A movie producer named Harvey Weinstein is said to have committed sexual sin, and who does the world blame? Hillary. You need no better yardstick to measure this nation's misogyny.
Also: You need no further proof that Julian Assange is working for the Republicans (or the Russians, or both) than to note that he tweeted the same "Blame Hill for Harv" message that Donald Trump Jr. tweeted. We're talking about damn near the same wording. We're all used to seeing disparate Republicans "spontaneously" blare the same message in the same way at the same time, but did you ever think you'd see Assange join the chorus?
(By the way, just why is Julie-baby still in that embassy? Surely he has nothing to fear from the American security services, now that his God Emperor Trump is running the show. Could it be that the charges facing Julie-baby in Sweden have merit?)
You need no further proof of Republican hypocrisy than to note the shameless way they have blasted Weinstein while defending Trump the elder, who is guilty of either the same sins or worse. As noted in a previous post, DJT Jr. scored Weinstein for having underlings sign NDAs, even though everyone in Trumpworld must sign NDAs.
Finally: You need no further proof that Infowars and the Intercept are part of the same operation than to run your eyeballs over the following two headlines (brought to you by this guy)...
Coordination can be a good thing. I usually try to wear a brown belt with brown shoes, although today I dressed too hastily. But when it comes to propaganda, a display of really, really obvious coordination always strengthens my determination to take the opposite position.
I can't believe I used to admire Greenwald. Right now, I'm trying to think of a way to glue a photo of his face to the bottom of my toilet.
6 comments:
Oh no worries on the Infowars/Intercept cross promotion. Ryan Grim assured us The Intercept had nothing to do with it and that Infowars merely ripped it. Though even if that's true, it makes one wonder why Infowars thinks The Intercept content is appropriate for their site.
This seems like a good time to remind everyone that Greenwald has praised Breitbart in the past. I would link directly to the Breitbart article, but merely linking to them causes me to want to take a shower. The most laughable praise he gives them is his admiration of their "editorial independence". https://twitter.com/bungdan/status/815664248030314496
Seriously, when will this nightmare end.
The Intercept headline is only half of a headline. Just because Weinstein urged Hillary Clinton to do something, which he probably didn't, but even if he had, so the fu_k what? Did Hillary Clinton follow the advice, or, is she her own person that probably took Weinstein's donation while thinking he was an imbecile, good for her if she did.
The most blatant form of misogyny that Hillary Clinton continues to face is the narrative that if she interacts with a presumed asshole or idiot, that she somehow doesn't have a brain to disavow the stupidity even if she accepts a donation from the dunderheads.
Sandro, all I can say is this: As you know, I've held infrequent fundraisers. If ever I find out that one of my donors is a first-class creep, I won't give back the money. Pecunia non olet, as the Romans used to say.
There's definitely a misogynistic double standard here. Trump money is dirty money; that's been established beyond reasonable debate. But nobody on the right wants Trump to come to accounts.
After staring at for a while, I started reading Hillary's book. I am glad that she did ok following the election, in fact I think she did better than me. But I already know she is a better person. So far I have two problems: apologizing for her speeches and Obama. That woman has a huge Obama problem. Although I saw from the beginning of the campaign, I didn't realized till now that most of the key people in her campaign came from Obama's campaign, 2008 no less???!!!????!!!
Seriously?
Anon 5:38 AM--
Your point is lost on me. Maybe I'm too tired.
But winning teams often go to work for the party's next candidate. Why hire new, inexperienced people?
Seems to be a long DC tradition, one the Dems have fallen away from. The GOP hacks have been around for decades. Roger Stone, to name only one of many, started with Nixon.
I'm missing something. How is this obvious coordination? That Infowars reprinted a year old article from the Intercept?
Post a Comment