In the constitutional monarchy of the United Kingdom, royals (what an archaic concept!) are not supposed to be political by being partisan, or interfering in the affairs of government, or even venturing a political opinion.
But the oh-so-woke “Duke and Duchess of Sussex” Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle, the former D-list actress of whom no one had heard until news of their marriage, are not abiding by that unspoken but understood convention.
As an example, in August of this year, a barefoot Harry lectured the world on climate change at the Google Climate Summit in Sicily, never mind the fact that he flew to the summit in a gas-guzzling, CO2-spewing private jet and stayed in a gas-guzzling, CO2-spewing super-yacht while on the island.
That act of eco-hypocrisy was followed by even more, as Harry and Meghan took four gas-guzzling, CO2-spewing private jets in just 11 days for vacation.
The Toxic Couple’s latest violation of the no-politics royal protocol is their public support for a California “migrant” charity that opposes the construction of a US-Mexico border wall.
Victoria Ward reports for The Telegraph, October 7, 2019, that each month Harry and Meghan highlight a number of different charities on their sussexroyal Instagram page.
One of the accounts the couple “followed” is that of Border Kindness, a charity founded just last year in direct response to President Trump’s plan to build a wall on the Mexico border.
Before she married Harry, HillaryClinton-supporter Meghan was outspoken about Trump, calling him “misogynistic” and “divisive” during his 2016 presidential campaign.
Founded by Kelly Overton who has masters degrees from both Harvard and Columbia universities, Border Kindness has about 12 volunteers who work in the Mexicali area of Mexico providing clothes, transport, food and legal aid to “migrants” intent on gaining illegal entrance into the United States.
Overton called the “migrant” crisis at the Mexico border “one of the most inhumane and unfair” crises ever seen. He said: “I’m ashamed of this country I’m from. To treat people like this is just beyond belief and we see on the ground that it’s getting worse. Our response is in direct response to President Trump’s immigration policies. We work with women and children who are incredibly vulnerable, who have nothing when they arrive at this city in the desert.”
Overton then wielded Demonrats’ favorite go-to “racism” card. He said that if “white kids were taken from their parents and put somewhere” there would be international outrage.
Hillary Clinton, Hunter College commencement speech, May 29, 2019
That woman has no shame.
In the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton lost the electoral vote by a wide 304–227 margin. She then blamed and trashed Americans who had not voted for her, calling them “deplorables,” racists, woman-haters (“misogynists”), and white nationalists.
2016 election voting precincts map
Aided and abetted by then-FBI Director James Comey’s refusal to investigate or indict her, Hillary also continues to deny she had violated the law when, as Obama’s secretary of state, she ILLEGALLY used a non-State Department personal email server to receive and transmit emails and documents, some of which were classified.
On Tuesday, October 8, during an interview on PBS News Hour, Hillary falsely claimed she’d won the 2016 presidential election and repeatedly teased that she may run again in 2020.
Hillary made that preposterous claim in response to host Judy Woodruff quoting President Trump’s tweet earlier that day. Trump wrote:
“I think that crooked Hillary Clinton should try to enter the race to try and steal it away from uber-left Elizabeth Warren. Only one condition: The crooked one must explain all of her high crimes and misdemeanors, including how and why she deleted 33,000 e-mails.”
“You know, it truly is remarkable how obsessed he remains with me. But this latest tweet is so typical of him. Nothing has been more examined and looked at than my e-mails. We all know that. So maybe there does need to be a rematch. Obviously, I can beat him again. But, just seriously, I don’t understand, I don’t think anybody understands what motivates him.”
Clinton later responded to Trump’s tweet directly with this tweet:
Ryan Saavedra of Daily Wire reminds us that during the first 2016 presidential debate, Hillary had grandly proclaimed she would “respect” and “honor” the outcome of the election because “To say that you won’t respect the results of the election, that is a direct threat to our democracy.” She said: “Well, I support our democracy. And sometimes you win and sometimes you lose, but I certainly will support the outcome of this election.”
According to Saavedra, “Despite teasing otherwise, those close to Clinton claim that she is not going to run in 2020.” Former Hillary campaign strategist Adrienne Elrod toldThe Hill on Monday:
“It’s silly. It’s a pipe dream. I mean, look, she’s made it very clear that after this last run she’s done. It’s time for new faces to come in. To be honest with you, I don’t know that a run this time around would yield a first- or second-place finish. I think there’s a lot of new people in the party who are stepping forward. I think we’ve got a very deep bench of strong candidates, and she knows this. I would advise against her running, not because I don’t think she’s qualified. Of course, she is, but I think that she knows it’s time for faces and new leadership to step forward.”
Drudge Reporthas gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!
Impeach President Trump for Russian collusion; for emoluments; for obstruction of justice. Now for Ukraine (and Australia and China and then (?). Adam Schiff and his fellow Democrats and Deep Staters’ impeachment jihad could be viewed as obsessed, crazy – perhaps even comedic, as they (and Adam Schiff in particular) increasingly resemble Wile E. Coyote futilely chasing the Road Runner.
But even crazy and obsessed people can be rational in their machinations. What if the Deep State swamp crocodiles fully recognize that it is unlikely that they’ll succeed in removing President Trump from office through impeachment, yet still persist? Is there a method to their madness? Yes.
True, they desperately want to take out President Trump, and dare not rely upon the electoral process plus whatever voter fraud they can muster to accomplish that for them. So impeachment is their offensive element, and remains their best-case scenario. Still, after Mueller belly-flopped, they must have finally realized (if not before) that a successful impeachment and removal from office is highly unlikely, if not impossible.
But there is also a defensive element. They have to surmise that Trump’s declassifications, and (let us pray) DOJ indictments will occur between the release of the Inspector General’s report and the 2020 election. So they also require a defensive strategy well before the election. The Democrats can, and are, simultaneously playing both offense and defense.
Well, if you got the goods sir, produce them NOW. Because I’m not going to hold my breath.
From Daily Mail: Republican senator Lindsey Graham said Sunday that the Inspector General’s report on how the investigation into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia began will be ‘ugly and damning’ for the Department of Justice.
During an interview with Fox News, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Graham said the Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report is ‘going to be ugly and damning regarding the DOJ handling of the Russian probe.’
Graham said that Horowitz’s report is now expected to be released in the coming weeks and he is determined to have the report released so that the American people can find out what it says about the Russia probe.
When asked why the report, which was expected to have been submitted months ago, was delayed for so long, Graham said that ‘Every time you turn around you find something new.’
He added that ‘Mr. Horowitz is doing a very in-depth dive’ into how the FBI made use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in an effort to obtain a warrant allowing them to monitor Trump’s former campaign adviser Carter Page.
Graham said that when Horowitz submits his report, the DOJ will evaluate it for classified information, but that he wants to ‘declassify as much as possible. ‘I want the American public to hear the story, I want all this information to come out,’ Graham said. ‘I don’t want people to believe what I say about it, I want them to read for themselves how bad it was.’
Graham said he wants ‘people to see how off the rails this investigation got’ and that he wants ‘people to be held accountable.’
‘I am patient,’ Graham said. ‘I am not in a hurry, I want to do it right.’
Graham said that he wanted George Papadopoulos, a former Trump campaign staffer who pleaded guilty to making false claims to the FBI, to testify in front of his Senate Judiciary Committee after Horowitz’s report is released.
The senator said he believes that Papadopoulos’ interview transcripts reveal that he was ‘clearly’ not working with the Russians as has been claimed.
Papadopoulos is said to have been responsible for initiating the Russia probe by telling an Australian diplomat that he had heard that Russia had damaging information about Hillary Clinton. The diplomat was said to have alerted US officials about what the ex-campaign staffer said.
Graham also noted that he believe the FBI’s application for a FISA warrant was a ‘fraud on the court’ because the FBI relied in Christopher Steele’s dossier to get the warrant, even though Steele was, what Graham called, ‘an unreliable informant’ who disliked Trump.
In the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton won the bi-coastal “blue states”, whereas Donald Trump won the “red states” in the heartland — what the MSM call “fly over country” and liberal elites like Katie Couric call “this great unwashed middle of the country”.
Now there’s a movie depicting rich liberal elites hunting and killing “deplorables”.
On September 27, 2019, Universal Pictures and Blumhouse Productions will release an ultra-violent, R-rated “horror thriller” movie, The Hunt, depicting rich elites hunting Americans in fly-over red states like Arkansas, for sport.
The film, which has been described as a gory satire featuring actresses Hilary Swank and Betty Gilpin, followsa group of elites who stalk and murder conservatives in red states. The hunters are fueled by their hatred of the “MAGA-type” characters and their right-leaning positions. While the term “deplorables” may not be explicitly stated in the trailer, Daily Mailnotes that the “hunted” were, in fact, described as “deplorables” in the screenplay.
“The film was originally called Red State Vs. Blue State,” the Daily Mail reports.
It is not clear whether the filmmakers are sympathetic to the “Deplorables” or the “hunters.” Nevertheless, Blumhouse founder Jason Blum is a notorious Trump-hater who was booed off stage at the 32nd Israeli Film Festival in Los Angeles last year after blaming the president for the rise of anti-Semitism.
“Did anyone see what our ratfucker-in-chief just did?” one character asks…. Another responds: “At least The Hunt’s coming up. Nothing better than going out to the Manor and slaughtering a dozen deplorables.”
According to the Hollywood Reporter, “From a business perspective, The Huntpresents a gamble for Universal in these divided times.”
That’s because a similar movie — the so-called black comedy Assassination Nation, a 2018 movie written and directed by (((Sam Levinson))) — had bombed in the box office. Like The Hunt, Assassination Nation also pitted liberals against conservatives in very violent fashion. Although the movie represented the top sale at Sundance 2018 at $10 million, Assassination Nation fizzled upon its release, earning just $2 million with no international rollout. Says one person involved with that film, “We thought people would get the joke.”
Update (August 11, 2019)
Gateway Pundit reports that President Trump complained about The Hunt in a press conference on Friday, August 9, before leaving for vacation. He said: “Hollywood is racist.… what they’re doing with the kind of movies they’re putting out — it’s actually very dangerous for our country.”
The next day, August 10, Universal announced it was cancelling the film’s release in a statement that reads:
While Universal Pictures had already paused the marketing campaign for The Hunt, after thoughtful consideration, the studio has decided to cancel our plans to release the film. We stand by our filmmakers and will continue to distribute films in partnership with bold and visionary creators, like those associated with this satirical social thriller, but we understand that now is not the right time to release this film.
“Now is not the right time to release this film” suggests that Universal Pictures has every intentions to release the execrable The Hunt sometime in the future, probably straight to video.
Drudge Reporthas gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
Note: This is a re-publish of a post that was originally published on August 16, 2016, but the post is lost after WordPress without warning took down Fellowship of the Minds on August 15, 2018. Fortunately, PaperBlog had reblogged the post, which enables me to re-publish it.
Chutzpah (definition): A Yiddish word derived from the Hebrew word (חֻוצְפָּה), meaning “insolence”, “cheek” or “audacity”.
But the MSM have outdone even themselves in their coverage of the 2016 presidential election by abandoning all pretenses at being objective.
Now, the New York Times, the premier national U.S. newspaper, openly admits their abandonment of objective journalism in their coverage of Donald Trump and, in an act of unbridled chutzpah, they actually blame Trump for it, arguing that objective coverage only benefits his campaign by providing him with free publicity.
If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies [Note how Rutenberg equates racism with nationalism or love of one’s nation ~Eowyn], that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him?
Because if you believe all of those things, you have to throw out the textbook American journalismhas been using for the better part of the past half-century, if not longer,and approach it in a way you’ve never approached anything in your career.If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. You would move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional. That’s uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, nonopinion journalist I’ve ever known, and by normal standards, untenable.
But the question that everyone is grappling with is: Do normal standards apply? And if they don’t, what should take their place? […]
But let’s face it: Balance has been on vacation since Mr. Trump stepped onto his golden Trump Tower escalator last year to announce his candidacy. For the primaries and caucuses, the imbalance played to his advantage, captured by the killer statistic of the season: His nearly $2 billion in free media was more than six times as much as that of his closest Republican rival.
To justify the media’s abandonment of journalistic objectivity, Rutenberg cites MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough:
Mr. Scarborough, a frequent critic of liberal media bias, said he was concerned that Mr. Trump was becoming increasingly erratic, and asked rhetorically, “How balanced do you have to be when one side is just irrational?”
Finally, Rutenberg justifies why journalists must abandon objectivity and fairness when it comes to Trump because they are simply saving Americans from what Rutenberg knows will be a horrible Trump presidency:
It would also be an abdication of political journalism’s most solemn duty: to ferret out what the candidates will be likein the most powerful office in the world.
It may not always seem fair to Mr. Trump or his supporters. But journalism shouldn’t measure itself against any one campaign’s definition of fairness.It is journalism’s job to be true to the readers and viewers, and true to the facts, in a way that will stand up to history’s judgment. To do anything less would be untenable.
In other words, it’s Donald Trump’s fault: He’s crazy, and so journalists shouldn’t be fair or objective in their reporting because their more important job is to prevent someone crazy like him to become President.
Rutenberg is simply saying what my erstwhile socialist friend Stephanie once said, in a fit of frustration after losing an argument: “I’ve made up my mind! Don’t confuse me with facts!”
Rutenberg’s version of Stephanie is:
“We journalists have made up our minds about Trump! There’ll be no objective reporting from us ’cause we don’t want to confuse you with facts!”