Post: #61001

(04-01-2017 03:33 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

He should call him Cuck Todd and watch liberals explode in real time.

Post: #61002

(04-01-2017 03:33 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Post: #61003

Post: #61004

"I hate this job and I'm going to resign sometime this week. I am sure you will all be very proud of President Pence and the reforms he initiates."

"GOTCHA! APRIL FOOL!!!"

I doubt he's tweeting something like that today, but hey, I'd be entertained by the media trying to cover it.

Post: #61005

Post: #61006

As much as I dispise putin.............

With all the liberals screeching about muh russaaaa , do they seriously expect to saddle up armored columns and ride east?

And from where?
Poland/Ukraine/the Baltics...oh wait, obama pissed them off via canceling missile defense and they aren't suicidal (especially given Germany to their backs).
Turkey...yea about that one
North out of Afghanistan.... um, logistical nightmare anyone. Also didn't we abandon the place to the status quo of various warlords under obama/kerry/clintonista?

And with what? The obama military? That was the problem in Iraq, we invaded with mostly clinton era initiatives. Took sometime to build up a proper NCO/Officer core who knew how to fight, get proper equipment out there etc etc

And then what? Rebuild it into a proper freedom loving allied state (ala Marshal Plan)? Like clinton could've done if he wasn't fucking chubby interns and selling us out to the chinese and saudis.

Post: #61007

The Anonymous Conservative Wrote:Trump Was Under Surveillance Before He Was GOP Nominee

I knew this already, though nobody in the know told it to me:

Quote:Fox News anchor Adam… Housley’s sources have revealed that the surveillance of Trump started before he was even the GOP nominee, he said during the broadcast of “Outnumbered” on Friday…

The person who did the unmasking is a “very senior” and “very well known” person in the intelligence community, Housley said, adding that he or she is not in the FBI.

It seems the spreading of names was done for “political purposes that have nothing to do with national security,” or foreign intelligence, but hurting Trump’s team, Housley noted.

This is huge. This means political partisans in Domestic Intelligence are using the domestic surveillance machinery to spy on innocent American citizens for political reasons – to destroy them so control will remain in the hands of those leftists in charge under Obama. If you know the extent to which the domestic surveillance machinery can penetrate an individual’s life, this is mind-blowing.

Using the state of the art technology, they can literally listen to every conversation you have, even in your most private sanctums, follow every key stroke, surround you with people who will report every single detail of your life to them, and more. I will bet Trump had super-model-level women sent by the machine to bang him, with the hopes he would compromise himself. Picture the movie Enemy of the State, only instead of a small ten man team of operatives alone, they are supported by thousands of regular citizen informants/agents who are probably blackmailed, bribed, or paid into service to the domestic intelligence agencies as part of a massive informant network.

What is out there is unimaginable given the silly patriotic propaganda we are fed growing up in civics class. The America you learned of exists in the hearts of individual Americans throughout the nation. But the nation as a whole is permeated by a machine that you would think was wholly incompatible with it. The only thing preventing conflagration is wholesale ignorance.

Intel is the dirtiest of businesses. We turn it on our enemies, because there are few ways better to destroy individuals. But it is not something you do piecemeal, because it involves ruthlessly violating those norms of behavior which separate the civilized fellow citizens from the savages you view as enemies. Once you cross that line, you are all in, especially when you are doing it within the US, and to fellow American citizens for political reasons.

If, as some allege, Clapper was the one running this, have no doubts that he will arrange killing someone to keep it under wraps and save his own ass. His only problem is he can’t be certain if he orders that, the shooter, who’d probably be K, would carry out the order. But if he can manipulate it into happening, he will because this is his ass on the line.

If Clapper was running an operation on Trump like this, I will bet it was being run on hundreds, if not thousands of other Americans. And that was just Clapper. What were Brennan, Jeh Johnson, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, and the plethora of leftist activists they installed in lower places in the security state doing during at the same time?

If you are Alt-right, I will bet you have been at least looked at. And it is not impossible every moment, every Key-stroke, and every action you have taken for years has been recorded in your permanent file, courtesy of Obama.

Act accordingly, because Trumps’ strength was that he was not compromisable.

Live up to his example, because that is the only strength the movement has.

Source: http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blo...p-nominee/

Post: #61008

(04-01-2017 03:08 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 12:09 PM)godfather dust Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 10:40 AM)911 Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 10:33 AM)kbell Wrote:  It would sweet, if Trump released a new report on the wage gap later on in the year, showing that there is none. Than claim his new woman's empowerment panel are why it happened. Than watch the head explosions of the SJWs.

Ivanka: "no, daddy! there is a gender pay gap!!!"

Anyone hoping for Ivanka to be the next president needs to realize she is Hillary Clinton lite. Plus she renounced Jesus to be with a money-changer/Jew.

True, but in Jared's defense he is one of the most devout textualists you can find, of which there are many passages in the Torah to respect Gentiles. It's the Leftist Jews who keep the ethnocentrism/racism but toss out the rest of the religion.

Figures like the Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson (that Kushner and Ivanka look up to) and Ovadia Yosef aren't exactly left wing Jews, and they're central figures in modern Jewish theology. And they don't exactly respect Gentiles, although they are revered by most in the Jewish and Israeli religious circles, and cucked hard from both sides of the isle.

Post: #61009

(04-01-2017 05:12 PM)RaccoonFace Wrote:  

The Anonymous Conservative Wrote:Trump Was Under Surveillance Before He Was GOP Nominee

I knew this already, though nobody in the know told it to me:

Quote:Fox News anchor Adam… Housley’s sources have revealed that the surveillance of Trump started before he was even the GOP nominee, he said during the broadcast of “Outnumbered” on Friday…

The person who did the unmasking is a “very senior” and “very well known” person in the intelligence community, Housley said, adding that he or she is not in the FBI.

It seems the spreading of names was done for “political purposes that have nothing to do with national security,” or foreign intelligence, but hurting Trump’s team, Housley noted.

This is huge. This means political partisans in Domestic Intelligence are using the domestic surveillance machinery to spy on innocent American citizens for political reasons – to destroy them so control will remain in the hands of those leftists in charge under Obama. If you know the extent to which the domestic surveillance machinery can penetrate an individual’s life, this is mind-blowing.

Using the state of the art technology, they can literally listen to every conversation you have, even in your most private sanctums, follow every key stroke, surround you with people who will report every single detail of your life to them, and more. I will bet Trump had super-model-level women sent by the machine to bang him, with the hopes he would compromise himself. Picture the movie Enemy of the State, only instead of a small ten man team of operatives alone, they are supported by thousands of regular citizen informants/agents who are probably blackmailed, bribed, or paid into service to the domestic intelligence agencies as part of a massive informant network.

What is out there is unimaginable given the silly patriotic propaganda we are fed growing up in civics class. The America you learned of exists in the hearts of individual Americans throughout the nation. But the nation as a whole is permeated by a machine that you would think was wholly incompatible with it. The only thing preventing conflagration is wholesale ignorance.

Intel is the dirtiest of businesses. We turn it on our enemies, because there are few ways better to destroy individuals. But it is not something you do piecemeal, because it involves ruthlessly violating those norms of behavior which separate the civilized fellow citizens from the savages you view as enemies. Once you cross that line, you are all in, especially when you are doing it within the US, and to fellow American citizens for political reasons.

If, as some allege, Clapper was the one running this, have no doubts that he will arrange killing someone to keep it under wraps and save his own ass. His only problem is he can’t be certain if he orders that, the shooter, who’d probably be K, would carry out the order. But if he can manipulate it into happening, he will because this is his ass on the line.

If Clapper was running an operation on Trump like this, I will bet it was being run on hundreds, if not thousands of other Americans. And that was just Clapper. What were Brennan, Jeh Johnson, Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch, and the plethora of leftist activists they installed in lower places in the security state doing during at the same time?

If you are Alt-right, I will bet you have been at least looked at. And it is not impossible every moment, every Key-stroke, and every action you have taken for years has been recorded in your permanent file, courtesy of Obama.

Act accordingly, because Trumps’ strength was that he was not compromisable.

Live up to his example, because that is the only strength the movement has.

Source: http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blo...p-nominee/

My guess is very rich people like Trump have a particular surveillance on them all the time compared to just average NSA phone listening. Given Trump has been giving signals of running since the 80s, with Obama in office and the birth-movement issue.

Post: #61010

Aight Paracelsus here you go:

Quote:Here is the transcript of my interview with Scott Pelley of 60 Minutes on fake news.

Scott Pelley: How would you describe what you do?

Mike Cernovich: I’m a lawyer, author, documenter, filmmaker, and journalist.

Scott Pelley: And how would you describe your website?

Mike Cernovich: Edgy, controversial content that goes against the dominant narrative.

Scott Pelley: What’s the dominant narrative?

Mike Cernovich: The dominant narrative is that there are good guys and there are bad guys. The good guys are liberals. Everybody on the right is a bad guy. Let’s find a way to make everybody look bad. Let’s tie marginal figures who have no actual influence to anybody we cannot overwrite. That’s the narrative.

Scott Pelley: That’s not a narrative I’m familiar with. Who’s narrative is that?

Mike Cernovich: Well, I guess, the question I always ask people is, why’s David Duke relevant? He’s not. But the media drags him out every time there’s a Republican runs for
office because David Duke knows if he endorses a candidate, then people will say oh my god, you better disavow this guy. You better disavow. Why? Nobody has anything to do with that guy. He’s trash, right?

Whereas on the left, when you have people like Reverend Jeremiah White, a right rath-Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and other kind of fringe people. I don’t see them being dragged out and saying Bernie, you better disavow, Hillary, you better disavow this guy.

Scott Pelley: But my, my question is who’s narrative is that?

Mike Cernovich: Well, it’s largely cultural. There narrative would definitely be conventional mainstream media. Which is made up of certain people. 90% of journalist who donate to campaigns, gave to Hillary Clinton. There’s a left-leaning bias for sure. Which is not necessarily nefarious, but is the result of our own human limitations to view the world rationally. To filter things, our own confirmation bias, and through cultural norms.

Scott Pelley: And, uh, you describe the mainstream media as what? Who is that?

Mike Cernovich: The industry. 90% of media companies are owned by six corporations. Concentration media ownership. So the New York times would be. The New York Times, the Washington Post, they’re all writing the same kind of stories.

Scott Pelley: Describe to me your biggest story so far.

Mike Cernovich: Probably my hoax busting. I’ve always been very good at finding hoaxes that, again, are narratives. People say this happened. For example, the University of Virginia rape case. Complete and total hoax. Rolling Stone said fra-five people in a fraternity had raped this girl, thrown her on the table. She had glass all over her body. I busted that hoax.

I did a lot of reporting on, probably actually my most valuable work for me, and gratifying, is that I was at the Democratic National Convention. And I watched all these massive protests. Five, ten thousand people. Largely Bernie supporters. And I noticed there weren’t any mainstream outlets out there covering that.

And we talked earlier about narratives. Well, there are narratives. And I will give you a great example. I went to the RNC, I went to the DNC, to do a documentary phone link. The narrative at the RNC in the media was divisiveness. It’s divided. There’s three people who supported Ted Cruz that like Trump. Divided, divided, divided. That becomes the dominant narrative. Whether that is group-think or whatever, we don’t know.

Okay. The narrative at the DNC was they’re uniting around Hillary. They’re uniting around Hillary. Meanwhile, I march with the protesters from city hall and Philadelphia all the way to Franklin Della Roosevelt Park five, ten thousand people everywhere you looked, and I way well, wait a minute. I don’t se much unity here. I see a lot of people who are very upset with Hillary Clinton. They think the primary’s are rigged. They’re pro Bernie, they’re pro Jill Stein. And these people are not going to vote for Hillary. So I found that gratifying because even though I’m though of as a right-wing person, I was actually giving coverage and a voice to more liberal people.

Scott Pelley: Well, f-for the record, we covered the Bernie protests around the Democratic National Convention. A-are you a right-wing person?

Mike Cernovich: I consider myself center-right. But these labels don’t really make much sense. I believe in some form of universal basic income. Well that isn’t a, quote unquote, conservative position because we have automation coming. What are you going to do?

I’m pro single payer healthcare. Is that right-wing or is that left-wing anymore? Well, if you have a lot of people, a large swatch of the company, or country, are suffering, then I think that we owe it to all Americans to do right by them, and to help them out. So is that right-wing or is that let-wing? I don’t know.

I’m pro free speech. Well, I remember when my great heroes who I read in
college, like Allen Dershowitz, were with the ACLU marching with the Nazis. Now I read that well, that guy’s a Nazi. Is it okay to punch him? Is it okay to hit him?

So I’m pro free speech, that used to be a left-wing value. That was core left-
wing value. And now we’re, we’re hearing from the left hate speech, and you should be able to punch people who disagree with political violence, and becoming more normalized.

That’s why I don’t like labels like left-wing or right-wing anymore. And don’t think they apply.

Scott Pelley: Who’s your audience?

Mike Cernovich: The people. Regular people who feel like their voices aren’t being heard in traditional media outlets. People of all walks of life, all genders, all ages. It’s a really fun, eclectic group actually.

Scott Pelley: You wrote in August a story about Hillary Clinton’s medical condition the headlines said, “Hillary Clinton has Parkinson’s disease. Position confirms.” That’s quite a headline.

Mike Cernovich: Yeah, Dr. Ted Noel had se-sent a story to me anonymously, that I checked out, analyzing her medical condition. And -

Scott Pelley: It isn’t true.

Mike Cernovich: How do you know?

Scott Pelley: Well, she doesn’t seem to have any signs of Parkinson’s disease.

Mike Cernovich: She had a seizure and froze up walking into her motorcade that day caught by a citizen journalist.

Scott Pelley: Did you, well, she had pneumonia. I mean -

Mike Cernovich: How do you know?

Scott Pelley: Well, because that’s what was reported.

Mike Cernovich: By whom? Who told you that?

Scott Pelley: Well, the campaign told us that.

Mike Cernovich: Why would you trust a campaign? Why would you trust the Hillary Clinton flats?

Scott Pelley: Why would you trust this doctor nobody every heard of?

Mike Cernovich: Why would you trust the doctors that go on CNN? Right because nobody’s every heard of him. And that’s the issue, one of legitimacy and social constructs and social statuses. Dr Ted Noel, board certified physician, he reached an analysis based on logic and reason that could be attacked using logic and reason.

Scott Pelley: Based on logic and reason, but not based on seeing Hilary Clinton ever in his life?

Mike Cernovich: She doesn’t want to do an independent medical examination, which he should’ve done. Now I remember when John McCain, speaking of narratives, I’m old enough to remember when John McCain ran for president and people said oh my god, he’s old. We’d better check his health records. John McCain is he, is he healthy? Is he not? Washington Post had it as a big story.

Scott Pelley: He’s been -

Mike Cernovich: John McCain.

Scott Pelley: He had a big -

Mike Cernovich: A big story.

Scott Pelley: Scare with cancer. He had.

Mike Cernovich: Yeah.

Scott Pelley: And recovered completely.

Mike Cernovich: And it was public. Well, okay. He had recovered completely. People wanted his medical records. But then when Hillary Clinton is having you, coughing fits, well it’s allergies. Hillary Clinton seizes up, oh, it’s pneumonia.

Right? So that’s what I mean. We’re willing, the confirmation bias says that you’re willing to take the Hillary Clinton campaign on their word. But that kind of benefit of the doubt would not be given to say, Donald Trump. If Donald Trump had some kind of seizure, and he said oh, it’s pneumonia, people would say oh, that’s alternative fact. And people wouldn’t accept that as true.

Scott Pelley: But the point is sh- The point is you didn’t check this story out. You didn’t have -

Mike Cernovich: Sure I did.

Scott Pelley: Multiple sources. You just, you have some guy who says he’s a doctor say that Hillary Clinton has Parkinson’s disease, and you put it out there as if it was true.

Mike Cernovich: Oh, he’s really a doctor though. Dr. Ted Noel, you can confirm that for yourself.

Scott Pelley: The point is, you didn’t talk to anybody who ever examined Hillary Clinton.

Mike Cernovich: Have you?

Scott Pelley: No. No.

Mike Cernovich: Have you?

Scott Pelley: I- this story’s not about me.

Mike Cernovich: Well, you haven’t though. So let’s be, let’s be honest with one another, which is that you are reporting that the Hillary Clinton campaign-

Scott Pelley: I didn’t report that she had Parkinson’s disease.

Mike Cernovich: You just told me she’s healthy though. Based on what was told to you by the campaign. See? That’s what I’m saying about the double standards which is I don’t take anything Hillary Clinton’s going to say at all as true. I’m not going to take her on her word. The media says we’re not going to take Donald Trump on his word. And that’ why we are on these different universes.

Scott Pelley: Why should anyone take you on your word?

Mike Cernovich: Oh, you should always double-check. You should always fact check. And if people don’t agree with me, people express that disagreement, and I’m completely, completely open to criticism.

Scott Pelley: How did you check the story on Parkinson’s disease?

Mike Cernovich: Dr. Ted Noel. He’s a great analyst.

Scott Pelley: So he, he gave you that analysis. And then that would be the starting point for a journalist to begin checking on other sources and trying to find verification.

Mike Cernovich: Yeah. I talked to other doctors about it too. And they said it was a sound analysis. And that she should undergo an independent medical examination. And that people should examine her medical records, which nobody ever did.

Scott Pelley: Hillary Clinton has Parkinson’s disease, position confirms. You don’t think that’s misleading?

Mike Cernovich: No.

Scott Pelley: You believe it’s true today?

Mike Cernovich: Oh, absolutely.

Scott Pelley: How did you find that story?

Mike Cernovich: I got it through, um, the doctor. He at the time had wanted to remain anonymous, and now he has a very big presence on YouTube and other places. And he even said, “I don’t want to take a lot of heat for this.” And I said,
“In understand, I understand.” I believe in anonymous speech. But I checked him out. I confirmed that he existed, that he was who he claimed to was. I read his analysis. Other doctors read his analysis. And some agreed with him. Some didn’t agree.

Scott Pelley: You reported in November five days before the election, quote Clinton’s inner circle includes child traffickers pedophiles, and now members of a sex cult.

Mike Cernovich: Lauren Silsby was arrested in Haiti trying to smuggle children out of Haiti. Do you remember that story?

Scott Pelley: For Hillary Clinton?

Mike Cernovich: She was a friend of Hillary. Hillary intervened on her behalf, to get a reduced sentence for Lauren Silsby. And her compatriots. So

Scott Pelley: “Clinton’s inner circle includes child traffickers pedophiles, and now members of a sex cult.” There, there, there’s no evidence of that.

Mike Cernovich: Well, Lauren Silsby, Hillary Clinton, and her are the inner circle together. Lauren Silsby was arrested in Haiti trying to leave the country with 33 children. Lauren
Silsby and her crew were. Hillary Clinton intervened personally and that, right? So that is 100% true. I don’t see Donald Trump intervening on behalf of child t-traffickers. Like Lauren Silsby. So that is true.

It does include that inner circle. Dennis Hastert, Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein good friends. Jeffrey Epstein is a lifetime registered sex offender. He was convicted of trafficking women who are underage. Great fiend of Bill Clinton. Great friend to Hillary Clinton. So that is part of her inner circle, so that is indeed a true statement.

Scott Pelley: Wait a minute. Friends or parts are inner circles?

Mike Cernovich: Well, y-you want to get, you want to define inner circle, or define something else?

Scott Pelley: Well, inner circle is the term that you used.

Mike Cernovich: Sure. Jeffrey Epstein -

Scott Pelley: What’s this, what’s the definition?

Mike Cernovich: If Bill Clinton is flying with Jeffrey Epstein without a secret service detail, repeatedly, then that would be inner circle.

Scott Pelley: Hillary Clinton’s inner circle?

Mike Cernovich: Well, Bill and Hillary. Who’s Hillary Clinton without Bill? She ran an Bill Clinton’s legacy. She didn’t have any ideas. She didn’t have anything new going on. She
ran on Bill Clinton’s legacy. So if you’re going to run on your husband’s legacy and ride his coattails, then you’re going to have to be responsible for what he does.

Scott Pelley: These news stories are fakes.

Mike Cernovich: They’re definitely not fake.

Scott Pelley: They’re lies.

Mike Cernovich: There are not lie at all. 100% true.

Scott Pelley: Do you believe that. Or do you say that because it’s important for marketing your website?

Mike Cernovich: Oh, I believe it. I don’t say anything that I don’t believe. Hillary Clinton had a seizure, faked it. Had to be picked up by her secret service detail. Put into a motorcade. That 100% happened. Pneumonia? Show me where anybody has pneumonia, they lock up. Nobody can.

Scott Pelley: But that doesn’t give you the right to speculate about it.

Mike Cernovich: It’s not a speculation. Its an analysis based on an expert doctor. Now you can disagree with that. You can say that isn’t true. But Hillary Clinton never underwent an independent medical examination. Why not?

Scott Pelley: When you heard about the guy who shot up the pizzeria?

Mike Cernovich: Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Scott Pelley: What did you think?

Mike Cernovich: Well, at the time there was no evidence connecting him to her. But that was a very sad thing. Very unfortunate thing.

Scott Pelley: Uh, uh, uh no evidence connecting who to what?

Mike Cernovich: Well, the shooter, I didn’t know anything about the shooter. But when it happened, and I heard about it and I read about it, it was a very sad thing.

Scott Pelley: But the pizzeria was part of this child pedophile -

Mike Cernovich: I never claimed that.

Scott Pelley: You didn’t name this pizzeria?

Mike Cernovich: Correct. I never -

Scott Pelley: That, that is -

Mike Cernovich: Never claimed that .

Scott Pelley: That is absolutely true.

Mike Cernovich: Correct.

Scott Pelley: We verified that you never named it.

Mike Cernovich: Right.

Scott Pelley: But wasn’t this an indication of fake news getting out of control? People picking up guns to take justice into their own hands after reading stuff like you put on your website that is based on fantasy?

Mike Cernovich: Well, first of all, we have to draw lines between what I wrote, which is an expert analysis on Hillary Clinton’s health, versus a completely different story, where I never named the pizzeria. And I never thought that the pizzeria was at the center of this. And then people, I would say that it was fake news that people would try to connect me to that pizzeria thing when I never said there was never anything going on in there. And moreover, the lawyer, it would strike me a utterly bizarre if a pizzeria were running any kind of weird operation out of it. 100%. I never, I never wrote that story. So if you guys want to say this is bad, we don’t agree with it, that’s bad and unappreciated. This is fair criticism. But let’s talk about what I wrote and why I wrote it, versus what other people wrote and the conclusions other people reached.

Scott Pelley: You described it as bizarre. Isn’t linking Hillary Clinton to a child pedophile ring the very definition of bizarre?

Mike Cernovich: Linking Hillary Clinton to Lauren Silsby would be 100% true. And you can find the information about that. Lauren Silsby tried to smuggle 33 children or some large number of children out of Haiti. She was arrested for human trafficking along with a number of her co-conspirators. Hillary Clinton intervened in that case.

Scott Pelley: Help me, uh, with, uh a bit of, uh the technology behind all of this. Would your site be as successful as it is, without Facebook and Twitter?

Mike Cernovich: They’re different platforms, definitely. So it would be, Twitter is very useful for different things. But my website would get around. Word would get around one way or another.

Scott Pelley: But, uh, web, uh. Let me ask a question this way. Twitter and Facebook are useful to you how?

Mike Cernovich: Reaching people directly without an intermediary. So what, the-the way I always explain to- you’re mediators. We’re going to talk for a number of minutes about a number of questions. This is going to go through editing, and then you’re going to go to television and say this is Mike Cernovich, this is what he believes. And then you’re going to tell a narrative whether I’m a good guy, a bad guy, a misguided guy, whatever the narrative is. And that’s fine. We’re all telling a story, right?

The issue is that that media is an intermediary. With social media, I can say to the people here’s me live on video for an hour. The full thing, raw and uncut. So it bring the message directly to the people. It bypasses intermediaries in the media.

Scott Pelley: Well, the benefit of intermediaries is having experienced editors check things out and research people. Check the facts before it goes out to the public. You don’t do any of that.

Mike Cernovich: Where are the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

Scott Pelley: That was a big mess, but that was because the Government -

Mike Cernovich: And how much -

Scott Pelley: Told us they existed.

Mike Cernovich: And how much, then why trust the government?

Scott Pelley: We also, we also reported that they didn’t exist.

Mike Cernovich: Right. Well, how much damage was caused by the fake news story about weapons of mass destruction? How much damage was caused by that Rolling Stone rape hoax, where the fraternity was shut down? Bang, bang, bang. People attacking them. Assault.

So the critique is, and the Washington Post recently of course had said that the Burlington power grid had been hacked by the Russians. And then it turned out well, actually some guy, maybe he had been watching some stuff he wouldn’t have been watching on the internet. And maybe his computer was compromised. But even then, nobody knows. That’s the Washington Post, right?
New York Times, weapons of mass destruction. None ever found. Washington Post, Russia attacking the power grid. Can you believe it? Unbelievable. What a disaster.

Obama prosecuting whistle-blowers all the time, everywhere. Obama spending money to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests. All the time. I don’t see any complaints about that. But then people want to come after me guns blazing. Come after me hard. I’m not starting wars in Iraq, which was a disgrace. I’m not starting wars in Afghanistan. I’m not getting people into deep deficits. And ruining lives, right?

So they way I look at all this stuff is people want to criticize me, I welcome it. But I would like to see a little bit more criticism of the media, and say why we got it wrong. Did the person who published that wep-weapons of mass destruction case get fired? No. Hands up, don’t shoot.

Scott Pelley: Well, she did actually. But then you -
Mike Cernovich: Okay. Well, thank you for fact checking. That’s good. Hands up, don’t shoot. No, a Rolling Stone woman, Sabrina Erdely, did. That was different.

Finally she did -

Scott Pelley: And, and, and Judy Miller at The Times got fired as well.

Mike Cernovich: Oh.

Scott Pelley: Anyway, go ahead.

Mike Cernovich: Hands up, don’t shoot. Didn’t happen that way, right?

Scott Pelley: It didn’t happen that way.

Mike Cernovich: Right.

Scott Pelley: According to the federal and state investigations.

Mike Cernovich: Right. So that’s the issue is we are all human beings. Trying to get it right. I start from the proposition that most of what I read in the media is not deliberately a falsehood but that people are biased and they filter things through their own worldview. And then I say why cannot people give me that same benefit of the doubt? I’m an attorney, I’m an author. A documentary filmmaker. What credential do I lack that other people have?

Scott Pelley: So you were saying that you do filter your stuff through your own bias in your own worldview.

Mike Cernovich: All human beings do.

Scott Pelley: We checked the numbers last month, your tweets were sent to users on social media 83 million times. What are you doing that is connecting with so many people?

Mike Cernovich: That was a slow month too. We, we hit a 150 million sometimes. What I’m doing is, is punchy, it’s fun, it’s counterintuitive, it’s counter-narrative. And it’s information that you’re not going to see anywhere else, right? Like we’re talking right now. It’s going to be edited.
Scott Pelley: You’re, you’re going to see information you’re not going to see anywhere else.

Mike Cernovich: So we’re talking right now. You have this fun banter. That’s what people like on social media. The banter. This full interview would be way more fun for people then the snippets that we’re going to see. Right? The people want the whole story. People want to have fun.

Scott Pelley: Why do you do this? Is is political for you? Is it fame?

Mike Cernovich: Definitely not fame. The fame stuff I don’t like. I had actually almost until recently never posted pictures on the internet. Fame generally comes with way more cons than pros. Fame makes you a target. Fame makes people hate you. Fame brings you stalkers. It definitely isn’t the fame.
Political activism would be a definite motivator.

Scott Pelley: You’re a political activist?

Mike Cernovich: I’m a social activist, absolutely.

Scott Pelley: Well, that would be the bid difference between you and reporters in journalism.

Mike Cernovich: Reporters are the mouthpiece of Democratic National Convention. Most of it is pro Hillary, pro Barack Obama. Donald Trump tweets something mean, the whole world, left-wing media explodes. Barack Obama prosecutes whistle-blowers more than anybody before him. Good old Barry. We love Barry, we love Barry, we love Barry. 90% of campaign contributions that came from journalists went to Hillary Clinton.

So the idea that journalists are these unbiased bastions of truth, and they’re not human beings, is completely not consistent with reality. Not consistent with the observable data. And moreover not consistent with what we know about people.
Scott Pelley: What do you consider to be out of bounds, in terms of copy and your website?

Mike Cernovich: Out of bounds would deficiently be anything that wrongfully takes a person who isn’t famous and draws unfair scrutiny to that person.

Scott Pelley: But if you’re famous … no holds barred?

Mike Cernovich: Well, if you’re a politician, if you’re Hilary Clinton certainly you, I don’t lie. Everything I say, I believe to be true. But even if I believe something to be true about someone who is a private figure. I wouldn’t do to them what Gawker has done to so many people.

What Gawker had done is they would take people who weren’t famous, they weren’t anybody, they didn’t have their own platforms. And essentially they would ruin their lives. I oppose that sort of journalism.

Scott Pelley: You say you don’t publish anything that you believe to be true. How do you decide whether something is true?

Mike Cernovich: How does anybody decide? That’s an epistemological question. What is the nature of truth? How do human beings who are floating around this rock with eyes and ears and skin and smell, how does anybody ascertain what is true or what is false?

Scott Pelley: Well, you ask questions, you verify the information it’s not that hard.

Mike Cernovich: You reach your own truth, find the truth. It’s not that hard?

Scott Pelley: I do it all the time.

Mike Cernovich: Philosophers have been writing about it for thousand of years. That’s why the scientific method came to be. Because truth and discovering truth is a challenge. And the idea is you’ve been wrong about things before. Everybody has been wrong about things before. But you believe it to be true at the time by reaching conclusions based on your background knowledge of the world, your ability to weigh and measure facts, the ability to determine what is material versus what is immaterial. And then you reach your conclusion. But there’s a lot going on. Thinking is the most important skill a human being can have. Rationality is what separates us from all other animals. And to say that that isn’t a daily challenge, searching for truth is never over.

Scott Pelley: You know every

Speaker 4: Just a moment you guys. Just a moment. Sorry.

Scott Pelley: Okay.

Mike Cernovich: Sure.

Scott Pelley: They want to throw some powder our way.

Mike Cernovich: All good.

Speaker 4: Hey, how you doing, guys?

Mike Cernovich: Great, man. How you doing?

Scott Pelley: Good.

What do you think, Mike?

Mike Cernovich: I like it. It’s good banter.

Scott Pelley: [laughter]. It is good banter. What, what do you think uh …

Mike Cernovich: I -

Scott Pelley: Other Mike?

PRODUCER: That … that they’re are a number of stories that you’ve done where you are conceded in some form or another. That they’re not true. And you have made an argument in favor of it, even though it’s not true. And there’s, there seems to be just a little bit of a disconnect for me here. Um. Uh, and I think a way to cut through some of these is, the, uh.

Part 2 of Mike Cernovich’s Interview with Scott Pelley of 60 Minutes

Mike Cernovich: And we’re back.

Scott Pelley: Have you published things that turned out to be wrong, you have regrets?

Mike Cernovich: Great question. I always want to update things, if they were proven to be incorrect, I would definitely always want to update that kind of stuff.

Scott Pelley: Well, you mean, correct, not update?

Mike Cernovich: Well when the Washington Post said that Russia had hacked the power grid, sending people into a form of hysteria, and then it turned out that Russia had not, had not hacked the power grid, and they issued a correction, and an update to the story. Very important.

Scott Pelley: What, What stories have you published that turned out to not be right?

Mike Cernovich: None, that come to mind.

Scott Pelley: None?

Mike Cernovich: That come to mind, no.
Scott Pelley: You know, it seems to me that the quickest way to destroy a democracy, is to poison the information.

Mike Cernovich: That’s exactly why the Iraq war was a mistake, caused by hysterical, fake news coverage. I also remember when people claimed, a Kuwaiti woman had claimed that Iraqi soldiers had went into a hospital, taking babies out of the incubators, throwing the babies away, and this was all reported true, they were untrue. So again, the idea is-

Scott Pelley: I’m talking about your work.

Mike Cernovich: I’m talking about the nature of truth though, because my work has to be contextualized relative to the structures that we resist in the media structure.

Scott Pelley: So some reporters, some where made a mistake and therefore it’s okay for you to write anything you want, whether it’s true or not.

Mike Cernovich: No, I never said that at all. I said that people are human beings, and that mistakes made by the New York Times, and the Washington Post, and Rolling Stone, and other outlets, have caused great damage to our democracy and is definitely a problem.
Scott Pelley: Are you damaging the democracy?

Mike Cernovich: I’m improving it by adding voices to the conversation. The idea of a democracy is that more voices are better than fewer, free speech is better than censorship, and we should all argue and have it out just as we’re having a somewhat of a debate right now, which is fine by me. I fully support this. I think this is great. I think scrutiny that people give me is fantastic, and I approve of it, and I scrutinize others and appreciate the same courtesy.

Scott Pelley: Who’s responsibility is it to judge whether something on your website is true, you, or the viewer?

Mike Cernovich: Oh, many people do. I have to judge it, the legal system judges it, the viewers have to judge it. Remember too, that I am an attorney. Right? You have a legal department of sixty minutes, we all know defamation, we want to avoid it. Not only because it’s not moral to harm people, dishonestly, we shouldn’t harm private people at all, but that’s a different conversation. So you’re going to be filtered through many people, but ultimately all news, all information, the personal responsibility of the person receiving it, to reach their own conclusions.

Scott Pelley: You’re making a living doing this. Your sight is supported by advertising, and the more outrageous the headline- the more people are going to click on it.

Mike Cernovich: Ah hah. That was fake news. I make no money off of advertising. I live off of book royalties from “Gorilla Mindset”, which is a book on mindset and emotional control. I don’t sell advertising, I do crowdfunding occasionally, but I do not keep that money, but rather I fund other ventures. So I have a patreon, I did a Kickstarter, I did a documentary on free speech, which included really important people, like Alan Dershowitz, Scott Adams, Milo Yiannopoulos was even in it, Dave Rubin was in it. Really great thing, talked to a lot of people, that was crowdfunded by people, and I don’t make any profit off of that. So I actually make no money doing journalism, I make money off of my book royalties, I don’t sell advertising.

Scott Pelley: Let me just look at my notes here, and see what we may have uh, may have run out … and guys, if there’s anything that I skipped let me know what it is.

PRODUCER: 12, and 13.

Scott Pelley: Oh, I did skip thirt- skip over 13, sorry about that.

Speaker 3: Yeah, and 12, I think, and uh, and then the uh, and that question about Dr. Noel.

Scott Pelley: Okay.

Mike Cernovich: Yeah, he’s a … You were going to say, Dr. Noel, is an anesthesiologist, therefore how is he qualified, right.

Scott Pelley: I was going to say that.

Mike Cernovich: Ah, no, come on. I’m a lawyer, you guys think I don’t know where this is going.

Speaker 3: That, That’s uh, That’s, That’s not, That not good reporting?

Mike Cernovich: No, that’s the thing, I, I’m, I’m completely okay with it, but.

Scott Pelley: You guys all set?

Speaker 3: Yeah.

Scott Pelley: Here we go. All set everybody?

Speaker 3: Yep.

Scott Pelley: Okay. We’ll just start right there. Dr. Noel is an anesthesiologist, what does he know about Parkinson’s Disease?

Mike Cernovich: Who’s had friends with Parkinson’s, has treated people with Parkinson’s Disease, and has encountered them in his practice, and had also run his story … I’m glad you asked that question, because he had also run that story by people who is specialized in Parkinson’s treatment.

Scott Pelley: Question becomes, what, what’s your standard for objective truth? Maybe you’ve talked to an anesthesiologist who’s never met Hilary Clinton, who’s decided she has Parkinson’s Disease, which there’s no sign of, and then-

Mike Cernovich: Are you a doctor?

Scott Pelley: I am not a doctor, but uh, the … Secretary Clinton does not seem to have Parkinson’s Disease. You seem to be the only person reporting that. It would be a pretty big story if it was true, and no one’s been able to verify it. So what’s your standard of proof? It doesn’t seem very high.

Mike Cernovich: I remember when John Edwards had fathered a wo- a child out of wedlock with a woman he was cheating on while his wife had cancer, the media wouldn’t cover it.

Scott Pelley: The question’s not about John Edwards. The question’s not about John Edwards, it’s about you, what’s your standard of proof?

Mike Cernovich: We’re having a philosophical conversation about the nature of truth, and the nature of truth is that John Edwards did not have a lovechild, that is fake news. Well actually it’s true, that happened. Right? So there are many stories that are under reported.

Scott Pelley: I’m talking about your website.

Mike Cernovich: I must believe it to be true. I will not say anything that I do not sincerely believe is true.
Scott Pelley: That doesn’t seem like a very high bar.

Mike Cernovich: It’s a high bar because I’m an attorney, I know how to weigh and measure evidence. I’m a skeptical person, and I know that there’s a lot of people gunning for me. I’m not going to be reckless.

Scott Pelley: Who’s gunning for you?

Mike Cernovich: You are. I’m on 60 Minutes. Right?

Scott Pelley: What do you mean, we’re gunning for you?

Mike Cernovich: Do I really think that you guys are going to tell the story that I would like to have told, no. Your story’s going to be here’s a guy, spreads fake news, uses social media, these social media people better … I know the story you guys are doing before you do it.

Scott Pelley: What’s wrong with that story?

Mike Cernovich: Because it is an agenda. The agenda is … The truth is you’ve talked to a person who sincerely believes true, you must also admit that there have been many stories reported by major outlets like the New York Times, the Washington Post, and Rolling Stone, that were false.

Scott Pelley: Agreed.

Mike Cernovich: People get it wrong, so why then come guns blazing at me, and not guns blazing at everybody? Why isn’t this segment going to say, how did the New York Times get conned? How did the Washington Post believe that Russia had hacked the power grid? We all together, collectively need to discover what the truth is, and converse with one another what the truth is, that’s a different story.
Another story is, here is a person that is able to bypass traditional media outlets, reach people directly to tell a story. Maybe he’s a good guy, maybe he’s not. People decide.
This is another story, ’cause I know the story you guys are going to tell. Hilary Clinton’s perfectly healthy. This guy Cernovich that said she’s not, he has no reason to say that. Facebook and Twitter need to crackdown on this kind of stuff.
Scott Pelley: What’s wrong with that story?

Mike Cernovich: I just told you, because that is an agenda. You could tell a more whole picture. You could tell a full story, but that’s one narrow thing. ’Cause I know by the questions you’re asking, the story you’re going to tell.

Scott Pelley: You said quote-

Mike Cernovich: Which is confirmation biased.
Scott Pelley: You said that fake news … let me put the question this way. You’ve said “Fake news, don’t fall for it, always be on guard against the enemy”.

Mike Cernovich: Yes.

Scott Pelley: Who’s the enemy?

Mike Cernovich: The opposition media. The media that is telling people … I lost a very good friend in Iraq, very, very good friend of mine died in Iraq. Great human being, engineering major, the nicest person you would ever meet in your life, he died in a war that we never should have fought, because of fake news. They killed my friend.

Scott Pelley: Where did the fake news come from, it came from the Bush Administration.

Mike Cernovich: Yeah.

Scott Pelley: All those stories were-

Mike Cernovich: I don’t like those guys.

Scott Pelley: … leaked to the New York Times.

Mike Cernovich: Exactly. Exactly.

Scott Pelley: What, What is a reporter supposed to do when, when the Chief of Staff, or the Vice President of the United States, leaks information to you?

Mike Cernovich: Don’t trust the government. I don’t trust the government. I didn’t trust the Bush Administration. I didn’t trust Obama Administration. I’m not going to serve as a mouthpiece for anybody. I go against Paul Ryan. I’ve said things that I don’t agree with that Trump has done. I go hard on everybody, I speak the truth in that regard, Glenn Greenwald, is somebody I admire, which is another segment you can do on. Who are people that I would view outside of the narrative? Well I would say Glenn Greenwald, and people will say “Well, I would be surprised because he’s a liberal. How could you admire a liberal journalist like …?” Well because he hits everybody hard. He hits power hard. Journalism is speaking truth to power. Journalism isn’t saying this government, whoever’s in office is out of control. They’re lying to people, they’re doing bad things. We need to hit everybody hard. That’s real journalism.

Scott Pelley: Isn’t hard to trust the guy who says he’s never published anything that was wrong?

Mike Cernovich: I said that it doesn’t come to mind. Right? But as a human being I’m willing to accept that there are times where I could reach better conclusions, 100%.

Scott Pelley: But none of those come to mind?

Mike Cernovich: None come to mind.

Scott Pelley: Thank you very much.

Mike Cernovich: Thank you.

Scott Pelley: Um, guys I think we have it.

PRODUCER: Do you think that maybe you can uh, ask him uh, you know, if he thinks that what he’s doing is filling the void left open by the mainstream media.
Scott Pelley: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Mm-hmm (affirmative). Mm-hmm (affirmative). Yes, absolutely. That’s a good one. Everybody ready? Are you filling a void that has been left open by the mainstream media?

Mike Cernovich: Yeah, that is why my profile has risen so much. Everybody kind of writes the same stories. Right now, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia. That’s what I hear everywhere, that’s all I hear anywhere. I don’t hear about Saudi Arabia. I’ve actually gone through thinking of real journalism, and doing research, and using my expertise as a lawyer, I’ve gone through FAR records to see who is actually paying people to be their mouthpieces. Ukraine, big money. They pay a guy, Doug Schoen, who goes on Fox News, $40,000 a month. Victor Pinchuk does. Pays him $40,000 a month, he goes on Fox News and says “Russia’s bad, the Ukraine is good”, he never discloses that he’s getting $40,000 a month. Saudi Arabia, more than any other country, they pay for propaganda. You can go through the FA- the FAR reports. Right? I don’t see any of that on the news.

Let’s talk about how Saudi Arabia owns a percentage of Fox News. Let’s talk about how Saudi Arabia owns a percentage of Twitter. Let’s talk about how they bought bombs from Obama, and they’re murdering the, let’s talk about that. I don’t see any of that. Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia. It’s like in the movie Being John Malkovich, being in Russia and America. So what I’m saying is well hey, why don’t we talk about Saudi Arabia? Why don’t we talk about Ukraine? Why don’t we talk about other stories that the media isn’t telling? Of course you’re going to draw an audience with that.

Scott Pelley: Tell me … Describe to me of your op- operation. Do you write everything that’s on the site, or do you have a number of reporters who work with you? How does that, How does that all work?

Mike Cernovich: Yeah, I have freelancers who do research and writing, and I do a lot of research and writing, so it’s a hybrid.

Scott Pelley: And you personally edit everything that goes into the website?

Mike Cernovich: I don’t personally edit everything that goes into the website, but I personally read everything to make sure that people aren’t lying.

Scott Pelley: You make a judgment about what goes in, and what stays out?

Mike Cernovich: Yes.
Scott Pelley: That’s right. That’s right. Um, you know, I’m curious how you um, how, how you came to start your website. Was it … I mean, to become what you will a publisher-

Mike Cernovich: Mm-hmm (affirmative).
Scott Pelley: … uh, as opposed to a blogger or just sending in an piece to that organization, or this, uh, you decided to take on creating this entity-

Mike Cernovich: Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Scott Pelley: … and how did, how did that come about?

Mike Cernovich: Well I’d always written letters to the editor. As a kid, right, even as a little kid I wrote letters to the editor. And with the internet, rather than write a letter to the editor, you can write it yourself. You can write it yourself, and be your own editor, and publisher. It’s an amazing time to be alive. I mean, that’s where, that’s where we talked about and there, there’s multiple stories that you could write.
One can be, Cernovich Bad Guy, one could be this, one could be the technology is so interesting that a lot of people, Greta Van Susteren, for example, when she had left Fox News, she was doing Facebook live videos. One of her videos got 1.5 million views. So there are people in the quote unquote mainstream media, who are learning the power of social media too. And this is especially true for up and comers. Right? You have this big brand, you got this big platform, you of course you have a boss, like everybody has a boss, of course, but you’re there, you’ve made it. So what do you tell the 20 year old, the 30 year old, the 40 year old, who’s trying to come up in the ranks?

Scott Pelley: You were never bossed.

Mike Cernovich: People … I have a lot of bosses. I have an audience, and believe me they let you know when they don’t agree with you, and they let me know, in very colorful terms. Plus I have Shauna back there too. She, She’s my conscience.

Post: #61011

(04-01-2017 03:08 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 12:09 PM)godfather dust Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 10:40 AM)911 Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 10:33 AM)kbell Wrote:  It would sweet, if Trump released a new report on the wage gap later on in the year, showing that there is none. Than claim his new woman's empowerment panel are why it happened. Than watch the head explosions of the SJWs.

Ivanka: "no, daddy! there is a gender pay gap!!!"

Anyone hoping for Ivanka to be the next president needs to realize she is Hillary Clinton lite. Plus she renounced Jesus to be with a money-changer/Jew.

True, but in Jared's defense he is one of the most devout textualists you can find, of which there are many passages in the Torah to respect Gentiles. It's the Leftist Jews who keep the ethnocentrism/racism but toss out the rest of the religion.

And what of the Talmud? Which book is more important? Are you really going to emphasize a few Torah passages about gentiles? Does the exception not prove the rule?

Godfather makes a great point.

If anything this illustrates how desperately we are in need a of true aristocracy, and the secondary and tertiary leadership from which to draw. The aristocracy of The West has been totally compromised and destroyed by the world revolutionary movement and the two world wars. With Trump we finally, after decades of globalization, have someone in whom we can place our hopes to represent the common good of the nation, and whom does he have to support him besides a tenuous majority of the population? Each level of our power structure, with the exception of a faction of the military, has been hostile towards him. The legislative and judicial branches of government can't be trusted, Wall Street and the Fed can't be trusted, the corporate media is openly hostile, the deep state bureaucrats are openly hostile, and the intelligence agencies are compromised. It's Trump alone and surrounded by a hostile elite from which he is at cross purposes (with a few exceptions), and we intuitively respond to this and glorify him with memes as the god Emperor, but an appropriate reading of the situation is that he doesn't even have a legacy with his own daughter, either spiritually as a Christian (she rejected Christ) or genetically - and she is who he is positioning to carry on his legacy. His grand children by Ivanka (Yael), and his financial fortune, will be married off to a foreign tribe who will train their children to speak of his ancestors in the most pejorative of terms. And Trump sees no problem with this as evidenced in both word and action, and that's the truth of the situation.











Here's a brief section of the last bit of Protocol 1 from THE PROTOCOLS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION, Page 28 of 109, concerning the aristocracy:

Quote:In all corners of the earth the words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" brought to our ranks, thanks to our blind agents, whole legions who bore our banners with enthusiasm. And all the time these words were canker-worms at work boring into the well being of the goyim, putting an end everywhere to peace, quiet, solidarity and destroying all the foundations of the goya States.

As you will see later, this helped us to our triumph; it gave us the possibility, among other things, of getting into our hands the master card -- the destruction of the privileges, or in other words of the very existence of the aristocracy of the goyim, that class which was the only defense peoples and countries had against us. On the ruins of the natural and genealogical aristocracy of the goyim we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by the aristocracy of money. The qualifications for this aristocracy we have established in wealth, which is dependent upon us, and in knowledge, for which our learned elders provide the motive force.

Our triumph has been rendered easier by the fact that in our relations with the men whom we wanted we have always worked upon the most sensitive chords of the human mind, upon the cash account, upon the cupidity, upon the insatiability for material needs of man: and each one of these human weaknesses, taken alone, is sufficient to paralyse initiative, for it hands over the will of men to the disposition of him who has bought their activities.

The abstraction of freedom has enabled us to persuade the mob in all countries that their government is nothing but the steward of the people who are the owners of the country, and that the steward may be replaced like a worn-out glove. It is this possibility of replacing the representatives of the people which has placed them at our disposal, and, as it were, given us the power of appointment.

I don't want to be the dispenser of black pills here, but our situation is what it is. I am a very big supporter of Trump, and the man has the spirit of a hero for taking the risk that he has taken to publicly challenge the entire establishment at great personal expense (and even greater expense if he lost, or worse). He has made great personal sacrifices to do what he has done, as has his family for their support, and it is obvious that he has done so to help save the nation he loves. Having taken such risk I understand his desire to setup a legacy for his himself and his family who supported him in this political journey. It makes sense. Ivanka appears to be a nice person and, perhaps, Jared is too. I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on a personal level, but they ARE the establishment. They don't seem to share Donald's spirit and they aren't the Maverick that he is in the political sense. We already see compromise regarding climate change at the behest of Ivanka, and women's rights, and who knows what Jared has been whispering in Trump's ear.

Despite his flaws, it really is all down to one man, a true alpha male and one of a kind, and that's Donald Trump. If he were out of office tomorrow, it would be back to business as usual. There is no aristocracy to support Donald, rather there is a corrupt plutocracy, and as such hopefully we'll have Donald for a full 8 years to sort out as much as he can. I don't expect a legacy in any real sense from Ivanka unfortunately, quite the opposite. Who knows with Don Jr., who appears to be out of the picture. If we are lucky Donald's heroics will inspire countless other men worldwide to stand up and buck the system of globalization and Cultural Marxism that is destroying The West. That would be a worthy legacy.

Post: #61012

(04-01-2017 05:57 PM)911 Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 03:08 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 12:09 PM)godfather dust Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 10:40 AM)911 Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 10:33 AM)kbell Wrote:  It would sweet, if Trump released a new report on the wage gap later on in the year, showing that there is none. Than claim his new woman's empowerment panel are why it happened. Than watch the head explosions of the SJWs.

Ivanka: "no, daddy! there is a gender pay gap!!!"

Anyone hoping for Ivanka to be the next president needs to realize she is Hillary Clinton lite. Plus she renounced Jesus to be with a money-changer/Jew.

True, but in Jared's defense he is one of the most devout textualists you can find, of which there are many passages in the Torah to respect Gentiles. It's the Leftist Jews who keep the ethnocentrism/racism but toss out the rest of the religion.

Figures like the Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson (that Kushner and Ivanka look up to) and Ovadia Yosef aren't exactly left wing Jews, and they're central figures in modern Jewish theology. And they don't exactly respect Gentiles, although they are revered by most in the Jewish and Israeli religious circles, and cucked hard from both sides of the isle.

This link has no citations or proof for the quotes: http://www.texemarrs.com/122013/hello_donkeys.htm

Need more info than that to judge someone.

Post: #61013

Using the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a cudgel against Jews is an idiotic move. Every competent historian at a university in the Western world knows that it's a forgery created by the Tsarist secret police.

How do we know? Large sections of it are copied from contemporary novels.

Post: #61014

(04-01-2017 09:00 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  Using the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a cudgel against Jews is an idiotic move. Every competent historian at a university in the Western world knows that it's a forgery created by the Tsarist secret police.

How do we know? Large sections of it are copied from contemporary novels.

It's fake but true (I'm aware how stupid that sounds.) Definitely forged but everything in it has happened/is happening. Laying it all at the feet of Jews is irresponsible but elitist/supremacist Jews are a major player.

Post: #61015

Also, this sort of thinking goes against everything our founding fathers stood for and what built this country.

Post: #61016

Gotta love them Russians

Quote: On April 1, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted a spoof voicemail offering "Russian hackers services" and "election interference." And the mainstream US media appears not amused.

"You have reached the Russian embassy, your call is very important to us. To arrange a call from a Russian diplomat to your political opponents, press one," the message posted on the ministry’s official Facebook page says, playing first in Russian, then in English.

"To use the services of Russian hackers press two," it goes on.

"To request election interference, press three and wait until the next election campaign. Please note that all calls are recorded for quality improvement and training purposes."

https://www.rt.com/news/383098-russia-fo...f-hackers/

Post: #61017

(04-01-2017 09:00 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  Using the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a cudgel against Jews is an idiotic move. Every competent historian at a university in the Western world knows that it's a forgery created by the Tsarist secret police.

How do we know? Large sectiovffns of it are copied from contemporary novels.

Are these the same historians who say that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK or that 911 was perpetrated by 19 Arabs with box cutters?

Also, these "novelists" have an uncanny way of predicting the future with astonishing accuracy. Weird.

Post: #61018

Sometimes I reminisce and think back to November 8 by watching these dolts melt down





Oh what a night!

Post: #61019

(04-01-2017 07:32 PM)durangotang Wrote:  If anything this illustrates how desperately we are in need a of true aristocracy, and the secondary and tertiary leadership from which to draw. The aristocracy of The West has been totally compromised and destroyed by the world revolutionary movement and the two world wars.

The aristocracy was destroyed by jews, simple as that, they weaseled their way in with money and then bred their genes into those original lineages.

What is aristocracy anyway?

I bet most of us have no idea really. We've not only been brainwashed about nobility since the French Revolution, but we've also been deliberately kept out of the loop by the nobles themselves.

Aristocrats are redpill as no others, they live by completely different rules and ethos, to this day if still diminished.

For example, cuckland Sweden, the glorious home of feminists and marxist schooling, has numerous private boarding schools which are run by militaristic dicipline and peer hierachies, where the older students literally abuse and sometimes kill the younger. Asked why? Tradition, but some claim it's to drum the important of hierachy into them and in addition the humiliation serves to give these spoilt brats some sympathy with those of lesser standing than themselves, so they don't go all oligarch on their subjects. Makes sense in a perverse way? Who am I to judge, I don't run countries or can trace my lineage back 1000 years to Kings (actually I can, but that's another story).

Breeding. That word, I don't think we the people know what it means.

"He shows good breeding"

"It takes 3 generations to make a gentleman"

Quote:1. The mating and production of offspring by animals.
‘the flooding of the rivers is a trigger for breeding to start’

2. The good manners regarded as characteristic of the aristocracy and conferred by heredity.
‘that's the kind of modesty you get from good breeding’

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/breeding

Fukking lol huh?

Do we need to spell it out for you (the people), the elites practice eugenicism and have for hundreds of years. They BREED their lineages. They don't allow their sons and daughters to marry who they want, no they look at other aristocratic lineages to gain their genome. The high IQ, the beauty, the height, the valor.

"It takes 3 generations to make a gentleman"

We need to wait and see if the genetic lineage is feasible.

Are they right? Do they posses some extraordinary genetic superiority? Common sense would say yes - and no. Their women are usually very attractive and they bring them in from the outside, Grace Kelly marrying the prince of Monaco. They get their gene replenishment from women, not outside men. Still doesn't work well. Inbreeding has been a serious problem since several hundred years ago.

In any case, once upon a time, many aeons ago, the royalty of Europe was originally descended mostly from German (incl. Normanns, Anglo-Saxons, Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Rusvikings) warrior-kings who with successive sweeps drove south. They're the Charlemagnes of history. Great Kings of the Battlefield.

That's aristocracy. The ethos and genetics of medieval Europe's most prolific warlords and leaders in battle.

What's our current aristocracy? Money lenders, with as little sense for bravery as they have honor. Actors, the occupation considered the absolute lowest, below prostitutes in Rome.

Who is our current aristocracy? The old lineage is polluted and inbred. The new one has poor breeding.

Post: #61020

Yeah, if someone could find this chick's IG that'd be great. Her DM's are looking to be slid in by someone ready to grab her by the choker.

Post: #61021

(04-02-2017 08:24 AM)redbeard Wrote:  Yeah, if someone could find this chick's IG that'd be great. Her DM's are looking to be slid in by someone ready to grab her by the choker.

SOCIAL MEDIA:
Instagram: thecalmmorning
Snapchat: thecalmmorning
Twitter: @RageAfterStorm
Bandcamp: https://thecalmmorning.bandcamp.com/

I like her Rabbity teeth as much as her red pill leanings.

Post: #61022

Off topic, but damn; Eddie Murphy and Rick James were on the Trump Train back in EIGHTY-FIVE!



Please don't ask how I stumbled upon this.

EDIT: Sorry about this size; couldn't find a smaller version.

Post: #61023

(04-01-2017 08:45 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 05:57 PM)911 Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 03:08 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 12:09 PM)godfather dust Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 10:40 AM)911 Wrote:  Ivanka: "no, daddy! there is a gender pay gap!!!"

Anyone hoping for Ivanka to be the next president needs to realize she is Hillary Clinton lite. Plus she renounced Jesus to be with a money-changer/Jew.

True, but in Jared's defense he is one of the most devout textualists you can find, of which there are many passages in the Torah to respect Gentiles. It's the Leftist Jews who keep the ethnocentrism/racism but toss out the rest of the religion.

Figures like the Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson (that Kushner and Ivanka look up to) and Ovadia Yosef aren't exactly left wing Jews, and they're central figures in modern Jewish theology. And they don't exactly respect Gentiles, although they are revered by most in the Jewish and Israeli religious circles, and cucked hard from both sides of the isle.

This link has no citations or proof for the quotes: http://www.texemarrs.com/122013/hello_donkeys.htm

Need more info than that to judge someone.

The quotes by rabbi Ovadia Yosef are well-known, they're from his saturday sermons and have been picked up by sources including Israeli newspapers like the Jerusalem Post:

Quote:The sole purpose of non-Jews is to serve Jews, according to Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the head of Shas’s Council of Torah Sages and a senior Sephardi adjudicator.

“Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel,” he said in his weekly Saturday night sermon on the laws regarding the actions non-Jews are permitted to perform on Shabbat.

According to Yosef, the lives of non-Jews in Israel are safeguarded by divinity, to prevent losses to Jews.

“In Israel, death has no dominion over them... With gentiles, it will be like any person – they need to die, but [God] will give them longevity. Why? Imagine that one’s donkey would die, they’d lose their money.

This is his servant... That’s why he gets a long life, to work well for this Jew,” Yosef said.


“Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi [master] and eat.

That is why gentiles were created,” he added.

Yosef’s Saturday night sermons have seen many controversial statements from the 90-year-old rabbi.

https://crownheights.info/jewish-news/29...erve-jews/

Post: #61024

Had a good experience on Friday night.

I met a Texan on holidays here with his Irish girl.

Was outside smoking, first thing he said to me after asking for a light was sorry about Trump, went on for a full two minutes or so gushing about how awful it was he was the president, racism, sexism blah blah blah....

I didnt correct, didnt argue, just chatted, made friends and wished him a happy stay. Politics and alcohol rarely mix well in my experience.

I was on a date with a girl I've been seeing on and off for over two years at the venue, she was there beside me the whole time.

She heard what the guy said, without me saying a word after he left she told me she likes Trump, how great he is, and how wrong that guy was, I had no idea.

Says to me "yeah I used to hate him like everyone else, then I actually read up on his policies and the things he was saying a couple days before the election, I really like him now, hes great!"

So an American man from the south hates him, an Irish woman who are normally huge liberals loves him once she saw past the headlines

I may keep her, what she said gave me a raging boner that I gladly plunged a few hours later

Was a huge turn on to hear a woman actually using her brain and making up her own mind

Post: #61025

Jeb running his mouth

Breitbart
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/04/0...p-helpful/

Quote:Sunday on “The Cats Roundtable” on New York AM 970 radio, former Gov. Jeb Bush (R-FL) told host host John Catsimatidis “leadership” from President Donald Trump would be “helpful” to get Republicans to unite behind a common agenda.

Bush said, “We haven’t come up with a compelling, unifying agenda that can replace that. And that’s where you see the struggles in Washington right now. The healthcare debacle is a good example of that. And presidential leadership would be helpful here. There’s a lot that could be done that I think has broad-based support.”

He added, “If he could focus on these positive things, our brand then could be solidified, I think. Being against what the other guys are for is not a sustainable political position ”

Trump campaigned on a very compelling agenda, that's while he won despite the massive smear campaign and you did nothing with $100 million.