A little over a week ago, I wrote an article talking about how there was no link between extreme weather phenomenon and man-made climate change. Well, today, let’s talk about another ridiculous claim that the Left often makes: climate change leads to rising sea levels and will mean coastal cities will be flooded in a certain amount of time unless we employ more and more socialistic policies to “turn this around”.
When you put it that way, it’s hard to deny how much it looks like a scam… because that’s precisely what it is. And yet, many people buy into the idea that we are killing our planet through our cars and our air conditioners and our capitalism (somehow, despite China being one of the most egregious polluters in the world) and that in a certain amount of decades, places like Los Angeles, New York City, Miami, etc. will be uninhabitable for humans and land animals because they will be flooded.
This sort of cycle continues, as we still hear about this idiocy despite the fact that people have made predictions for today that are exactly like that and have failed to come true, such as Dr. James Hansen predicting back in the late 1980s that New York City’s West Side Highway would be under water within 20 years. Not quite sure why he chose to be so specific, but whatever the reason may be, he was obviously very wrong as it has been about 30 years since the late 1980s and no such thing has happened.
However, a recent study has shown that “trends in recent rates of shoreline change along the U.S. Atlantic Coast reflect an especially puzzling increase in accretion, not erosion,” according to Armstrong and Lazarus (2019) in a newly-published paper.
Notice the sort of language these guys are using. They are totally baffled at the idea that shorelines are actually expanding, because they are under the belief that sea levels are rising, which would naturally lead people to believe that shorelines would have to be decreasing. The authors try to attribute this “enigmatic pattern” to “beach nourishment” or infrastructure development to explain how this is happening even though sea levels are supposed to be rising.
As Climate Depot notes, “From 1830 to 1956, shorelines eroded at the rapid rate of -55 cm per year on average. Since 1960, the U.S. Atlantic coast has been expanding (accretion) at a rate of +5 cm per year.”
The real reason for this happening is not “beach nourishment” but rather because any scientist who is not paid off to spew Leftist garbage knows that geophysical processes are the reason for such sea-level variations throughout the entire world, not idiotic beliefs like glaciers melting causing there to be more water in the ocean.
Which really brings us to the main point this article is meant to tackle: the idea that melting ice caps (which are actually doing the opposite of melting) would cause sea levels to rise and coastal areas to get flooded. Anyone who has passed 6th grade science ought to know that ice is water in a different form and that melting of ice does not cause there to be more water out of nowhere.
For example, fill a glass with ice and then fill it with water just before it begins to overflow. Leave that glass of water with ice alone until the ice melts (or put it in the microwave if you’re impatient) and see the results. According to the Left, the glass will overflow because the ice will melt. However, what we notice is something entirely different: the glass is still just as full as it was before, there was no overflow, but now there’s just no ice. That is because ICE IS WATER TOO! It’s just in a different physical state, but it will still take up the exact same amount of space. Whatever space the ice cube was filling before is replaced with the water that the cube was composed of. There is no displacement of water, so there is no overflowing of the glass.
How then, if the ice caps were to melt, would the world get flooded when all the melting of the ice does is change the physical state of the ice from a solid to a liquid?
What’s more, has any of these Leftists ever heard of the water cycle? You know, the cycle where water evaporates, goes into the atmosphere, precipitates as rain or snow (depending on the temperature), goes down into sewers, rivers, etc., makes its way back to the ocean and begins the cycle anew? Well, if the ice caps were melting, that means some of the ice would be turned into a gas too, go into the atmosphere and go through the process we just described, so there technically would be a little bit less water than when it was in its ice form anyway.
But returning to my main point, it is ridiculous to suggest that the ice caps melting (which isn’t even happening, for God’s sake) would in turn lead to coastal cities to get flooded. That’s not how any of this works.
If you don’t believe me, just ask Christopher Piecuch, Peter Huybers and literally six other scientists saying: “the majority of large-scale spatial variation in long-term rates of relative sea-level rise on the US East Coast is due to geological processes that will persist at similar rates for centuries.”
Climate change does not lead to rising sea levels. Trends in sea levels, whichever way they may go, have more to do with geological processes than climate change.
And if the study by the seemingly baffled scientists is in any way accurate, then we can clearly see this to be the case. Now, if you were to ask me exactly how it’s happening, then I have no clue. I’m not a geologist by any means. But I do understand enough about the world to know that it’s completely asinine to say that melting ice caps and glaciers, etc. would lead to massive cities getting flooded. Science itself denies that this is at all possible, never mind that shorelines around the world have been in a trend of growth for a number of decades.
Between 1985 and 2015, satellite observations showed that coasts all over the world have gained roughly 13,000 km2 more land area than it had lost to the ocean, according to scientists back in 2016. So all over the world, coasts have only gained land, not lost to the ocean.
Now just watch as the Left will spin that as “we are warming the planet up so much, we are drying up the oceans”. I wouldn’t put it past them to start claiming such a thing.
“The words of his mouth are trouble and deceit; he has ceased to act wisely and do good.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
For many people in the United States, it is hard to ignore the polar vortex that struck the U.S. this past week. Many in the northern and mid-western states are facing record-lows in temperature.
And just as quickly as the polar vortex hit, climate “experts” and believers chocked it all up to man-made climate change.
However, this is one massive and ridiculous copout and I will explain momentarily.
First, let me tell you that the reason for me writing this is the fact that I was looking through articles to give me some inspiration to write and came across one that contains an excerpt from the book “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change.”
I was originally going to write about this topic yesterday, but the whole issue of debating whether or not a baby is a baby and should be allowed to live OUTSIDE the womb came up and I really needed to address that.
However, now we shall discuss this climate topic because it’s still relevant.
This is the excerpt of the book around which I am basing this article:
“Predictions of less snow were ubiquitous by global warming scientists. But once that prediction failed to come true, the opposite of what they predicted instead became – what they expected. How did global warming scientists explain record snow after predicting less snow? Easy. More snow is now caused by global warming. ‘Snow is consistent with global warming, say scientists’ blared a UK Telegraph headline in 2009. The Financial Times tried to explain ‘Why global warming means… more snow’ in 2012… So no matter what happens, the activists can claim with confidence the event was a predicted consequence of global warming. There is now no way to ever falsify global warming claims.”
A very interesting excerpt from that book. However, I would like to disagree with the final argument that there is no way to falsify global warming claims now. There is.
This is precisely the reason I call this sort of thing a copout. Scientists and “experts” were predicting less snow. When that prediction turned out to be false, and the opposite happened – more snow – they said that that was also global warming.
Even though it literally makes no sense to chock up snow and cold temperatures to global WARMING (and even that Financial Times headline alludes to this ridiculous notion) that’s what they were saying. And that’s why they switched from “global warming” to “climate change”, so they would never be wrong about predictions (except, of course, they still are).
But it’s a complete and total copout. Every time they use “climate change” instead of “global warming” that’s a copout.
At least global warming was trying to predict something specific. But using “climate change” just so they can be right about the climate getting warmer or colder is basically the same as saying: “I predict the stock market will end higher by the end of the year… or lower… or about the same. I’m an financial genius!”
As it turns out, the climate will either get colder after a certain amount of time, get hotter, or stay about the same with next to no change.
THOSE ARE THE ONLY OPTIONS! So of course they are never wrong in their predictions. They don’t have to be specific about this sort of thing anymore.
Notice how the whole argument of “our kids will not get to experience snow unless they see it in movies or the internet” is no longer used? That’s because they have no actual way of telling whether or not that will actually be the case, so their predictions get broader and vaguer, or they are predictions about things that won’t happen for a very long time when no one will remember such predictions.
Of course, people like AOC still make short-term predictions just because, but it really doesn’t matter. No one’s going to hold her accountable for it, even when she turns out to be wrong in 12 years.
I’ve often said that the point of climate change is not so the Left would be right about anything. They don’t care about being right. They only care about making people be afraid of this climate change and make people think only Democrats can ever come up with “solutions” to this “problem”.
It’s almost like the mafia demanding “protection” money. The Democrats are the ones that make people be afraid and thus, they make people “pay” them by electing them into power.
But at the same time, the Democrats need to be able to seem somewhat reasonable as far as climate change goes. What I mean by that is that they can’t keep making predictions of less snow when there’s more snow, can’t make predictions about an impending apocalypse set to occur in a decade or so, and can’t keep suggesting the climate is only getting warmer, when it could also get colder.
Their credibility would take some serious hits if they are constantly wrong about every single thing.
Granted, they have no credibility with conservatives, but I’m also talking about credibility with just about anyone.
Are people more likely to believe someone who is constantly wrong about something or someone who cops out and makes general and broad predictions that will turn out to be true only because they cover the only possible options?
It’s because of this that they switched to “climate change”. They saw they were dead wrong about pretty much everything they were selling to people, so they started to say that cold weather is also because of global warming. Only that makes zero sense to anyone with half a brain, so they decided to start calling it climate change. The focus was that the climate was still getting warmer but they leave themselves the room to claim that the climate can also get colder.
It’s a massive copout, but it’s necessary to retain their credibility (however little they may have) and to retain the narrative’s usefulness to elect Democrats.
These people are completely shameless in their pursuit of power, opting to constantly lie and deceive people to attain it. Workers of deceit is what they are.
“When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
You know you have royally messed up if even the mainstream media won’t defend you and your claims. This is Elizabeth Warren now that she has willingly exposed herself as a fraud, believing that evidence contrary to her claims somehow proved her right.
Here are some headlines Monday morning when the DNA test had just been released, not a lot of people had finished reading it, and the media could have created the narrative in people’s minds that Trump was a racist and was proven wrong by the brilliant and brave Native American woman:
And my personal favorite:
Now, let’s contrast these to some of the headlines that came out after it was made obvious that the DNA test showed a range of 1/64th to 1/1024th Native American ancestry and the analyst didn’t even use Native American DNA in his analysis:
And there are plenty others like these. Keep in mind that it was the Daily Beast who most openly and utterly confirmed Warren’s Native American claims in their previous headline.
Again, you have to royally screw something up to get the media to turn on you if you are a prominent member of the Democrat Party and a figurehead of the “resistance” against Trump.
But all of this still makes sense. While it is still surprising to see the media turn on Warren in this way, which is something we never see with pretty much any other Democrat (except Bill Clinton, and you know you really messed up if you join him in the list of Democrats the media doesn’t want to talk about), it makes sense that Warren’s DNA results draw ire from people.
For decades, she had told the story that one of her ancestors was Cherokee and that her mother was Native American and had to elope with Warren’s father because her grandparents were bigots. All of it has since blown up in what can be considered a nuclear bomb on Warren.
What Warren did in releasing the test results was stupid, but not surprising. She wanted to own Trump, thought the media would back her no matter what, and thoroughly believed the lies she was propagating. She so desperately wanted to score points against Trump, particularly as part of an October Surprise against Republicans this election season, that she forsook reason, logic and facts.
The test very clearly disproved her claims that she was Native American, possibly Cherokee. While she does have some Native blood in her, so does nearly everyone else in the CONTINENT! And that’s ignoring the fact that the DNA test didn’t even use Native American DNA, but a mix of Peruvian, Mexican and Colombian, further suggesting that Warren has even less Native American DNA than the test might show.
But none of these things mattered. It didn’t matter that the test showed she has little more Native American ancestry than your average white person at best and far less than your average white person at worst. It didn’t matter that the person in charge of analyzing her DNA used samples that were not Native American to determine whether she was Native American. She wanted to score some points on Trump, was so blinded by that desire, that she inadvertently scored points against herself.
What she did was the equivalent of throwing a basketball the full length of the court, hoping to score a miracle shot, but somehow managing to get the ball to bounce all the way back and score in her own net.
With the sloppy evidence she had of her ancestry: the “high cheekbones”, the “my great, great, great x150 grandmother was Native American”, the “my parents had to elope because my grandparents were bigots”, and whatever else she had, it was a Hail Mary of a shot to try and prove Native American ancestry. And she failed… miserably… to the point even the MSM, who usually go along with the abandoning of logic, facts and reasoning, didn’t want to try and salvage or defend this train-wreck.
We will have to wait and see if this train-wreck properly derails Elizabeth Warren’s chances at a 2020 run. Despite her not having indicated that she would run, in fact, going as far as to suggest she wouldn’t, I didn’t believe her for one second. But after this week, she might actually be forced to seriously consider not running.
Her having claimed being a Native American for decades would hurt her more than you might think. The Harvard Crimson celebrated Warren as a Native American. Fordham Law Review celebrated Warren as being Harvard Law School’s “first woman of color”, which really tells you something about Harvard Law School, doesn’t it?
She identified as Native American and schools like Harvard Law School and the University of Pennsylvania Law School accepted her as Native American. She BENEFITED from calling herself Native American, given that Harvard is considered a federal contractor, with employment practices falling under Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. In other words, she benefited from affirmative action AS A WHITE PERSON!
This is not something that would sit well with minorities. Claiming to be a minority, particularly to benefit from doing so, is unethical. While the Left usually would not see much problem with this, given that they’ve been backing Warren’s claims for some time now, it would definitely be seen as a problem in any presidential race, and perhaps any future Senate race, now that she has been basically proven to be a liar.
While she is running in 2018, I don’t know if this would lead to her being beaten in a blue state like Massachusetts. But it does raise concerns for her here, at least to some extent. I don’t imagine she would even get her Party’s nomination in 2020 after this, given how much of a failure Clinton was. While Warren may not be a criminal (who knows?), part of the reason Clinton was defeated was because she was such a flawed candidate. This revelation could now mark Warren as a flawed candidate (despite the fact that she’s a socialist, that’s somehow not enough to make her flawed).
Again, you know you messed up big-time if even the media won’t cover for you. That’s almost a death sentence for Democrats.
“Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.”
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles delivered right into your inbox. All you have to do is put your email address in the allotted box on the right, click the “subscribe” button and you’re done. So make sure to check it out today!
Author: Freddie Marinelli.
Yes. Yes they are.
But why specifically do I bring this up? Because a Politico reporter tweeted about something she claims Donald Trump Jr. did… when he was 3-years-old.
Now, the tweet has some profanity in it and I’ll do my best to censor it while also letting you know what it is she said. So, MATURE LANGUAGE WARNING.
Virginia Heffernan, the Politico reporter, tweeted: “My friend Anna taught Don Jr preschool in Manhattan. She asked him to move his mat one day and he said, ‘f--- you, b---ch.’ He was three. Today’s for you, Anna.”
Now, I don’t know exactly what was going through Virginia’s head while she tweeted that, but that’s easily one of the dumbest lies I’ve seen. Not to mention that it really serves next to no purpose. That’s just lying for lying’s sake. Perhaps a crude attempt at smearing his reputation, but who exactly is going to believe a THREE-YEAR-OLD would curse out his teacher?!
Clearly, many twitter users easily caught on to the obvious lie.
Among the replies are things like: “Because this is how pre-schoolers talk, totally not an attention-seeking lie.” As well as: “I read this to my 3 year old and he said ‘that’s a f---ing lie. Now get me chocolate milk.’” And: “File this under ‘no way in hell this happened.’”
And if by some crazy stretch of the imagination this actually happened, users were quick to point out that doing or saying something when you are that young shouldn’t be a reason for attacking someone’s character. One user said: “So now what people did when they were three years old, as reported on by other people nearly 40 years later, is fair game to make claims about their character? And you think that’s sane? And you whinge like a pathetic little child at having that pointed out? Bless your heart.”
And do you want to know what’s funny? CNBC’s John Harwood actually believes it’s true, saying: “for real? That’s amazing.”
Whenever the Left writes tweets like these, I try to get into their heads and search for any possible reason for tweeting these things. Sometimes, it’s easy. For example, Sandra Fluke (remember her?) tweeted: “Killing #NetNeutrality would kill access to abortion information…”
Here, I can see the reason for the tweet. Even though it’s ridiculously stupid, she tweeted that so that people demand that the FCC keeps Net Neutrality. Even though such information would be available with or without Net Neutrality, Sandra Fluke is deceiving her audience by making such a ridiculous claim for which she has no facts to back up.
So I know her reasoning behind the tweet: deception. Virginia’s tweet is flat-out a waste of the 4 seconds that it takes to read it. Never before has so little time mattered so much and she wastes everyone’s 4 seconds with that garbage.
That tweet has no clear reasoning. If I’m taking a stab at it, I’d say that it’s a flimsy attempt at character assassination or smearing. And that’s my best guess. Why she’s specifically targeting Trump Jr., I don’t know. Maybe she was just bored and decided to tweet out something utterly insane.
And it’s precisely because that’s my best guess for her reasoning that I ask the question: “is the Left just a bunch of serial liars?”
Because I can understand lying for the reason Sandra Fluke lied about Net Neutrality. The reason any Democrat lies about the tax bill. The reason the Left lies about how Trump is racist. The reason the Left lied about Roy Moore being a pedophile and sexual assaulter.
Those are all for advancing their political agenda and/or winning elections. Those are the kind of lies I tackle on a daily basis, so I understand the reason behind them. But this? Again, this is not even a good attempt at harming someone’s reputation. It’s just lying for lying’s sake.
That’s why I ask that question. Is there something within their brains that basically FORCES them to lie? Are they actually incapable of telling any sort of truth? Are they pathological liars?
I answered the question at the very beginning. Yes, they most certainly are serial liars. Pathological liars. They couldn’t tell the truth about someone they despised if their lives depended on it.
Because Trump Jr. is someone Virginia deems “despicable” (or deplorable, if you will), she feels the uncontrollable urge to lie about him. Big lie, small lie, it doesn’t matter. He’s someone she hates with a passion so she simply MUST do something that may cause harm to his reputation. It doesn’t even have to be believable. Just as long as enough of their brainwashed sheep believe it because of what they themselves think of the President’s son, it’s more than ok.
Something has to seriously be wrong with you to make such a baseless claim. Baseless much in the same way they make claims about Trump and conservatives, but differently at the same time. Again, there’s a difference between those kinds of lies and this particular kind of lie.
Those lies are lies with a clear objective in mind. Virginia’s lie hardly seems like it has a purpose for existing.
These kinds of lies are what make me curious about the state of mind of the Left. They claim Trump is demented and unfit for office, yet they hardly seem fit for eating a meal without a bib or changing clothes without the help of their parents.
I know I’ve made the joke that, as time goes on, the Left seems to be losing more and more of their sanity. But this time, it’s a bit less of a joke and more of a serious case.
Beyond asking if the Left is a bunch of serial liars, I wish to ask, is the Left mentally ill? And this is not a joke. You have to have something seriously wrong in your head to lie like that for seemingly no reason. You have to have something seriously wrong to believe that a man can be a woman and a woman can be a man and that they have the right to use the opposite gender’s restroom.
You have to have something seriously wrong in your head to believe killing an unborn child is a woman’s “right”. That, despite the fact that a human being is growing inside a woman, he or she is somehow not alive.
You have to have something seriously wrong in your head to deny that Man-made Climate Change is a hoax. Now, that’s a bit different because it’s more about information. Ignorance plays a big hand in believing Man-made Climate Change is real. But for someone to flat out accept Man-made Climate Change with no proof is actually worrying.
Denying facts such as no increase in Earth's temperature in years is to flat-out deny reality. And that can make people very dangerous. In my previous article, I said that Roy Moore failed to attack the Left, particularly failing to attack how hateful and dangerous they are.
What do I mean by that? Let’s use this example: Kate Steinle was killed by an Illegal Immigrant who shouldn’t have been in the country, who was wanted for deportation and who had been deported several times prior. The Left-run San Francisco declared itself a “sanctuary city”, a city that protects Illegal Immigrants from deportation to the best of their ability. San Francisco literally harbors criminals.
When the case came to a close and the Illegal Immigrant murderer got off scot-free, not a single Leftist was in uproar over the decision. It was clear involuntary manslaughter, but the jurors were not convinced. That case was a mockery of justice and not a single Leftist was outraged.
That case is merely one of the many cases of an Illegal Immigrant doing horrendous criminal activity, but the Left still wants open borders. They want these horrible people in the country for no reason other than so that they may vote Democrat.
The Left wants to pass gun law after gun law that makes it nearly impossible for good people who want to protect themselves to legally procure a gun. Such laws would, logically, increase crime rates. Yet, that doesn’t matter to them. They don’t care.
And that’s what makes them dangerous. They just don’t care about the safety and well-being of people. They don’t care about the lives of people. And you really have to have something seriously wrong in your head to have such little to no care for your fellow Man.
It’s a combination of an evil and sinful heart and such a psychologically unsound mind that drives people to do bad things. Take, for example, Ted Bundy and Adolf Hitler. Both were inarguably evil and messed up in the head. But one of them killed multiple women throughout the 70’s and the other killed millions and millions of people, mostly Jews.
Both were despicable human beings, but we don’t consider them to be on the same level. Taking aside the number of people they’ve killed, they were very different types of evil and insane.
One was what I would call a “chaotic evil” and the other was what I would call a “lawful evil.”
Don’t misunderstand, one is not better than the other. But they are different. Bundy was an all-out psychopath while Hitler was a bit more objective with his evil. Bundy didn’t seem to have an objective in mind. He just raped and killed his victims. That’s not to say he wasn’t tactical about it. He certainly was, that’s how he avoided law enforcement for such a long time. But what he didn’t have was an objective.
I won’t claim to know how Bundy’s mind worked, but I could say that he did those things mostly because he wanted to or wanted to see if he could do it.
Hitler’s evil was more objective. He didn’t just randomly want to kill tons of people. No, he killed the people that he deemed undesirable or unworthy of life. Starting out with 'imbeciles' (actual term of the time for describing people with special needs) and moving on to Jewish people, Gypsies and just about anyone who would be a retardation of Hitler’s desire for a superior and optimal race of human beings.
He rose through the ranks of politics and created his own National Socialist party that would rule Germany and much of Europe throughout WWII.
But why do I talk about them? Because in both cases, there was a link between an evil and sinful heart and an unsound mind. Bundy may have shown more psychopathic tendencies, but there’s no denying they were both severely evil and messed up in the head.
You have to be to believe murder is not just a welcomed option but also a primary and sought-after option.
It’s those evil and sinful hearts and unsound minds that we often see displayed by the Left. They may not quite be at the level of seeking murder and genocide, but the signs are there. The similarities are right there for people to see.
So, to answer my own questions: Yes, the Left is a bunch of serial liars and they are definitely mentally ill. Not necessarily to the level of Ted Bundy or other serial killers, but worryingly close to Hitler’s mental state.
“But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you…”
Author: Freddie Drake
Just when I thought the Left had no sanity left within them, one of them comes out and makes one of the most idiotic claims we’ve seen this year… and that’s really saying something.
Less than a week after ABC News’ Brian Ross reported fake news about candidate Trump ordering Michael Flynn to contact the Russians (as a reminder, he made that order after he won the presidency), CNN reported fake news that Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., received an e-mail containing sensitive material about Hillary Clinton that was discovered by Wikileaks. CNN reported that he received that e-mail on September 4th, 2016, before some of the information in that e-mail was published by Wikileaks.
But it’s since been discovered that the e-mail was sent on the 14th of September, at a time when the information within that e-mail had already been shared to the public.
That report was an obvious attack on the President and a way to fuel the “collusion” story, much like Ross’s fake news story was. And one of the funny things about it is that Manu Raju will not be punished like Brian Ross was because according to Brian Stelter: “[Raju] followed the editorial standards process. Multiple sources provided him with incorrect info.”
How is not checking the validity of the source or info considered following standard editorial process? If he got the date wrong, he either didn’t read the e-mail or didn’t read it carefully and thoroughly. Is that CNN’s standard editorial process? What am I saying, OF COURSE IT IS!
This is the fake news media, after all. If any story against Trump or Republicans can be somewhat believable, then facts schmacts! They’ll run with that story.
Regardless, we return to the topic at hand. In a segment with Brian Stelter, David Frum, a CNN contributor, said: “…I would say, the mistakes are precisely the reason the people should trust the media. Look, astronomers make mistakes all the time because science is a process of discovery of truth. Astrologers never make mistakes or at least they never own up to them, because what they are offering [is] a closed system of ideology and propaganda.”
By that logic, Weinstein raping women is precisely why they should trust and support him.
Does he not hear the stupidity that comes out of his mouth? And then there’s what he said after the ridiculous claim.
“Astronomers make mistakes all the time because science is a process of discovery of truth”. Journalists (at least today) are as much scientists as Leonardo DiCaprio or Al Gore are. Their processes aren’t about discovering the truth. They are about HIDING IT. They are about ALTERING THE TRUTH TO FIT THEIR NARRATIVES.
Although, I’m glad he says what he said about Astrologers. They “never make mistakes… because they use a closed system of ideology and propaganda.” That’s precisely what the MSM is.
Since this latest blunder, CNN has yet to apologize for delivering fake news to their audience. CNN did correct the story, but they didn’t apologize for it. They didn’t apologize to their audience for reporting fake news and they didn’t apologize to Trump Jr. for spreading misinformation that could’ve damaged his image and reputation. Then again, I wouldn’t expect them to apologize for defamation.
Returning to Frum, he wasn’t finished making his plea for winning the “Dumbest Claims Made in 2017” award. Later, he said: “The worst mistakes that press organizations have made in the coverage of Trump has precisely occurred in their effort – their overzealous effort to be fair to the President.”
You mean to tell me everything they’ve reported about the Trump-Russia collusion, the sexual assault allegations, the ridiculous claims of bigotry and their narrative that Trump’s so insane he is guaranteed to start a nuclear war with North Korea has all been IN FAVOR OF THE PRESIDENT?!
What kind of upside-down land of the missing brains world do you live in that you think the media is trying to be FAIR to Trump? Seriously, this guy, who once claimed to be Republican, is in the company of the most public serial liars so much that he himself believes the b.s. these people share. And does so with PASSION.
So much passion, in fact, that he’s gone completely insane. You HAVE to be if you fundamentally believe that the reason people should trust the fake news media is precisely BECAUSE they lie and get things wrong all the time.
I’ll be honest, I’ve been trying to follow his kind of logic. But seeing as to how I’m not a massive imbecile, I can’t follow it. Earlier, I made the comparison that, following that logic, women should trust Weinstein precisely because he rapes women. You can also say that, if you cheat on your spouse, your spouse should trust you PRECISELY because you cheated.
How anyone could honestly believe what Frum just said is beyond me. How anyone can take him seriously is beyond me.
But I’m happy and glad to see a blabbering idiot in this situation. The fact that he said something so outrageously mindless when discussing a botched story by CNN shows you the reality of the fake news media. They’re scared to the point of mindless blabbering.
Scared that they truly have lost their monopoly on news-sharing. Scared that most people in the country don’t trust them anymore. Scared that, with these latest and highly talked-about blunders by the news media, some of the people they thought would trust them no matter what may begin to question them on occasion.
To point out the obvious: No Mr. Frum, people don’t trust the fake news media because they are fake. They certainly shouldn’t and certainly don't for that reason.
The fake news media has been lying to the public long before Trump was in the picture. They’ve been exposed in recent time and their credibility is long gone. Botching stories in the manner Ross and Raju did certainly doesn’t help them.
And the best part is that they’re not going to stop. The fact that they continue lying and occasionally getting caught in the act is what helps Trump and conservatives in the long-run. Since just about everything that comes out of their mouths is a lie, they’re easily countered with facts. With the truth. With logic.
I’ve said before that if the Republicans really wanted to defeat Democrats at nearly every turn, they could. All it takes is knowing your stuff. Learning the facts. Pointing out the lies the Left tells you. And sometimes, the Left makes it rather easy to counter what they have to say, as you could see from this article.
All Republicans need to do is tell the truth, back it up with facts and point out the lies of the Left and attack them for it.
Fox News could OBLITERATE CNN, ABC and every other news source out there if their entire cast was filled with conservative truth tellers and not the occasional Never Trumper *ahem* Shepherd Smith *ahem* Chris Wallace *ahem*.
Unlike what Frum believes, people trust news sources that don’t lie. That’s why the Left is in total shambles, or at least that’s one of the reasons.
Much like with the fake news media, people just don’t trust the Left anymore… well, the majority of the people, that is. The Left’s credibility has only suffered in the last few years, but especially so this last year.
Hollywood icons people thought to be godly are proving to be anything but. The Democrat Party has no one to be their next champion like Obama was or Hillary, to some extent. And the media has been called out for their constant altering of the truth.
The Left is in shambles and they have no one to blame for it other than themselves.
“A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
We all knew something like this had to happen eventually. With the Alabama Senate election taking place tomorrow, the sexual assault allegations were going to regain focus. Especially the allegations by the only woman who offered any tangible “evidence” against Moore.
There were really three possible outcomes for this story: Beverly Young Nelson releasing her yearbook for independent handwriting analysis, Nelson deciding against talking about it further before the election (which was the least likely to happen), or Nelson admitting that it’s fake.
And lo and behold, the lattermost option is the case.
Beverly Young Nelson has admitted that she forged a portion of the yearbook, officially discrediting her and her so-called “evidence”. Now, a Leftist could ask: “It’s just a portion! Why does this discredit her evidence if the rest is not forged?”
That’s the thing: we don’t know if it’s all forged. But if only a little bit of it is forged, it severely weakens this piece of evidence and the accuser. If a part of it is forged, how do we know if the rest isn’t forged as well? Lying never helps in a court case such as this. If you’ve been assaulted, why would you lie about anything? That’s what discredits Nelson. There was no reason to lie if what happened is the truth.
But still, something as clear as water goes right over ABC News’ head. ABC News had the opportunity to interview Nelson about the yearbook.
In the interview, ABC News reporter Tom Llamas asks in a rather strange way about the yearbook. “Beverly, he signed your yearbook”, Llamas said, prompting Nelson to reply with: “He did sign it.” Llamas then says: “And you made some notes underneath”, with Nelson replying: “Yes.”
Does that sound like he’s essentially leading Nelson on what to say and admit? The MSM has a very specific way to phrase things to drive their narrative. And that interview definitely sounds like one of the ways the MSM drives their narrative.
And what’s most puzzling, at least to the regular viewer, is that the segment is rather short and they quickly move on from it as though it’s not a big deal.
Of course, it IS a big deal, so I understand why they want to basically bury it under the rug as fast as possible. It’s still news so they still have to talk about it but they definitely tried to downplay it and pretend it was nothing of interest before moving on to something that doesn’t almost completely destroy the narrative against Roy Moore.
Worse still, Breitbart tells us: “Early reports are that Nelson and Allred (Nelson’s attorney) will produce an expert to prove the rest of the yearbook is not a forgery. So a proven forger is bringing in her own expert.”
That’s the equivalent of Hillary Clinton hiring her own investigator to look into her e-mail scandal or the Uranium One deal. An insider investigator will hold as much credibility as Nelson herself.
And you have to ask: “Why hire your own investigator? Why not allow an independent handwriting analyst to analyze the yearbook? Why bring this up FOUR DAYS BEFORE THE ALABAMA SENATE ELECTION? And more importantly, WHY LIE?!”
You see, it’s the last question that will likely seal victory for Roy Moore. Plenty of Alabama voters, including yours truly, already didn’t believe Nelson or any of the other accusers in the first place. One of them presents tangible evidence but then, 4 days before the election, admits that it’s not entirely truthful (and very well could be entirely dishonest). That destroys her accusations and arguments completely.
The funny thing is that, earlier in the interview, she says that “God knows, and Roy knows and I know what happened.” Well, at least THAT is a rather honest statement. Of course God knows, He knows EVERYTHING. Of course Roy knows, IT INVOLVES HIM. And of course she knows, SHE’S THE ONE LYING TO THE PUBLIC.
So God, Roy and Nelson all know what happened and they all know she’s lying. She knew from the beginning that the yearbook was forged. I knew since she brought it up (and learned a good deal about it) that the yearbook was forged. If you remember, the yearbook is signed “Roy Moore D.A.”, but Roy Moore wasn’t the District Attorney at the time he allegedly sexually assaulted her.
Beyond that, Breitbart reminds us that Nelson has a reason to lie about Roy. That as circuit judge, Roy “ruled against her in a 1999 divorce case.”
Breitbart also reminds us that the other two accusers: Leigh Corfman and Tina Johnson have reasons to be discredited and not believed. Corfman claims that, after Moore allegedly molested her when she was 14-years-old, she began to live a troubled life of “drinking, drugs, boyfriends, and a suicide attempt.” The reason she’s not believed is that contemporaneous court records (records that existed at the same time of the alleged molestation) contradict her statement, saying that she had discipline problems before the time of the alleged molestation and that her “disciplinary problem has improved greatly”, according to documents from 1980, a year after the alleged molestation took place.
So Corfman herself has a big hole in her story. What about Johnson? She claims that Moore once “groped her butt in his office in 1991.” According to Breitbart: “She was not in Moore’s office ‘on business’”, but rather she was in his office “due to a bitter custody battle where Moore represented Johnson’s mother, who was trying to gain custody of Johnson’s 12-year-old son based on the claim that Johnson was an ‘unfit, absent, and unstable mother.’”
So she has her own reasons, like Nelson, to lie about Roy Moore, thus discrediting her accusation as well, or at the very least creating a cloud of doubt about her own story. And she has to prove her accusations beyond reasonable doubt, which she can't.
Regardless, it just seems funny that, four days before the Senate election, Nelson admits she lied and her evidence is forged. It’s even funnier that ABC News made it seem like the revelation was no big deal.
It really makes you think, and even confirms some people’s suspicions, that this was all a sham and a political effort and strategy by the Democrats. None of the accusers have solid and TRUTHFUL evidence or accounts against Moore. Knowing that, and the fact that Moore’s opponent Doug Jones basically made himself known to be a racist with a strategy about “if Moore were a black pedophile, would we consider electing him?” as though race has anything to do with this just further cements my confidence that Roy Moore will handily win the election.
And what makes me happier is that yet another Democrat effort to destroy a conservative figure in politics will have failed. More so, since this has been a months-long effort to destroy the judge that will likely end in failure.
“No weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed, and you shall refute every tongue that rises against you in judgment. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord and their vindication from me, declares the Lord.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
You know the interesting thing about lying? You can often get caught in your own web of lies.
Sure, often times the fake news media will get away (at least publicly) with lying to people, but occasionally, they are so clearly caught in a lie that even other fake news sources have to take some notice.
ABC News’ Brian Ross was suspended for 4 weeks without pay after he “was forced to correct a bombshell on-air report about Michael Flynn”, according to CNN.
In a statement apologizing for Ross’s mistake, ABC said: “We deeply regret and apologize for the serious error we made yesterday. The reporting conveyed by Brian Ross during the special report had not been fully vetted through our editorial standard process. As a result of our continued reporting over the next several hours ultimately we determined the information was wrong and we corrected the mistake on air and online.”, adding: “It is vital we get the story right and retain the trust we have built with our audience – these are our core principles. We fell far short of that yesterday.”
Yeah, when they say that “it’s vital we get the story right”, they really mean “it’s vital we TELL the story right.”
Just so you know, Brian Ross, on Friday, cited a single anonymous source about the Flynn investigation, saying: “Michael Flynn promised ‘full cooperation to the Mueller team’ and is prepared to testify that, as a candidate, Donald Trump ‘directed him to make contact with the Russians.’”
That, understandably, made Leftists everywhere soil themselves with excitement. Unfortunately, and very hilariously, Ross was lying and had to correct his story. Trump didn’t order Flynn to do anything as a candidate. The Trump transition team, however, did order him to speak with foreign leaders. An order that is not illegal. It’s not even unconventional for an incoming administration to do that.
But because of the way Ross reported it, Leftists cheered and called for Trump to be impeached and locked up, and the Dow Jones dropped over 350 points on Friday, before recovering a decent deal.
So Ross’s story was so groundbreaking that it made the Dow Jones dropped like a bag of bricks, costing a lot of people a decent deal of money. You see, liberals, your dumb actions have consequences.
But of course, the fake news media being the fake news media, ABC News “initially attempted to downplay the mistake, referring to its correction as a ‘clarification’ on ‘World News Tonight’ and then online. After a barrage of criticism, the network changed the language online from ‘clarification’ to ‘correction’”.
So even after getting caught in their own fake news, they still tried to pretend it was no big deal.
Saying Trump, as a candidate, ordered Flynn to contact the Russians is MASSIVELY DIFFERENT from saying Trump, as president-elect, ordered Flynn to contact the Russians.
One story gets closer to finding Russian collusion and the other is a story about what usually happens during a transition between one administration and another.
One is massive breaking news and the other is simply standard procedure.
Of course, on Friday, the Left thought they were one massive step closer to impeaching Trump and convicting him. One such example comes from The View’s Joy Behar, who read aloud the false report from Ross and was celebrating the fake news along with her colleagues on that terrible show and the ignorant audience who clearly had nothing better to do that day.
Behar, visibly getting excited as she read the report, clapped and cheered at the news. Her colleague, Ana Navarro said: “It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas and it’s beginning to look a lot like collusion.” With Meghan McCain, daughter of John McCain, saying that the crowd reacted as though they were in Oprah, saying it was like “you get a car, and you get a car, and you get a car”, with Behar chiming in saying: “No, it’s ‘you go to jail, you go to jail, you go to jail.’”
So you can imagine the grin on my face when I saw the video of Behar apologizing to the audience for delivering the fake news herself.
Regardless, she explains to the audience that Brian Ross was wrong when he gave his report, believing it to have simply been a mistake and not intentional fake news. And you can see the disappointment on each of The View’s hostesses on seeing that their latest pathetic effort to unseat Trump has failed.
They say over and over again (with the slight exception of Meghan McCain) that this wasn’t fake news, just “wrong news” if you will. That they don’t believe Ross intended to mislead people into thinking they’ve found evidence of Russian collusion or that Trump, as a candidate, sought to collude with the Russians.
I, for one, believe he intended to mislead people. They’ve become so entrenched in their fake news stories about Russian collusion that they now believe it to be true. And Brian Ross, having also lied about the Aurora theater shooter’s affiliation with the Tea Party, clearly is eager to bust Trump for anything even remotely shady. And if he can’t find anything shady, he makes things look shady.
Like I said, there’s nothing illegal or unorthodox about an incoming administration looking to make contact with foreign leaders. That’s not shady. What would be shady is what Ross reported. A candidate making such contact with foreign leaders and governments is illegal and very shady. Which is why I’d be happy to point the Left in the direction of a little woman named Hillary Rodham Clinton.
If they’re looking for a story about a candidate colluding with foreign governments, they need not look any further than Clinton. With the Russian dossier, there’s clearly more Clinton-Russia collusion than Trump-Russia collusion. With the Uranium One deal, there’s clearly more Clinton-Russia collusion than Trump-Russia collusion.
And yet, they choose to ignore or flat out deny the truth. They are the ones who are corrupt, shady and criminals. They are the ones who constantly lie to the American people.
Take the Tax Reform bill that (thankfully) passed Senate last Friday as an example. The Left keeps saying that the bill will cost low and middle-income families a lot of money. That the bill is a scam. That it will take from the poor and regular people and give money to the rich. That’s a lie that they always tell about any Republican tax plan.
The Washington Post wrote about the tax plan, and they too say it will hurt low and middle-income families: “The JCT (Joint Committee on Taxation) found that the GOP bill would add nearly $1.5 trillion to the debt over the next decade and that, on average, families earning between $20,000 and $40,000 a year and between $200,000 to $500,000 would pay more in individual income taxes in 2023 and beyond. JCT does not explain why these families see an increase, but it is likely that it’s in part because some tax credits aimed at helping the middle class expire in 2023.”
In other words, the GOP tax plan only hurts families WHEN THE TAX CREDITS EXPIRE! JCT doesn’t need to explain why these families see an increase because IT’S PAINFULLY OBVIOUS WHY THEY WOULD SEE AN INCREASE! THEY WILL PAY MORE WHEN THE TAX CREDITS EXPIRE IN 2023!
But this is the kind of thing I’m talking about. Occasionally, the fake news media gets caught in their web of lies and is publicly mocked and called out for their lies. But there’s lies wherever you look in the media.
Trump, as a candidate, didn’t order Flynn to contact the Russians. Trump, as president-elect, did (indirectly, through his transition team, but you know what I mean).
The GOP tax plan will only hurt families when tax credits expire. There’s nothing in it that will hurt them once it passes and there’s nothing in it that indicates the rich will take money from the poor. The tax credits will expire with or without this bill.
But at least someone in the fake news media world is being punished (though given a rather small punishment) for blatantly lying to the public.
“The righteous hate what is false, but the wicked make themselves a stench and bring shame on themselves.”
Author: Freddie Drake.
Danielle Cross and Freddie Marinelli will bring you the TRUTH that the Left denies you. You'll live a more joyful and victorious life, because the Truth will set you free...