Oh, fudge … After a full year of nonstop Russia collusion coverage by the mainstream media, are media types finally figuring out the error of their ways? Despite all the attacks on the president and cheering of the Mueller investigation, has the investigation actually helped Trump? The Daily Caller’s Peter Hasson has the details of how the New York Times’ Frank Bruni has reached that conclusion.
Bruni believes that the focus on the investigation has diverted attention from other things Trump has done that he believes people would not like. As examples, Bruni cites Trump’s use of an unsecured phone and Scott Pruitt. Here’s the thing Bruni doesn’t realize: A focus on what Trump has actually accomplished might be even worse for him and his fellow leftists. For example, household income is at its highest level ever in the U.S., and the rubes are giving Trump credit.
Can Cillizza handle the truth? … CNN’s Chris Cillizza asked – probably rhetorically – his followers on Twitter the following question yesterday:
If Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch meeting on a tarmac in 2016 bothered you…then why doesn't Donald Trump telling the Justice Department what to do in 2018 bother you?https://t.co/m504bPOBsc pic.twitter.com/HPoYooVVQR
— Chris Cillizza (@CillizzaCNN) May 22, 2018
This is simple, Chris. Bill Clinton wasn’t the president in 2016. Donald Trump is the president. He has the power under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution to run the government of the United States. There is no such thing as an independent agency. That’s why we have elections.
Independent agencies not subject to control by the elected executive, nor subject to oversight by the people’s legislature, have no place in a government of, by, and for the people. I answered Cillizza on Twitter, but he probably didn’t really want responses.
Say what? … The mainstream media’s favorite arbiter of “hate groups” aka “people they disagree with” is the Southern Poverty Law Center, a once proud institution that has turned itself into a hatemonger for hire. Just how outside the mainstream is the SPLC? It just tweeted that Donald Trump and the White House staff are racists, wait for it, because they called MS-13 members “animals.”
The SPLC wasn’t talking about Trump’s misconstrued comments last week. No, it included a screenshot of a White House webpage on MS-13. You’ve got to see this ridiculousness to believe it.
It is unacceptable for such racist, dehumanizing language to now be repeated 10 times on the White House website in a document that speaks for America. pic.twitter.com/U5yfT33BX6
— Southern Poverty Law Center (@splcenter) May 21, 2018
… against the mainstream media’s biased reporting, selective facts, and outright propaganda. Sign up now for the daily dose of sunlight you need to disinfect the media’s lies. It’s free!
A definition … Before we delve into the media idiocy over the word “spy,” let’s look at the definition. Dictionary.com defines spy thusly (relevant definitions highlighted below):
noun, plural spies.
1. a person employed by a government to obtain secret information or intelligence about another, usually hostile, country, especially with reference to military or naval affairs.
2. a person who keeps close and secret watch on the actions and words of another or others.
verb (used without object), spied, spying.
5. to observe secretively or furtively with hostile intent (often followed by on or upon).
6. to act as a spy; engage in espionage.
By those definitions, the employment of an informant on foreign soil to report back to intelligence officials about the actions of Trump’s associates is spying. It is plain and simple.
You get the idea. If you believe that clandestine informants reporting on their interactions with Trump campaign officials is “spying,” you’re just a nut.
I wanted to say thanks to those of you who reach out to me at [email protected]. I enjoy reading your emails and they do help guide some of my coverage. So keep them coming! Also don’t forget to let people know about WTF MSM!? by using the subscribe and forward buttons below.
Robert Eno is the director of research for Conservative Review. He is a conservative from deep blue Massachusetts but now lives in Greenville, SC.