patrick.net

Patrick says

It's kinda basic psychology, but all the Trump haters overlook it because they are literally whacking off to hate every day. They are addicted to their daily masturbatory hate. And this is a huge benefit to Trump, who looks much better with this kind of nutty opposition than he would otherwise.

Leftists hate Genetics, owning up to the legacy of the New Society, and the effectiveness of 3-strikes Criminal Policy, the failure of closing down public mental health facilities, among other things.

Their answer is to always double down. If Welfare didn't work, the answer is better benefits and less restrictions. They forgot the 90s era Community Policing and 3-strikes was in response to the wave of Criminal Terror the Dems unleashed in the 60s-80s by weakening enforcement, doing away with the death penalty, and expanding parole and early release.

This is why they eventually lose, they moved from decriminalizing gay behavior which most supported, to allowing gay marriage which only a plurality supported, now they want to force all K-12 to have unisex bathrooms and accept all claims of 13-year old M2F Trans, and the teen girls and their parents will just have to "Suck It". Then they pressure companies and states to boycott other states that require official recorded sex use of bathrooms, rather than the person's perceived gender of that day.

They always cross a line.

marcus says

Democrats 1960-2008: Question Authority. The CIA, the Corporations, and Academics and especially the Media are all looking out for each other, and the Man, not you, man. Don't trust 'em, man.
Democrats 2008- : If you question the Authorities, you're a dangerous Populist. The CIA, the Corporations, and Academics and especially the Media are all looking out for your best interest, man. Trust them utterly, man.

Or in pithy meme form:



Again, Trump's most vital purpose is exposing the Anti-American Oikophobes for their end goals. When they were at odds with most of society, their goal was to question and undermine every part of society. Now that they dominate the Media, Academia, Large Corps, Silicon Valley, etc. - the Clerisy - they demand total obedience in the name of social cohesion, while their real goal is to "radically transform America" using those institutions they now control.

The historical example would be the Jesuits: When Princes became Protestant, sometimes ruling Catholic majorities, like Queen Elizabeth I, the Jesuits pushed the Unjust Ruler mentality, that a Catholic should seek to undermine Protestant rulers regardless of their secular legitimacy. When many Catholic Princes came to rule over Protestant Heavy areas, like James II of Great Britain or Phillip II, they did a complete 180 and demanded all Catholics obey their Monarchs, chosen by God, to the nth Degree without question.

marcus says

he really is a terrible and dangerous President

Let's talk about specific Trump policies. Which of his policies are you opposed to?

marcus says

Maybe what liberals really do hate is the "fuck you" aspect Trump supporters repeatedly admitted to having when electing a President becasue going to do a lot (even some really bad stuff - such as with the environment)

I, for one, Voted against Hillary. Sad that we had to choose between a sociopath and a reality show playboy.

Trump's message was, "Make America Great Again". Hillary's message was "You're are deplorable if you vote against ME and for that racist, sexist, womanizing, homopho...".

Many voted against Hillary or for Trump. More voted for Hillary or against Trump. Trump just had the smarter game plan.

Onvacation says

we had to choose between a sociopath and a reality show playboy

Yup. But a reality show playboy with a plan for America to escape dependency on China and to stem the flood of illegals.

Trump's policies are generally very good for the country.

This one should blow your mind.

UV Treatment of Blood was used fairly extensively in the past; a NY Writer got this companies Product Demo Video removed from Youtube for "Violating Community Guidelines", and he's proud of it.



That's right, the media is now targeting Biotech startups if their product seems to support an offhand Trump remark.

“So, supposing when we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. And then I said supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And I think you said you’re going to test that too. Sounds interesting. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me. So, we’ll see, but the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute. That’s pretty powerful.”

So watch that video, and then try to figure out how the press came up with these headlines:

NYC Poison Control Sees Uptick In Calls After Trump's Disinfectant Comments - NPR

No, Don't Inject Disinfectant: Outcry Over Trump's Musing - U.S. News & World Report

Trump's disinfectants for coronavirus remarks show the danger in his disdain for experts - NBC News

Trump wonders if injecting bleach kills coronavirus, but Cristina Cuomo bathes in it - Los Angeles Times

Injections of Bleach? Beams of Light? Trump Is Self-Destructing Before Our Eyes - New York Times

Proof that the press is not interested in the truth, only in fomenting hate.

FAKE NEWS

Again

https://www.dailywire.com/news/fact-check-no-trump-did-not-tell-people-to-inject-themselves-with-disinfectant-or-drink-bleach

See video above ^^^^

And tell your friends to see the video. They don't have to be logged in:

https://patrick.net/post/1331299/media-lying-outright-hear-what-trump-really-said?offset=120#comment-1665251

https://therightscoop.com/the-media-is-lying-about-increased-emergency-calls-about-drinking-bleach-in-order-to-blame-trump/

Patrick says

Let's talk about specific Trump policies. Which of his policies are you opposed to?

Good luck on getting a cogent answer

The real heroes of this crisis are the Journalists.

hahahahahaha

Patrick says

But a reality show playboy with a plan for America to escape dependency on China and to stem the flood of illegals.

@Patrick,
I don't think he wants to stem flow of illegals. E-verify!!!

Pretty sure they had the US main stream media in mind when they wrote this song:

www.youtube.com/embed/YOqMZkb4Bgo

https://reason.com/2020/04/27/when-it-comes-to-covering-trump-the-new-york-times-has-abandoned-any-distinction-between-reporting-and-opinion/

There is a difference between reporting facts that make Trump uncomfortable, or reporting the opinions of Trump critics, and calling him stupid, uninformed, vain, petty, irresponsible, and self-obsessed. By crossing that line, the Times is erasing the distinction between reporting and advocacy.

Maybe that's for the best. There is nothing wrong with advocacy or opinion journalism (I do it all the time!), as long as it is intellectually honest and explicitly identified as such. The subtler forms of bias that were apparent in news coverage by the Times long before Trump was elected—manifested in decisions about which facts to include or omit, which sources to quote, and which angles to emphasize—are more insidious and therefore more misleading.

Readers may be better served by a newspaper that is open about its prejudices and does not pretend that it aspires to anything like objectivity, which was always an impossible standard to meet, or even balance. But if that is the route the Times chooses, it must abandon the notion that what it does is fundamentally different from what Fox News does, and its "reporters" can hardly object when Trump publicly describes them as political opponents.

Oh hell!

https://nypost.com/2020/04/29/homicide-cops-investigate-death-of-man-who-drank-chloroquine/

Gary Lenius died March 22 when his wife, Wanda, said she served him a mixture of soda and the chemical, typically used to clean fish tanks, after hearing President Trump tout it as a potential cure for the deadly global pandemic, the Washington Free Beacon reported Tuesday.

PATRICK.NET was RIGHT!!!!

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/04/29/the_ny_times_used_to_correct_its_whoppers_but_not_these_two_heres_why_123118.html

The 1619 Project is basically full on Black Power trash.

It completely ignores the widespread slavery in Africa - chattel slavery - that existed for thousands of years before European contact, that is was involved far longer with the Arab World over the Sahara via Timbuktu, or the huge profits African Empires made selling slaves by warring on neighbors. The Romans making money selling Gallic Slaves is uncontroversial, why is African Slavery in Africa a taboo Topic? Black Supremacy (aka Dindu Nuttin).

It also grossly exaggerates slavery in the North, turning a handful of Black household servants (scullery maids, housekeepers) to the very wealthy, as somehow crucial in the development of NY or Boston. If anything, the only thing they did was slightly retard wages for unmarried women, given their insignificant numbers and that slavery was ended right away in early 19th Century. Or that the Northern States were among the first governments to do so. Arabs and Africans only ended it at British Cannonpoint.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/01/31/disputed_ny_times_1619_project_is_already_shaping_kids_minds_on_race_bias_122192.html

The amazing thing is that Noted experts on Colonial America protested the curriculum, and the NYT didn't even acknowledge their receipt of it.

It's almost as if they're pushing a narrative.

Interestingly, the most daring opponents of 1619 are orthodox Marxists.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/04/20/ahrr-a20.html

And CNN...

As I point out in my column today, there is no 'double standard' in the way Kavanaugh was treated vs. Biden. A few Dems called for immediate withdrawal of nomination, but the prevailing view was that the accusations should be heard and investigated. Same should be done w Reade.

— Kirsten Powers (@KirstenPowers) May 1, 2020

Amazing.

https://dailycaller.com/2020/05/10/nbc-news-admits-aired-deceptively-edited-clip-bill-barr-meet-the-press-chuck-todd/

NBC News admitted it aired a deceptively edited clip Sunday of Attorney General Bill Barr talking about former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s case.

The clip, aired on host Chuck Todd’s “Meet the Press” program, showed Barr being asked by CBS News’ Catherine Herridge how the decision to dismiss Flynn’s case will be viewed upon looking back.

Todd played a clip that showed Barr responding by saying that “history is written by the winners, so it largely depends on who’s writing the history.”

Todd chastised Barr for the comment, saying he was “struck by the cynicism of the answer – it’s a correct answer, but he’s the attorney general. He didn’t make the case that he was upholding the rule of law. He was almost admitting that, yeah, this was a political job.”

However, the clip that NBC News played did not show that Barr did, in fact, say that the decision “upheld the rule of law.” The network was immediately called out on the deceptively edited clip, and NBC’s “Meet the Press” Twitter eventually admitted wrongdoing in a reply tweet.

“You’re correct,” NBC News’ show tweeted after Department of Justice spokeswoman Kerri Kupec trashed the clip in a tweet. “Earlier today, we inadvertently and inaccurately cut short a video clip of an interview with AG Barr before offering commentary and analysis. The remaining clip included important remarks from the attorney general that we missed, and we regret the error.”

The network and show have not yet said if they will issue an on-air correction.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/fake-news-new-york-times-admits-report-26-yr-old-e-r-doctor-died-coronavirus-completely-made/

New York Times Admits Report on 26-Yr-Old E.R. Doctor Who Died from Coronavirus Was Completely Made Up

https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/02/source-says-only-smoke-canisters-not-tear-gas-used-on-protestors-before-trumps-arrival-at-burned-church/

Source Says Only Smoke Canisters, Not Tear Gas, Used On Protestors Before Trump’s Arrival At Burned Church
June 2, 2020 By Jordan Davidson

President Trump’s visit to St. John’s Episcopal Church last night was met with heavy social media backlash after reports by many news outlets were publicized suggesting that peaceful protestors were forced from the area using tear gas. According to reporting by Neil Augenstein for WTOPnews, however, there were only smoke canisters.

“A source says tear gas was never used — instead smoke cannisters were deployed, which don’t have an uncomfortable irritant in them,” tweeted Augenstein. “And, the source says Park Police didn’t know President Trump would be walking across the park several minutes later.”

A source says tear gas was never used — instead smoke cannisters were deployed, which don't have an uncomfortable irritant in them. And, the source says Park Police didn't know President Trump would be walking across the park several minutes later. Park Police say…

— Neal Augenstein (@AugensteinWTOP) June 2, 2020

Augenstein says the source also suggested that the crowd began to grow rowdy even before the president’s arrival, which is why police used force.

“…the reason the crowd was disbursed with smoke cannisters [sic] is that at that moment, officers were being pelted with water bottles. Another factor was that protesters had climbed on top of the structure at the north end of Lafayette Square that had been burned the day before,” he continued in the Twitter thread.

https://mashable.com/article/twitter-donald-trump-suspend-tweets-policy-violence/

One Twitter account is reposting everything Trump tweets. It was suspended within 3 days. ...

"This account will tweet what the President tweets," Twitter account SuspendThePres posted on May 29. "Let's see if it gets suspended for violating twitters [terms of service]."

Approximately 68 hours later, SuspendThePres was temporarily suspended for violating Twitter's rules against glorifying violence. Twitter officially refers to this state as being "locked" or "temporarily unavailable."

CBS News claims 'white Americans' are racists, have 'contempt for black life' https://t.co/ueavsQVBnj

— Cindy (@asheborn57) June 4, 2020

https://www.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeech/comments/gwocwn/censorship_twitter_removes_exposeantifa_from/

[Censorship] Twitter removes #EXPOSEANTIFA from United States trending list after Project Veritas undercover video on Antifa receives over a million views in two hours.

https://nypost.com/2020/06/02/the-lying-about-donald-trump-is-now-completely-out-of-control/

Anti-Trump liberals (i.e., Democrats and the media) just have to find something — anything — wrong with the president, even if it means making it up. ...

People even started saying Trump was “hiding in his bunker” and the lights went out — until a CNN reporter pointed out the main lights always go out at 11 p.m.

It’s not as if this hasn’t happened before. Recall the images of “children in cages” that were all the rage heading into summer 2018, passed off as demonstrable proof that the Trump administration was taking a needlessly callous hard line in locking up illegal immigrants.

Those photos ended up being from 2014, again, when Obama was president. ...

CNN political analyst David Gergen said Tuesday that Trump’s referrals to himself as “the president of law and order” functioned as “race-baiting” and, in turn, “would deliberately incite violence.”

Liberal Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank wrote Monday that the riots and destruction we’re seeing “are the wages of Trump’s hate-filled incumbency.”

The always-hysterical Don Lemon on CNN said late last week that Trump has “contributed” to the “environment” we’re now experiencing.

It never ends, but these aren’t mistakes. This is how the national media are intended to operate in the Trump era. If they can’t find something wrong with him, they make it up.

The frustrating thing is that liberals believe the media no matter how outrageous the lie, and they never do any fact checking the lies that they want to believe.

jazz_music says

Hence civil debate is what it's all about.

That's not even possible when too many working white men embrace divisive lies and propaganda as reality.

"It Was All a Lie: How the Republican Party Became Donald Trump" by Stuart Stevens

Don't you realize, that is what you are doing.

You are listening to some propagandist, working for a propaganda organization telling you what to think, and telling us to listen to this propagandist and encouraging other people to accept the propaganda. Stuart Stevens is a propagandist. You are embracing propaganda which are divisive lies.

The person that was in the opposition of Trump was a woman that voted for the Iraq War as a Junior senator, and who promised to escalate the war in Syria, and who is justifiably known as the "butcher of Libya" because she was the driving force in bombing that nation which has left it in civil war with operating slavery markets.

Trump took the establishment of the Republican party and throttled it and people are very happy to see it "hijacked". Clinton was a clone of George W. Bush, just as Obama was. People are sick of this establishment that the propaganda media supports and you have been tricked into supporting. Don't you recognize that our "news" media is - it is just propaganda at this point? They divide us.

richwicks says

Don't you recognize that our "news" media is - it is just propaganda at this point? They divide us.

The media had all their revenue drained away by Google and Facebook. There is a beautiful "X" graph somewhere showing mainstream media revenue plummeting exactly as Google + Facebook revenue surged the same amount.

This left the media open to infection by opportunistic parasites, for example Jeff Bezos' takeover the Washington Post.

The media has this facade of credibility, but they clearly are no longer reporters, but just paid agents of division and hate now. Especially hate for Trump.

The NY Times overtly lied about Tom Cotton's Op-Ed and refuses to issue a correction.

Cotton explicitly rejected an "equivalence of rioters and looters to peaceful, law-abiding protesters. A majority who seek to protest peacefully shouldn’t be confused with bands of miscreants."

https://twitter.com/saletan/status/1269738391731658752

https://spectator.us/andrew-sullivan-new-york-column-riots/

What has happened to New York media? Just as the New York Times was experiencing its own Inner Mongolia Moment over the now notorious Sen. Tom Cotton ‘Send in the Troops’ op-ed, the Maoists at New York magazine were going after their best columnist, Andrew Sullivan.

Sullivan revealed on Twitter yesterday that his column wouldn’t be appearing. The reason? His editors are not allowing him to write about the riots.

Heads up: my column won't be appearing this week.

— Andrew Sullivan (@sullydish) June 4, 2020

Presumably Sullivan’s editors are frightened that he might make the radically bourgeois point that looting and violence are wrong. ...

Sullivan is not just forbidden from writing for the New York magazine about the riots; his contract means he cannot write on the topic for another publication. He is therefore legally unable to write anything about the protests without losing his job — at the magazine that, in 1970, published Radical Chic, Tom Wolfe’s brilliant and controversial excoriation of progressive piety. It’s the bonfire of the liberals!

Here's the terrible, no good, fascist screed that got the editor of the NY Times removed:

This week, rioters have plunged many American cities into anarchy, recalling the widespread violence of the 1960s. New York City suffered the worst of the riots Monday night, as Mayor Bill de Blasio stood by while Midtown Manhattan descended into lawlessness. Bands of looters roved the streets, smashing and emptying hundreds of businesses. Some even drove exotic cars; the riots were carnivals for the thrill-seeking rich as well as other criminal elements. Outnumbered police officers, encumbered by feckless politicians, bore the brunt of the violence. In New York State, rioters ran over officers with cars on at least three occasions. In Las Vegas, an officer is in “grave” condition after being shot in the head by a rioter. In St. Louis, four police officers were shot as they attempted to disperse a mob throwing bricks and dumping gasoline; in a separate incident, a 77-year-old retired police captain was shot to death as he tried to stop looters from ransacking a pawnshop. This is “somebody’s granddaddy,” a bystander screamed at the scene. Some elites have excused this orgy of violence in the spirit of radical chic, calling it an understandable response to the wrongful death of George Floyd. Those excuses are built on a revolting moral equivalence of rioters and looters to peaceful, law-abiding protesters. A majority who seek to protest peacefully shouldn’t be confused with bands of miscreants.

But the rioting has nothing to do with George Floyd, whose bereaved relatives have condemned violence. On the contrary, nihilist criminals are simply out for loot and the thrill of destruction, with cadres of left-wing radicals like antifa infiltrating protest marches to exploit Floyd’s death for their own anarchic purposes. These rioters, if not subdued, not only will destroy the livelihoods of law-abiding citizens but will also take more innocent lives. Many poor communities that still bear scars from past upheavals will be set back still further. One thing above all else will restore order to our streets: an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers. But local law enforcement in some cities desperately needs backup, while delusional politicians in other cities refuse to do what’s necessary to uphold the rule of law. The pace of looting and disorder may fluctuate from night to night, but it’s past time to support local law enforcement with federal authority. Some governors have mobilized the National Guard, yet others refuse, and in some cases the rioters still outnumber the police and Guard combined. In these circumstances, the Insurrection Act authorizes the president to employ the military “or any other means” in “cases of insurrection, or obstruction to the laws.” This venerable law, nearly as old as our republic itself, doesn’t amount to “martial law” or the end of democracy, as some excitable critics, ignorant of both the law and our history, have comically suggested. In fact, the federal government has a constitutional duty to the states to “protect each of them from domestic violence.” Throughout our history, presidents have exercised this authority on dozens of occasions to protect law-abiding citizens from disorder. Nor does it violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which constrains the military’s role in law enforcement but expressly excepts statutes such as the Insurrection Act.

After thousands of whites rioted in Oxford, Miss., in 1962 to prevent integration of the University of Mississippi, President John Kennedy sent U.S. troops to quell the violence. For instance, during the 1950s and 1960s, Presidents Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson called out the military to disperse mobs that prevented school desegregation or threatened innocent lives and property. This happened in my own state. Gov. Orval Faubus, a racist Democrat, mobilized our National Guard in 1957 to obstruct desegregation at Little Rock Central High School. President Eisenhower federalized the Guard and called in the 101st Airborne in response. The failure to do so, he said, “would be tantamount to acquiescence in anarchy.” More recently, President George H.W. Bush ordered the Army’s Seventh Infantry and 1,500 Marines to protect Los Angeles during race riots in 1992. He acknowledged his disgust at Rodney King’s treatment — “what I saw made me sick” — but he knew deadly rioting would only multiply the victims, of all races and from all walks of life. Not surprisingly, public opinion is on the side of law enforcement and law and order, not insurrectionists. According to a recent poll, 58 percent of registered voters, including nearly half of Democrats and 37 percent of African-Americans, would support cities’ calling in the military to “address protests and demonstrations” that are in “response to the death of George Floyd.” That opinion may not appear often in chic salons, but widespread support for it is fact nonetheless. The American people aren’t blind to injustices in our society, but they know that the most basic responsibility of government is to maintain public order and safety. In normal times, local law enforcement can uphold public order. But in rare moments, like ours today, more is needed, even if many politicians prefer to wring their hands while the country burns

Tom Cotton (@sentomcotton) is a Republican senator from Arkansas. The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor.

Lol, that last sentence is hilariously false!

The NY Times is 110% committed to suppressing all dissent from The Narrative, as they have so abundantly proven with this fiasco.

Can anyone find any line in there that would justify firing the editor of the paper?

Here's one from CNN:

CNN reporter starts a live hit by saying it’s peaceful in the Seattle “CHAZ.”

An occupier crashes the shot and tries to organize people to interrupt the hit.

The reporter then says “no doubt some of these protesters are armed.” pic.twitter.com/CNXHanvxFm

— Alex Salvi (@alexsalvinews) June 12, 2020