Sell The Whitehouse to Trump

[Diogenes]

Trump is President of the whole country, and the Media need to act like it.

They have no such obligation as a president does.

There is a belief out there among the public, long cultivated by "journalists", that Journalists are objective, and will relate the actual truth because "the public has a right to know. "

One would think that given how long journalists have asserted this notion, it would be a sort of "obligation" which they should live up to.

[Diogenes]

There is a massive propaganda system out there trying to manipulate public opinion so as to influence elections.

The only upstart is that the bias is becoming so obvious that many are starting to finally notice. Hillary would likely have gotten the same treatment; her past (& future) scandals forgotten in a massive "girl power", "you go girl" propaganda blitz. Not particularly bothered at this point by the stories about Trump's alleged polls numbers hitting "record lows"; after all the same polls predicted a Hillary landslide. Curious how everyone is trying to hang the Charlottesville riots on Trump while making no mention of say Ferguson:

I used to think "news" organizations were liberal because they were headquartered in Liberal Towns and they hired liberal personnel from liberal institutions; That it was a sort of self perpetuating feedback loop that concentrated liberals in these vocations.


Over the last two years I have developed a new theory. Surely some of my old theory is true, but enough evidence has accumulated to make me believe that it is incomplete. I now believe the "news" media are also liberal because this suits the interests of the people who own them.

I postulate that liberal government spending policies cause government money to find it's ways into the media owners pockets, and therefore as a matter of business, it behooves them to keep the government money spigot flowing as freely as possible.

I got my first inkling that this was the case back in 1995 when I noticed from the media what I regarded as an unnatural and peculiar hostility to the idea of balancing the budget. I thought to myself, "Who could be against balancing the budget? Why would anyone oppose balancing the budget? "


Well after thinking about it, the obvious answer seemed to me, "the people who are getting that money. That's who would be against balancing the budget. "

Doesn't GE own ABC? Don't they get a lot of government contracts? Of course that's a simplified example, but I think i'm conveying the gist of the idea.


Elect Liberal politicians, get more government spending. If you are in the right position to benefit from this, it is a win.

What does this have to do with Ferguson and Charlottesville? The way the media covers them differently furthers the goal of electing liberals and preventing the election of conservatives. They are literally trying to manipulate elections by the methods they use to spin or censor the news.

[Tom Ligon]

Obama, McCain, Hillary, VIctoria Nuland, CNN and the MSM have no problems supporting NAZIS in Ukraine, they even have their pictures taken with them. Not the punk a$$ variety in Charlottesville either, but NAZIS in power who killed 60,000 people during WW2. Charlottesville was a carbon copy of Ukraine right down to the tiki torch parades and blood and soil chants.

Let me get this straight. Is this the same Ukraine Mattis says we're thinking of sending weapons to?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/worl ... ussia.html

[paperburn1]

Obama, McCain, Hillary, VIctoria Nuland, CNN and the MSM have no problems supporting NAZIS in Ukraine, they even have their pictures taken with them. Not the punk a$$ variety in Charlottesville either, but NAZIS in power who killed 60,000 people during WW2. Charlottesville was a carbon copy of Ukraine right down to the tiki torch parades and blood and soil chants.

Let me get this straight. Is this the same Ukraine Mattis says we're thinking of sending weapons to?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/worl ... ussia.html

Yep , we are playing with fire ,folks all to support another country's interest's To the detriment of the many to benefit the few or the one.

[choff]

The very same.

Ever hear of a guy named Stephan Banderas?

[TDPerk]

Obama, McCain, Hillary, VIctoria Nuland, CNN and the MSM have no problems supporting NAZIS in Ukraine, they even have their pictures taken with them. Not the punk a$$ variety in Charlottesville either, but NAZIS in power who killed 60,000 people during WW2. Charlottesville was a carbon copy of Ukraine right down to the tiki torch parades and blood and soil chants.

Let me get this straight. Is this the same Ukraine Mattis says we're thinking of sending weapons to?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/worl ... ussia.html

Yes it is, but why sweat it?

Choff is FoS calling Ukraine full of Nazis.

[choff]

I'm not saying their full of Nazis, just that the Nazis were empowered by the U.S., CIA, State Dept, George Soros and NGO's to overthrow a democratically elected government. You had a Neo Nazi thug with an AK parading through the parliament, threatening the sitting members at one point.

If Trump delivers the weapons to the Ukraine military, I won't be at all surprised if CNN calls him out for arming Nazis. If he doesn't, CNN will call him out for being Putin's sock puppet.

[TDPerk]

I'm not saying their full of Nazis, just that the Nazis were empowered by the U.S., CIA, State Dept, George Soros and NGO's to overthrow a democratically elected government. You had a Neo Nazi thug with an AK parading through the parliament, threatening the sitting members at one point.

Except you are full of shit, because even if your feverish sources were correct about Obama backing Nazis, it wasn't Nazis who did any overthrowing, it was the Ukrainian people generally and parliament.

"If Trump delivers the weapons to the Ukraine military, I won't be at all surprised if CNN calls him out for arming Nazis. If he doesn't, CNN will call him out for being Putin's sock puppet"

None of which has anything to do with the fact it is in our best interest for Ukraine to be armed against Russian expansionism if Ukraine is inclined to resist it with our allies and help.

[Tom Ligon]

Choff is FoS calling Ukraine full of Nazis.

My point exactly. Even the present administration doesn't believe it.

[choff]

"And in the happy event Ukraine can preserve it's sovereignty, why shouldn't there be mass deportations and even executions? Russians out of uniform in Ukraine should expect to be killed out of hand as the Geneva Conventions permit. Ukrainian citizens who fought for the invaders should also expect that, although at least a military trial and conviction should precede it."

There are two breakaway provinces full of people who believe it, why else go to all the trouble of leaving.

Who do you think will be called upon for the mass executions, the girl guides?

[choff]

If those Russian soldiers leave you won't be listening to the MSM talking about the genocide mass/deportations taking place, only alternative media if you even pay attention. But lets assume everything you say is true, back to my original point, how is tarring Trump with the Charlotteville Nazi brush any more legitimate than tarring Obama, McCain, Hillary with the Ukraine Nazi brush.

And in the happy event Ukraine can preserve it's sovereignty, why shouldn't there be mass deportations and even executions? Russians out of uniform in Ukraine should expect to be killed out of hand as the Geneva Conventions permit. Ukrainian citizens who fought for the invaders should also expect that, although at least a military trial and conviction should precede it.

No one has said Trump! should be tarred with a Nazi brush, although just like when David Duke gave his endorsement to Trump!, it took Trump! too long to figure out he should condemn the Nazis, Kluxers, and White nationalists--and he still bobbled his condemnation saying there were fine people on each side. Among the Antifa thugs and the thugs across from them, no, there aren't good people.

That's quite the happy event isn't it.

[Tom Ligon]

Gee, what kind of country might have an insurrection, and then the insurrection is put down, and some people call for capital punishment of the rebels?

Couldn't happen here. Or could it? One early example. No problem finding more. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shays%27_Rebellion.

That there were no widespread capital reprisals, but instead blanket amnesty, after the Civil War is an anomaly in our history. The reprisals were, instead, political and economic.

Let's say Canada sent mercenaries into Maine to take it over (Canada assures us they are not behind this and the mercs are not members of their military), and a few Maineiacs joined them, shot other citizens, shot down an airliner passing over head, set up their own government and started executing their opponents. But they get put down.

What would the citizens of this country be calling for? Pretty sure they would not propose the Girls Scouts do this. I think it unlikely we would seek out neo-NAZIs to form a firing squad. Pretty sure the usual justice system route for killing capital offenders would be followed.

Canada would not do this, of course, but we did invade Canada in the War of 1812, and they remember it to this day.

[choff]

Over 90% of the people in those ukraine breakaway provinces voted for secession, exactly how many do you propose be executed/deported?

[Tom Ligon]

Over 90% of the people in those ukraine breakaway provinces voted for secession, exactly how many do you propose be executed/deported?

Just the ringleaders guilty of murder. Look up Shay's Rebellion, the Whiskey Rebellion, etc.

[choff]

What if 90% of the 2 million people in the breakaway provinces who voted to succeed consider themselves ringleaders to their own rebellion?