A channel popular for broadcasting President Donald Trump’s rallies was banned from livestream capabilities Sunday night, according to the broadcaster.
Without explanation, YouTube blocked Right Side Broadcasting from going live, despite the channel, known for streaming Trump rallies, having over 380,000 subscribers and 80 million views.
After 300 million + views of President @realDonaldTrump rallies and 4 years following the rules on YouTube, our live streaming ability was taken away with no explanation. We have ZERO copyright or community violations on our account. We are shocked. Why, @YouTube? #FreeRSBNpic.twitter.com/WJta2GPUx8
“Tonight our live-streaming abilities have been revoked by youtube,” said the channel’s founder Joe Seales, in a video uploaded to Twitter. “That’s right after 300+ million views and four years plus of obeying copyright law, of obeying community guidelines, all of a sudden we can no longer livestream on YouTube. They have given us no reason why we can’t livestream. We have received no communication or correspondence whatsoever.”
The channel’s YouTube analytics also show RSBN received zero copyright violations and zero community guidelines strikes.
Seales says ultimately the ban will “cripple” his company’s revenue going into 2020, and suspects his channel has been targeted for censorship by Big Tech, especially given the channel’s demonitization and recent censorship from search results.
“We don’t want to say this, but it feels like we are being targeted by YouTube – because we have been kept out of the search results now for the last several months,” Seales says, adding, “But now not even allowing us to livestream, this is going to severely cripple our company and make it very difficult for us to survive in the lead-up to 2020.”
In follow-up posts, RSBN says a YouTube bot shut down livestream capabilities after it flagged one of their videos for containing audio which violated copyright guidelines, unbeknownst to them.
The channel hopes to have livestream capabilities restored in time to stream a Monday Trump rally in Rio Rancho, New Mexico.
President Trump unleashed on Barack Obama and the Democrats Monday morning in a tweetstorm and called for the Justice Department to investigate the former president’s many sweetheart deals.
Trump (and the American people) still have not forgotten about the Congressional slush fund used to pay off sexual harassment claims against lawmakers, and on Monday the president called for the slush fund to be investigated.
“House Judiciary has given up on the Mueller Report, sadly for them after two years and $40,000,000 spent – ZERO COLLUSION, ZERO OBSTRUCTION. So they say, OK, lets look at everything else, and all of the deals that “Trump” has done over his lifetime. But it doesn’t work that way. I have a better idea. Look at the Obama Book Deal, or the ridiculous Netflix deal. Then look at all the deals made by the Dems in Congress, the “Congressional Slush Fund,” and lastly the IG Reports. Take a look at them. Those investigations would be over FAST!” Trump said in a pair of tweets Monday morning.
Book deals, Netflix and the Obama Foundation are just a few ways the Obamas have been able to enrich themselves since leaving the White House.
In fact, the Obamas just purchased a $15 million estate in Martha’s Vineyard — it pays to run a crime spree for eight years.
But the Democrats are hell bent on destroying Donald Trump and have launched several lawsuits against the president claiming he is violating the emoluments clause.
The emoluments clause is a provision that bars US presidents from accepting gifts from foreign governments without permission from Congress first.
Trump is losing money serving as US President and he donates his salary to various causes as a way to give back even more — a true servant of the American people.
Trump fired off another pair of tweets slamming Obama again for his sweetheart Netflix deal.
Thanks to CNN, Politico, and the New York Times, last week was filled with the kind of fake news that used to end prestigious media careers. No more, though. Nowadays publishing fake news is nothing less than a résumé enhancer.
Early in the week, CNN and Politico dumped two MASSIVE pieces of fake news. And then, over the weekend, the Times said “Hold my beer” with a transparently dishonest smear of Associate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Let’s recap…
The week opened with CNN’s fake news about how President Trump’s mishandling of classified information resulted in the CIA having to pull a key intelligence asset out of the Kremlin. We now know this never happened. Whatever intelligence mishandling it was that forced the asset’s removal, it happened during the —wait for it, wait for it — Obama administration.
The fake news came from Jim Sciutto, who, like a lot of CNN “reporters,” is a former Democrat operative with a documented history of publishing fake stories. Of course, CNN also has a long and sordid history of publishing fake news, which is why he fits right in.
Sciutto’s story was so blatantly misleading that even the far-left New York Timescried foul. As did the far-left Washington Post.
Next up: the far-left Politico, with its own fake news bonanza, this one about the Air Force rerouting planes to Scotland so Trump’s Turnberry resort can benefit from the overnight stays, which helps to line the president’s pockets.
We now know this isn’t true and that Politico deliberately removed these rather pertinent facts from is now-debunked hoax: 1) the contract to land flights at this airport was signed during the Obama administration, 2) the contract to use Turnberry for overnight stays was signed during the Obama administration, 3) only six percent of the Air Force’s overnight stays occurred at Turnberry, and 4) Turnberry’s $127 per night room rate is not only the least expensive in the area, it is hardly worth risking impeachment.
Like CNN’s fake story about the CIA, Politico’s fake news about Turnberry was debunked by the far-left Washington Post.
Neither CNN nor Politico have corrected or retracted their debunked bombshells.
By the time Friday night rolled around, by the time the weekend kicked off, there were already two eggs dripping off the media’s smug and corrupt face. So you would think that at this point the institution as a whole might want to take a few days off to regroup, lick their wounds, soul search, and figure out how to regain the trust of the public.
LOL…
Sike!
No one believes the establishment media would ever do that, at least not any citizen of the planet we call Earth.
And so, on Saturday, the New York Times went for the fake news crown, the fake news brass ring, the fake news gold medal with a hoax so bold and audacious it makes CNN and Politico look like women competing in a weightlifting contest against a guy who says he’s a gal.
To the surprise of no one, the Failing New York Times dropped a bombshell about a sexual assault allegation against Brett Kavanaugh.
We all knew this was coming. You see, the Times and the media overall are still miffed over the fact that all their other phony allegations against Kavanaugh were not only debunked, but failed to keep him off the court, so they just went ahead and invented a new one.
According to the report, a former Clinton operative told some people Kavanaugh exposed his penis during his freshman year in college. Things then got out of hand (pun intended) when one of Kavanaugh’s frat buddies pushed him, which resulted in the penis ending up in the hands of some unsuspecting woman.
We now know there are three colossal problems with this story:
1) The Clinton operative refuses to talk to the Times, refuses to confirm he saw this, which means the Times is reporting on what other people said this guy told them. In a court of law this is called hearsay and is not admissible as evidence.
But that’s the least of it. Get this:
2) The alleged victim whose alleged hand the alleged penis allegedly ended up in does not remember this happening.
3) The fake New York Times storydeliberately omittedthe fact that the alleged victim whose alleged hand the alleged penis allegedly ended up in does not remember this happening.
Yes, you read that correctly: The Times knew this woman did not remember being sexually assaulted and not only still ran with the story, they omitted that information! The Times deliberately hid this fact from its readers!
Eventually, the Timeswas shamed into updating the story with this vital piece of information that proves the story never should have been written, that it’s totally bogus.
This is what I think is happening; why the media is recklessly selling out its credibility and moral authority in an all-new frenzy…
All the reports about the Deep State’s attempted coup against President Trump are about to be released, and to try and save themselves and their lying sources, the media are hurling any kind of shit they can get their corrupt hands on as a means to distract from their corrupt role in acts of government malfeasance that make Watergate look like a water balloon fight.
The other thing is that media know the American people are no longer paying attention to them, so they are just publishing stuff to impress each other, to give each other the sugar highs they became addicted to during the Russia Collusion Hoax.
But the media are not the enemy of the people, y’all… They’re only try to deceive us, overturn our elections, take away our guns…
Nevertheless, if you think the media are desperate and corrupt liars now, wait till the 2020 campaign begins.
A transgender advocacy NGO has told teachers that puberty blockers are harmless and should be given to children as young as 12 in a “model” training session for UK schools.
Scholars and medics warn such advice is “disturbing.”
Administering puberty blockers to children questioning their gender identity as early as the age of 12 is beneficial for them as such treatment is “completely reversible” and gives them “immense relief,” a trainer with the transgender lobby group Mermaids told a gathering of some 20 teachers and pastoral support workers at the Newman University in Birmingham last December.
The content of the meeting, which has arguably become a blueprint for further training sessions held by the group in schools across the UK, was revealed by the Times on Sunday.
“Puberty blocker medication doesn’t make any changes,” the trainer argued, explaining that it simply puts “a pause button on the pituitary gland and freezes puberty where it is” and the biological processes “will recommence” as soon as the treatment is stopped.
The Mermaids’ line of argument did not sit well with one of the meeting’s attendees, Michael Conroy, a pastoral support worker, who taped the footage. He told the Times that he was concerned about the group literally encouraging young children to believe that they were “born in the wrong body.”
“It’s putting children at risk.”
His concerns were shared by Michael Biggs, an associate professor in sociology at St Cross College, Oxford, who told the Times that such a strategy pushes children toward further medical intervention up to sex affirmation surgery.
“Mermaids [are] not giving pupils a choice that they may just be gay or lesbian. Instead, it is diverted down a drastic path that ultimately ends in surgery. To be propagating such information to schools is disturbing,” he said.
The group stated on its website that its advice was based on an “international scientific study and 25 years of experience in this field.” It also boasted about receiving funding from the UK Department for Education ever since the December 2018 session, under a program “overseen by the Government Equalities Office.”
While Professor Biggs has been accused of “transphobia” in the past, according to some reports, he is far from being the only one who sounds an alarm over practices that many find quite controversial. Earlier this year, groups of medical specialists both in the UK and across the pond – in the US – warned about the long-term effects of puberty-blockers and hormonal drugs, calling it a “grave public health concern.”
The doctors warned that treatment starting with puberty blockers and often ending up with gender-reassignment surgeries has horrifying side effects, including “surgical complications, thromboembolic and cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, malignancy, and persistently elevated rates of suicide.”
The American College of Pediatricians (ACP) – a conservative children’s advocacy group – also noted that healthcare professionals are “increasingly prohibited from investigating psychosocial factors” forcing children and adolescents to question their gender identity.
Meanwhile, links between gender identity issues and autism have been repeatedly invoked in the past. In 2017, a London clinic for transgender children reported that a third of their patients had “moderate or severe autistic traits.” Yet, instead of paying more attention to the psychological side of the issue, many schools still apparently opt for going ahead with gender affirming actions.
The far-left New York Times has been shamed into adding a humiliating “correction” to its latest and now-debunked smear of Associate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
The correction admits a fairly, somewhat, kinda, sorta, maybe important piece of information about how Kavanaugh’s alleged “victim” refused to talk to the Times and doesn’t remember the alleged “assault.”
Prior to publishing the smear, the Times knew this fact and still chose to deliberately hide it from the public. And we all know why… It proves the whole story is fake news.
Now…
Did you catch that?
Did you catch what the New York Times is now admitting…?
Let me repeat it for the CNN-impaired:
Brett Kavanaugh’s alleged victim doesn’t recall being an alleged victim.
The “victim” doesn’t remember the assault.
The “victim” doesn’t remember being sexually assaulted.
She doesn’t remember it happening.
And the New York Times not only went ahead and reported the story as credible, the New York Times hid that information from its readers.
On Saturday, the failing New York Times published a piece claiming it had found a new Kavanaugh accuser. Here’s the bombshell portion:
We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. [Deborah] Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly. (We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier.)
But what the Times didn’t tell its readers is that the alleged victim of this alleged assault, the very person into whose alleged hand the alleged penis was allegedly thrust, does not recall anything about the penis incident and does not want to talk to the media.
Does that piece of information not seem somewhat pertinent to the story? And when I say “pertinent,” I of course mean “the story is totally bogus and never should have been published.”
This now-debunked bombshell is based on an upcoming book by two New York Times reporters. In the book, they do admit the alleged victim does not remember the assault. But still, knowing this, the Times deliberately left that information — the only information that matters — out of its bombshell.
And the only reason we know the Times withheld this information is because the Times got caught.
Thankfully, and the Times obviously didn’t expect this, a few conservatives received an advanced copy of the book; they located this pertinent fact and blew it up on social media. This is the only reason why, after 36 hours of attempting to deceive the public, the Times grudgingly added the following correction Sunday evening:
Editors’ Note: An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book’s account regarding as assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports the female student declined to be interviewed and fr8iends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.
The updated story reads like this and even the update is a lie…
(We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier; the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the episode.)
It’s worth pointing out Max Stier is a Democrat operative, a former attorney for the Clintons, and who also refused to talk to the Times.
Finally, when the Times claims in its update that it “corroborated the story” that’s a lie. All the Times did was talk to a couple of people who say Stier told them about a sexual assault that the victim doesn’t even recall happening. That’s not corroboration, that’s “hearsay.”
But…
Since this is the new standard of journalism, I have something to report…
I am deeply ashamed to admit it, but I honestly don’t remember New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet sexually assaulting me.
Here’s my headline:
I Do Not Remember Dean Baquet Sexually Assaulting Me
So a Democrat operative is running around claiming he witnessed an assault that the victim herself cannot remember, but even he is not talking to the Times about it — Gee, I wonder why?
Anyway, I honestly don’t remember Dean Baquet sexually assaulting me. How can I deny something when I don’t have any memory of it ever happening?
The forced resignation of neoconservative warmonger John Bolton from the Trump administration hascaused a mass exodus of globalistswho have resigned in protest.
Garrett Marquis and Sarah Tinsley, who formerly worked as the National Security Council’s press operation as senior directors for strategic communications, and Christine Samuelian, who was Bolton’s personal assistant, have chosen to leave the White House staff as a result of President Trump’s decision.
“It was an honor to serve my country, and I wish the president and the administration success moving forward,” Marquis said on Wednesday
Marquis was connected to Bolton for years, working as his spokesman when Bolton had a job at the public affairs firm Prism Group. Samuelian was Bolton’s long-time assistant, having worked with the mustachioed warmonger for many years. Tinsley formerly worked for the Foundation for American Security and Freedom (FASF), a not-for-profit entity founded by Bolton to encourage a more hawkish foreign policy.
“America needs more robust and effective involvement in international affairs to keep our allies close and further our national security interests,” Bolton said in a press release when FASF was established in 2015.
“This new foundation will provide the necessary platform, resources, and leadership to demonstrate to the world that we will recognize American exceptionalism not only in rhetoric, but also in deeds,” he added.
“So, John is somebody that I actually got along with very well. He made some very big mistakes,” Trump said following Bolton’s firing last week.
“As soon as he mentioned that, the Libyan model, what a disaster. Take a look at what happened to Gadhafi,” Trump elaborated about Bolton’s incompetence. “I don’t blame Kim Jong Un for what he said after that. And he wanted nothing to do with John Bolton. And that’s not a question of being tough. That’s a question of being not smart to say something like that.”
“John wasn’t in line with what we were doing and actually in some cases he thought it was too tough what we were doing. Mr. Tough Guy, you know, you had to go into Iraq. Going into Iraq was something he felt very strongly about,” Trump added.
It may be the dawning of a new era within the Trump administration, as the Bush-era neocons are losing the battle to influence President Trump into adopting the failed foreign policy of past globalist presidential administrations.
The third Democrat debate in Houston, Texas, finally brought the top-tier candidates on the same debate stage. While there were a few squabbles over hot button issues like Medicare for All and ongoing wars, three subjects were, notably, not mentioned during the three-hour event: impeachment, abortion, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) false ancestry claims.
There were a few tense matchups between the ten candidates on the debate stage – Joe Biden (D), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Warren, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), Mayor Pete Buttigieg (D), Beto O’Rourke (D), Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Andrew Yang (D), and Julián Castro (D). Early on, Castro questioned Biden’s memory during a heated discussion on health care.
“Are you forgetting what you said already just two minutes ago?” Castro asked after Biden said his healthcare plan would cause Americans to lose their employee health insurance and “automatically … buy into” his plan. Minutes later, he said they would not have to.
“I mean, I can’t believe that you said two minutes ago that they had to buy in, and now, you’re saying they don’t. … You’re forgetting that,” Castro said.
Other notable moments include O’Rourke’s vowing to enact mandatory gun confiscation, Warren’s refusing to say if she would raise taxes on middle class Americans to pay for Medicare for All, and Sanders’ urging the U.S. to focus less on military expenditures and more on bringing the world “together” on climate change.
However, three hot topics were notably absent from the evening’s discussions: impeachment, abortion, and Warren’s false ancestry claims.
Impeachment: Impeachment has been a contentious topic on Capitol Hill. On Thursday, the House Judiciary Committee passed a resolution outlining the impeachment inquiry rules, even though the full House has yet to vote. While Democrats are more than 80 votes short of a pro-impeachment majority in the House, chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) said a vote will transpire before Democrats choose a Democrat nominee to face President Trump.
“Candidates for the president are going to run on whatever they run on,” Nadler told the Washington Examiner. “By the time of the campaign, the president will or will not have been impeached.”
Despite the buzz on the Capitol and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) constantly fielding questions on her position on the committee’s move, impeachment was not mentioned during the debate.
Abortion: Women’s issues – abortion, specifically – have been a massive talking point for many of the Democrat candidates. The subject became even more prominent following the slew of states enacting pro-life laws this year, and tensions increased as Democrats repeatedly stiff-armed the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.
Some candidates have been under fire in recent weeks for their hardline stance on abortion. Buttigieg – who considers himself a Christian – made waves last week after suggesting that Scriptures indicate that a baby’s life does not begin until a physical first breath. Sanders also came under fire last week after CNN’s climate change town hall during which he floated population control – via worldwide abortion – as a viable solution to combat the climate change “crisis.”
Despite that, abortion was not mentioned during the three-hour event.
Warren’s ancestry:Warren’s ancestry failed to come up in the third presidential debate, as moderators and candidates refused to grill her on the subject. While Warren mentioned her past – waitressing, going to college, and becoming a special needs teacher – she failed to mention the role her false claims of Native American heritage played.
The presidential hopeful identified as a minority in the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) deskbook for years and listed herself as a Native American on her Texas Bar registration card. Ultimately, a DNA test found that she had between 1/64th to 1/1,024 Native American ancestry. Even so, her possible connections were not associated with tribal nations in America. Additionally, as Breitbart News reported, Warren has significant ancestral ties to Indian fighters. Specifically, her great-great-great-grandfather, Jonathan Crawford, “served in Major William Lauderdale’s Battalion of Tennessee Volunteer Militia from November 1837 to May 1838, a six month time period during which it fought two battles in Florida against the Seminoles.”
While Warren has apologized for making “mistakes,” she has yet to elaborate on her false claims of Native American heritage, particularly on a debate stage.
President Trump has said for years that the US was hurt by politicians that didn’t protect US jobs. He decided to do something about and the US is winning because of it!
The far-left Washington Post wrote in August that President Trump’s tariffs will cost the average family hundreds of dollars a year –
More than a year into the U.S.-China trade war, American consumers are about to find themselves squarely in the crosshairs for the first time, with households estimated to face up to $1,000 in additional costs each year from tariffs, according to research from JPMorgan Chase.
Consumers, whose spending fuels about 70 percent of the U.S. economy, have been largely shielded from previous rounds of tariffs, which have left businesses reeling and upended global supply chains. But that’s about to change with the 10 percent levies on roughly $300 billion in Chinese imports, about a third of which will take effect Sept. 1. Those tariffs will primarily target consumer goods.
But it was just more fake news from the far left Washington Post.
Sorry liberals, Trump’s tariffs are having little to no impact on the cost of goods to the consumer.
Prices for U.S. imports fell 0.5 percent in August following a 0.1-percent increase in July and a 1.1-percent decline in June. With the exception of the August and June decreases, U.S. import prices advanced in each month of 2019. Despite the increases, the price index for U.S. imports declined 2.0 percent from August 2018 to August 2019. (See table 1.)
Fuel Imports: Import fuel prices decreased 4.3 percent in August, after rising 0.7 percent the previous month. Prices for import fuel fell 11.1 percent over the past 3 months. In August, lower petroleum prices more than offset higher prices for natural gas. The price index for import petroleum declined 4.8 percent, after increasing 0.9 percent the previous month. Fuel prices decreased 8.7 percent over the past 12 months; prices for import petroleum fell 9.6 percent over the same period. The price index for natural gas imports rose 16.0 percent in August, after declines in each of the previous 4 months. Despite the August increase, natural gas prices fell 6.1 percent over the past year.
All Imports Excluding Fuel: Prices for nonfuel imports were unchanged for the second consecutive month in August following 0.3-percent decreases in both June and May. In August, lower prices for foods, feeds, and beverages and nonfuel industrial supplies and materials were offset by price increases for automotive vehicles and consumer goods. Prices for nonfuel imports declined 1.0 percent over the past 12 months, led by price decreases for industrial supplies and materials and capital goods.
President Trump said years ago what he would do years ago about China to stop their theft of American jobs – tax China 25%.
Beto O’Rourke solidified himself as the Civil War candidate after proclaiming, “we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47,” during Thursday night’s Democrat debate.
The amazingly stupid presidential hopeful is openly promoting a policy that would rip the country apart by sending armed government agents to seize semi-automatic rifles from law-abiding Americans.
Beto: "Hell, yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47. We're not going to allow it to be used against your fellow Americans anymore." pic.twitter.com/LkAdc8eYNE
Beto even reiterated his bold stance on Twitter, repeating, “Hell yes, we’re gonna take your AR-15.”
O’Rourke previously tried to mask his intentions by calling his plan a “mandatory government buyback,” but most people understood exactly what that means.
The Texas Democrat is using his anti-gun platform to raise money, asking people to donate money so he can ban semi-automatic rifles.
The 2020 field of Democrats is the most anti-Second Amendment group of politicians to ever run for office in America.
A U.S. federal appeals court ruled Friday that a lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump of violating the U.S. Constitution’s emoluments clause can move forward.
The lawsuit, filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), was dismissed for lack of standing by a lower-level judge in December 2017. The plaintiffs, comprised of the president’s rivals in the hospitality industry, have alleged that the president’s profiting off his “foreign and domestic government clientele” have hurt their businesses.
“The Plaintiff establishments cater to foreign and domestic government clientele, and allege that they are direct competitors of hospitality properties owned by the President in Washington D.C. and New York City. The complaint alleges that President Trump, operating through corporations, limited‐liability companies, limited partnerships, and other business structures, is effectively the sole owner of restaurants, hotels, and event spaces, which are patronized by foreign and domestic government clientele,” reads the appellate court’s explanation of the case.
“The President has announced that, since assuming office, he has turned over day‐to‐day management of his business empire to his children and established a trust to hold his business assets. However, he maintains sole ownership, receives business updates at least quarterly, and has the ability to obtain distributions from the trust at any time,” it added.
Noah Bookbinder, CREW’s executive director, lauded the development and called on the president to “end his violations” of the Constitution’s emoluments clauses.
“We thank and applaud the judges of the Second Circuit for their decision today. We never wanted to be in a position where it would be necessary to go to court to compel the President of the United States to follow the Constitution,” Bookbinder told Law&Crime. “However, President Trump left us no choice, and we will proudly fight as long as needed to ensure Americans are represented by an ethical government under the rule of law.”
“If President Trump would like to avoid the case going further and curtail the serious harms caused by his unconstitutional conduct, now would be a good time to divest from his businesses and end his violations of the Emoluments Clauses of the Constitution,” he added.
Tom's Blog 