Sunday, October 2, 2016

Leftists Trying To SHUT OUT Conservative Media From Covering Presidential Elections

Examiner via via The Federalist Pages Project ^ | October 2,2016 | 

In a ruling clearly aimed at Fox News and other conservative media, the Federal Elections Commission is trying to ban media outlets with any foreign ownership from covering presidential races or even giving endorsements.
A top Democrat on the evenly-split split board proposed that the group begin the process of prohibiting companies with foreign ownership as small as 5 percent from “funding expenditures, independent expenditures, or electioneering communications.”
If approved, the plan would cover Fox News, The Wall Street Journal – and as collateral damage, the New York Times, from participating in the elections process by covering or endorsing candidates, The Washington Examiner is reporting.
Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said in her submission, “Given everything we have learned this year, it blinks reality to suggest that that there is no risk of foreign nationals taking advantage of current loopholes to intercede invisibly in American elections. This is a risk no member of the Federal Election Commission should be willing to tolerate.”
Under her proposal, any entity that has more than 5 percent foreign ownership would be banned from advocating for a candidate’s election or defeat.
Not only would this prohibit major conservative media from becoming involved, but politically active companies like Ben & Jerry’s would also be prohibited.
The Examiner reports that one analysis even suggests that these media might not even be permitted from mentioning candidates like Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.
Democrats on the commission have been on a three-year campaign to limit the voice of conservative media, stopped by Republican commissioners who have warned that the First Amendment is under attack in the FEC.


Powerline ^ | 30 Sep, 2016 | JOHN HINDERAKER 

If this year’s presidential election has a silver lining, it is the final demise of “mainstream media.” Which is not to say that liberal media are going away; they aren’t, of course. But liberal media’s claim to being mainstream–reliable, objective, fair, unlike fringe or partisan news sources–is gone forever. That is a good thing.

No one could follow this year’s campaign without understanding that the media formerly known as mainstream (sorry, Prince) have jettisoned any pretense of neutrality, or even of journalistic integrity, in their desperation to preserve the status quo by electing Hillary Clinton president. Fair enough. We know where they stand.

One of the last vestiges of liberal media’s pretense to authority is its legion of “fact checkers.” “Fact checkers” like PolitiFact, the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler and others purport to rule judiciously on claims made by candidates of both parties. In fact, as those who pay attention have long known, “fact checking,” in pretty much all cases, is just liberal activism under another name
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Do Not Trust the Polls - October Surprise

The Vanity Post | October 1st, 2016 | 1Eagle 

As I warned you prior to the 1st Debate, there was good reason to be cautious about putting any trust in the polls. Herman Cain has been hammering this topic very efficiently, whereas Sean Hannity actually said he trusts the polls.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A 'SCIENTIFIC POLL'. The average student having done well in any college level Statistics Class can tell you that. The 'margins of error' were blown out of the water so badly in 1996, they they can no longer be said to have any value. Who determines the margin of error? By what means do they calculate it? And why did 99% of polls in 1996 not only miss the mark but were completely outside their margins of error? A poll of even 20,000 people cannot be said to be accurate in a country of over 300 MILLION.

In my last post I warned you that the goal post would be lowered for Hillary, and with the excuse of any kind of win, albeit a purely debate win by scoring the most "points", or however, that this would unleash the skewed poll results.

But first we have to be properly brainwashed so as to accept this odd result, and so Hillary had to unleash what was apparently a pre-meditated crime of character assassination on Trump (ie: the gangster gal who was insulted) and having the moderator set up to be a "fact checker" to pummel Trump in the 2nd half of the debate to put him on the defensive. I'm sure Crowley must have been impressed. Here in America, Free Speech no longer exists on College Campuses or in Political Debates.

By the numbers, it went sort of like this:
1) Clinton Camp sets the stage with "War on Women" narrative. It never made any sense until now.
2) Clinton Camp sets stage by baiting Trump with Kelly's tough questions in line with "war on women"
3) Clinton Camp publicizes request for moderator to become a "fact checker"
4) Clinton sends signal for "fact checker moderator" to activate "OK, Fact Checker get ready to work on this one!" Afterwards, moderator starts hammering Trump.
5) Hillary sets off the "insulted woman" narrative with a last minute mention, followed by planned articles to activate the smear (character assassination) of Trump.
6) As days go by, we start getting articles like this one in the New York Times (click NYT link for the article).

All this just to make it seem reasonable for Hillarys numbers to go up when she is clearly not exciting anybody and she was just photographed weeks ago going into convulsions on the street. Something drastic had to happen, some shock and awe, some October surprise, something really big to get the bad news off the Front Page.

Article Link

Hillary Clinton’s Own Words: “Super Predators, Taco Bowls, Bimbos, Deplorables, Basement Dwellers” ^ | October 01, 2016 

This week, audio was uncovered that revealed Mrs. Clinton mocking Bernie Sanders supporters as basement dwellers. These comments reveal the true Clinton: arrogant, contemptuous, and utterly dismissive of any and all who might oppose her quest for power.
Here is just a partial list of Clinton’s views on others:
“SUPER PREDATORS” – Hillary’s phrase used to describe young black males in America.
“TACO BOWLS” – A description of Hispanic voters by the Clinton campaign revealed via hacked DNC emails.
“BIMBOS” – Hillary’s generalization of women who claimed to have been sexually abused by her husband, Bill Clinton.
“DEPLORABLES” – Hillary Clinton’s description of tens of millions of Donald Trump supporters.
“BASEMENT DWELLERS” – This is how Hillary views Bernie Sanders supporters.
Hillary Clinton has spent the entirety of her adult life being coddled and cared for by the the same American taxpayer she holds in such low regard.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Trump's Crowds vs. Hillary's Crowds: By The Numbers ^ | September 29th 2016 | Staff 

On Tuesday—just one night after the first presidential debate—Donald Trump held a massive rally in Melbourne, FL. 15,000 people attended the rally and another 12,000 had to be turned away.
Those numbers are important because—according to the Gateway Pundit—in just one night, Donald Trump had to turn away the total number of people who have attended Hillary’s rallies since August 1st.
Since August 1st when both parties’ conventions concluded, Trump has had more than 312,000 people at his events with thousands turned away due to space limitations. He has set records for some of these locations in attendance. However, Hillary has only had 12,000 total at her rallies since August 1st.
Unfortunately for Hillary, her Tuesday rally only drew a crowd of “about 1,400 people.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

State Department Admits It ‘Lost’ Clinton Foundation Email

Breitbart ^ | 1 Oct 2016 | John Hayward 

The State Department has admitted it lost a 2012 email between Hillary Clinton aide Jake Sullivan and a Clinton Foundation employee, which may demonstrate a financial conflict of interest for the former secretary of state. The Washington Examiner describes the message as follows:
The email contained an attachment memo about Greek bonds — a significant detail given the heavy investments Clinton’s son-in-law, Marc Mezvinsky, was making in the Greek economic recovery during that same period.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Is America Ready For Hillary Clinton's 'Shariah Advisor' In The White House?

Investor's Business Daily ^ | September 30, 2016 | Kerry Jackson 

Some have expressed concern that Bill Clinton might be back in the White House, this time as the first gentleman.
But as worried as they might be, at least Bill isn't a supporter of Shariah law. We wonder if we can say the same thing about the person who will be one of Hillary's chief, if not top, advisor.
Huma Abedin has been called Hillary's "shadow" by Politico. Hillary has said if she had a second daughter, it would be Abedin. She has been with the Democratic presidential candidate since 1996, when Hillary was first lady.
Abedin has followed Clinton through her years as a U.S. senator from New York and was by her side when Hillary was wrecking America's foreign relations and making a mess in the Middle East as secretary of state. While deputy chief of staff to Clinton at State, Abedin also worked for the Clinton Foundation and Teneo, a consulting firm that does business with international business titans....
(Excerpt) Read more at ...