The Halt Action Group (HAG) – no, they really do call themselves that – has decided that the best way to voice their concerns about President-elect Donald Trump is by harassing his daughter Ivanka.
To that end, the Halt Action Group (HAG), founded by Gingeras, Powers, artist Jonathan Horowitz, and several others, initiated a campaign called “Dear Ivanka.” The group has an Instagram feed in which they repost glossy stock images of Trump along with earnest appeals about what they foresee as the dire consequences of her father’s politics—topics addressed include global warming, universal health care, and contraception policy. Hoping to “thwart the normalization of what was unfolding in front of our eyes,” Gingeras said, the group, comprised of artists, dealers, psychoanalysts, and even a few collectors, reached out to the artists featured in Trump’s Instagram feed. They asked the artists to join them and ask Ivanka “to answer for some of the hypocrisy she embodies,” Gingeras said.
Earnest appeals? Right.
More like hysterical whining and teeth-gnashing not rooted in any reality.
Let’s start with the fact that Ivanka is a successful businesswoman, who has paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to purchase art and promote artists, who may or may not have had as much success with their work without her. Let’s also point out that Ivanka Trump is not her father, and his “policies” have yet to be implemented, because…
HE’S NOT FUCKING PRESIDENT YET, YOU GUM-FLAPPING, WHINING SNOT GOBBLERS!
“Racism, anti-Semitism, misogyny, and homophobia are not acceptable anywhere—least of all in the White House,” the HAGs write.
Well, that’s fortunate since Ivanka is an orthodox Jew, and her father bucked the general GOP trend of trying to legislate bathroom morality – even before he won the nomination – by publicly declaring that transgender people should use whatever bathroom they felt was appropriate.
All these facts, of course, haven’t stopped snobby, self-important, elitist assclowns from harassing Ivanka Trump and, in one case, even demanding that she remove art she has purchased – her own property – from her home!
Ivanka Trump has posed for pictures in front of her art collection, including a painting by Philadelphia artist Alex Da Corte, who recently Tweeted at her “Dear @Ivankatrump please get my work off of your walls. I am embarrassed to be seen with you.”
First of all, it’s her fucking property, for which she paid quite a bit. If she wants to wipe your painting with her kid’s shitty diaper, she’s within her right to do so. If she wants to hang a tacky, red “Make America Great Again” hat from a nail hammered right into the middle of your work that my cat could have painted by dipping his tail into some watercolors, she could. Because it’s HERS, you sniveling fuck goblin! You want to cough up the auction value of this trash you painted and buy it back from her? I’m sure she’d be thrilled, as she’s paid quite a bit of money for the art collection she displays in her home, and the artists she graciously promotes by doing so have benefited both financially and in terms of publicity.
In one post, Trump shimmies in front of a Dan Colen “chewing gum” painting; a comparable work sold for $578,500 at Phillips New York in 2012. In another post, Trump’s child plays the piano in front of a “bullet hole” silkscreen by Nate Lowman; a bullet-hole painting in the same palette sold for $665,000 in 2013 at Sotheby’s in New York. In yet another post, taken from a Harper’s Bazaar shoot, Trump poses at her dining table in front of a work by Alex Israel. A similar painting by Israel sold for $581,000 in 2014 at Phillips New York.
The hypocrisy is incredible! They were more than happy to take her money when she was just a businesswoman and the daughter of a real estate mogul who helped promote their work on the world stage. But now, because it’s en vogue in their snotty, quasi-intellectual circle jerks to hate Trump, they’re condemning her for nothing more than being the daughter of a President-elect whom they did not support!
It’s not just the supercilious hypocrisy that bothers me here, but also the promotion of frothing histrionics by HAG, who staged a protest outside Ivanka’s home on in late November.
For the record, Ivanka Trump has nothing to do with their irrational fear of Mike Pence and his alleged “homophobia,” which has amply been addressed, had anyone bothered doing a shred of research. For the record, no he didn’t try to divert public money for “conversion therapy.”
For the record, Ivanka Trump has done plenty to help people who “don’t look like” her, you blithering ignorami! Some of the charities she supports are Habitat for Humanity, AIDS Life, the Children’s Aid Society, United Cerebral Palsy, and the Walkabout Foundation. And in 2010, Ivanka designed and sold a bracelet specifically to benefit the United Nations Foundation’s Girl Up campaign, which “aims to raise money and awareness to educate and propel adolescent girls in need to the next generation of leadership.”
In addition to the protest, the group collected cards from people explaining why they are concerned about the president-elect.
‘I am a Muslim-American immigrant and I don’t feel safe,’ one card read.
‘You’re scaring the hell out of women,’ another said.
So she’s scaring the hell out of women by helping promote and educate them?
She’s scaring the hell out of women by showing that a woman can rise up and become a business powerhouse in her own right, outside of daddy’s sphere of influence?
She’s scaring the hell out of women by showing them what they are capable of with some creativity and ingenuity?
I guess it makes sense given the kind of pseudo-feminist toads who are engaging in this campaign of intimidation against her.
Success would require hard work, talent, creativity, and strength. These alleged “feminists” don’t exhibit any of those traits, and they’re too lazy to develop them. Instead, they wallow in their inadequacies and demand the world worship their flaws, rather than their ability to overcome them – as if their warts should be a claim check to others’ means merely by “virtue” of their ugliness, and as if their sores somehow make them more righteous. It’s certainly easier than working to evolve and mature as human beings or nurture nascent talents!
Maybe these pompous, overbearing ass bags should look in the mirror and really examine who is “scaring the hell out of women.” Is it the successful businesswoman, who uses her wealth and creativity to help others, including up-and-coming artists, the poor, and women worldwide…
…or the pompous, overbearing ass bags themselves, who are fomenting hysteria, spreading misinformation, and targeting the family of a President-elect they don’t like – something they vehemently opposed and screeched about when Democrat presidents were in office – merely because they’re related?
But that would require some self awareness and objectivity. I doubt they’re capable of either.
The media – and by virtue every Democrat and Republican – were in a froth flecked rage over the weekend, because a CIA briefing regarding Russia’s cyber meddling in U.S. elections was leaked to the press.
The assessment – as reported by Reuters – said that “Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help President-elect Donald Trump win the White House, and not just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system.”
Citing U.S. officials briefed on the matter, the Post said intelligence agencies had identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, to WikiLeaks.
The officials described the individuals as people known to the intelligence community who were part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and reduce Clinton’s chances of winning the election.
“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” the Post quoted a senior U.S. official as saying. “That’s the consensus view.”
As soon as the news came out, Trump supporters immediately went into fully defensive mode.
How do we know these reports are true?
Do all 17 intelligence agencies agree?
Are we supposed to disregard what was in those emails, because they may or may not have come from the Russians, and they probably haven’t, because MEDIA LIES!!!!11
Obama Administration lies!
This is the same CIA that assessed the presence of WMD in Iraq! (Which, by the way, many Republicans were more than happy to defend.)
WikiLeaks denies this, so it must be false! (Coming from the same people who attacked Julian Assange as a criminal and dog knows what else when he published Bradley Manning’s leaks.)
Clinton supporters worked themselves into a frenzy, because…
That means Hillary actually may have won!
Invalidate election results!
Challenge them in courts!
The Russians installed Trump in the White House!
Install Hillary in the White House using the courts! (This last bit of full retard recommendation came from none other than the Huffington Post, whose staff has apparently been eating paint chips and huffing Sharpies in an effort to get over the election.)
In the interest of accuracy and fairness, let’s examine the report.
The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.
There are two assessments here – both about Russian intent. One is that they wanted to influence the election to help Donald Trump win, and the other is that they also wanted to undermine the confidence in the U.S. electoral system. These are not surprising assessments, and there’s nothing to disbelieve here, given the Russians’ history of meddling in sovereign nations’ affairs, and threatening the sovereignty and even territorial integrity of at least one of its neighbors in the not too distant past.
Anyone remember this report (in Russian) I cited back in 2014, detailing Russian meddling in the Crimean referendum prior to its annexation? Anyone see already filled out ballots being brought in?
Note what the assessment does not say.
The assessment does not say that Russia HELPED DONALD TRUMP WIN. That would be near impossible to quantify, because the agency would have to examine reasons why Trump voters voted the way they did, and assume said voters were telling the truth about their motivations. It would also have to quantify how many Trump voters would have voted for Hillary had it not been about the Russian revelations.
The agency did not assess any of this. They made a judgment call based on existing intelligence and historical evidence about Russia’s motivations for interfering. At no time did they make an assessment on the success or failure of these efforts!
The agency also did not judge (at least not judging from the available media reports) that Trump or anyone in his campaign were complicit in these efforts or somehow colluded with Russia to steal the election.
Why haven’t they released the underlying intelligence that was evidence for this assessment?
Because it’s classified.
But the briefing was released! We want to see the underlying intelligence!
My guess is the briefing was released without authorization – probably to influence policy. If you want to see the underlying intelligence, get a clearance, join the intelligence community, work on cyber issues. No one is going to give you read access to sensitive material that may compromise sources and put lives and collection in danger, because your tinfoil hat is so tight, that you think the CIA is somehow biased against Trump, and made an assessment about him cheating his way into the White House that the CIA didn’t actually make.
The CIA presentation to senators about Russia’s intentions fell short of a formal U.S. assessment produced by all 17 intelligence agencies. A senior U.S. official said there were minor disagreements among intelligence officials about the agency’s assessment, in part because some questions remain unanswered.
Some are using this bit in the report to claim that because there is disagreement, the assessment is false/biased/an Obama Administration plot to overturn the election. The DC, in particular, ran a story yesterday claiming the FBI disagreed with CIA’s assessment.
The FBI did not corroborate the CIA’s claim that Russia had a hand in the election of President-elect Donald Trump in a meeting with lawmakers last week.
Except, according to the original report, that’s not really what the CIA assessed. They assessed the motivations for the meddling (that the Russians wanted Trump to win), not that somehow Russia HELPED Trump win, because it’s nearly impossible to assess that Russia was actually responsible for Trump’s victory. CIA was assessing Russia’s motivations and desires vis-a-vis the election. I doubt anyone can dispute the Russians’ involvement given these activities detailed in an August report in which the FBI confirmed that Russians had, indeed, been mucking around in our elections systems. But FBI, being a law enforcement agency, uses a different standard of evidence than the intelligence community, because their ultimate goal is to bring a prosecution.
Were the Russians successful in undermining Americans’ confidence in their election systems, which is the second assessment CIA made? Gallup polling in September indicated that only 62 percent of Americans had confidence in the accuracy of the vote count, but this number is similar to the polls conducted in 2008 – before revelations about active Russian meddling came to light. So it’s difficult to attribute the low confidence to the Russians. But again, the assessment wasn’t about the Russians’ success or failure, but the motivations behind their hacking activities. Big difference.
Further, the Democrats weren’t the only ones hacked, according to the FBI, although the Republican Party denies it was hacked.
A solid explanation of the differences in FBI and CIA assessments can be found here.
For example, intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin “directing” the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks, a second senior U.S. official said. Those actors, according to the official, were “one step” removed from the Russian government, rather than government employees. Moscow has in the past used middlemen to participate in sensitive intelligence operations so it has plausible deniability.
Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, has said in a television interview that the “Russian government is not the source.”
Well, gosh. Because the information would arrive at
Assange’s Ecuadorean Embassy’s doorstep stamped: FOR WIKILEAKS — WITH LOVE — FROM THE KREMLIN! Of course, Kremlin’s involvement would be several times removed! That doesn’t prove or disprove anything. It would be rather suspicious if there were obvious links to the Kremlin. That’s when I would scream that something is off, because the Russians are never this obvious!
Hopefully, this clarifies some stuff, because both sides seem to be going full turnip on this issue.
Nothing in the reports claims that the intelligence community assesses that Russia helped Trump win – only that this was the Russians’ desired outcome.
Nothing in the reports claims that either Trump or his campaign were in any way complicit in those efforts.
Nothing in the reports or the assessments claims Hillary would have won had Russia not interfered. Frankly, she was a weak candidate to begin with
And by the way, nothing in the reports indicates in any way that Russia was successful in hacking the actual RESULTS or somehow changed them in some way. Nothing.
So maybe Republicans need to stop screeching about lies and CIA conspiracies.
And maybe the Democrats need to quit wailing about how the election was ostensibly stolen from Queen Pantsuit.
And maybe – just maybe – we need to focus on the fact that Russia, in addition to its activities threatening the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its neighbors, and using outright thugs to do it, trying to weaken the NATO alliance, shooting down civilian airliners, and using militants to achieve its goals of increasing its influence in the former Soviet sphere, has also been trying to wage cyber warfare against us.
If you don’t think that’s a big deal, because “we deserve it for our own meddling,” and you think that’s just fine, because ultimately your guy won, I wonder if you’d be intellectually honest enough to admit if you’d feel similarly had Hillary won.
I’d wager to say you’d be screaming bloody murder.
As distasteful as I find the President-elect, and as much as I opposed him during this election, the schadenfreude nearly makes me orgasm when I see the most unhinged on the left lose their shit!
I get being upset that the person you supported didn’t win. I get opposing the winner’s policies. But I gotta tell ya, the amount of sheer unhinged fuckwittery I’m seeing from some on the left is… well… schadenfreudelicious!
Take, for instance, the infamous Arthur Chu (aka Kim Jong Un’s retarded twin brother), whose claim to fame is winning at Jeopardy and then going full potato on social media as the left’s resident social justice zealot howler monkey. Arthur must have a tiny little penis, because he howls the SJW message louder than almost any other fuckwit, and he’s irrational on the best of days – like when he or one of his ass maggot friends tried to disrupt a peaceful gathering of gamers in DC by calling in a threat to the bar in which the get-together was to take place, or like when he admitted he knew about sexual assaults in college but was too chickenshit to report it, or like when he called Brad Torgerson’s beautiful, African-American wife and biracial daughter “shields” for his racism.
Arthur was a little unhappy about Trump’s victory last night, and he let the entire Twitter world know it!
That’s a hell of a lot of bile and hatred to harbor toward his fellow Americans, but then again, anyone who is as bitter, shrill, and odious as Arthur is certainly capable of spewing that much venom.
Then there was the bitter, unhinged harpy who saw a bright side in the election of Donald Trump.
The rest of the conversation went just as you might imagine.
Harpy: I have a lot of faith in our Secret Service. I’ve known people that have done that service for our country. If he has a good scare though, he will abandon the second amendment like a Section 8 housing project.
Me: Yes, that’s just what we need. A president who will abandon the US Constitution because of personal fears. Nice. Not.
Harpy: Nicki Kenyon , you think he wouldn’t? He’s already made noise about getting rid of the First. He’s not above tinkering.
Me: Oh, I’m sure he would. What I’m appalled at is your apparent joy at it.
Harpy: I would be absolutely jubilant if we had some sensible gun control. I really don’t see an upside for any of the constituencies I care about : folks with disabilities, people that have differences which are vulnerable to mob rule, the elderly and infirm. Trump has been absolutely clear that a woman’s value is in her looks and elderly people aren’t usually lovely anymore. I look for less societal support for all those groups and I find it appalling. Maybe when Red America loses their 401k and wonders why only they pay taxes, and why won’t Medicaid pay for Granny’s nursing home anymore. But gun control would be good, especially with so much free floating hatred around.
Me: Because 20K laws on the books, plus individual state laws are just not enough. Right. Got it. We need to infringe on the rights of law abiding citizens for you to be satisfied. Mkay.
Harpy: Yep. I think about all you law abiding citizens when I drive by Newtown and shudder. I have better things to do than engage with you. Good luck with that whole burn it down thing.
Me: I’m sorry, but you’re a moron, both in your assumptions (which are erroneous, by the way), and your assertions, which contain no actual fact, but a whole lot of emotionalist rhetoric. You have a nice day now, swallowing those crocodile tears and dreaming of assassination attempts on a US president.
It’s one thing to disagree on gun laws. It’s quite another to call for the assassination of a President to promote your anti-freedom agenda. But to the deranged loons on the left, it’s OK – for the greater good, ya know?
My next altercation with the mentally unbalanced came via a hysterical, incoherent, blithering Tyrannocuntus Rex. I cannot possibly do this conversation justice, so I’m going to post screen caps of the much crazy, which came after I asked another friend a question. You see, she wrote that she invites anyone who voted for Trump to “unfriend” her. I pointed out that it’s quite passive aggressive, and that if she’s so intent on keeping those with differing views out of her life, she should probably just hit the “unfriend” button first.
The friend replied that she cannot stand racists and homophobes. For the record, I can’t either, but something didn’t add up, so I asked a follow-up question. The friend didn’t respond, but her batshit crazy, disturbed padded cell candidate pal did… shrilly, using a lot of capital letters.
Note there’s no actual coherent thought there. There are a lot of reasons people would support Trump. Many of my friends voted for him – friends who are black, gay, Latino and female. That does not make them racist.
Well… my little mental patient interlocutor didn’t like that very much. She obviously didn’t understand metaphoric speech, so she (metaphorically) tore out her Thorazine drip, and began to (metaphorically) run around, flapping her arms like a maniacal badger on meth. To clarify, this crazy bitch went on a lengthy, incoherent, incomprehensible tirade.
Yep. Shrew That Mindless Dickface.
I don’t know what “DUHA” is either.
But apparently, this mindless Mega Twat’s keyboard is haunted, because it randomly types capital letters and makes her otherwise reasoned, logical contentions sound like mindless gibberish.
Yeah. Me neither. That level of DERP! can only be reached via space shuttle… or time warp.
UPDATE: The Tyrranocuntus Rex is becoming more unhinged by the hour. It’s actually entertaining to watch, as her grammar and spelling abilities deteriorate in a wave of froth-flecked rage!
So in the spirit of making crazy famous, I present to you, the continued crazy of… KEEP MY NAME OUT OF YOUR MOUTH!
These people exist! Literally! I’m actually laughing so hard, I’m crying right now!
…and your news and social media feeds are filled with: TRUMP, KGB (no, it doesn’t fucking exist anymore – try FSB, assholes!), HILLARY, WIENER, HUMA, WEINER, RUSSIANS, PUTIN, WIENER, MORE WEINER, and all you really want to do is stab yourself in the eyeballs rather than see another photo of Anthony Weiner’s half naked torso and tales of his schlong, you almost give up on blogging until after this accursed election happens.
And then you run across this, which partially explains why out of 300 million people in this country, we wind up with the most awful, the most venal, the most narcissistic, the most corrupt candidates for president possible (although I shouldn’t say “the most,” because at the rate we’re going, there’s always the possibility that el Chapo will gain U.S. citizenship and will run for President in 2020 and win).
See, here’s what happened.
This greasy cock monkey was at a Trump rally, and was recorded screaming “JEW-S-A” when everyone was chanting “U-S-A” to demonstrate their love for our country.
The left, of course, glommed onto this slovenly bit of residue that looks like he gelled his hair with a bit of leftover KY after fucking several siblings, as typical of Trump voters – and probably conservatives writ large.
But never fear. There’s no racism or Jew hatred here!
George Lindell claims he wasn’t yelling “JEW-S-A,” as the liberal media accuses him of doing. No, he was yelling “U-S-A” but in Spanish.
I. Shit. You. Not.
“Everybody is saying I’m a racist because I was saying ‘Jew S.A,'” Lindell said during an interview on Monday. “It has nothing to do with the Jews. I was speaking Spanish.”
Lindell said he is from Phoenix and Phoenix is a multi-cultural society with a lot of Spanish-speaking people.
“When you pronounce ‘USA’ in Spanish it sounds like ‘Jew S. A.,'” Lindell said “I like the sound of it — ‘Jew S.A’ — it’s a lot better than ‘USA’ which is very boring. We need to integrate the Spanish lingo, the Spanish language into our society.”
Don’t you worry, ese! I was just trying to sound like them Messicans! I wasn’t makin fun of them Jooos or anything! And I love them blacks too!
He seems nice!
Not that it matters at this late stage, because one of these douchecus candidati will wind up in the White House, but maybe the GOP ought to try and trot out the more intelligent of the Trump supporter lot – you know…
…those who speak coherent English, and those who sound like they may have finished high school at the very least, so that the rest of American conservatives aren’t lumped in with this inbred fuckwit.
We know there are intelligent, well-spoken people out there who do support the GOP nominee (vice the shit-flinging Trumpanzees). Could we get those out in the public eye at the very least?
I got back from Luxembourg Friday night to my social media feed bleeding the headline, “Attorney General Lynch ‘Pleads Fifth’ on Secret Iran ‘Ransom’ Payments!”
The stupid came from the Washington Free Bacon, the UK’s Daily Fail, and of course, Trumpbart, which has never met a story it didn’t misinterpret, twist, or outright invent.
For those who aren’t familiar with the concept, “pleading the fifth” is a colloquialism for declining to answer questions where the answers might incriminate the defendant. Basically, the defendant cannot be forced to become a witness at his own trial.
My first reaction was: Lynch has been charged with something? She is being tried? Is she a witness in a trial?
I was confused.
The answer is nope, nope, and nope, but it’s such a cool headline, that every screeching ass monkey on the right ran with it!
In fact, what happened was that Congressman Mike Pompeo and Senator Marco Rubio sent AG Loretta Lynch a series of questions about the Obama Administrations $1.7 billion cash payment to Iran, and Lynch’s office sent back a reply saying, (paraphrasing from the original document here), “We’ve already answered the questions. The information – much of which is classified – has been available to you since September. We don’t want to discuss classified information in public fora. If you have any additional questions, let us know.”
In response Marco Rubio and Mike Pompeo sent back a reply saying the answers were unacceptable, and that Lynch’s office was “essentially pleading the fifth.” This was a metaphor, showing that the Senators were dissatisfied with the replies they got, and yet these “media outlets” screamed that line from the rooftops (especially the Daily Fail, Newsmax, Zerohedge, and the Free Bacon), prompting several friends to share it on social media as if this was fact.
This little incident is part of a bigger problem.
For years, those on the right have accused the media of liberal bias, of twisting or eliminating sources, and of spinning facts to suit their agenda. We all knew the media was far from objective. Media outlets do many times reflect the views of their ownership and their editorial board. Those of you who think Fox News is more objective than, say, CNN should go ahead and pay me for that bridge now.
And yet, during this election year, specifically, I see a lot of people on the right, defending the obvious clown show media outlets on the right have become, because LIBERAL MEDIA!
Look, I get that every story will have a slant. A media outlet will be influenced by the views of its leadership. This is nothing new. But there’s a difference between being influenced by the politics of its ownership (or in Daily Fail’s case, merely posting clickbait to try and get readers) and writing outright lies and misinformation, and abandoning any semblance of integrity.
BUT HEY! THE LIBERAL MEDIA HAS BEEN DOING THIS FOR DECADES! So the fuck what? Does that mean the conservative outlets are justified in becoming liars? Does that mean conservative lies are OK, because the liberals have been doing it for a long time? Does that mean publishing outright disinformation is fine, because it’s time for readers and listeners to hear lies from the right for a change?
Psychologically, some on the right are so desperate to point out the evil on the left, they’ve abandoned any semblance of integrity they may have had. Fact checking falls by the wayside, and gives way to hysterical headlines such as:
IT’S OVER: Huma Abedin Just Flipped! What She Did Minutes Ago Has Hillary In Tears…
This is where I look at the source. Oh… shit… it’s redflagnews/breitbart/conservativetreehouse/*insert retard blog here*.
Google several words in the title. Nothing comes up save for a few additional “conservative” blogs. Damn.
Click the link. Look for sourcing. More “conservative” blogs as sources – nothing actually credible, especially when you click on those sources, and they link to yet more right-leaning blogs as sources, or take you back to the original article.
It’s a right-leaning circle jerk!
If we are not objective or honorable enough to condemn asshattery on the right, we have no business criticizing it on the left. Facts don’t have a political affiliation. They are facts. And if we fail to denounce fraud among our own, we have no standing to denounce it among others.
As I have often said, merely not being Hillary does not qualify Trump for the White House.
Well, merely not being the left does not excuse lying and misinformation on the right.
Failing to decry the bad – whether on our own side, or the other side of the aisle – makes us part of the problem.
By refusing to police and call out our own, we become the bad.