Councilor Mike Gaffney Quotes Voltaire About Free Speech, Failed Reporter Buttmunch Billy Shaner Says He Was Quoting A White Supremacist Want to advertise with Turtleboy? Email us at Turtleboysports@gmail.com for more information. Yesterday Worcester City Councilor Michael Gaffney wrote a letter to Turtleboy about his disgust towards Worcester Magazine Editor Walter Bird for the way Bird sexually harasses and tries to hook up with women who he has business dealings with. But why did Councilor Gaffney wait until now to release this damning information? Well, he was probably mad that Buttmunch Billy Shaner, his newest minimum wage reporter, insinuated in the recent copy of their free newspaper that Councilor Gaffney subscribed to white nationalist ideology: YIKES: Quoting a white supremacist is not the best look, especially after one of them rammed a car into a group of people, killing one and injuring 19. With that in mind, I bring you a recent article in the Worcester Independent Leader by City Councilor At-Large Mike Gaffney blasting city leadership for policies that favor big business and development. While I felt the article did a fine job portraying his perspective, a friend pointed out something worrying toward the bottom. Just before the last sentence, there’s a quote overlaying an image attributed to Voltaire. The quote reads: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” It is often attributed to Voltaire, although it has been disputed as to whether he, in fact, said it. A prominent and supremely controversial white supremacist named Kevin Alfred Strom did, however. Among other things, Strom has denied the Holocaust, advocated for a Neo-Nazi party and pleaded guilty to child pornography possession charge. The quote kind of takes a different meaning in proper context, I think. So let me get this straight. Gaffney gives a completely applicable quote about the dangers of censoring free speech, which he and most other people attribute to Voltaire – the philosopher whose writings most historians agree was a driving force in the American Revolution. And what does Billy do? He goes out of his way to turn this into Gaffney quoting a white supremacist. For the record, even the far left attributes this quote to Voltaire: So did people in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo murders: Voltaire: "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise" #JeSuisCharlie pic.twitter. 8KF3C6i — Sam Sussex (@SamSussex) January 8, 2015 So do Palestinians who want to criticize Israel: To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.-Voltaire #GazaUnderAttack pic.twitter. 3yt6jzHNH — Persia (ر) (@persiatx) August 13, 2014 So did Trump’s lucky sperm: To find out who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.Voltaire — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) April 25, 2013 This is what you get when you Google image that quote: In other words, everyone thinks Voltaire said this. No one knows for sure if he did or didn’t. All we do know is that a random white supremacist from West Virginia also wrote it here 25 years ago. So obviously Councilor Gaffney has been brushing up on his 25 year old West Virginia white supremacist literature. Either that or he, just like many progressives and conservatives before him, believe this is a Voltaire quote. Anyone with a brain could see what Buttmunch Billy was trying to do here. He doesn’t like Gaffney because he’s a social justice warrior. He tries to play if off like he’s just “reporting the news” but he doesn’t do a very good job hiding it. Keep in mind that the Turtlegram and Gazette called Gaffney a “slave master” two years ago for investigating a fraudulent non-profit that just so happened to be run by a black woman. They act like it’s harmless to throw these labels out there. It’s not. And what I love about Gaffney is that he’s not afraid to fire back at these frauds, which is exactly what he did on his Facebook page last night: Juicy! Walter Bird didn’t write the blurb, but his newest employee did. I’m sure Walter appreciates Buttmunch Billy dragging him into a world of shit that is Turtleboy blowback. But what choice did Gaffney have? We’re the only media outlet in town that tells the truth. The rest are clearly against him, so why should he place nice with them any longer? Either way, Walter is the editor. He approved of this. He allowed his newest employee to insinuate that the Vice Chairman of the City Council quotes white supremacists. Buttmunch Billy quickly objected on Gaffney’s Facebook page: Yea Mike. He didn’t actually call you a racist. He just insinuated that you are inspired by white supremacist literature and freely quote them in order to push your agenda in Worcester. What’s the harm? YIKES! Instead of just apologizing and admitting he fucked up, Buttmunch Billy doubled down and said that he was NOT insinuating any racism on his part: Yea dude, no one believes you. You’re not good at lying. You don’t go out of your way to research a meme’s origins, and then attribute it solely to a white supremacist, unless you’re trying to tie Gaffney to that particular white supremacist. We’re not as stupid as you are. Plus, who cares? Yea, there’s no consequences to being tied to a controversial white supremacist just a couple days after one of them murdered a woman with his car. It’s not like Joe Petty and his mindless followers will use that against him. Oh wait…. “Councilor Gaffney quotes white supremacist.” That’s the story now. That’s how it will be told from this point forward. Buttmunch Billy knew this, which is why he wrote it in the first place. But it’s not his fault: “It’s not on me the way partisans choose to use my reporting.” See? He was just reporting the facts by going out of his way to suggest that Gaffney quoted a Nazi. Not his fault how people react to that. Kind of like how people like Billy don’t blame Trump when his supporters do fucked up shit. Many accused him of racebaiting, but Buttmunch Billy once again disagreed: Yea, totally not race-baiting. White supremacy has nothing do with race. Then things got even juicier: Busted! Apparently Billy was texting Gaffney wanting to know why a post from one of his trolls named Eric Malouin was deleted: Notice the face he forgot to crop out after he screenshotted: That would be fellow Worcester Magazine minimum wage employee Oh I see now – it was a group effort from Worcester Magazine. No wonder Gaffney wanted to spill the bins on their boss – they conspire to make him look bad and they got caught in the act. Nice going Billy. So that means Lyford was watching this all go down, started screenshotting his boy Eric’s troll comments, and then cried about it to Buttmunch Billy when Gaffney blocked him. Because Josh was too much of a pussy to confront Gaffney himself. Sad. It looks as if the local African-American community was not impressed with their race baiting: Boom. Roasted. Once Gaffney threatened to spill the bins on Walter’s sexting scandal, Billy realized he fucked up. He’s only been on the job a couple months and his childish vendetta was about to lead to the public humiliation of his boss. So he was all like, “Why not focus on my behavior?” Because Walter allowed this to happen. What you write reflects upon him. When South Shore Turtlegirl offends large groups of people they go after the brand, not the blogger. We all own it together. It’s OK though, because “Worcesteria” is “irreverent.” Yea, it’s just a joke Mike! So I called you a white supremacist. Big deal snowflake! His “friend” thought it was funny: At least he understands that without doing stuff like this no one would actually read his columns: I hate to even give Buttmunch Billy attention he so dearly craves. He writes about us EVERY SINGLE WEEK. Or so I’m told, I don’t read it myself. My grandmother calls me about it on her landline. He’s baiting for us to write about him because he’s smart enough to realize that becoming a Turtleboy villain will at least make him somewhat relevant. But now he’s finally got our attention. Unfortunately for him he was completely exposed for being the fraud that he is, and his boss might lose his job. We urge you to support the following local businesses.


Alex Jones (Right Wing Watch) Alex Jones delivered one of his all-time wildest rants against MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, whom he compared to demons, parasites and disease. The InfoWars host attacked the “Morning Joe” co-hosts Tuesday in a crazed tirade that included a bug-eyed, tongue-lolling impersonation of a demonic Brzezinski, reported Right Wing Watch. “They’re both like horrible foot-long tapeworms, man, I’m telling you,” Jones said. “Tapeworms that we vomited out and crapped out and they’re just trying to force-feed themselves back into our lives. They’re like gonorrhea or syphilis, I mean they are just — they’re like HIV, they’re like cancer. They are just — I mean, you have to understand, folks, they literally want to destroy you. God, they’re evil. Do you realize how evil these people are?” He promised the friends-turned-critics of President Donald Trump would be “removed” once Jones and his followers triumphed over their enemies, and then launched into a frenzied spasm of unholy gibberish. “They’re like from upside-down world, folks,” Jones said, making a reference to the Netflix series “Stranger Things.” “You have to understand. They’ve broken into this dimension. They want to destroy us.”


Image copyright 2017 Getty Images. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Columbia University Law School professor and confidant of former FBI Director James Comey refuted a charge by President Donald Trump and his advocates in the media Monday: that Comey shared classified information with journalists. Daniel Richman, with whom Comey shared at least one memo -- the contents of which Richman shared with New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt -- said President Trump was simply wrong. "No memo was given to me that was marked 'classified,'" Daniel Richman told CNN. "No memo was passed on to the Times." Richman did share the contents of one memo, he said, but "the substance of the memo passed on to the Times was not marked classified and to my knowledge remains unclassified." During Senate testimony in June, in which he said he gave memos to someone he described as a Columbia University professor, Comey said he specifically wrote the memos to avoid including classified information. "My thinking was, if I write it in such a way that I don't include anything that would trigger a classification, that'll make it easier for us to discuss, within the FBI and the government, and to -- to hold on to it in a way that makes it accessible to us," Comey told senators. On Sunday, writing in The Hill, John Solomon reported that, "More than half of the memos former FBI Director James Comey wrote as personal recollections of his conversations with President Trump about the Russia investigation have been determined to contain classified information, according to interviews with officials familiar with the documents." CNN has not independently verified The Hill's report. The Hill's reporting raised "the possibility," Solomon reported, that "Comey broke his own agency's rules and ignored the same security protocol" that Comey criticized Hillary Clinton for disregarding. Solomon did not report that the possible breaking of FBI rules was determined to have happened, nor did he report that this would be a violation of the law. Yet that is how President Trump depicted it in a tweet Monday morning: "James Comey leaked CLASSIFIED INFORMATION to the media. That is so illegal!" One of the issues at play may have to do with whether any contents of the Comey memos have since been upgraded to classified, although that has not been definitively reported by CNN. The-CNN-Wire ™ & © 2017 Cable News Network, Inc., a Time Warner Company. All rights reserved.


With most rational individuals condemning Kathy Griffin’s reprehensible photoshoot, some dark souls are coming out of the woodworks and showing their true colors. Most of the country condemned Kathy Griffin’s now-infamous photo shoot holding a fake severed head of President Trump. The shocking photo shoot prompted a nationwide outrage and sparked debate over whether or not Griffin should be investigated as a threat to national security. As the Trump family reacted to the photo, it was reported that President Trump’s youngest child—11-year-old Barron—had seen the photo while watching the news and became understandably upset. The one thing these so-called artists fail to take into account is the impact their message will have on family members of their targets. It’s incredibly hard to believe that creating images of this violent nature wouldn’t provoke thought into how they will affect families or even the audience. Not only was Griffin’s photo shoot and full admission of wrongdoing completely unacceptable by anyone’s standards, it was disrespectful to victims of terrorism and their families. Radical Islamic terrorists are notorious for beheading innocent people—including Americans—for propaganda videos. By far, the most disgusting social media post came from some guy who apparently won big on Jeopardy over ten years ago. Ken Jennings took to Twitter and decided to campaign for Dirtbag of the Year. “Barron Trump saw a very long necktie on a heap of expired deli meat in a dumpster. He thought it was his dad and his little heart is breaking,” the game show winner from 2004 posted on his Twitter account. He even defended Griffin’s actions, citing—you guessed it—another game show from the ‘90s where he said Griffin was known for holding up severed heads. Barron Trump saw a very long necktie on a heap of expired deli meat in a dumpster. He thought it was his dad & his little heart is breaking — Ken Jennings (@KenJennings) May 31, 2017 This kind of reaction is absolutely reprehensible, especially under the circumstances. CNN has since announced that Kathy Griffin has been fired from her job as a New Year’s Eve announcer for the network alongside Anderson Cooper, who also expressed outrage over the violent photo. With serious reactions to the photo taking place in the United States, opportunists usually crawl out of the woodwork to make a sad attempt at humor. This was a huge fail. Attacking a child who was understandably disturbed by the gruesome image of his father’s mock beheading is a new low in our society. Adding to this creep’s sentiment, Rosie O’Donnell weighed in via her Twitter account, dismissing Barron Trump’s reaction by asking, “Do you think he saw anything about these 2 heroic men who died defending young girls? Hatred promoted by his father?”This was in reference to the two men who were killed in Oregon defending a Muslim girl from an attack. Regarding which, by the way, President Trump released a statement condemning the act as hatred that has no place in the United States. It seems like reactions to disturbing incidents like the Kathy Griffin photo expose the true nature of individuals and separate those with compassion for humans—regardless of political belief—from truly heinous people.


Despite the fact that the Las Vegas shooter would have passed any an all background checks, some on the left still think background checks will somehow solve all of our ills in this country. They’re absolutely convinced that universal background checks will miraculously keep guns out of the hands of not just criminals, but also the man who may someday open fire on an unsuspecting crowd enjoying some music. However, what they think will happen and what actually occurs tends to be rather dissimilar. But such expanded background checks wouldn’t have stopped any of these attacks. Since 20, all of our mass shooters obtained their weapons without using private transfers. Attacks such as the San Bernardino massacre in California and the Umpqua Community College shooting in Oregon occurred in states that already have universal background checks. Indeed, mass public shootings have recently occurred in France, Belgium, Norway, Germany and other European countries where these background checks also exist. This hole in their argument is so glaring that even some of the media have noticed it. Last year, ABC News’s Jon Karl asked Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), “Why are we focusing on things that have nothing to do with the massacres that we are responding to?” Murphy responded, “We can’t get into the trap in which we are forced to defend our proposals simply because it didn’t stop the last tragedy.” But obviously Karl’s question wasn’t just limited to the most recent attack. Research looking at U.S. data has consistently found no evidence that any type of background checks reduce rates of violent crime. Michael Bloomberg’s groups are the source of contrary claims, but they fail to analyze the national data in an academic manner. They compare states with background checks next to those without them. They do not compare states before and after background checks are imposed. The fact is that criminals have a pipeline for inexpensive black market guns that require no background checks either, as was illustrated by CBS in their report on Chicago gun crime. They’re not looking for private sellers who want the best dollar they can get from a prospective buyer. They want a gun, they want it cheap, and they want it now. Let’s also face the fact that criminals are, by definition, lawbreakers. They’re not concerned with whatever laws you pass because they’re already breaking so many, they figure, “What’s one more?” Despite claims by the leftists on social media, no one supports another massacre. No one at all. However, it doesn’t make any sense to make proposals that do nothing except inconvenience and burden law-abiding gun buyers who want to follow the law. While I may disagree with Sen. Feinstein’s bump-fire stock ban proposal, at least that makes some sense in light of what we know from Las Vegas. Universal background checks? Nope. No sense at all. Of course, why should anyone be surprised? These are the same people who still think banning guns will somehow ban violence in general while doing nothing about the underlying causes. Right now, things are no different except they’re also trying to ban things that have no bearing on what happened, just because they figure the public will back it at the moment. And I’ve had people wonder why I call these people ghouls.


State Police say an investigation has revealed the information in the viral video not to be accurate. (Photo from ) ( ) -- The Michigan State Police out of Detroit took to Twitter reporting the claims of a viral video about human trafficking in a Metro Detroit suburb are not accurate. "It was investigated by law enforcement and not a case of human trafficking. He was right about being vigilant but that’s about it," said the State Police on Twitter. This is the Facebook post where Nick Ahmad claims human trafficking almost happened to his wife and others. The video has been viewed over 650,0 times and shared close to 30,0 times. After an investigation the Michigan State Police took to twitter saying the viral Facebook video is not accurate.


After constant attacks from the political and media elites, Steve Bannon has some of the thickest skin in America. Washed up rapper Eminem ripped Bannon during his now infamous BET Hip Hop Awards freestyle. When asked what he thought of the diss, the Breitbart boss offered a classic response. Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon does not “give a shit” about Eminem’s freestyle roast in which he name-checks Bannon in his attempted takedown of President Donald Trump. “On the record: Honey badger don’t give a shit,” Bannon reportedly told Joshua Green, the Bloomberg reporter and author of the best-selling Devil’s Bargain book, on Wednesday evening. At the BET Hip Hop Awards on Tuesday, Eminem appeared in a video in which he attacked Trump and referenced Bannon. As TGP previously reported, Eminen went on a four minute freestyle rap against President Donald Trump. This was very poor poetry. Hip Hop is really hurting these days. Complete with references to Steve Bannon and the K. Of course, there is no truth to anything Eminem was rapping about. But what the hell. Meanwhile inner cities across the US continue to suffer and wither away with their drugs, gangs and Democrat politicians. (Warning on Language) Eminem obviously wants to be invited back next year. What a disgrace. Sponsored Sponsored


Donald Trump rose to power by telling disaffected white people that the past represents the right and natural order. Joe The rise of President-elect Donald J. Trump is a triumph for white supremacy and misogyny that too many of us believed was impossible in the United States in 2016. Trump’s promise to “Make America Great Again” is a call to return us to a past in which white men of all classes could expect the government to protect their economic and social dominance relative to racial minorities and women. It’s a harkening back to the “greatness” of a time when programs like the New Deal and the G.I. Bill created a path to a middle-class life through government benefits that were systematically denied to black people. When you didn’t have to let black people live in your white apartment buildings. When it was difficult or dangerous for a person of color to participate in the political process by voting. When only white men were judges. When black men accused of sexual assault were presumed guilty and faced execution, but powerful white men were free to treat women’s bodies as their property without facing legal consequences or even outrage. When men were men, and women knew their value depended on their attractiveness and subservience to those men. When a high school diploma entitled a white man to a good job without competition from people of color, women or robots. Trump rose to power by telling disaffected white people that the past represents the right and natural order, and he can bring it back. He made no secret of who he would take our country back from: minorities, women, immigrants, Muslims, Jews. And despite his open disdain for the rule of law, he often justified his mission by invoking the language the reactionary right has long used to describe their quest to turn back time: “restoring the Constitution.” It is imperative that we stop letting the right own the Constitution. Given that we’re about to have a president with dictatorial aspirations, and both houses of Congress controlled by the Republican Party from which he sprang, the public needs more than ever to understand and demand our constitutional protections. We must be a meaningful check on how much damage these people can do. But for that to happen, liberals are going to have to stop letting the right’s claims to constitutional authority for their preferred social order go unanswered. Too often, liberals and progressives treat the Constitution as an obsolete document written by white men who enslaved black people and treated women as property that has little relevance to our modern battles. In doing so, we’ve ceded the ground to white men longing for the good ol’ days. Michael Cohen, Lanny Davis and the Russian Mafia Yes, the Constitution was written by white guys who got a lot very wrong, and it would indeed be a bankrupt document if it were frozen in time. But while the Founders lacked the empathy or courage to recognize that “We the People” includes people of all colors, religions and genders, they enshrined revolutionary principles of what liberty entails and left room for us to interpret and amend the document to be more in keeping with those principles. Liberals must articulate a vision of the Constitution, because what Americans understand the Constitution to say acts as a constraint on what politicians and courts can do. Historically, we’ve made major strides by getting our fellow citizens to accept evolved interpretations of the Constitution’s text – for example, by arguing that segregation violates the right to equal protection of the law, and that forcing a person to carry a pregnancy to term against her will violates her 14th Amendment right to liberty. The shocking election of Donald Trump tells us we haven’t made nearly as much progress as we thought toward convincing our fellow citizens that all people are created equal and protected by the Constitution. It’s a moment to remember that in the not-so-distant past a suffragette demanding the full rights of citizenship could be imprisoned and force-fed, and even more recently black people doing the same were beaten and lynched. In hindsight, it was somewhat naive to think the country had changed so much and so quickly that it would resoundingly reject Trump’s misogyny, racism and xenophobia. Right now, in the days and weeks and months after Trump’s upset victory, we must articulate a vision of the Constitution to combat the idea that our changed country is a deviation from it. It is deeply unsettling to a large segment of Americans that they can suffer in economic malaise while a black man occupies the highest office, as the country becomes less white and Christian, and as women assume new roles. We need to be clear that there is no going back to when things were “great” just for white men – the changes we’ve seen are the inevitable result of moving closer to the equality the Constitution requires. We’re here, we’re queer, we’re female, we’re black, we’re brown, we’re Jewish and we’re Muslim. As dire as things feel today, Trump, his supporters and the Republicans who bred them will eventually have to get used to it. We must explain to change-resistant white people that an altered country is the inevitable result of adhering to the founding document they claim to revere. But the more concrete and immediate reason we have to start talking about the Constitution is that many of the things Trump wants to do are not only terrible policy, but flagrantly unconstitutional. We just elected a man who has proposed torturing people, making religious discrimination official policy, banning abortion and “loosening up” the First Amendment, along with a Congress full of Republicans who have proven incapable of standing up to him. We cannot let shock and fear and defeatism paralyze us. When Trump proposes something that is off-the-table constitutionally, We the People must tell him early and often and loudly that we’re not going to take it. Donald Trump becomes president-elect of the United States. Watch here.