There’s fake news, and there’s FAKE NEWS. There’s spin, and then there’s such complete imbecilic fuckery disguised as “reporting,” that the moment you read it, you should ridicule it and block the site. Anyone with a shred of knowledge or an inclination to check actual links in a story that claims to be “news,” should be able to discern fact from bullshit, but just in case, let me demonstrate.
A few days ago, some rabid cock weasel writing for some outfit named DC Memo, that claims to provide “news and commentary from our nation’s capital,” wrote an article titled, “Obama Using Top Secret iPad to Take Pics of Michelle.”
The title unequivocally claims that Barack Obama, who left office in January, is publicly using a classified device that he took from the government to take photos of his wife. This is a federal crime, and the headline is misleading and libelous. Let me explain.
After leaving the presidency, Barack Obama has been spotted using his favorite iPad to take photos of his wife while on a David Geffen-owned megayacht in Tahiti. But this may be no ordinary iPad. A government watchdog speculates that he may have taken the Top Secret version out of the Oval Office, a big no-no.
Note the language.
Barack Obama is using his favorite iPad to take photos of his wife, but it MAY be no ordinary iPad. This is already speculative. The idiot who wrote the piece links to Judicial Watch, claiming that the organization speculates Obama may have taken the TS version of the tablet out of the Oval when he left.
This is no longer fact, as claimed in the title, but conjecture. Further, if you click on the links provided as evidence for said claim, you will see this:
We can’t tell what iPad is being used by the former president, and the story postulates that this is a TS tablet that he somehow stole from the intelligence community and is now publicly using it to take photos of his wife.
But do you know what photo comes up when the story is linked on social media?
Does this look like the photo was taken on a yacht, as the article claims? What kind of fucktard would wear a suit and tie on a yacht?
So what is this absurd claim based on?
The link to Judicial Watch claiming that the organization speculates he may have taken the iPad leads to the organization’s home page. I have done several different searches to find out what, if anything, Judicial Watch has written about an ostensibly missing presidential daily brief (PDB) tablet. I couldn’t find a thing. No speculation about any missing iPad. No accusation – not even an indirect one – about Obama having taken the tablet out of the White House.
Additionally, the TS tablet that contains the PDB is completely disabled and cannot in any way connect to any wi-fi, why in the world would Obama take a photo of her that he cannot share? Being a pretty tech savvy guy, one would think any device he would use to photograph his wife would be able to connect to the net, so that these photos can be shared.
The report claims there is a top secret iPad that went missing during the transition, and claims White House staffers were searching for it. There is no link to any reporting confirming this claim, and no actual source is named. Additionally, the fuckwit who wrote this travesty claims, “The iPad device that Obama is suspected to have taken with him into civilian life still has access to current Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs). Trump associates believe this device may be giving the ex-president an “over the shoulder” view inside the secret workings of the Trump Administration.”
Now, I’m wondering how it is that a tablet that is not wi-fi enabled, and requires the intelligence community to load the information onto it in a secure location daily, which means the old data on it is deleted, can possibly contain information about the “secret workings of the Trump Administration.”
Here’s a clue, it can’t. The “journalistic” douche circus is so eager for a “gotcha” story against Obama, that he contradicts himself in froth flecked zeal to nail the former POTUS. And if you don’t think there’s a mechanism on this tablet that erases all the information on it automatically after a certain amount of time, in case the device gets accidentally lost or left behind, you’re as much of a moron as this “writer” is.
The National Archives, this chucklefuck claims, was also “unaware” of the existence of the iPad, because somehow he thinks the PDB staff can’t reuse the tablets and would hand them over to the National Archives instead.
“A member of the Obama team declined to comment for this report,” he concludes, as if somehow this is a condemnation against the former President.
Perhaps said member thought the story was so stupid, that he considered it to have been a waste of his time to even bother talking to this retardified butt penguin.
So let’s recap.
The title makes a definitive claim that Obama is committing a crime.
The story then speculates that Obama is committing a crime, based on the fact that he has a personal iPad and on spurious claims that there’s a missing presidential iPad that somehow, even though it’s not wi-fi enabled, is receiving current presidential daily briefs, and that Obama is reading them to get intel on the Trump administration… or something.
And to add insult to injury, it provides links that absolutely do not support said speculation and sets a default photo that when shared shows the President in a completely other situation, at another time, that has nothing to do with the original claim that he was using an iPad on a boat while on vacation to take photos of his wife.
This, boys and girls, is how you spot bullshit.
By the way, if you want to keep your sanity, do NOT read the comments at the bottom of the original story. The retardulous FAIL will make your brain bleed.
Don’t say you haven’t been warned.
UPDATE: Looks like the idiotarians removed that “story.” Maybe someone sent them my article? Hmmmmm?
Normally, I wouldn’t call someone a Filthy Antifa Whore (FAW). However, since Moldylocks, who was shown getting punched out at this weekend’s Berkeley protests by some dude everyone claims is a fascist/racist/neo-nazi/somethingorother, is a nasty, unwashed, slovenly sow, and since she did, in fact,
demonstrate riot, throw bottles, and assault people at a rally for a President whom she apparently does not like, and since there are photos of said skank on the Internet baring her unshaven, unwashed, beaver and sprocket, that probably reek of week-old garbage and decaying pork, wide for the world – and presumably her parents – to see, I think FAW is appropriate.
No, I’m not giving you a link, pervs. When I ran across it while doing an image search on the protests the other day, I’m pretty sure I developed a severe case of post-traumatic stress, and I may or may not have gone blind for an unspecified period of time, while desperately stumbling around my house trying to find enough brain bleach to erase that image from my mind forever. Suffice it to say that cum-gurgling sausage junkie gives the term “bearded clam” an entire new meaning.
Her mommy and daddy must be so proud!
The FAW decided to speak out to the uber-friendly media – journowhores who will take any opportunity to make Trump supporters or anyone who didn’t worship at the cankles of Queen Pantsuit – look like a horde of fascist monkeys.
She was just a peaceable protester, you see.
She was just there to show her support, you see.
They were “rushed” by the counter-demonstrators, you see.
Her boyfriend disappeared, you see (oh-so-brave soul, who probably saw some pissed off demonstrators, who decided they’d had just about enough bullshit from the black-clad fascist crowd, and decided to hide, while his filthy hippie whore decided to engage in some assault) and she was just trying to protect herself.
“There was no time for emotion,” she said. “I was just terrified. I didn’t have time to process what was happening to me. All I knew was I was trying to find my boyfriend and not get hit…When it was happening I realized they were trying to crack my skull on the curb and on the rocks in the planter.”
During the entire attack, Rosealma said she never saw any Berkeley police officers. She also said the attack was unprovoked.
“I didn’t exchange words with anyone,” she said. “I was just standing there.”
Funny how the journaljizzer reporting on this story didn’t include photos that clearly show the FAW is lying.
Oh, whoops! Who would that be holding a bottle with the all-telling dreadlocks snaking out from under her hat?
And who would this be, viciously attacking that guy before getting “equal treatment” at the hands of her would-be victim?
Oh, did you want a clearer photo of the FAW getting her ass handed to her as she holds said bottle?
What’s that red arrow pointing to? Would that be a bottle? Gee, but she was just an innocent protester, lending her support, right? She only accidentally ran into that guy’s fist!
And she didn’t plan on violence, right?
Except that she did. Publicly. On Facebook. With her barely literate minions encouraging her “beat they ass.” Of course, now her account has been locked tight, but the Internet is forever, you noxious cum dumpster, and there are plenty of screen shots out there.
None of the “news” outlets covering this story mention this awkwardly inconvenient visual evidence. None of them even tried to appear balanced in any way! They’re simply all falling all over themselves to paint this hairy, walking septic tank of spectacular FAIL as a victim.
I’m used to the media being a completely biased, cocked up horde of communist-fellating fucknozzles. But to pretend to be objective, when there’s so much visual evidence available that contradicts the FAW’s claim of innocent victimhood? Come on!
She was not a victim. She was not innocent. She came to that protest fully prepared to attack those who dared to hold different political views than she did. What she didn’t expect is for the targets of her rage boner to fight back.
Recall when I said to prepare for civil war?
Just remember how that fucking fist felt cracking into your face, you miserable, lying sack of cunt. I’m pretty sure no one is going to play nice with you any longer.
Karma is a bitch.
So the New York Times writes a piece about 45’s CPAC speech quoting him as having “included a promise to throw undocumented immigrants ‘the hell out of the country.'”
Only that was actually an outright lie, as caught by the Gateway Pundit.
Trump said no such thing, according to the transcript of his speech.
We are also going to save countless American lives. As we speak today, immigration offers are finding the gang members, the drug dealers and the criminal aliens and throwing them the hell out of our country.
So what he said was that drug dealers and criminal aliens are getting tossed “the hell out of our country.”
So is the NYT guilty of the very thing of which they accuse Trump – of being a bigoted asshole who pigeonholes all “undocumented” immigrants into the “violent drug dealer” box?
Because it certainly sounds like that’s what the New York Times is doing. They paraphrased the President’s speech and took his words, which referred very specifically to a certain type of alien, and applied them to “undocumented immigrants” writ large.
This says more about the “journalist” who wrote the piece – Glenn Thrush – than it does about Trump.
And, yes, I’m perfectly aware that they’re simply trying to paint the President as a bigot by misquoting him. Question is, how many believe it? If there wasn’t a market for bullshit, the crap would fly.
Take, for example, the flag flap. Apparently, the Russian flags with Trump’s name on them were handed out prior to the 45’s CPAC speech by Democratic operatives. Question is, why did so many CPAC attendees take them and proceed to wave them around?
Because there’s a market for bullshit. They were either too ignorant to know what the Russian flag looks like, or they didn’t care, and grabbed it in their frothing zeal to show Trump their blind adoration.
Whatever the reason, they grabbed up those flags. And whatever the reason, those anxious to believe that Trump is a an anti-immigration bigot, would immediately believe the NYT piece without doing any fact checking.
The fact that the quote is utter bullshit doesn’t matter. It supports their preconceived notions, so it’s good to go.
If there wasn’t a market for bullshit, it wouldn’t exist.
I woke up relatively late for me, which means my dog and my cat actually allowed me to sleep today without singing me the song of their people entitled, “Pet me! No one has petted me in eight hours,” and “My food bowl is empty, bitch! Let’s go!” I have to admit it was cool to actually sleep until 9 on a weekend.
Since I wasn’t particularly tired, I had no excuse not to go to the gym, so I went. It was the first time I attempted a workout since the orthopedist sliced my ankle open over the summer and stitched together my ligaments, so I wondered how long I would last before collapsing. I didn’t do too badly.
Yeah, I’m pretty proud of myself. Not bad for the first workout since last summer.
The rest of the day will be spent in pajamas, hanging out with the animals and the husband. Chillin’.
Our plan was to find a movie to watch on one of the premium channels, because there’s not a single news channel that’s not either severely slanted left, or ridiculously skewed right. Want to see liberals losing their shit over an Executive Order? Go to CNN or MSNBC. Want to see the right collectively tongue bathe Trump’s ball sack? Tune in to Fox News.
Either way, the vapid, dull, biased outrageary has gotten old.
So, movies. I was distraught to find out from Snopes that Hollywood really wasn’t threatening a strike to force Trump to resign.
I was kind of hoping they would, and then I wouldn’t be subjected to such “classics” as the “Ghostbusters” remake, the “Independence Day” sequel, and the unwatchable and boring “Fifty Shades of ZZZzzz…”
If there’s a single reason for Trump to stay in office, let this be it!
Too bad it was a hoax.
Because maybe without the usual Hollywood histrionics, virtue signaling, and political messaging, maybe we’d have some interesting movies to watch.
We wound up watching last year’s Tarzan movie with Alexander Skaarsgard and Christoph Waltz. It wasn’t Oscar material or anything – at least by today’s standards. It was just cookie cutter fun. Nothing complex. Nothing particularly intelligent. Just a lot of beefcake thanks to Skaarsgard’s shirtless yumminess.
I guess I’ll spend the rest of the day watching “Charmed” reruns. At least their brand of feminism doesn’t involve parading around dressed as bloody tampons.
I read an interesting opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal today. BLUF: Donald Trump has spent the past year and a half trolling the news media with everything from outright lies, to outrageous statements, to egotistical exaggeration, but it’s all part of a greater strategy: to send the media off on pointless “fact checking” errands in search of intrinsically worthless data.
Meanwhile, Trump does what Trump does.
Now that he is president, reporters assigned to Mr. Trump are in a tough position. They have to pay close attention to what the White House says, but they know the White House may give them garbage and dare them to spend an entire working day trying to verify or debunk it. Meanwhile Mr. Trump will make the ordinary decisions any president must make—court nominations, executive orders, negotiations with foreign leaders—while reporters are off trying to disprove some idiotic claim about the president’s approval ratings. They’ll feel as if they’re in an impossible bind, trolled into looking the other way, futilely insisting on their authority as the nation’s guardians of truth.
I’ve often said on this very blog that I don’t care about the idiot minutiae that the media digs up on 45. I don’t care how many books he’s sold. I don’t care how big his inauguration crowds were compared with 44. I don’t care if and when he opposed the Iraq war. He wasn’t a public official back then – merely a bloviating rich guy – and it’s completely irrelevant to me what he said on the Howard Stern show about the Iraq war more than a decade ago. While the media goes off chasing down Trump’s latest claims, blows hot air about which Trump lawsuits we should be keeping track of in 2017, and dutifully covering Charlie Sheen’s tweets about how much he hates Trump, Trump’s National Security Adviser Flynn was chatting on the phone with his Russian counterpart – on the day sanctions were announced. Now, I’m not saying he revealed anything about the sanctions, but the optics aren’t good, given his connections to the Russians. Two weeks later, the media was catching up. “Oh! He spoke to the Russians on the day Treasury announced sanctions!”
Barton Swaim, the author of the column, suggests that the media are going to have to find new ways to deal with Trump. He doesn’t do business in any way they’re used to, whether you agree with him or not.
I would suggest the media start actually covering the story, covering the presidency, and letting us know what is going on, rather than wasting time spinning, “fact-checking,” and analyzing every word he says to death, in an attempt to discredit him.
If you’re going to be the “nation’s guardians of truth,” perhaps you should start by reporting actual news rather than chasing down silly, inconsequential claims. Stop digging for ways to discredit Trump on stupid issues, such as how many people attended his inauguration. Nobody gives a shit! You are reporters. So report, goddamit! Report accurately. Report the truth. Leave spin and analysis at the door, because frankly, most of you aren’t sufficiently versed in policy to analyze it.
Stop blurring the line between journalism and editorializing. No one gives a fuck what you think. Report the story, and let the audience decide what they think about it.
Confirm accuracy before publishing stories with buzzwords such as “unverified,” in a pathetic effort to beat everyone to the story. Verify.
And most of all, make rational decisions about what is important to the American people, and leave Buzzfeed, Breitbart, and other clickbait purveyors to their tabloid chaff.