Fishnet Friday

Not Fake News: A Liberal Tells the Truth!

Wednesday on CNN’s “The Messy Truth,” host Van Jones said President Donald Trump was “driving liberals insane,” to the point he does not want “y’all to be in charge either.

Breitbart - Jones said, “One thing I want to share, progressives tend to focus, when we critique him, on politeness and proper protocols okay? There’s a proper way to deal with reporters or intelligence agencies or judges. And when Trump breaks the rules, we start fanning ourselves and fainting and freaking out and handing out all of these protocol violations. And for his supporters, his appeal has nothing to do with protocol. It has everything to do, though, with pride and prosperity.”

“He’s saying, I want you to be proud of the country and have a job. So liberals seem to only see, like the crazy tweets. And we act like that’s all he’s doing. But his supporters actually ignore those tweets. You want to know the tweets they cherish? The one where he’s taking credit for the stock market that’s rising and their 401(k)s doing better and the jobs he so-called saved. If progressives want to understand Trump supporters, those are the tweets we need to be paying attention to.”

He added, “I think he’s driving liberals insane. I mean that. I think he is. I think he is. And I’m seeing more — I’m seeing liberals and progressives now so mad and distracted and depressed, I’m like, I don’t really want y’all to be in charge either. So it’s — Am I wrong?”

Thank You MJA for the Linkage! 

Someone Made a Trump Mosaic Out of Crying Liberals!

This is Fresh! 

Author Unknown

Well, He Did Say He'd Bring Back Jobs

Trump Giving Print Media New Vigor To Beat Their Establishment Drums

Attacks on Journalism are Fueling a Renaissance in 

Newsrooms Across the Country

Until very recently, the world of institutional journalism seemed so bleak that its future existence was beginning to be questioned. Newsrooms across the country have been forced to lay off journalists as advertisers and readers have flocked to the internet for their daily dose of news. The fate of print media has been so dire in the last decade that there is even a website called NewspaperDeathwatch.com which, true to its name, chronicles the decline of the nation’s newspapers.

The Spectator

“Across the country – though unevenly reported – we see new newsroom job losses likely counting into the high hundreds,” Politico reported in late November. “Newsroom employment at the nation’s 1,375 dailies could fall below 28,000, less than half of its high point in 1990.”

That has changed, however, with Donald Trump’s attacks on certain media outlets like the New York Times and CNN.

According to Grant Glickson, president of the News Guild, Local 31003—a union with 40% of its membership employed by the New York Times—“subscriptions are soaring as news organizations pour resources into political and investigative reporting.”

In a post to his members entitled “Fake News” Attacks Backfire as Journalists Dig for the Truth, Glickson wrote:

"Far from discouraging or silencing journalists, the attacks are fueling a renaissance in newsrooms across the country. Morale is going up; talk of job cuts is going down. Many of our members are among journalists getting national attention for their Trump coverage. They are doing us proud. Not only is their work exceptional, they are unfailingly civil and professional in the face of attacks on their character. They are not taking the bait."

By Glickson’s logic, the election of Donald Trump as President could not come at a better time. Like other unions, Glickson’s local union has lost a third of its membership in the last 15 years.

“Trump is the best thing to happen to the Times’ subscription strategy” New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet CNN’s Reliable Sources last month. “Every time he tweets it drives subscriptions wildly.”

Clearly, as much as institutional journalists may despise the Trump presidency, he appears to be giving them a better sense of job security than they’ve had in years.

Clintons Spend "Day Without Women" Dropping Acid in Chappaqua and Grooving With Nature

💩 💩 💩 💩

Thank You MJA  and Springer for the Linkage!

The Claim that Russia “hacked the election” has Essentially Been Totally Discredited

From the latest dump by Wikileaks:

"The CIA’s hand crafted hacking techniques pose a problem for the agency. Each technique it has created forms a “fingerprint” that can be used by forensic investigators to attribute multiple different attacks to the same entity. 

This is analogous to finding the same distinctive knife wound on multiple separate murder victims. The unique wounding style creates suspicion that a single murderer is responsible. As soon one murder in the set is solved then the other murders also find likely attribution.

The CIA’s Remote Devices Branch’s UMBRAGE group collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques ‘stolen’ from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation. With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the “fingerprints” of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from.  UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques.”

And now, back to you Wolf Blitzer..... 

TV Shows Reach "PEAK GAY" as Viewers Turn Off

Big media has steadily been pushing the gay agenda for decades, something the public have reluctantly put up with, because it has been in relatively small doses. But now it looks like the TV companies have gone too far, after they rolled out a number of big budget, gay-themed TV shows that flopped disastrously with viewers.

ABC's "When We Rise," an eight-hour drama miniseries depicting the "struggles" of LGBT activists in the "bad old days" when people actually had moral standards, was blatant in its characterization of gay activists as heroic idealists and the public as low-browed homophobes. Well, it seems like Joe Public didn't like being insulted, with the result that the show, screened on four consecutive nights, tanked and created a massive hole in ABC's ratings, despite saturation ad coverage during Oscar week, ahead of its premiere last week. 

Part one flopped on Monday, leading ABC to reschedule its popular "Modern Family" show (8-10 million viewers) to run just before the second installment of gay propaganda in order to boost ratings. Guess what? That didn't work either, and the show lost another million viewers, down to 2 million—on prime time Wednesday!!! 

The Left is now trying to claim that the show was "just not done right" rather than admit that the vast majority of people are just sick and tired of having the gay agenda constantly pushed at them by Hollywood and the Big Media. This argument is like Leftists who claim "Communism never failed" because "true Communism" has never really been tried. 

The fact is any gay-themed TV series is now poison for viewers. "When We Rise" is just one of several notable failures. USA's gay murder mystery "Eyewitness" was canceled due to lack of interest, while CBS’s "Doubt"—with an actual transsexual playing the transsexual lead role—fell like a lead balloon and was scratched after just two shows. This is starting to look like a pattern of "peak collapse," where a sharp rise in something—overtly gay TV programming in this case—leads to its sudden collapse. 

The big secret that gays should realize is that tolerance for their, ahem, "lifestyle" is pretty much conditional on not having it shoved in the public's face all the time. 

[Variety]                              Thank You William Teach @ Pirate's Cove for the Linkage!
[Entertainment]
[Alt-Right]

Elsewhere, in the Real World......

Unemployed and not qualified enough to be a Wal-mart greeter, Joe Biden aimlessly wanders parking lots taking selfies with terrified local residence

Media Still Doesn't Realize Who They're Dealing With

We've spent the last few days (and probably will most of this coming week) watching the usual suspects in the media as they attempted to knock down or explain away Donald Trump's wiretapping claims. What I suspect the media doesn't understand is Donald Trump is playing a different game, a game using their own rules against them.

Let's start with the key word "legally." They keep going over the ways Obama could have wiretapped Trump in a legal manner. Who said anything about legal? Donald J. Trump has never said that Obama wiretapped him legally. It's funny to see the way the useful idiots talking heads all blow past this point as if this dick Obama was beyond something like that.

One example was the little weasel from The Washington Post, E. J. Dionne: 

"It appears that Trump issued his wild tweet storm Saturday morning largely on the basis of reports in conspiracy-minded right-wing media. He signaled his lack of evidence first by reportedly pushing his White House staff to ransack sensitive intelligence information to find support for his claim. Then on Sunday, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Trump wanted Congress to look into the matter and that the administration would offer no further comment. Trump has a problem either way. If he was not wiretapped, he invented a spectacularly false charge. And if a court ordered some sort of surveillance of him, on what grounds did it do so?" 

"Trump has a problem either way," Dionne says, working from DNC script as usual. He imagines only two possibilities: 1) Trump didn't get wiretapped at all, and  2) Trump got wiretapped legally, with "a court ordering some sort of surveillance of him."

Believe it or not, E. J. Dionne graduated summa cum laude from Harvard. But because he was working from script, he didn't consider the obvious third possibility. It's hard to believe that we will hear it bandied about only on right-wing talk shows:  3) Trump was wiretapped illegally, by a gang of "plumbers."

Earth to six- and seven-figure journalists: Donald J. Trump is playing a game it's fairly easy for him to win, at least within his own tribe. As a general matter, neither Barack Obama, nor anyone else, can prove that he didn't engage in a certain action. If Trump wants to claim that Obama sent in a gang of plumbers, no one will ever be able to prove that it didn't happen. For this reason, there's only one approach to take to claims of this type. You have to note that the accuser, in this case, Donald Trump, has offered zero evidence in support of his claim. Zero evidence; none at all.

You need to draw attention to that fact, and to very few others. But alas! In the hands of our under-skilled cable talkers, we've already seen Trump's wiretap claim end up seeming more credible.

The media pundits have peddled bullshit for many, many years. They've carried water for decades for very some shaky accusers. They're much more practiced at selling bullshit than at knocking it down. They have little experience at trying to ferret the truth. They're mainly skilled at reciting script, not at challenging demagoguery, on which their own engine runs. They're good on Q-ratings, makeup and clothes, but still not that, just as no one "ordered tax" in the famous old joke, Donald Trump hasn't said squat about "legal." 

Thank You MJA for the Linkage!

☠ ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠

The President can technically request a warrant to gather information via wiretap, but it still has to go through the process. Obama couldn't authorize it on his own. The Attorney General still has to sign off and the FISA judge still has to authorize the warrant. If the wiretapping did happen, everyone is under the assumption this was all done above board and legal. But we're talking about Democrats here, remember?

Critics say Trump's wiretap claim is baseless, but what is truly lacking in solid evidence is the claim that there was some sort of collusion between Trump or his aides and Russian officials to hijack the election. Yet that's all Trump's foes (and much of the press) want to talk about. Remember, too: Team Obama has a record of abusing power for political gain, as when the IRS targeted conservative groups.

At this point, it's hard to know for sure if Trump Tower was actually bugged, and if so, who authorized the tapping and why. But given Team Obama's record,  and the never-ending bid to overturn the election, there's little doubt why Trump might think the worst."