Robert Mueller and his “investigation” were just bad jokes.  End of story.

Robert Mueller and his Hillary Clinton “hit squad” just were not able to manufacture any wrong doings by The President, his family, or anyone involved in his campaign.

Remember that Mueller and his team and everyone else knew going in that President Trump wasn’t guilty of any of this stuff, but Hillary, Obama, the Obama DOJ and the Obama FBI were, and it was their job to create a distraction and deflect an investigation away from their “swampy” friends.

This was not an investigation of a crime, this was an “investigation” in search of a crime…, any crime…, but there was no crime to be found.  Believe me…, if they could have found anything…, ANYTHING…, A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G…, that’s all we would be hearing about.

But as it is, Robert Mueller and his team finally had to slink away, with their tails between their legs, unable to come up with anything that would justify the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media’s” and the democrats’ daily charges (for almost two years now) of Russian collusion and obstruction of justice.

This is what today’s New York Times headline SHOULD look like!

mueller report paper

Instead, after close to two years of bashing our president on a daily basis, they are sporting some mealy-mouthed small print headline that doesn’t come anywhere near giving The President his due.

According to Dan Gainor of Fox News, “[The] Liberal media’s Mueller collusion coverage turns out to be Titanic of media disasters.”

The “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” bought “the swamp’s” fantasy narrative, hook, line and sinker!

The rallying cries of “It’s Mueller time!” have turned into “What you talkin’ ‘bout Willis?”

mueller time

The much anticipated Mueller Report has exposed, “… one of the worst disasters of media bias in history – the false claim that Donald Trump, his campaign or associates colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election.”

“Attorney General William Barr sent a letter to members of Congress Sunday stating that Special Counsel Robert Mueller found no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion – something the president has been saying [all along].”

“Like the luxury liner Titanic, the supposedly unsinkable passenger ship that sank when it collided with an iceberg in 1912 in the Atlantic, the claim of Trump-Russia collusion was supposed to be unsinkable. At least that’s what we were told repeatedly by the anti-Trump media.”

“But in reality, there’s nothing new about Russia’s attempts to influence our elections. The Washington Post has reported that Russia and its predecessor Soviet Union have been trying to influence American elections since 1960.”

“Yet ever since President Trump was elected – surprising media pundits who expected Democrat Hillary Clinton to defeat him – many news organizations have claimed he only got to the Oval Office because of help from Russia.  Forget that President Obama had promised Russia’s leader he’d have “more flexibility” working with Russia after the 2012 election. It had to be Trump who was the one working with Russia.”

“Journalists set aside ordinary things like honesty, professionalism and accuracy in their desperate quest to be the one who took down Trump.”

I would argue that things like honest, professionalism and accuracy had been set aside long before this by the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media.” The whole Russian collusion hoax just removed any shadow of a doubt that the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” was real and an enemy of We the People, just like President Trump had warned.

“The Russia collusion claim dominated the news for the past two years because much of the media couldn’t accept that their favored candidate – Hillary Clinton – was beaten by a man they could not stand.”

“There had to be another reason Trump won. The media had reported many times he was almost guaranteed to lose.”

“Buzzfeed published the uncorroborated dossier attacking Trump with salacious gossip and rumor even before he took office. Then it defended the foul result.”

“Three CNN reporters resigned after their false Trump-Russia story was removed from the CNN website.”

“On it went. ABC’s then-investigative reporter Brian Ross incorrectly reported that Trump directed Michael Flynn to contact Russia. ABC had to bail the lifeboats when it turned out that the contact was post-election. The Dow was underwater briefly for about 350 points. Ross was later suspended and he no longer works at ABC.”

“The list of such failures is almost endless. Now the press is forced to admit the Mueller report vindicated the president on collusion.”

“According to Barr, Mueller found that when the president said repeatedly that “there was no collusion” the president was right.”

“The narrative collapse would cause sane men and women to stop and reassess how they got here, how they got to a point where they violated every tenet of journalism they claim to support – just for revenge on Trump.”

“A few have noticed. Liberal writer Matt Taibbi released a whole chapter of his upcoming book ‘Hate, Inc.,’ demolishing media coverage of Trump. The piece was headlined: ‘It’s official: Russiagate is this generation’s WMD,’ comparing the false collusion claims to the incorrect claim that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction to justify the U.S.invasion.”

“Taibbi called the Mueller report ‘a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media.’

“The media didn’t just ignore warnings like the Titanic captain. They aimed right at an iceberg (Trump) and were determined to smash it. Instead, the only thing that sank was their reputation.”

mueller report meme

Agreed, Mr. Gainor, although I would say a lot more than their reputation has sank…, many of these networks, newspapers and magazines have lost any shred of credibility they may have had, and their viabilities as functioning media outlets are now in question.

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the very bottom of this page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

“A picture is worth a thousand words.” In these cases…, maybe more.

Here are some of the famous pictures that reflect our American history and reflect events that have changed our history.

aoc history

… although this picture is not one of those pictures!

Let’s continue…

nine eleven

09/11/2001.  Some pictures don’t need any description.

The assassination of John F. Kennedy, the ensuing investigation, and all of the questions surrounding the assassination, have remained for over 50 years.

1963 – President John F. Kennedy and his wife Jacqueline in Dallas, Texas, moments before he was fatally shot.

jfk 2

President Kennedy is hit.

jfk 3

A frantic Jackie scrambles onto the back of the car.

jfk

The murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, the alleged assassin of The President, by Jack Ruby, in the Dallas jail.

jfk 4

In 1986 The Space Shuttle Challenger exploded shortly after lift-off, shocking our nation and the world.

challenger 2

challenger

Neil Armstrong takes the first step onto the moon’s surface, July 20, 1969.  He and Buzz Aldrin were the first humans to land on the moon.  A smart phone, like most of us have, has thousands of times the computing power of the computers on Apollo 11.

“That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” – Neil Armstrong, as he stepped onto the surface of the moon.

moon landing

This picture, taken in New York City, known as “The Kiss,” represents the unbridled joy by all Americans that World War II had finally come to an end.

the kiss

On August 14, 1945, President Harry Truman announced from the White House that the Japanese were unconditionally surrendering.  As soon as the news was announced, spontaneous celebrations erupted across the United States.

But as memorable as the arrival of victory over Japan was, the day was bittersweet for the many Americans whose loved ones would not be returning home.  More than 400,000 Americans had given their lives in World War II, and America would never be the same.

In 2016, Donald Trump shocked the entire country by pulling off the upset of the century, while not only winning the presidency, but doing so convincingly.  The “forgotten men and women” in our country rose up and made their votes count.  Politics and the way we view “the media” in our country would never be the same.

trump elected

trump wins landslide

I hope you enjoyed this trip through some of our history as Americans, as seen through the camera lens.

Please let me know if you agree with the events I’ve chosen, if you feel I missed any, or if you you’d just like to reminisce or leave a comment.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the very bottom of this page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

The hypocrisy of “the left” knows no bounds!

According to Paul Farhi of The Washington Post, “The Democrat National Committee (DNC) has decided to exclude Fox News Channel from televising any of its candidate debates during the 2019-2020 cycle …”

Is this even legal?  Isn’t this a violation of the freedom of the press?  It surely is at least un-American.

You can’t say the democrats aren’t consistent.

Consistently hypocritical.

Consistently unconstitutional.

“In a statement Wednesday, DNC Chairman Tom Perez cited a story in the New Yorker magazine this week that detailed how Fox has promoted President Trump’s agenda. The article, titled ‘The Making of the Fox News White House,’ suggested that the news network had become a ‘propaganda’ vehicle for Trump.”

(Please see my other blog today on this very topic.)

“I believe that a key pathway to victory is to continue to expand our electorate and reach all voters,” said Perez in his statement to The Washington Post.

Soooo you “expand” your electorate “and reach all voters” by excluding certain news coverage?  You “expand” the reach of your party by excluding the most watched cable news channel on TV?  Is this what they call liberal common sense?  It sounds like you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth.  You’re a democrat alright!

‘“That is why I have made it a priority to talk to a broad array of potential media partners, including Fox News.  Recent reporting in the New Yorker on the inappropriate relationship between President Trump, his administration and Fox News has led me to conclude that the network is not in a position to host a fair and neutral debate for our candidates. Therefore, Fox News will not serve as a media partner for the 2020 Democratic primary debates,’ Perez added.”

Oh, you mean they won’t be fair and neutral and allow the DNC to provide debate questions to your candidate of choice before the debate, like what happened last time at a CNN debate?

tom perez and brazile

We are all also painfully aware of how “fair and neutral” the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” is towards President Trump and the virtually 100% negative reporting around the clock.

But that’s okay?

It sure is okay…, in the whacky world of irrational and hypocritical democrats.

“Hours later, Trump responded to the decision by suggesting he might seek to retaliate.”

“Democrats just blocked @FoxNews from holding a debate,” he said in a tweet Wednesday night. “Good, then I think I’ll do the same thing with the Fake News Networks and the Radical Left Democrats in the General Election debates!”

Nice retaliatory strike Mr. President!  The DNC obviously didn’t consider what the repercussions of their “stupidness” would be.  That’s what happens when all of these idiots get together in a room and bounce dumb ideas off of each other.

“Numerous networks, including Fox, have submitted proposals to the DNC to televise one of the 12 scheduled debates, which will start in June.”

12 debates?!  And that’s only amongst the democrats!  By the time we get to the twelfth debate there won’t be anything left that the democrats and their socialist government can give away “free” that the democrat candidates will be able to promote.

“So far, the organization has only awarded rights to the first two, to NBC (along with sister networks MSNBC and Telemundo) and to CNN.”

Telemundo?!  Really?

Well, I suppose the DNC does have to be careful to consider the tens of millions of illegal immigrant voters who can’t speak English.

I’m sorry…, I’m bad…, I know it…, but I just couldn’t help myself.

“In a statement, Fox News Senior Vice President Bill Sammon said: ‘We hope the DNC will reconsider its decision to bar Chris Wallace, Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum, all of whom embody the ultimate journalistic integrity and professionalism, from moderating a Democrat presidential debate. They’re the best debate team in the business and they offer candidates an important opportunity to make their case to the largest TV news audience in America, which includes many persuadable voters.’”

We shouldn’t be surprised by these turn of events.  The DNC is just the logical extension of the liberal fascists we see all of the time attempting to silence conservative voices on college campuses around our country and at other public events and public protests.

We are well aware of their “playbook” by now.

In the Socialist democrat world, the freedom of speech only applies to those who believe like they do.  Everyone else must be shouted down, silenced and labeled as racists, misogynists, homophobes and Nazis.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the very bottom of this page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

tom-perez-35030444

For all of those liberals living in denial…, well here you go, straight from the horse’s…, uh, I mean the editor’s mouth!

Jill Abramson, a veteran journalist in her own right, and the former executive editor at The New York Times newspaper from 2011 to 2014, says “The Times” has a financial incentive to bash the president and that the imbalance is helping to erode its credibility.  She added that, the paper’s “news” pages have become “unmistakably anti-Trump.”

Please go on Ms. Abramson, but tell us something we don’t already know.

Being the executive editor for four years during President Obama’s tenure was obviously a pretty boring time at “The Times.”  The “biased, liberal, fake news media” wasn’t interested in any hard hitting investigative “journalism” concerning President Obama or his administration.  There were no daily attacks of President Obama, the first lady, or his family. There was only properly spun propaganda or propaganda by omission.

I’m sure “The Times,” version 2017-2018, looks and sounds quite different today compared to the paper she left four years ago.

I do wonder, however, what she is referring to when she says “The Times has a financial incentive to bash the president….” What “financial incentive” exactly do they receive for bashing the president, and from whom?

This definitely does not sound like something a “fair and balanced” news source would practice.  Does it?  Fair minded people of course would say “no,” but how do my liberal friends respond to this?  I’m just wondering, and I hope they give me some feedback.

I can’t see any possible justification for this behavior unless you’re okay with a major media outlet being a propaganda tool for any ideology or political party, while claiming to be objective.

According to Howard Kurtz, of Fox News, for Media Buzz, “In a soon-to-be published book, ‘Merchants of Truth,’ that casts a skeptical eye on the news business, Abramson defends the Times in some ways but offers some harsh words for her successor, Dean Baquet.  And Abramson, who was the paper’s only female executive editor until her firing, invoked Steve Bannon’s slam that in the Trump era the mainstream media have become the “opposition party.”

‘“Though Baquet said publicly he didn’t want the Times to be the opposition party, his news pages were unmistakably anti-Trump,’ Abramson writes, adding that she believes the same is true of the Washington Post. ‘Some headlines contained raw opinion, as did some of the stories that were labeled as news analysis.’”

“Abramson describes a generational split at the Times, with younger staffers, many of them in digital jobs, favoring an unrestrained assault on the presidency. ‘The more “woke” staff thought that urgent times called for urgent measures; the dangers of Trump’s presidency obviated the old standards,’ she writes.”

President Trump routinely claims that he “is keeping the failing New York Times in business.”  Some would say this is an exaggeration, but the former editor acknowledges a “Trump bump” that saw digital subscriptions during his first six months in office jump by 600,000, to more than 2 million.

I would call that quite significant!

‘“Given its mostly liberal audience, there was an implicit financial reward for the Times in running lots of Trump stories, almost all of them negative…,’ Abramson added.”

When her boss, Arthur Sulzberger Jr. decided to let her go, he called her in, fired her, and handed her a press release announcing her resignation.

Abramson says she replied, “Arthur, I’ve devoted my entire career to telling the truth, and I won’t agree to this press release.  I’m going to say I’ve been fired.”

Just one more attempt at “fake news” I guess!

Of course the rest of the “biased, liberal, fake news media” claim that a result of losing her job she is now being vindictive and making false claims against The New York Times.

It’s funny, but I never hear “the biased, liberal, fake news media” claiming that former Trump appointees or employees are acting in a vindictive manner or making false claims against him.

Just sayin’.

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click the “Follow” button.  That’ll keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

nytimes-fake_news-all_the_news

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑