A Soros-linked media group sought to launch a character assassination smear against Fox News host Tucker Carlson over the weekend, seeking to get the ratings kingpin fired from the cable news channel and ostracized from “polite” society over recordings of a few backroom jokes with some radio show hosts around a decade ago.
Operatives from the organization had hoped that Carlson would profusely apologize, back down, and retire from public life, thus silencing a leading critic of the progressive left’s push for total political, social and cultural control over American life.
Media Matters had been hoping for a “apology,” potentially creating a window for the progressive hate mob to flood Fox with calls for Tucker’s firing.
Instead, the Tuck fired back with a scathing takedown of the progressive mob that will leave the Soros-funded operatives with a rhetorical smackdown they won’t soon forget.
Watch here:
Tucker’s takedown of classic and time-tested leftist character assassination tactics could represent the first chink in neutralizing them as one of the most effective political tools of the progressive left.
Liberals are compelled to try and oust individuals like Tucker because he represents a threat to their political power- not because they’re genuinely morally outraged over a few jokes Tucker told a radio host ten years ago.
Tucker brought up the Covington Catholic hate hoax earlier this year- highlighting it as an example of another incident when conservative leaders were all-but prepared to let a few innocent boys be defamed by progressives.
Yet, a few fearless truth-seekers stood up, standing up to the mob and exposing a dastardly hate hoax.
The sooner conservatives, patriots and right wingers learn to simply shrug off the “deceit and enforced silence” demanded of them by progressives, the sooner the left becomes utterly powerless and doomed in the American political arena.
Tech companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter are having a “huge problem” controlling content on their platforms, and censoring conservatives isn’t enough, claimed BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti.
“Tech platforms are having a huge problem with the content on their platforms,” Peretti said Friday at SXSW. “They don’t make the content and are having trouble controlling the content.”
Peretti also said that censoring conservatives alone isn’t enough; Big Tech also needs to promote “good content,” ie particular points of view.
“We can’t just police bad content, we have to produce good content,” Peretti said.
A video presentation included in Peretti’s speech showed an image of a garbage can equated with the words “Anti-Vaxxers,”“trolls,” “political extremists,” “flat-Earthers,” “racists,” “misogynists,” and “pedophiles,” as among the issues Big Tech faces.
“They’re trying to get rid of all the bad stuff, and it’s an endless fight to get rid of all the terrible content that’s uploaded to these platforms, and they can never win this fight,” Peretti said.
“There’s a vacuum which is created by a lack of good content and it’s made it difficult for the platforms, and it’s opened up this opportunity for all these other bad actors to upload content.”
The Austin Chronicle’s Austin Sanders agreed with Peretti’s premise, saying that “it’s not just about banning Alex Jones.”
“The point illustrates the challenge facing platforms like Facebook and Twitter: It’s not just about banning Alex Jones, it’s about promoting the media companies that produce quality journalism, so more people are seeing thoroughly verified information,” Sanders wrote Friday.
Media Matters launched a new smear against Fox News host Tucker Carlson on Sunday compiling a bunch of out-of-context, heavily edited comments/jokes he made over a decade ago while on shock jock radio with Bubba the Love Sponge.
Carlson was employed by MSNBC at the time and it caused no controversy.
Bill Maher made similar comments in the past and was defended by the left:
Let's recall when Bill Maher said it was perfectly fine for a teacher to rape a 12-year-old resulting in two children, and he wasn't joking he defended it vehemently. Waiting for your video on this. #TuckerCarlson@TuckerCarlson Tucker Carlson pic.twitter.com/whly6UC3JU
Does anyone believe for a second these leftists give a s*** what Tucker Carlson said on shock jock radio with Bubba the Love Sponge so many years ago?
They want to take him down because he represents a threat to the establishment.
They don’t like the fact he stands up against the US war machine and speaks out against mass immigration.
They don’t like the fact he gives honest leftists like Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang a platform on national television.
That’s why some loser went through potentially hundreds of these old interviews and listened to them in their entirety just find some comments/jokes they could take out of context to attack him over.
They’re trying to destroy this man because of the threat he represents to the establishment and their billionaire globalist bosses. They can’t argue in favor of prog-globalism and defend brainwashing kids with transgender propaganda so they just dig up old comments they can misconstrue and take out of context.
A search of their archives shows they defended Virginia Governor Ralph Northam’s defense of infanticide and didn’t even write about his blackface-KKK controversy (other than to attack one Fox News employee for suggesting Northam should “dig in” and not resign [which was also taken totally out of context]).
These dishonest hacks don’t give a damn about anything other than helping their globalist masters seize power.
Kudos to Tucker Carlson for refusing to issue a groveling apology and instead standing strong in the face of these dishonest smears.
A U.S. Senator and 2020 presidential hopeful kept an aide on her staff despite multiple accusations of sexual harassment, according to several Monday report.
“The military adviser to Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, a 2020 presidential candidate who has been an outspoken supporter of the #MeToo movement and a campaigner against sexual misconduct in the military, kept his job despite allegations he sexually harassed a junior female aide,”according to Washington Examiner.
The female aide and alleged victim of the misconduct resigned in protest over the way Gillibrand handled her complaints. She is described as mid-20’s, married and apparently Gillibrand officiated her wedding.
The military advisor, who has now been terminated, is Abbas Malik. He was only fired after media inquiries into his alleged misconduct.
“The woman has accused Gillibrand of hypocrisy in protecting a powerful male staff member and abandoning a junior female staffer — a sharp contrast with her political rhetoric on sexual misconduct,” according to the report.
Malik allegedly made “a string of unwelcome advances” and sexually explicit remarks. He reportedly said that the young female aide “couldn’t get laid unless she was raped.”
Despite the aides reports, Malik kept his job.
Gillibrand released a statement to The Examiner:
“These are challenges that affect all of our nation’s workplaces, including mine, and the question is whether or not they are taken seriously.
As I have long said, when allegations are made in the workplace, we must believe women so that serious investigations can actually take place, we can learn the facts, and there can be appropriate accountability. That’s exactly what happened at every step of this case last year. I told her that we loved her at the time and the same is true today.”
The accuser wrote a letter to Gillibrand, which was subsequently published in Politico:
“I have offered my resignation because of how poorly the investigation and post-investigation was handled.
I trusted and leaned on this statement that you made: ‘You need to draw a line in the sand and say none of it is O.K. None of it is acceptable.’ Your office chose to go against your public belief that women shouldn’t accept sexual harassment in any form and portrayed my experience as a misinterpretation instead of what it actually was: harassment and ultimately, intimidation.”
On Sunday, democratic presidential candidate Julián Castro appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” with Jake Tapper.
During the segment, Tapper spoke with Castro about the issue of reparations for descendants of slavery: “This is also dividing Democrats on the trail. You’ve said that there needs to be some kind of reparations to descendants of slaves to compensate for years of slavery and discrimination against African Americans in this country.”
Tapper then played a clip in which presidential rival Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) talks about Castro’s and Sen. Kamala Harris’ (D-CA) support for reparations:
What do they mean? I’m not sure anyone’s very clear. What I just said is that I think we must do everything that we can to address the massive level of disparity that exists in this country.
Tapper asked Castro: “So, what do you mean? Do you think that there should be actual monetary payments to descendants of slaves? Do support more like what Senator Sanders is talking about, policies such as child care and education that help those who are disadvantaged?”
Castro replied:
Well, you know, what I said was that I’ve long believed that this country should address slavery, the original sin of slavery, including by looking at reparations, and if I’m president, then I’m going to appoint a commission or task force to determine the best way to do that. There’s a tremendous amount of disagreement on how we would do that.
Castro then took a jab at Sanders, saying that he shouldn’t be arguing against an approach to reparations that might include “writing a big check” because that’s been the senator from Vermont’s position on health care and college tuition.
He concluded: “So, if under the Constitution, we compensate people because we take their property, why wouldn’t you compensate people who actually were property?”
The notion of somehow compensating the ancestors of American slaves has long been a topic of discussion among academics and political thinkers. However, the mechanics by which a reparations program would operate have challenged even the most diligent.
On an episode of “Point Taken” on PBS regarding reparations, libertarian commentator Kmele Foster stated bluntly: “I think the important things to consider are, who pays? How much do they pay? And who do they pay it to? These are impossibly difficult questions to actually reconcile and answer in a meaningful and just way.”
Even progressive author Ta-Nehisi Coates, in his 2014 thesis on “the case for reparations” published in The Atlantic, didn’t come to any conclusion as to how reparations should work, writing in part:
Perhaps no number can fully capture the multi-century plunder of black people in America. Perhaps the number is so large that it can’t be imagined, let alone calculated and dispensed. But I believe that wrestling publicly with these questions matters as much as—if not more than—the specific answers that might be produced. An America that asks what it owes its most vulnerable citizens is improved and humane. An America that looks away is ignoring not just the sins of the past but the sins of the present and the certain sins of the future. More important than any single check cut to any African American, the payment of reparations would represent America’s maturation out of the childhood myth of its innocence into a wisdom worthy of its founders.
Coates does refer to a bill from former Rep. John Conyers as the beginning of a potential solution: “A country curious about how reparations might actually work has an easy solution in [John] Conyers’s bill, now called HR 40, the Commission to Study Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act. We would support this bill, submit the question to study, and then assess the possible solutions.”
Former President Obama even commented on the non-feasibility of a reparations program:
As a practical matter, it is hard to think of any society in human history in which a majority population has said that as a consequence of historic wrongs, we are now going to take a big chunk of the nation’s resources over a long period of time to make that right.
Instead, Obama pointed toward progressive redistributionist programs as a means of reparations:
[I am] not so optimistic as to think you would ever be able to garner a majority of the American Congress that would make those kinds of investments above and beyond the kind of investments that could be made in a progressive program for lifting up all people.
As the Democratic presidential candidates gear up for a contentious primary season, they should be prepared to answer questions about reparations. With Julián Castro, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren already promoting the issue, it’s unlikely that it will fade silently into the night.
Human traffickers are exploiting weak U.S. asylum laws and immigration policies by ‘recycling’ children used to escort adult illegal aliens into the country, according to DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen.
Nielsen testified before Congress on Thursday regarding the explosive crisis unfolding at the U.S. border – a situation she said is “truly an emergency.”
“Smugglers and traffickers have caught on realizing that the outdated laws, lack of resources and bad court decisions effectively give them a free ticket into America,” Nielsen said. “Information about the weaknesses in our system has spread quickly in Central America, in fact they are advertised. And our booming economy under President Trump has made the dangerous journey even more attractive to migrants.”
“As a result, the flow of families and children has become a flood. In the past five years we have seen a 620 percent increase in families or those posing as families apprehended at the border. The last fiscal year was the highest on record.
“And of great concern to me is that the children are used as pawns to get into our country,” Nielsen continued. “We have encountered recycling rings where innocent young people are used multiple times to help aliens gain illegal entry. As a nation, we simply cannot stand for this. We must fix the system.”
Nielsen revealed that Customs and Border Patrol agents apprehended or encountered a stunning 75,000 migrants attempting to illegally enter in the United States in the month of February alone – an 80 percent increase over the same period last year – and that the agency is already on pace to apprehend more migrants in the first six months of this fiscal year than the entirety of FY 2017.
Nielsen warned that if the crisis continues on its current trajectory, it “will overwhelm the system entirely.”
She also explained that due to changing migration flows and demographics of arrivals, combined with laws and policies currently in place, most are now released into the United States “with virtually no hope of removing them in the future.”
“The vast majority of these individuals are from Central America,” Nielsen said. “While many of them initially claim asylum and are let into the United States, only one in 10 are ultimately granted asylum by an immigration judge. Unfortunately when it comes time to remove the other 90 percent, they have often disappeared into the interior of our country.”
HSINO… That is Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) — our “House Speaker In Name Only,” an aging figurehead limping towards extinction.
Late last month, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez declared herself “the boss” — and Thursday’s disgraceful House vote condemning All the Hates proved that sentiment 100 percent true.
Don’t be fooled by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MD); she is not “stepping on rakes” or “accidentally” revealing her antisemitism. This is a coordinated strategy on the part of her and her allies to legitimize antisemitism, to normalize bigoted stereotypes about money-grubbing and dual loyalties that go above and beyond honest criticism of Israel.
That’s the play here, that is what is at stake, and because she’s lost control of the House and her caucus to the Ocasio-Crazies, Pelosi is helpless to stop it.
In fact, Pelosi has become Ocasio-Crazy’s puppet, her mouthpiece… “I do not believe she understood the full weight of the words,” Pelosi told reporters Thursday to explain why she does not believe Omar should apologize or lose her consequential seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
“I feel confident that her words were not based on any antisemitic attitude. But that she didn’t have a full appreciation of how they landed on other people where these words have a history and a cultural impact that might have been unknown to her,” the ventriloquist dummy added without blinking.
This week marked the third time in two months Omar went there, went to a place we have not seen a mainstream figure go since Father Coughlin in the 1930s. And with Ocasio-Crazy out there launching a ridiculous (and condescending) defense of Omar (it’s a learning process) and refusing to back a House resolution that condemns antisemitism alone (think about that), Pelosi had no choice but to back down, to come up with this utterly meaningless All the Hates resolution that Omar was perfectly comfortable voting for.
And why wouldn’t she vote yea? The resolution was not only a triumph for Omar and her wild-eyed ilk over Pelosi, it proved her strategy is working — that you can now hurl these bigoted smears without fear of condemnation.
This is how much of a shell Pelosi is now: she no longer has the influence to convince her caucus to support a standalone resolution against antisemitism; she no longer has the authority to stop Omar from her antisemitic quest to move the Overton window, she is powerless against Omar’s launching of one rhetorical fire bomb after another directly into the middle of Pelosi’s agenda for the 116th Congress.
And let’s be honest, going back to its Ku Klux Klan and Jim Crow days, the Democrat Party has always been a hotbed of antisemitism — a party that has tolerated and even feted Louis Farrakhan for decades, that embraces Rev. Al Sharpton, a Party that seems to have grown tired of having to hide its antisemitism and just wants to be free.
Trump antagonist Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) deleted a tweet posted Friday morning attacking President Donald Trump for taking a trip to Alabama. Lieu went off on Trump with Lieu acting completely unaware that parts of Alabama had been recently devastated by deadly tornadoes. Lieu later explained the tweet, saying he assumed Trump was going to Alabama for a rally.
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) in a previous display of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Trump tweeted Friday before he departed, “Heading now to the Great State of Alabama!”, prompting Lieu to vomit on Twitter:
“WE ARE IN THE THIRD WEEK OF A NATIONAL EMERGENCY! Can you feel the emergency? Is this why @RealDonaldTrump is going to Alabama, because we need to build a Wall along Alabama’s southern border? Oh wait, I just looked at the map….#FridayMorning Thoughts”
Lieu deleted the tweet after being hammered and posted an explanation, “I have concluded based on Twitter comments I received that my last tweet was inappropriate. I understand the purpose now of the President’s visit to Alabama. I apologize and am going to delete my tweet.”
Lieu followed with a reply to former NYPD offcier John Cardillo, crediting Cardillo with informing him about the nature of Trump’s visit to Alabama, “You have the absolute right to criticize my inappropriate tweet and to not accept my apology. It was your first Tweet that alerted me to the purpose of the President’s visit. Thank you for your input.”
Lieu explained to another critic that he assumed Trump was going to Alabama for a rally, “Sure. I thought Trump was going to a rally. Because that’s how he sometimes announces them on Twitter. I was incorrect in my assumption. And here is my explanation for why I deleted the tweet.”
Tom's Blog 