I have documented multiple times how rank-and-file Democrats have done everything they could to use every means – including infiltration and outright acts of violence – to prevent Americans from participating in the political process according to their 1st Amendment rights to hear a major political figure offer his ideas at a political rally. It has become so bad that at times, Donald Trump has been forced to climb walls and truck loading docks to enter venues through rear entrances to avoid violent Democrat “protesters.” And the same media that was all over Donald Trump when ONE Trump supporter struck a Democrat fascist infiltrator who was trying to prevent Trump from speaking to his supporters have done exactly WHAT to confront Democrat candidates over their continuous violence as they go to Trump events and try to violently stop them???
I am so beyond SICK of the abject moral hypocrisy that IS the Democratic Party. Recently, a bunch of thug Democrats turned violent in Las Vegas, Nevada because they have come to realize that the arbitrary way the Democrat Party picks its candidates is quintessentially fascist. And while these people are perfectly fine with violent fascism, they want THEIR fascism and THEIR fascist candidate. So they rioted and demonstrated that they “have a penchant for violence.” So, being fascist thugs, they “shouted down the keynote speaker, Sen. Barbara Boxer, and others they thought were tilting the rules in Clinton’s favor.” They “shouted obscenities and rushed the dais to protest rulings.” And they created “a very dangerous atmosphere that ended in chaos and physical threats to fellow Democrats.”
Now, here’s the thing. The same damn Democrat fascist thugs have been doing AND CONTINUE DOING the very same damn thing to virtually EVERY Donald Trump rally that they did to DNC crony-capitalist fascist mucky-mucks in Las Vegas. And all of a sudden it’s “violent.” But these Democrat Party Nazis already proved they are Nazis when they not only refused to call the violent Democrat thugs out but even praised them and turned them into victims when they were engaging in all the exact same tactics against Donald Trump and his supporters at Republican rallies.
By the same vile argument the Democrat Party and the propagandists masquerading as “journalists” offered, the Democratic Party is evil and violent. Because after all, if Trump was responsible for the violence of these “protestors,” then surely the Democratic Party is just as responsible when these identical protestors “protest” the identical same way they “protested” Trump events. Thrown chairs. Screaming speakers down. Brute intimidation of people trying to exercise their 1st Amendment rights. Leaked cellphone numbers. Substances intended to look exactly like anthrax people mailed to people. Death threats spewed across the Internet. You know, all the traditional Democrat Party Nazi thug tactics plus a couple of new ones.
You tell me how many times Hillary Clinton has been forced to low-crawl under a fence to attend a rally because violent rightwingers would attack her???
The answer to that question as well as the one I ended my opening paragraph with is ZERO to the ten thousandth decimal point. Similarly, why is it that thousands of Democrats illegally blocking traffic at event after event, chaining themselves to cars at event after event, screaming to drown out speakers at event after event, resorting to frequent violence even against the police who are trying to keep the peace at event after event – and frequently doing ALL Of the above under a foreign country’s flag – is okay but when one Trump guy goes over the top trying to stop the fascist madness it’s an indictment of Trump??? Because we live in a society today that the left has shaped to be even more suppressing of truth and facts and objective process in media coverage and fairness in reporting than it was when Joseph Goebbels ran his Ministry of Propaganda for the Nazi Party.
The cat – which is actually a fascist ferret – is out of the bag now. We can openly see the left’s intent to destroy the 1st Amendment even as they pursue the destruction of the 2nd Amendment and the clearly defined “right of the people to keep and bear arms” which “shall not be infringed.” At least until fascists take over. So we have a liberal writing for the liberal Harvard University saying this:
Harvard writer: Abolish free speech
Woman claims First Amendment threatens liberalism
Published: 1 day ago
A student writer at Harvard University is raising eyebrows after publishing her belief that free speech on campus should be abolished and professors with opposing views be fired.
Sandra Korn, a senior who writes a column for the Harvard Crimson newspaper, thinks radical leftism is the only permissible political philosophy, and the First Amendment only hinders colleges from brainwashing students with her viewpoint.
“Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice,” states the subtitle of her Feb. 18 column, in which she insists Harvard stop guaranteeing students and professors the right to hold controversial views and conduct research putting liberalism in a negative light.
“If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals?” Korn asks.
“It is tempting to decry frustrating restrictions on academic research as violations of academic freedom. Yet I would encourage student and worker organizers to instead use a framework of justice. After all, if we give up our obsessive reliance on the doctrine of academic freedom, we can consider more thoughtfully what is just.”
You don’t have the right to speak unless a liberal agrees with you. They have the right to shut you down, to shout you down which includes destroying your career, to punch you down, and the ends justifies the means. Whether it’s Donald Trump or gay marriage or LGBT bathrooms or anything else.
This is now the official attitude of every single Democrat in any position of influence whatsoever. And bad, wicked people vote for these fascists.
So we just found out that Facebook – one of the largest sources of “news” for young stupid morons who frankly don’t know a damn thing about reality because liberalism is Satanism – is an outright leftist propaganda source:
Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News
· Filed to: Facebook
Facebook workers routinely suppressed news stories of interest to conservative readers from the social network’s influential “trending” news section, according to a former journalist who worked on the project. This individual says that workers prevented stories about the right-wing CPAC gathering, Mitt Romney, Rand Paul, and other conservative topics from appearing in the highly-influential section, even though they were organically trending among the site’s users.
Several former Facebook “news curators,” as they were known internally, also told Gizmodo that they were instructed to artificially “inject” selected stories into the trending news module, even if they weren’t popular enough to warrant inclusion—or in some cases weren’t trending at all. The former curators, all of whom worked as contractors, also said they were directed not to include news about Facebook itself in the trending module.
In other words, Facebook’s news section operates like a traditional newsroom, reflecting the biases of its workers and the institutional imperatives of the corporation. Imposing human editorial values onto the lists of topics an algorithm spits out is by no means a bad thing—but it is in stark contrast to the company’s claims that the trending module simply lists “topics that have recently become popular on Facebook.”
These new allegations emerged after Gizmodo last week revealed details about the inner workings of Facebook’s trending news team—a small group of young journalists, primarily educated at Ivy League or private East Coast universities, who curate the “trending” module on the upper-right-hand corner of the site. As we reported last week, curators have access to a ranked list of trending topics surfaced by Facebook’s algorithm, which prioritizes the stories that should be shown to Facebook users in the trending section. The curators write headlines and summaries of each topic, and include links to news sites. The section, which launched in 2014, constitutes some of the most powerful real estate on the internet and helps dictate what news Facebook’s users—167 million in the US alone—are reading at any given moment.
“Depending on who was on shift, things would be blacklisted or trending,” said the former curator. This individual asked to remain anonymous, citing fear of retribution from the company. The former curator is politically conservative, one of a very small handful of curators with such views on the trending team. “I’d come on shift and I’d discover that CPAC or Mitt Romney or Glenn Beck or popular conservative topics wouldn’t be trending because either the curator didn’t recognize the news topic or it was like they had a bias against Ted Cruz.”
The former curator was so troubled by the omissions that they kept a running log of them at the time; this individual provided the notes to Gizmodo. Among the deep-sixed or suppressed topics on the list: former IRS official Lois Lerner, who was accused by Republicans of inappropriately scrutinizing conservative groups; Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker; popular conservative news aggregator the Drudge Report; Chris Kyle, the former Navy SEAL who was murdered in 2013; and former Fox News contributor Steven Crowder. “I believe it had a chilling effect on conservative news,” the former curator said.
Another former curator agreed that the operation had an aversion to right-wing news sources. “It was absolutely bias. We were doing it subjectively. It just depends on who the curator is and what time of day it is,” said the former curator. “Every once in awhile a Red State or conservative news source would have a story. But we would have to go and find the same story from a more neutral outlet that wasn’t as biased.”
Stories covered by conservative outlets (like Breitbart, Washington Examiner, and Newsmax) that were trending enough to be picked up by Facebook’s algorithm were excluded unless mainstream sites like the New York Times, the BBC, and CNN covered the same stories.
And fat chance of that because the New York Slimes, BBC and Clinton News Network are every bit as biased as Facebook with the same sort of arrogant, self-righteous Ivy League liberals running them that are running Facebook.
Oh, the fascist leftist propagandists deny this ideological and outright dishonest suppression of truth has been going on. But we have Zuckerberg himself on the record demonizing Trump every bit as much as the most rabid Clinton staffer, and we have Facebook’s own internal communications in which they ask, “What responsibility does Facebook have to help prevent President Trump in 2017?”
Yeah. It’s not like the site that 140 million Americans get their “news” is rabidly BIASED or anything.
To answer the Facebook question above, how about NONE? Because if you’re reporting as a NEWS SOURCE, you have a moral and ethical DUTY to merely REPORT the facts according to your own established objective criteria rather than play shenanigans and distort the record with your bias???
Easily proven leftist ideologue Mark Zuckerberg hired leftist ideologues as his “journalists” who then put their thumbs on the scales of every story they weighed to see if it was “trending.” That’s what happened.
Then there’s the Washington Post, one of the two leading flagships of quote-unquote “journalism.” We just learned that the leftist WaPo assigned a literal ARMY in journalistic terms of TWENTY REPORTERS to dig up dirt in every phase of Trump’s life:
Woodward: Washington Post Assigns 20 Reporters to Dig Into Trump’s Past
By Greg Richter | Wednesday, 11 May 2016 06:56 PM
The Washington Post has assigned 20 reporters to look into every aspect of Donald Trump’s past as the presumptive GOP nominee seeks to become the next president of the United States, famed Post associate editor, Bob Woodward, said Wednesday.
“There’s a lot we don’t know,” Woodward told the National Association of Realtors convention, according to The Washington Examiner. “We have 20 people working on Trump, we’re going to do a book, we’re doing articles about every phase of his life.”
Woodward himself is looking into Trump’s real estate deals, he said, saying that “The New York real estate world is more complex than the CIA.”
Woodward said Jeff Bezos, the Post’s publisher and a Democratic Party donor, has urged the paper to cover all of the candidates thoroughly.
“He said, ‘Look, the job at The Washington Post has to be tell us everything about who the eventual nominee will be in both parties, 15-part, 16-part series, 20-part series, we want to look at every part of their lives and we’re never going get the whole story of course but we can get the best attainable,'” Woodward said.
Woodward, who first exposed the Watergate break-in with fellow Post reporter Carl Bernstein, told the group that the Post also is working to get the “essence” of Hillary Clinton, the expected Democratic nominee. But he said he doesn’t believe Clinton purposely tried to use her private email server to send classified information when she was secretary of state.
“I don’t think anyone feels that there was intent on her part to distribute classified information in a way that was illegal or jeopardized security,” he said.
It’s amazing how subjective bias plays into their “objective” thinking. And how these self-professing geniuses are too morally stupid to realize what they are doing. Objectively, Hillary Clinton not only broke but SHATTERED every damn law on the books in her paranoid and fascist determination to establish a secret personal server so she could bypass all public transparency and reporting laws and bypass all security national laws. And for the damn record, “intent” is totally irrelevant according to the law here, just as “gross negligence” is not a defense. The question is merely, did Hillary Clinton put classified information on a nonsecure nongovernment device? And if the answer is “yes,” she committed a federal crime. Even the leftist Daily Kos – which albeit obviously is rooting for her opponent Bernie Sanders – acknowledges this objective fact. But what do liberals do? Let’s put aside the objective facts and focus on the most subjective element of all. I mean, did they ever give Mitt Romney the benefit of the doubt in terms of his “intent” on ANYTHING they blasted him for???
Consider the Washington Post is trying to tell us that Donald Trump is somehow a new figure and they need to vet him. Did they assign 20 reporters to dig up every shred of dirt on the totally unknown Barack Hussein Obama in 2008??? Nope. Have they ever assigned 2o reporters to investigate ANY of Hillary Clinton’s vast conspiracies? Benghazi? The secret server? The hundred million dollars the Clintons siphoned off from the world’s worst human rights abusers? The fact that Bill Clinton just got caught giving $2 million dollars described for the IRS as “charitable contributions” to a “friend” he is in all likelihood having sex with? The fact that the Clinton’s have a rather longstanding pattern of giving the VERY SCANT “charitable contributons” from their corrupt Clinton Foundation to political allies? Keep in mind it is a documented FACT that the Clinton Foundation – officially for tax purposes a charity organization – gives only TEN PERCENT of the billions it is raising for “charity.” And now we’re finding it goes to whore friends and crony friends.
These are just the very most RECENT facts that we’re learning.
We’re now learning that Hillary Clinton had a longstanding, regular and documented pattern that “show Hillary Clinton could not care less about the security of her communications.” We’ve got her on the record saying send what by definition was secure information “nonsecure.” strip the identifying headers saying “classified” all over the top of the page out first, mind out. To the damn extent that “intent” even matters, how the hell does that not show her INTENT to break the law??? Especially when she was briefed and told and signed her acknowledgement that she was briefed and told what the damn law was. And broke it over and over and over again anyway???
Now we’ve got Hillary Clinton caught red-handed in the damn act of lying to the American people yet again for like the fifty-trillionth time. She has steadfastly maintained that she is NOT under FBI investigation but that this is all just a “security inquiry.”
Hillary Clinton for months has downplayed the FBI investigation into her private email server and practices as a mere “security inquiry.”
But when asked Wednesday by Fox News about Clinton’s characterization of the bureau’s probe, FBI Director James Comey said he doesn’t know what “security inquiry” means — adding, “We’re conducting an investigation. … That’s what we do.”
It’s in their damn NAME. The last I heard it was the “Federal Bureau of INVESTIGATION.” Hillary Clinton is under criminal investigation by the FBI and both she and the damn media are so pathologically dishonest we can’t even be told the damn truth about THAT.
But where the hell are your twenty damn reporters covering the past of Hillary Clinton when there are so many rotting and fresh bodies, so much toxic waste, so many crimes, it is beyond UNREAL???
The same place they’d be if the Washington Post was part of Goebbels’ Ministry of Propaganda during Hitler’s day. Nowhere.
This exchange reveals the essence of modern “journalism” and the despicable bias that masquerades as “reporting”. And how they will go after Republicans tooth and nail and then fascistically back-flip on what they had just sworn was their divine duty the moment a Democrat gets elected in favor of a different objective:
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Yeah, well, you know what? I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work, and I think that —
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Is that your job? You just talked about being a journalist!
MATTHEWS: Yeah, it is my job. My job is to help this country.
Matthews wasn’t done with his odd new job description . . . An incredulous Scarborough kept pressing, astonished at such a complete 180 from Matthews’s repeated insistence during the Bush presidency that he had to hold the government accountable.
SCARBOROUGH: Your job is the make this presidency work?
MATTHEWS: To make this work successfully. This country needs a successful presidency.
Matthews will hardly be alone in that sentiment. Once Obama assumes office, the “speaking truth to power” line we’ve heard so often during the past eight years will be a thing of the past.
It’s so damn dishonest and hypocritical, but to be a liberal, to be a Democrat, means having a soul that SWIMS in dishonesty and hypocrisy.
The thing that makes me so viscerally angry about this is that liberals spent – from the very outset when they tried to delegitimize Bush’s very election as president – eight vicious years savagely undermining every aspect of the Bush presidency, and now react in horror that a conservative would even think of doing the same thing to an Obama presidency.
You go back to the pioneers that liberal journalists built their field upon, such as Edward Bernays:
In describing the origin of the term Public Relations, Bernays commented, “When I came back to the United States [from the war], I decided that if you could use propaganda for war, you could certainly use it for peace. And propaganda got to be a bad word because of the Germans … using it. So what I did was to try to find some other words, so we found the words Counsel on Public Relations”.
Bernays explained his project this way:
“the very essence of the democratic process” is “the freedom to persuade and suggest,” what he calls “the engineering of consent.” If the freedom to persuade happens to be concentrated in a few hands, we must recognize that such is the nature of a free society.
UNLESS of course a conservative gets to say anything. THEN he should be shouted down. Because to be a liberal is to be a fascist hypocrite who lied and said it was a level-playing field when they were so slanting the field that it was beyond unreal.
Bernay’s daughter described her father this way:
“Democracy to my father was a wonderful concept, but I don’t think he felt that all those publics out there had reliable judgment.. that they very easily might vote for the wrong man, or want the wrong thing. So that they had to be guided from above. It’s enlightened despotism in a sense. You appeal to their desires and their unrecognized longings that sort of thing. That you can tap into their deepest desires or deepest fears and use that to your own purposes.” Ann Bernays said, ““Anyone who disagreed with him, he used the word dope and stupid over and over. And the masses, they were stupid.”
That’s what we get today from the elite media who call Republicans and especially Trump voters as ignorant and uneducated and stupid and worse.
And Walter Lippmann who defined “journalism” this way:
Walter Lippmann described a “revolution” in “the practice of democracy” as “the manufacture of consent”
Lippmann – the “journalist” par excellance, has a terrifying definition of his profession which could come right out of Lenin:
It follows that two political roles must be clearly distinguished, Lippmann goes on to explain. First, there is the role assigned to the specialized class, the “insiders,” the “responsible men,” who have access to information and understanding. Ideally, they should have a special education for public office, and should master the criteria for solving the problems of society: “In the degree to which these criteria can be made exact and objective, political decision,” which is their domain, “is actually brought into relation with the interests of men.” The “public men” are, furthermore, to “lead opinion” and take the responsibility for “the formation of a sound public opinion.” “They initiate, they administer, they settle,” and should be protected from “ignorant and meddlesome outsiders,” the general public, who are incapable of dealing “with the substance of the problem.” The criteria we apply to government are success in satisfying material and cultural wants, not whether “it vibrates to the self-centered opinions that happen to be floating in men’s minds.” Having mastered the criteria for political decision, the specialized class, protected from public meddling, will serve the public interest — what is called “the national interest” in the webs of mystification spun by the academic social sciences and political commentary.
The second role is “the task of the public,” which is much more limited. It is not for the public, Lippmann observes, to “pass judgment on the intrinsic merits” of an issue or to offer analysis or solutions, but merely, on occasion, to place “its force at the disposal” of one or another group of “responsible men.” The public “does not reason, investigate, invent, persuade, bargain, or settle.” Rather, “the public acts only by aligning itself as the partisan of someone in a position to act executively,” once he has given the matter at hand sober and disinterested thought. It is for this reason that “the public must be put in its place.” The bewildered herd, trampling and roaring, “has its function”: to be “the interested spectators of action,” not participants. Participation is the duty of “the responsible man.”
Which is to say that you have the right to shut up and stand aside if you are not hysterically screaming the same vileness that our elite, godless masters are spouting. This has – as Noam Chomsky put it – “an unmistakeable resemblance to the Leninist concept of a vanguard party that leads the masses to a better life that they cannot conceive or construct on their own.”
Elsewhere Chomsky has this brilliant observation about the nature of the intellectual left:
Hume was an astute observer, and his paradox of government is much to the point. His insight explains why elites are so dedicated to indoctrination and thought control, a major and largely neglected theme of modern history. “The public must be put in its place,” Walter Lippmann wrote, so that we may “live free of the trampling and the roar of a bewildered herd,” whose “function” is to be “interested spectators of action,” not participants. And if the state lacks the force to coerce and the voice of the people can be heard, it is necessary to ensure that that voice says the right thing, as respected intellectuals have been advising for many years.
The end game of the left, of its’ “journalism,” of its’ twisted definition of “tolerance,” is this as I have defined it:
Political correctness is not just a leftist way to make overly-sensitive people feel better. It was designed by early Marxists in Russia and the left continues to execute the Orwellian tactic today: if you can control words, you can control thought; if you can control thought, you can control actions. “PC” is an enormous, sophisticated and highly-coordinated effort by elitist intellectuals to “fundamentally transform” Western culture as we know it by redefining it – by shaping the “acceptable” language people are allowed to use – and thereby dictating the parameters of cultural arguments. And people with incredibly radical agendas have been exploiting this tactic for decades and it has succeeded.
Ultimately what these “respected intellectual” will advise will lead to this:
It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name. — Revelation 13:16-17
The unwashed masses are being betrayed by these elites who profess themselves to be wise, but are fools (Romans 1:22). We were warned by the Word of God, “Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ (Colossians 2:8). But these deluded fools hate the Word of God with a rabid passion. And that is why they impose abortion when Psalm 139 among other passages clearly teach that the unborn babies that are being murdered are innocent human beings created in the image of God and literally formed by God in that womb. That is why they impose homosexuality when Romans chapter one could not be more clear that any society that does this is demanding that the wrath of a holy God be poured out upon it.
We are now learning that THOUSANDS of emails that were just hanging fruit on Clinton’s unsecured server are now in the possession of Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR). They are hoping that the American people are stupid enough and wicked enough to elect Hillary so they can blackmail her into betraying the United States.
We are on the verge of actually electing a president who will be blackmailed into selling the soul of the United States of America to Vladimir Putin and Russia. And NO ONE is talking about how Hillary Clinton betrayed America.
But don’t worry. If Donald Trump every so much as tied his shoes improperly, you’ll know all about it on every television program, every newspaper and every magazine.