Sunday, July 2, 2017

The Boomerang Finds New Targets! Go, Mad Dog Trump. The Foaming Left. Don't Call Liberal Dictators Out,They Get Angry. Raskin The New Rasputin.

The boomerang, I warned about in previous memos, is reaching new targets.  Meanwhile, has the left gone mad and, if so, when? (See 1 and 1a below.)

Mad Dog Trump strikes back. (See 1b and 1c below.)

Is attorney Raskin, Soros' new Rasputin? Because he disagrees with Mad Dog Trump, Raskin believes he can trump the voter's decision with his own.  Beware of liberals employing dictator tactics but that is what they do and then they get upset when you call them out and challenge them.

This is why, among other reasons, liberals are dangerous. They play by and impose their own rules, the same ones they deny and protest others having and, as Kim wrote, they love to intimidate.

Stand up to them and you will become their target of abuse. They hate to have their ideas and beliefs challenged because they are so self-righteous.

They will lie and cheat and circumvent in order to get their way.  Obama was a master at employing Alinsky's tactics.

As a skilled and radical community organizer, Obama was deaf and arrogant when it came to considering alternatives. His programs and policies bore no relation to economic costs and this is why they have failed but the intricate and deft way in which they were constructed make them difficult to erase. Furthermore, Republicans do not have the stomach for a fight. They are too patrician.

I once received this unsigned, handwritten letter in my mail box: "You're a nasty old racist, and an embarrassment to your Landings neighbors. Vote for whoever you want but keep your ugly, offensive thoughts to yourself. You're a creep."

Rather than deter me it emboldened me to be more vocal. I used to post one memo a day, now I generally post two.  I used to send one LTE to the local paper, now I send dozens. I used to be more balanced in my judgement  now I tend to be more partisan. I used to be more tolerant of liberal thinking now I am more prone to dismiss it as inane prattle.

This is why I understand Trump.  I am not a tweeter but neither am I going to bow to the true and real "creeps" in this world.

As I once wrote in a previous memo: "Don't screw with Hoppy!"
Have a memorable 4th and don't fear being patriotic, religious and outspoken.
1) Like Haman Being Hanged on the Scaffold He Built for Mordechai

An online friend watching the week’s events observes that they remind her of the villain Haman being hanged on the very scaffold he had built to hang Mordechai in the biblical Book of Esther. That sums up the week in which the federal investigators are themselves under investigation and the press is forced to recant the lies it has been publishing about the administration. Having watched the deep state eviscerate gentleman G.W. Bush and his administration on the Plamegate fiction, this turn of events warms my heart. It’s long overdue.

1. The Attempted “Russian Collusion” Coup Fails

The Plotters Are Under Scrutiny

Loretta Lynch,  Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and James Comey -- not President Trump -- have more to fear from the ongoing investigations than does President Trump, against whom not a shred of evidence of illegal or improper conduct of his campaign has turned up in a year of searching for one .

Even Comey’s replacement, as acting head of the FBI Andrew McCabe, is under investigation -- three separate inquiries into his behavior are, in fact, ongoing

Circa reported Monday that former supervisory special agent Robyn Gritz, a decorated counter terrorism agent, has filed a sexual discrimination and retaliation complaint that names McCabe and other top FBI officials.

That is working its way through the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and is awaiting a review by an administrative law judge in the Office of Federal Operations.
Gritz also filed a complaint against McCabe with the main federal whistle blower agency in April, alleging social media photos she found show he campaigned for his wife’s Virginia state senate race in violation of the Hatch Act.
 FBI employees are held to a higher standard than other federal workers under the Hatch Act and may not “endorse or oppose a candidate for partisan political office or a candidate for political party office in a political advertisement, broadcast, campaign literature, or similar material if such endorsement or opposition is done in concert with a candidate, political party, or partisan political group.”

The OSC told Circa that complaint is still being actively investigated.

In addition, the Justice Department Inspector General is investigating allegations from Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, that McCabe may not have properly disclosed campaign payments to his wife on his ethics report and should have recused himself from Hillary Clinton's email case. 
Investors Business Daily concludes that the worm is beginning to turn on “the conspiracy mongers”:

Over the weekend, the New York Post reported that the firm behind the infamous Trump dossier -- Fusion GPS -- has been stonewalling the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has been trying to get information on who paid the firm to produce it and how it was used by government officials.

It has been publicly known since at least early January that Fusion GPS was behind the discredited dossier, which claimed that Russia had blackmailable information on Trump, and that it was a notorious opposition research firm that was often enlisted to dig up dirt on Republicans, including a 2012 smear campaign against a donor to Mitt Romney's campaign.

As the Post notes, one of the Fusion's founders, Peter Fritsch, contributed "at least $1,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund and the Hillary for America campaign."

The Post story has sparked renewed interest in this dossier, most of which has been discredited, but which appears to be serving as a "road map" to various investigations.

John McCain, who peddled the dossier story, knew better -- some of the same figures were involved with him in his presidential campaign, and the claims were proven groundless.

The press, which megaphoned the plot, has lost all credibility.

As my online friend Thomas Lipscomb notes, the press has to keep up its ad revenue in order to print all the corrections it has to publish.

CNN has been hurt the most for its around-the-clock promotion of the claims against Trump.
This week it forced the resignation of three of its employees for running a fake story based on an “anonymous” source. Mollie Hemingway details the sordid history of fake news at CNN:

But taking responsibility for just one of the many flawed stories CNN has been pushing is nowhere near sufficient a response to the institutional problems plaguing the media outlet. The serious problems with CNN’s approach to the Russia-Trump collusion conspiracy are much deeper than just one story, go back many months, and involve several stories and larger themes that no one at CNN has bothered to sufficiently explain. 

But whether it’s the embarrassingly false Comey story, the discredited dossier hit job, the retracted collusion story, or any of the other thinly sourced and overhyped collusion stories, all of these problems are similar. The journalists are getting bad information from anonymous sources, not being transparent about what has gone wrong when sourcing fails, and generally being too credulous with anonymous -- always-anonymous -- sources.

Yes, letting three employees go is a good first step. But more needs to be done to restore credibility. 
Sometimes, the errors are not even the result of bad sources as much as mindless reliance on the claims of those they endorse. This week, the NYT printed this correction to a long-repeated lie:

Correction: June 29, 2017

A White House Memo article on Monday about President Trump’s deflections and denials about Russia referred incorrectly to the source of an intelligence assessment that said Russia orchestrated hacking attacks during last year’s presidential election. The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies -- the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.

The Associated Press followed on, eating crow as well:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In stories published April 6, June 2, June 26 and June 29, The Associated Press reported that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies have agreed that Russia tried to influence the 2016 election to benefit Donald Trump. That assessment was based on information collected by three agencies -- the FBI, CIA and National Security Agency -- and published by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which represents all U.S. intelligence agencies. Not all 17 intelligence agencies were involved in reaching the assessment.

My online friend JMH notes how dumb was the assertion that all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community had concluded Russia hacked the DNC:

It only took one look at the Intelligence Community roster to figure that out. Did anybody really think that National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency weighed in on Russian hackery, or that Coast Guard Intel confirmed it? The patent risibility of the claim is what drove me crazy. All it takes is for something to appear in print once, and the left will run with it forever, no matter how thoroughly or often it gets debunked.
In the meantime, the administration just continues to drain the swamp while the press goes bananas over the President’s tweets.

Our own editor explains the significance of the President’s tweets

Can anyone argue that "pretending we are all Good Friends" when the other side doesn't works to Trump's (or conservatives') best interest? The norms associated with it need to change. There will be unpleasantness along the way. President Trump is setting about it in his own way and in his own style, which almost always occasions outrage, as it did in the presidential election. It turns out that the norms of the Beltway elite are not universal, and that a culture far larger than the media-political elite also has a voice in the end.

If a candidate won’t defend his own interests, using all weapons at his command, why should the public think he will zealously defend their common interests, especially against pseudo-aristocratic racial/ethnic claims of privilege? It is scarcely egomania, let alone “white nationalism,” to defend oneself from fire coming at one from a safe space. Why are low blows and insults tolerated when they are directed at Republicans, but “unpresidential” and “beneath the dignity of the office” when they are repulsed in equal measure? In fact, Aristotle makes it clear that permitting an injustice to oneself is a vice. [snip] Just as the left makes every attack on the administrative state an attack on the 1964 Civil Rights Act, so every Republican

Administration becomes for the media and Democrats a replay of Nixon and Watergate. Nixon tried to rollback the Democrats’ successor to the New Deal, the Great Society. Republicans still haven’t learned the meaning of Watergate, which was far more a political crisis engineered by partisan Democrats than a constitutional crisis brought about by Nixon. Republicans have yet to recognize that their Machiavellian enemies in the bureaucracy, media, and politics brought about Nixon’s demise. Trump has seen that crisis early on in his presidency, embodied in James Comey, and is gamely fighting it. 

Iowahawk is also on target. David Burge‏ @iowahawkblog  June 29

“Washington is now just a bunch of kittens with laser pointers stapled to their heads.”

They keep chasing that red dot and ignore the fact that the EPA can no longer claim the puddle in your driveway gives them jurisdiction over your property. Your son will no longer have to face a university star chamber if some gal claims he invaded her safe space. The military halted endorsing the recruitment of transgenders. No longer will energy sources be locked up from exploitation, or our allies be left hanging while we send a plane with pallets full of cash to the murderous mullahs. NATO members are paying more of their share of defense costs.  Abbas has stopped paying terrorists in Israeli jails. 

A real revolution is underway which is knocking the arrogant incompetent elites off their feet. They can scamper about all they want. There’s no catching that red dot at the end of the laser beam.

1a) How the Left Lost Its Mind
Polemicists, conspiracists, and outright fabulists are feeding an alternative media landscape—where the implausibility of a claim is no bar to its acceptance.
by McKay Coppins

Last month, Democratic Senator Ed Markey delivered what seemed like an explosive bit of news during an interview with CNN: A grand jury had been impaneled in New York, he said, to investigate the Trump campaign’s alleged collusion with Russia.

The only problem: It wasn’t true.

The precise origins of the rumor are difficult to pin down, but it had been ricocheting around social media for days before Markey’s interview. The story had no reliable sourcing, and not a single credible news outlet touched it—but it had been fervently championed by The Palmer Report, a liberal blog known for peddling conspiracy theories, and by anti-Trump Twitter crusaders like Louise Mensch. Soon enough, prominent people with blue check marks by their names were amplifying it with “Big if true”-type Tweets. And by May 11, the story had migrated from the bowels of the internet to the mouth of a United States senator.
After Markey’s office apologized for spreading the unsubstantiated story, there was a mild flurry of articles warning of “fake news” aimed at the left, and then everyone moved on. But the episode jarringly illustrated an under-examined phenomenon in American politics.

Over the past two decades, an immense amount of journalistic energy was spent exploring the right-wing media ecosystem—from talk radio, to Fox News, to Breitbart and beyond—and documenting its growing influence on mainstream GOP politics. This turned out to be a worthy and prescient pursuit, and if any doubt remains about that, I’d present “President Donald Trump” as Exhibit A. While serious Republicans in the political class spent years scoffing at the “entertainers” and “provocateurs” on the supposedly powerless fringe, the denizens of the fever swamp were busy taking over the party.

But 2017 poses the question: Could the same thing happen on the left?

It’s a prospect that deserves more serious attention and debate than it’s gotten this year. The Trump era has given rise to a vast alternative left-wing media infrastructure that operates largely out of the view of casual news consumers, but commands a massive audience and growing influence in liberal America. There are polemical podcasters and partisan click farms; wild-eyed conspiracists and cynical fabulists. Some traffic heavily in rumor and wage campaigns of misinformation; others are merely aggregators and commentators who have carved out a corner of the web for themselves. But taken together, they form a media universe where partisan hysteria is too easily stoked, and fake news can travel at the speed of light.

Before we go on, let me try to quiet the cries of “False equivalence!” before they begin: No, these personalities and publications do not yet wield the same influence in the Democratic Party that their counterparts do in the GOP. But ignoring them would be a mistake. In recent months, some of the most irresponsible actors in this world have proven alarmingly adept at influencing venerated figures of the left—from public intellectuals, to world-famous celebrities, to elected officials.

What follows is an attempt to map the topography of the left’s modern alternative media landscape. It is by no means comprehensive, but hopefully it provides a useful start to the kind of exploration and anthropology that’s needed.

Twitter conspiracists

In past political epochs, popular conspiracy theories spread via pamphlets left on windshields, or chain emails forwarded thousands of times. These days, the tinfoil-hat crowd gathers on Twitter.

People like Mensch, Claude Taylor, Andrea Chalupa, Eric Garland, and Leah McElrath feed their followers a steady diet of highly provocative speculation, rumor, and innuendo that makes it sound as if Trump’s presidency—and, really, the entire Republican Party—is perpetually on the verge of a spectacular meltdown.

The most prolific of the conspiracy-mongers tend to focus on the Russia scandal, weaving a narrative so sensationalistic and complex that it could pass for a Netflix political drama. Theirs is a world where it is acceptable to allege that hundreds of American politicians, journalists, and government officials are actually secret Russian agents; that Andrew Breitbart was murdered by Vladimir Putin; that the Kremlin has “kompromat” on everyone, and oh-by-the-way a presidency-ending sex tape is going to drop any day now.

Writing recently in The New Republic, Sarah Jones identified the popularity of these notorious tweet stormers—some of whom boast followings in the hundreds of thousands—as part of a “disturbing emerging trend” on the left. “Liberals desperate to believe that the right conspiracy will take down Donald Trump promote their own purveyors of fake news,” she wrote.

Hyperpartisan Facebook pages

If Twitter is where liberal conspiracy theories germinate and spread among news junkies, Facebook is where anti-Republican propaganda can go wide.

Facebook pages like Occupy Democrats have millions of fans who ensure that every meme, video, and breathless blog post they publish has a good chance at virality. The content plastered across these pages includes standard-issue clickbait (“Trump Just Did Something Awful At His Golf Course”) and hyperbolic headlines (“Queen Elizabeth Just Told Trump To Go F*ck Himself And It Is Perfect”). But these feeds are also studded with straightforwardly fake news.

An analysis by BuzzFeed during the frenzied final weeks of the 2016 election found that nearly 20 percent of the stories posted by three extremely popular liberal Facebook pages—Occupy Democrats, The Other 98%, and Addicting Info—were either partly or mostly false. While conservative Facebook pages were even more likely to spread false stories, BuzzFeed’s finding should serve as a red flag for the kind of the news that millions of rank-and-file Democrats are getting on the world’s largest social-media platform.  

Blogs and message boards

The roots of the liberal blogosphere can be traced back to the early Bush years, when Markos Moulistas launched the Daily Kos to crusade against “an oppressive and war-crazed administration” and Josh Marshall used Talking Points Memo to take the Senate Majority Leader to task. A decade and a half later, some of the blogs of that era have matured into more professional news sites, like TPM, while others have disappeared. But in 2017, the left has more niche political sites than ever, and in many ways they make up the core of its modern media ecosystem.

Some are relative newcomers to this scene. There is The Palmer Report, the publication of record for anti-Trump conspiracy nuts who don’t care about the credibility of the record; Shareblue, a viral news site that aspires, according to its founder David Brock, to become the “Breitbart of the left”; and Patribotics, home to Mensch’s Russia-related rumor mongering.  

Meanwhile, old-school platforms like Reddit and Daily Kos continue to host freewheeling forums that attract the kind of occasionally enlightening, occasionally deranged conversations that tend to thrive in those environments. And the HuffPost contributor platform—an un-vetted, unedited section of the site that operates apart from its professional journalism—has been a vehicle for some of the most bizarre, and outright craziest, content to go viral on the left in recent years.

Just this month, editors were forced to delete a contributor post that began, “Impeachment and removal from office are only the first steps; for America to be redeemed, Donald Trump must be prosecuted for treason and — if convicted in a court of law — executed.” And throughout last year’s primaries, Seth Abramson, a creative writing professor at the University of New Hampshire, used his HuffPost perch to churn out a procession of increasingly delusional blog posts explaining why Bernie Sanders would inevitably win the Democratic nomination.

Abramson’s arguments not only denied political realities and delegate math as the race wore on; they often denied basic human logic. But thanks to the hordes of Bernie fans desperately scouring the internet for some hope to cling to, Abramson’s posts consistently went uber-viral. (He eventually wrote a post defending this shameless play for clicks as a form of “experimental journalism” that embraced “the multi-dimensionality of metanarrative.” The Washington Post’s Matt O’Brien responded via Twitter: “Area Academic Writes Barely Comprehensible Defense of Lying.”) These days, Abramson’s main platform is Twitter, where he has over 150,000 followers, and specializes in imminent-indictment stories in the style of criminal complaints.


The constellation of popular podcasts that has emerged on the left serves many of the same functions that right-wing talk-radio hosts served for their audiences in their early days. They provide a mix of commentary, entertainment, and partisan catharsis; a safe space to process the daily onslaught of bad news.

The hosts tend not to be household names, but to their listeners they are superstars. The most successful podcasters—from the mainstream Democrats of the Crooked Media empire, to the gleefully vulgar champions of the “dirtbag left” at Chapo Trap House—are able to sell out theaters for live shows, and can even get recognized on the street (in certain zip codes, at least).

The nature of the medium—walled off from the web and unplugged from social media—means that podcasts are not innately integral to the spread of sketchy information on the left. Above all, they offer their stressed-out listeners a sense of community (plus plenty of discount codes for Blue Apron and MeUndies).

VIP Validators

One sign of the potential power in this alternative media universe is the regularity with which stories that originate there end up reaching public figures with real influence and massive followings. These may be people who are relatively unsophisticated when it comes to politics and media, but whose prominence in other fields—academia, history, law, literature—gives them a certain sheen of trustworthiness. So when they share stories from fringe outlets on Twitter or Facebook, many are inclined to take them seriously.

On the “about” page for The Palmer Report, the site thanks a range of well-known people and mainstream media outlets it claims have shared its (dubious) reporting —including Representative Ted Lieu, former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, former DNC chair Howard Dean, the actors Mark Ruffalo and Debra Messing, Newsweek, The Oregonian, and an array of MSNBC contributors. Lawrence Tribe, the renowned Harvard scholar of constitutional law, has been an especially active booster for the site, routinely tweeting links to highly questionable, unverified news stories about Trump.
Last April, when Jason Chaffetz announced he would resign his House seat, The Palmer Report published an anonymously sourced bombshell claiming the FBI had discovered the Utah congressman was being blackmailed by the Kremlin. The story was characteristic of the site’s well-worn shtick. But that didn’t stop Ned Price, a former special assistant to President Obama, from credulously passing it along on Twitter.

“Interesting, if single-sourced, article from a few days ago,” he wrote.
Eric Schultz, a senior adviser to Obama, then chimed in, “Too bad nobody flagged this earlier.”

When journalists began pressing the duo on why they were sharing a story from a website with such a spotty track record of accuracy, Price’s response was telling. “Every once in a blue moon, the tin hat can fit.”

1b) Trump the Junkyard Dog: Poke Him and Expect to Be Bitten

Remember Bad, Bad Leroy Brown?  He was "Badder than old King Kong and meaner than a junkyard dog." Junkyard dogs are good in a fight, mean and nasty when provoked.  They're often docile when treated decently, with respect and kindness.  But don't poke them with a stick or kick them unless you want to be attacked with bared teeth and a nasty bite.

President Donald Trump is a junkyard dog.  Raised in New York City, he spent his entire working life dealing with N.Y. politics, graft, regulations, backstabbing, and aggressiveness.  A true junkyard.  It's not the lunch room at Bergdorf Goodman on Fifth Avenue; it's the trenches of political warfare and bureaucracy of building hotels and managing real estate.

Trump is generally kind and gentle.  Ask his employees or his family.  For all the thousands of people he has interacted with over the years in his personal and professional life, few have been critical of Trump.  Except for a handful of women who piled on, accusing him of unwanted affections just after the Access Hollywood video release.

Morning Joe co-hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski "fawned over Trump" during much of the presidential campaign, to the dismay of Media Matters and other left-wing groups.  Treating him with respect, they had pleasant and informative interviews.  And good ratings.  Discussions and challenging questions regarding policy were fair game for a presidential candidate.  It wasn't personal or nasty.

Post-election, Joe and Mika spent New Year's Eve at Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago, enjoying their cordial relationship with and proximity to the president-elect.

Fast-forward to the Trump presidency.  Joe and Mika, perhaps responding to their MSNBC viewers and corporate masters, decided that petting the junkyard dog was no longer appropriate.  Instead, throwing rocks and poking him with a stick would be more suitable for the MSNBC audience.

How did they provoke the junkyard dog?  Mika accused him of "lying every day" and "destroying the country." She also referred to his "teensy" hands.

Remember Marco Rubio commenting on Trump's hands?  Early in the primary season, Rubio remarked, "And you know what they say about guys with small hands."  Poking the junkyard dog with a stick.  Trump hit back against "Little Marco" with a new nickname, and during the next debate, he defended his manhood: "I guarantee you there's no problem."

Ted Cruz learned a similar lesson after a Cruz-linked super-PAC posted nude photos of Melania Trump from 2000. Trump hit back hard with a side-by-side photo of Heidi Cruz and Melania Trump.  Poke a junkyard dog with a stick and expect to be bitten.

Joe and Mika learned a similar lesson this week when poking Trump, calling him a liar and questioning his manhood – not privately, but to the world on their morning news show, three hours a day, five days a week on a major network.  It was not for the first time, either.  Their show, network, and the entire mainstream media have been throwing rocks at Trump.  Incessant criticism.  Name-calling and worse.  Did they expect Trump to just ignore it?

Were they expecting a George W. Bush response of turning the other cheek – of repeatedly not reacting to criticism, content to "let history be the judge of what he did"?  How did that work out?  The Bush approach reflects the refined highbrow world he grew up in, not the rough-and-tumble world of New York City, where Trump cut his teeth.

Donald Trump is who he is.  We have been watching him daily for the past two years.  He doesn't pick fights, but he certainly responds when someone picks a fight with him.  First Lady Melania Trump set the stage for how this sort of thing goes: "When her husband gets attacked, he will punch back 10 times harder." 

So why the shock and outrage from the media and #NeverTrump Republicans?  This is who Trump is.  Call him a pig or a fascist or a Nazi incessantly.  Tell the world he is mentally ill and that he is ill endowed.  Claim that he wants to kill people and destroy the country.  Call him a liar – and this is not some small market talk radio host, but instead a prominent national network morning news show.  Even Carl Bernstein, still surfing his Watergate wave from 40 years ago, said we have "a malignant presidency."

Kick the junkyard dog and expect blow back.  Other presidents may have ignored this, but not the scrapper from Queens.  Poke him with a stick, and expect to be bitten eventually.

Spare us the high-horse indignation from the #NeverTrumps – whether it's Senator Ben Sasse saying, "This isn't normal and it's beneath the dignity of your office" or Senator Lindsay Graham saying, "Your tweet was beneath the office," these same paragons of virtue didn't seem to have a problem when Barack Obama weaponized the FBI, DOJ, CIA, and IRS in pursuit of political opponents.  But let Trump punch back, and it's the apocalypse.
Time for a new nursery rhyme for the media and everyone else outraged over President Trump.  "Ring around the Rosy" needs an update.

New version: Diss Trump around the rosy; get punched in the nosey.  Fake news, fake news, they all fall down.
Brian C Joondeph, M.D., MPS is a Denver-based physician and writer.  Follow him on FacebookLinkedIn, and Twitter.

1c) Joe and Mika, wallowing in the mud

"A sure sign of ineptitude and malice is manifested when one's attacker is willing to cover himself with mud in order to try to make some it adhere to his target." --Christopher Hitchens
The ever-execrable Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezenski are basking in the glory of mud of their own making; they think they are heroes of a kind because Trump tweeted something crass about them.  Indeed he did.  But it was well-deserved.  The pair host a morning program on the anti-Trump MSNBC each morning to which they dedicate nearly every moment to trashing Trump in every conceivable way, mostly personal.  They relentlessly mock him physically, mentally, and in every other way possible and have done so these past eight months.  They are cruel and vicious like the worst ten-year-old bully at a rough elementary school.  They rarely discuss policy; they would not have a clue.  They know nothing about health care, immigration, tax reform, national security, etc. They are thoroughly ignorant of all things substantive.  They only know Democrat talking points which lack substance, to say the least.   Most of their time is spent maligning the president.  Their guests, most of them ridiculous anti-Trumpers like Danny Deutch, et al, do the same. They are all hired thugs who betray their declared professions by being so easily purchased.  They are all shameless professional Trump bashers. 
Trump finally retaliated after eight months of tolerating their vitriol.  One would think the world shifted on its axis.  For the next 48 hours, the network and cable news outlets jabbered on about nothing else.  Had the Norks launched a missile at Hawaii it might not have interrupted their glee at thinking they have finally got Trump in some sort of vise that will turn out to be an impeachable offense.  Newsflash!  Trump's tweet is not remotely an impeachable offense.  It was well-deserved payback for months of vindictive nonsense that Joe and Mika spew each day.  Good for Trump.  Was it distasteful?  Yes, it was.  Are we Americans unaccustomed to such a ruthless reprisal from our President?  Yes, we are.  We have for too long accepted the  spiteful language of the left  Because conservatives have better manners, we take it lying down.  So, yes, even Republicans were taken back a bit by Trump's coarse tweet, but most are likely secretly pleased, like when we witness a bully who has long gotten away with his or her bullying is taken out by his perennial victim.  There is no question that the silly duo Joe and Mika deserved every hard-bitten word.  They are the bullies; they attack Trump and conservatives all day long from their cushy on-screen chairs and have the audacity to be jolted when someone, anyone, fights back.
The butt of Trump's tweet, Joe and Mika, are as mind-numbed as mind-numbed lefties can be.  They do not think critically about any policy debate and cannot discuss one intelligently.  All they know is the politics of personal destruction of the opposition.  As surely as Ted Kennedy set out to destroy Robert Bork, our left has set out to destroy Trump.  Kennedy's campaign to ruin Bork succeeded; he ruined the career of a fine and brilliant man.  And what was Ted Kennedy?  A coward of incomparable proportions; he let a woman die rather than be caught in an affair and then went on to collude with the Soviet KGB.  The left thinks Trump is a cad,  a misogynist!  The Kennedys and the Clintons make Trump look like an altar boy.  That truth is just another reason why they hate him so much.
Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezenski are nothing more than a couple of drones of the left.  Not many people watch their program so Trump's tweet was a boon for their ratings but that won't last.   They are boring and pathetic.  They have for many months covered themselves with mud in their feeble attempt to smear Trump.  Unlike the passive George W., Trump smeared back and they are shocked! Shocked that he could be so un-presidential.  Un-presidential his response to their daily venom may be but they earned it.  Trump was ever so justified.  Some of their mud may have stuck to Trump but Joe, Mika and the rest of the MSM are wallowing in it.
Charley Reese of the Orlando Sentinel wrote that  "If malice or envy were tangible and had a shape, it would be the shape of a boomerang."  The left learned nothing from their electoral loss.  They have just become more obnoxious, more malicious, more despicable.   That  muddy boomerang is headed their way.

No comments: