Analysis – Skunk Politics

November 5, 2018January 20, 2019

THE UNHOLY ALLIANCE BETWEEN CNN AND THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY

Unspoken alliances often develop when two entities share a common goal and can support each other’s effort to achieve said goal. The entertainment industry is not shy about their allegiance to the Democratic party, and although CNN anchors can’t admit their selfsame devotion, it is pretty obvious to everyone watching.

Athletes and actors have mutual admiration and envious relationship with each other. Actors want to play football and football players want to walk the red carpet at movie premieres. Likewise, CNN anchors dream of being mobbed by fans while comedians dream of being CNN anchors who get to tell the American people what to think.

It is no surprise that CNN anchors believe part of their job as journalists is to replay every SNL skit that lampoons the Republicans. The entertainers reciprocate by having the CNN folk appear on their shows as “celebrity guests.” The subconscious positive reinforcement is strong and is reminiscent of Pavlovian dog training. Anchors who attack Trump are rewarded with appearances on late night TV, and if late night TV attacks Trump they are rewarded by having their jokes treated as news stories by CNN. Since both sides already prostitute their profession, there is no reason not to do some favors for fellow #resistance fighters.

This phenomenon has never been more evident than on modern-day Saturday Night Live. The show is not content with slap stick mockery of Republicans anymore, they are now in lock step with the Democrat’s actual message. A great example is the current midterm elections.

The Democrats and CNN want to get the message across that the migrant-caravan-story is only fear mongering by Republicans. So SNL does their duty and mocks the manner Republicans discuss the caravan as fear mongering. Then, CNN replays the SNL mockery as news to reinforce the Democratic message.

Ironically, as CNN demeans the Republican story about illegal immigration as fear mongering, they partake in the fear mongering that Democrats practice over healthcare. Message controlled.

July 31, 2018August 17, 2018

THE WASHING POST CREATES A TESTAMENT TO THE MEDIA’S ANTI-TRUMP BIAS

The US media outlets continuously attempt to outdo each other in their quest to publicly skewer the President. They persist in re-imagining actual events to fit their four or five persistent narratives meant to belittle Trump. One narrative they have fallen in love with is that Trump is an unprecedented-liar. And one herculean effort to hoodwink the American people into believing this false narrative was concocted by the Washington Post (WAPO.) They created an abortion of truth in the form of an interactive, graphical, updating, accumulation of 4,229 (and counting) falsehoods or misleading claims made by the President. The crown jewel of modern day fact-checking.

In the Washington Post’s attempt to create a history of Trump lies, they have inadvertently created a historical testament to the bias of their own paper. I believe that in the near future, this WAPO creation will be studied in schools as young students marvel with open mouths at the audacity of the journalistic bias prevalent during the Trump era. In fact, the piece is so light on actual lies, you will note that they add the term “or misleading claims” into the title so they can lump opposing opinions in with the alleged lies. How do they get away with it? Ask CNN’s Brian Stelter, Brooke Baldwin or Jake Tapper, or the swarms of journalists who only read this project’s headline (above) and then irresponsibly proclaim that Trump spewed four thousand lies on their cable news shows or in their tabloids, solely based on the headline.

Let’s examine the first batch of the Washington Post’s findings to see how the Post bastardized the fact-check:

Trump said “collusion is not a crime” which is true. WAPO claims Trump is playing word games because something else, that is not “collusion,” is a crime. Huh? Who is playing word games, Trump? This is insanity and WAPO should be thankful no one actually reads past the headline of this mockery of journalism. PS, paying Christopher Steele to buy Russian intelligence from Russian agents is kind of, sort of, possibly, likely collusion, sorry Hillary.

Trump stated he didn’t need the Koch brothers support, which he did not get. WAPO is claiming… the Koch’s support for Republican senators “likely” had an overall positive effect on Trump. This assertion is the Post’s opinion, not a fact. In reality, the Koch’s did many things to impede Trump’s success as well. Additionally, WAPO relies on the fact the no one will read the Politico article they linked because in no way did the article affirm that Trump sought the Koch’s support, it claimed someone from Trump’s campaign filled out a questionnaire, lol.

This particular fact check by WAPO defies human logic. They wrote a sentence that has nothing to do with what Trump said. Where did Trump say anything about the ratio of people crossing the border into/out of America? They should fire the intern who wrote that one.

The three lies I linked were not anomalies. I chose the first three lies written on the first topic. Journalism is dead.

January 30, 2018February 14, 2018

Is the Obstruction of Justice charge as ridiculous as the collusion charge?

We will stipulate at the outset of this analysis that if Putin and Trump colluded, then Trump would be guilty of obstructing justice in addition to whatever crime “collusion” entails. However, the serious Democrats and even CNN know collusion is a fantasy so they are now betting on a Nixon-like obstruction charge sticking where collusion failed. One must note a crucial difference between Watergate and Russiagate. Nixon had an underlying crime to conceal, the break-in, whereas the Russia investigation of Trump will yield no such crime.

We are basing the analysis herein on our assumption that Vladimir Putin does not actually have the power to pick who becomes the President of the United States. We are also assuming that Putin would not take the risk of getting caught by CIA, NSA, and FBI having open discussions where he offered to publicly leverage this imaginary power to bet on a heavy underdog in a presidential race, in exchange for… something. We will even assume that neither sitting US Senator Jeff Sessions, nor *Carter Page , nor **George Papadopoulos, engineered this fantastical plot. Furthermore, we assume the story that Donald Trump Jr took a failed meeting with a Russian claiming to have dirt on Hillary Clinton, was in fact a failed meeting with a Russian, claiming to have dirt on Hillary Clinton, and that’s all folks!

Onward; person obstructs justice when they have a specific intent to obstruct or interfere with a judicial proceeding. However, a President makes decisions about what to investigate all the time. A POTUS can tell the DOJ “don’t waste staff on marijuana cases instead go after hard-core drugs,” or “round-up some white-collar crimes” or give whatever instructions he thinks are important. This is not obstruction, it’s his job. So if Trump believes there was no collusion then how can he intend to obstruct justice? This is the crucial point, believing no crime occurred precludes the element of intent. Trump clearly thinks the investigation is a hoax and a witch hunt so when he tries to hurry the investigation along, is he obstructing justice or just attempting to end the hoax? Remember, his intentions matter.

When it comes to pass that Mueller declares that there was no collusion and the investigation was a wild goose chase, will we really prosecute the lone member of our government trying to stop the monumental fraud? Will we really follow one circus with another? Was P.T. Barnum the greatest showman or was it Adam Schiff and cast of CNN?

(*) who did not feel the need to bring a lawyer to his FBI hearing

(**) a man whose girlfriend was more upset people called him “coffee boy” than worried about him being hung for treason

November 1, 2017November 25, 2017

CNN Bias Permeates Every Crevice of the Network

You might imagine that when CNN does a non-news segment, you would get a break from their propaganda. In actuality, imagining is the only way to get a break from the network’s spin. Christine Romans hosts the business segments on CNN. Apparently they won’t play nicely with her at break unless she perverts her segments to knock Trump like everyone else. And she wants friends.

Most everyone in economics, on both sides of the political aisle, understands that when the economy is strong the Fed can raise interest rates. Low interest rates are an economic stimuli and the Fed can’t keep a stimulus running forever. Janet Yellen was able to begin raising interest rates under Obama and hopes to continue under Trump. But how does CNN portray the upcoming hikes?

Is she serious? Her graphic includes every negative aspect of “what a fed rate hike means to you.” She highlights all the ways higher interest rates can hurt an individual via higher payments on credit card, auto and home loans. How about the ways it can help:

Increased interest on savings accounts & CDs
More earnings in 401(K) plans
More money in student 529 plans for college

This Lady does this type of propaganda constantly. She twists the booming stock market story into something only good for the rich, and don’t get me started on her tax lessons. CNN does get credit for consistency though.

August 21, 2017August 21, 2017

Did CNN Leak Their Plan To Attack Trump’s Afghanistan Policy?

CNN is circling their prey as they lie in wait for tonight’s unveiling of Trump’s Afghanistan strategy. The President has two distinct options: withdraw from Afghanistan or stay and continue the war. CNN will remain in a holding pattern all day and not offer any preference via anchors or pundits so they are free to attack whichever option Trump chooses.

If Trump chooses to withdraw they will attack. CNN, and the democratic strategists, have a few game plans to go with and likely will start with all of them and wait to see which sticks:

Bannon influence still running the White House
First US President to lose a war (surrender)
Trump wasting the sacrifice of so many soldiers
Flip flopping on promise to fight terrorism
Not listening to generals (White House in disarray)
Trump doesn’t have the stomach for war and he will look weak to our enemies

If Trump chooses to stay he will also be attacked. Once again CNN, and the democratic strategists, have a few game plans to go with and will likewise start with all of them and see which sticks:

Trump letting generals run White House
Trump will get soldiers killed for no reason
Flip flopping on promise of a withdrawal
Attack announced strategy of an unwinnable war

As we discussed earlier, the main goal of CNN is to chip away support of “the base.” So if we had to guess their favored outcome, we would go with stay in Afghanistan. CNN can then really focus on the betrayal of his base. If the network had any integrity this would be difficult for them. As avid Hillary supporters, CNN aligns strongly with the philosophy of retaining a military presence in Afghanistan, but if Trump chooses that option they have to go with their higher calling; shitting on Trump.