like watching a human Twitter feed.

A combative and unrestrained President Donald Trump opened his authentic political soul, in possibly the most memorable news conference in presidential history, that is certain to become a defining moment of his administration.
It was supposed to be a routine event at Trump Tower in New York to tout the President’s infrastructure plan.
But the session quickly veered off course into one of the most surreal political moments in years as Trump unloaded about the fallout from the weekend’s protests by “alt-right” activists, white supremacists and neo-Nazis in Virginia.
Gesticulating with his right hand, Trump blasted what he called the “alt-left,” protested that he had already condemned neo-Nazis and parroted far-right talking points on the Confederacy.
On the substance, it was a performance that quickly emboldened white nationalist groups and appeared certain to heighten racial tensions and fear in the country.
There’s no chance that Trump’s political team can finesse this one, or walk it back.
But the tone and the spectacle of Trump’s unchained performance was equally stunning.
The unapologetic, stream-of-consciousness style of delivery left no doubt at all: This was the real Trump, not the scripted version who appeared in the White House on Monday and tried to clean up his initial failure to condemn white supremacists after the death of a counter-protester in Charlottesville.
His anger emerged in a torrent, as he obliterated any benefit of the doubt he earned on Monday, thought piling on thought, in a style the nation has become accustomed to from his Twitter feed.
In the most incredible moment, as he stood at a podium bearing the seal of the President of the United States, Trump tore at the nation’s racial fault lines by appearing to offer a pass to a racist and neo-Nazi movement.
“I think there is blame on both sides,” Trump said, returning to his original position about the protest in Charlottesville, saying that an extreme right demonstration in which marchers held torches and Swastikas and chanted racist and anti-Semitic slogans contained some “bad people …. but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides.”
Trump accused counter-demonstrators of being as violent as the white supremacists.
“What about the fact they came charging — that they came charging with clubs in their hands, swinging clubs? Do they have any problem? I think they do,” he said.
“I think there is blame on both sides,” Trump said.
The President’s fury was first sparked when he was challenged by reporters on his handling of Charlottesville, evidence of how Trump’s extreme sensitivity to personal slights sometimes leads him into politically self-destructive behavior.
It was a display that will renew questions about the suitability of Trump’s temperament for the presidency, and at a time of increasing tensions around the world that will exacerbate fears he will be unable to control his emotions at a time of crisis as commander-in-chief.
Trump also condemned efforts to take down statues in southern states dedicated to heroes of the Civil War Confederacy.
“This week it’s Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson’s coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after?”
“You’re changing history. You’re changing culture. And you had people, and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists.”
It did not take long for key figures in the extreme right movement to take comfort in Trump’s remarks, after the news conference appeared to nudge the President closer to an isolated spot on the far right of US politics.
“Thank you President Trump for your honesty & courage to tell the truth about #Charlottesville & condemn the leftist terrorists in BLM/Antifa, wrote David Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, on Twitter.
Some of Trump’s fellow Republicans were quick to condemn him.
“If you are showing up to a Klan rally you are probably a racist or a bigot,” Texas Rep Will Hurd said on CNN’s “The Situation Room.” “I think the outrage across the political spectrum about this is maybe the thing that ultimately unites us.”
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio was also quick to rebuke Trump.
“Mr. President,you can’t allow #WhiteSupremacists to share only part of blame. They support idea which cost nation & world so much pain,” Rubio said on Twitter.
“These groups today use SAME symbols & same arguments of #Nazi & #KKK, groups responsible for some of worst crimes against humanity ever.”

The overall impression of Trump’s performance was of a president out of control, who is captive to his whims and instincts and defies any attempt to manage him — including by his new Chief of Staff John Kelly.
“That was all him — this wasn’t our plan,” a senior White House official told CNN’s Jeff Zeleny.
One person who has spent time with Trump over the past 24 hours describes the President as “distracted” and “irritable” in his interactions with top aides. Trump felt pressured into the Monday statement by staff members, the person said. As he went about his day Tuesday, Trump was upset and repeatedly returned to the topic, the person said, culminating in the lobby press conference.
CNN senior political analyst David Axelrod compared Trump to a “runaway truck, there are no brakes, there is no reverse.”
Axelrod also questioned why Kelly and other Trump aides even allowed the President to appear before reporters on Tuesday, given their presumed knowledge of the state of his mood over the Charlottesville coverage.
But ultimately, Tuesday’s stunning appearance will be remembered for the sentiments that passed the lips of a President of the United States.
In the long and tortured history of a nation still trying to work through its complicated story on race, Trump’s meltdown will stand out, as a moment ripped from the darkest pages of history and transposed into the 21st Century.
In the process, he appears to have abdicated any claim to the traditional presidential role as a moral voice for the nation and the world.

 

THE VIDEO OF THE PRESS CONFERENCE: Prompted by OldOzzie, here is the press conference so you can see it for yourself.

His infrastructure statement is pretty good as well!

Desperate for bad news

The first three articles on Lucianne.com at the moment. It’s a different world where the left, the media and #NeverTrump keep looking for something. And there will be something some day, but for these people the only good news is what is bad news to the rest of us.

Trump refuses to take
call from Venezuela’s Maduro
Washington Times, by Dave Boyer    Original Article
Posted By: LittleHoodedMonk– 8/12/2017 10:15:33 AM     Post Reply
President Trump rebuffed the offer of a phone call from the president of Venezuela late Friday night, after Mr. Trump warned that he is considering military options to address civil and political unrest in the South American country. “President Trump will gladly speak with the leader of Venezuela as soon as democracy is restored in that country,” the White House said. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro requested a phone call with Mr. Trump after Mr. Trump made a surprise statement late Friday that he’s considering unspecified military action to address what the administration is calling a “dictatorship.”
Donald Trump Wins Round
One with North Korea
Breitbart Big Government, by Joel B. Pollak    Original Article
Posted By: earlybird– 8/12/2017 10:06:22 AM     Post Reply
The mainstream media are aghast at President Donald Trump’s comments on North Korea as he promises “fire and fury” and warns that American military solutions are “locked and loaded.” The political elite, and the foreign policy establishment, oscillate between bitter scorn and sheer panic at his tactics. But one does not have to be convinced of Trump’s rhetorical genius to note that he has already re-framed the conflict in a way that is advantageous to the U.S. First, Trump has radically changed the costs of a potential conflict, for both sides. The dominant paradigm of nuclear face-offs is mutually assured destruction (MAD),
In Trump Era, U.S. Corporations
See Best Earnings in 13 Years
Breitbart Big Government, by Warner Todd Huston    Original Article
Posted By: earlybird– 8/12/2017 10:01:59 AM     Post Reply
As President Trump’s administration enters the last half of its first year, U.S. corporations are experiencing their best earnings in 13 years, a report finds. Bloomberg reports that U.S. corporate profits in the second quarter “have beaten estimates at more than three-quarters of the Standard & Poor’s 500 member companies. In every sector, at least half of the companies have surpassed or met expectations, with many also getting a boost from a sinking U.S. dollar.” “Growth was particularly strong in key regions of North America and Europe, where we grew sales greater than twice GDP, as well as throughout Asia-Pacific,” Dow Chief

He says and does in private what he says and does in public

You may be sure the Administrative State is hunting through everything they can get their hands on – which includes pretty well everything that exists – to find something, anything, that will discredit Donald Trump. And the most remarkable result is that they cannot find a thing. If this is the best they can come up with, the transcript of PDT’s conversation with MT on exchanging the boat persons on Manus for some Central Americans the US won’t admit, they truly have nothing at all. This is from Andrew Bolt: TRANSCRIPT SHOCK: TURNBULL CONSPIRED WITH TRUMP ON REFUGEE CON. First Trump:

TRUMP: I am taking 2,000 people from Australia who are in prison and the day before I signed an Executive Order saying that we are not taking anybody in. We are not taking anybody in, those days are over…

The rest of the transcript is MT saying Trump doesn’t actually have to take any of them; he only has to agree to see if any of those in detention will pass the extreme vetting being imposed. This is certainly discrediting to Malcolm but not to Trump. For those who support Trump, he says and does in private what he says he will do in public. And now we have the American left revealing itself over Trump wishing to bring in only those migrants who can speak English and will be economically self-supporting. You would think that would at least be acceptable on the left, but if you think that, you don’t know the left.

The distractors are complaining about the distractions they have caused

This story is almost beyond parody coming from the media, The Wall Street Journal in this case: Donald Trump: as Washington churns, world gets more dangerous. Listen to this loon:

When folks here in Washington end a summer filled with White House hijinks and an epic but inconclusive healthcare debate, they will look up and discover something unsettling: The world has become a more dangerous place while everybody has been distracted.

That’s most obviously true in North Korea, where its rogue weapons program has leapt so far forward that the nation now has a missile with the range to reach much of the US Pyongyang’s capabilities are advancing so quickly that the Defense Intelligence Agency has had to ratchet forward, to as early as next year, its estimate of when it will have an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.

And etc. So let’s go to the comments at The Oz, from the top rated on down a bit with nothing left out.

The world is a more dangerous place than it was eight years ago primarily because of Obama, not Trump. Obama was a weak and indecisive leader who allowed all of America’s enemies to grow stronger.

You forgot to mention SSM in Australia, Gerald

But hey, we are getting (unaffordable) light rail in Canberra, (unaffordable) green energy in SA, (unaffordable) public service growth and increased debt in Qld and federally 99.9% of the population wont get a say on SSM. But hey, lets blame it all in Trump. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaait a minute!!! Better add Abbott in there too.

“The world has become a more dangerous place while everybody has been distracted.” Who is “everybody”? The media badly needs an education away from their “Latte buddies”.

I’m not really sure what this journalist is concerned about, doesn’t he realise same sex marriage will be passed “sooner then we think?” Our politicians understand the importance of freeing us from cultural restraints, so never mind about North Korea/china/Russia/Iran. None of them are progressive enough to have ssm.

The most urgent problem is to resolve disputes with Russia. With the US and Russia on the same side, all the other problems can be solved. With the US and Russia throwing mud at each other, all the other problems will just keep accumulating until something goes bang. Russia under the Putin government is far from perfect but anyone who expects perfect partners needs to stay away from international politics.

The main danger is not in Washington but in New York in the fantasy mind of Gerald Seib at the Wall Street Journal who wrote this tosh.

The interesting thing is how little Trump pays attention to these flea bites and tries to get on with the main game.