Internet censorship is hurting conservative websites like DC Clothesline. If you enjoy our articles please consider making a small donation today. Thank YOU! ******************************************************************************** While North Korea dominated much of the news of late and the recent events in Charlottesville, VA have been the talk of the internet over the last couple of days, the recent revelation of the “Memo that rocked Washington,” which exposes the deep state subversion against President Trump and explaining the tactics being utilized, is being spun as “crazy” with the writer of the memo being labeled a “nutcase” by the MSM, who has converged on a narrative in a weak attempt at damage control. The memo is embedded in full below, so readers can read the seven-page memorandum produced in May by the former director of strategic planning at the National Security Council, Rich Higgins. Before we detail some of the highlights from the memo, then offer the document in full, lets take a look at Higgins credentials, the man that the media is doing their best to discredit with labels like nutcase (MediaIte) with outlets like Washington Post calling the memo itself “crazy.” Not only was Higgins the the former director of strategic planning for the NSC, before being fired by Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster for writing the memorandum, but perhaps more impressive, the Army veteran was also a former Pentagon official who specialized in irregular warfare. Department of Defense defines Irregular Warfare in a 100 page document from 2007, in the following manner: Irregular warfare (IW) is defined as a violent struggle among state and nonstate actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant populations. IW favors indirect and asymmetric approaches, though it may employ the full range of military and other capabilities, in order to erode an adversary’s power, influence, and will. It is inherently a protracted struggle that will test the resolve of our Nation and our strategic partners. Our adversaries will pursue IW strategies, employing a hybrid of irregular, disruptive, traditional, and catastrophiccapabilities to undermine and erode the influence and will of the United States and our strategic partners. Meeting these challenges and combating this approach will require the concerted efforts of all available instruments of US national power. Influencing foreign governments and populations is a complex and inherently political activity. This Joint Operating Concept (JOC) describes the military role in protracted IW campaigns; however, these campaigns will fail if waged by military means alone. The nature of IW requires the US Government (USG) to achieve the level of unified action necessary to integrate all available instruments of national power to address irregular threats. The USG will have to develop “Whole of Government” approaches to waging IW at the political, strategic, operational, and tactical levels. Other government agencies must build their capacity to operate in unstable or hostile environments. Revolutionary Hearing Aid Is Now Giving Free Fit & Feel Samples Irregular warfare is about people, not platforms. IW depends not just on our military prowess, but also our understanding of such social dynamics as tribal politics, social networks, religious influences, and cultural mores. People, not platforms and advanced technology, will be the key to IW success. The joint force will need patient, persistent, and culturally savvy people to build the local relationships and partnerships essential to executing IW. So a man that specialized in irregular warfare tactics for the Pentagon, writes a seven-page memo which details a plot to overthrow the President of the United States, by globalist members of the deep state, with the intentional help of propaganda being fed to the media in order to influence the public, using tactics he was responsible for observing while at the Pentagon in order to save American militarylives, and the media starts screaming “nutcase,” and “crazy,” and “conspiracy theory!” Something doesn’t smell right here. MEMO THAT ROCKED THE NSC & SENT THE MSM INTO DAMAGE CONTROL MODE The memo is titled “POTUS & Political Warfare,” and starts off detail some background on the “information campaigns designed to first undermine, then delegitimize and ultimately remove the President,” calling it “political warfare at an unprecedented level that is openly engaged in the direct targeting of a seated president through manipulation of the news cycle.” While naming the actors, such as the media, Democrats, establishment Republicans, and explaining what each gains in their political warfare campaign against the president, it is on Page 5 of the document embedded below, where Higgins detailed the “Adversary Campaign Plan,” in the following manner: Adversary Campaign Plan. Political Warfare has been described as “propaganda in battledress.” The effort directed at President Trump is executed along one overt, as well as two covert, lines of effort: • The overt line of effort is PUBLICITY. Publicity is the straightforward projection of a case that builds a picture in the audience’s mind designed to garner support. It is facts without context and information the adversary wants the audience to possess that creates an impression and sets conditions. It seeks to establish good will and receptiveness to additional inputs. • There are two covert lines of effort: PROPOGANDA and . o Propaganda is the deliberate direction, even manipulation, of information to secure a definite outcome. It is an attempt to direct the thinking of the recipient, without his conscious collaboration, into predetermined channels that are established in the Publicity line of effort. It is the unwitting conditioning of the recipient by devious methods with an ulterior motive that seeks to move them incrementally over time into greater belief and acceptance of message transmitted in the Publicity line of effort. o Infiltration and subversion operate internal to the targeted organization in order to inform, target, coordinate, and amplifythe effects of the publicity and propaganda. Both operate to gather intelligence, obstruct legitimate courses of action, provide inside information, and leak sensitive information that undermines the leadership and suppresses the morale of friendly elements. o Infiltration of political and social groups within a target state is done for the purpose of extending counter-state influence and control. The endgame is concealed and may involve illicit activities. o Subversion undermines or detaches the loyalties of significant political and social groups within the target state and transfers political ideological loyalties to the counter-state. As thcounter-state forms, a counter-elite of influential individual and key leaders within the target state will later facilitate the legitimacy and permanency of the new regime. On page #6 we see “Political Warfare Executive – The Meaning, Techniques and Methods of Political Warfare,” which accurately captures what we at ANP have been documenting and reporting on for years, including how the media is being used to deliberately push “pseudo-realities,” in a campaign to “delegitimize President Trump,” with preferred narratives including the “Russia hacked the election”, “Obstruction of Justice”, “Hiding Collusion”, and “Putin Puppet.” As is explained, each of these “pseudo-realities,” is geared toward a specific propaganda point, the first an attempt to push the “illegitimate” narrative, the second to push the “corrupt” narrative,” the third to push the “dishonest” narrative and the last to push the idea of “treason.” Supporting Narratives. Meta-narratives are supported by an ongoing series of supporting-narratives that can be swapped out as circumstances warrant. It is important to recognize that these stories do not have to be true, valid or accurate to serve their purpose. Over time, deserved or not, the cumulative effect of these supporting narratives will result in a Trump fatigue. From a political warfare perspective, President Trump’s inability to meet this challenge will cast him as a weak failed leader. The entire memo is embedded below, read it and decide for yourself. Below the memo we analyze why a man that specialized in irregular warfare for the Pentagon, was fired by McMasters for detailing what many in the Independent Media have been documenting since Trump won the election. WHY WAS HIGGINS FIRED? We have largely refrained from weighing in on H.R. McMasters, despite the fact that his stances on Iran, Islamic Terrorism, the Paris Accord, were more in line with Obama policy than President Trump’s policy, where in each case McMasters lost his argument and the President aligned himself with the promises made, keeping them rather than allowing McMasters to influence his decisions, but according to recent reports, the second McMasters saw this internal memo, he “detonated,” and then proceeded to fire the man that wrote it. The memo was written in May, but after McMaster discovered it, Higgins was called into the White House counsel’s office on July 18 and questioned about it. On July 21, he was fired by McMaster’s deputy, but not explicitly given a reason why. As to McMasters stances on a variety of issues that do not align with the president’s base, that can be chalked up to “politics” as Trump the businessman was well known for hiring people with opposing views as to look at all angles before making his decisions, it was not surprising in the least that he brought McMasters on. The firing of the director of strategic planning for the NSC on the other hand, for utilizing his experience in known irregular warfare methods for and tactics for the Pentagon, to warn of a campaign against a sitting president by multiple factions, including globalists, deep state members within the intelligence community, and the media, forces us to ask the question of whether McMasters is part of the “political warfare” campaign against President Trump? That is a question President Trump should be asking. BOTTOM LINE The fact that the media was called out directly in the memo, highlighting the part they play in pushing “pseudo-realities,” in order to generate a narrative to influence the general public, explains clearly why they are in all-out damage control mode trying to discredit the writer of the NSC memo that rocked Washington, because he just publicly exposed them all. The fact that the media, Trump haters, neverTrumpers, establishment Republicans, and Democrats are all supporting McMasters, also begs the question: Is he one of the enemy within? The fact that he fired a man trying to protect the president from other enemies within, might be the answer to that question. A couple other articles detailing other Trump loyalists fired by McMasters and the campaign to #FireMcMasters, discussed below: Help Keep Independent Media Alive, Become A Patron for All News PipeLine at SHTFplan.com


Examples of freedom in a Sentence Or Bugs would do the impossible by jumping out of the frame and landing on the drawing board of the cartoonist who was at work creating him. This freedom to transcend the laws of basic physics, to hop around in time and space, and to skip from one dimension to another has long been a crucial aspect of imaginative poetry. —Billy Collins, Wall Street Journal, 28-29 June 2008 I can see that my choices were never truly mine alone—and that that is how it should be, that to assert otherwise is to chase after a sorry sort of freedom. —Barack Obama, Dreams from My Father, (1995) 2004 It's the beginning of summer. … For many adults who are really closet kids, this means that their blood hums with a hint of freedom … —Anna Quindlen, Newsweek, 18 June 2001 He thinks children these days have too much freedom. She has the freedom to do as she likes. a political prisoner struggling to win his freedom Recent Examples of freedom from the Web These example sentences are selected automatically from various online news sources to reflect current usage of the word 'freedom.' Views expressed in the examples do not represent the opinion of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback.


Martin Truex Jr. stands during the national anthem before opening race of the NASCAR Cup Series. More than 100 NFL players took a knee during "The Star Spangled Banner" on Sunday in response to President Trump's fiery comments slamming players who kneeled during the National Anthem. But during Sunday's NASCAR Cup Series opener in Loudon, New Hampshire, seemingly all drivers, crew and team members stood with their hands on their hearts before the race after multiple team owners threatened to fire drivers who refused to do so. AP has further details: Several team owners and executives had said they wouldn’t want anyone in their organizations to protest.Richard Childress, who was Dale Earnhardt’s longtime team owner, said of protesting, “It’ll get you a ride on a Greyhound bus.” Childress says he told his team that “anybody that works for me should respect the country we live in." "So many people gave their lives for it. This is America.” Dale Earnhardt Jr.—who's set to retire with a staggering 26 wins at the end of this season—disagreed with his late father's former colleague. The racing legend came out in support of Americans' "granted rights" to conduct "peaceful protests" and quoted President Kennedy in a tweet. Seven-time NASCAR champion and team owner Richard Petty took the strongest stance on the issue. The 72-year-old Hall of Fame driver said that anybody who takes a knee should be thrown "out of the country. Period" Richard Petty’s sentiments took it a step further, saying: “Anybody that don’t stand up for the anthem oughta be out of the country. Period.""What got ’em where they’re at? The United States.”When asked if a protester at Richard Petty Motorsports would be fired, he said, “You’re right.” NASCAR'S organization-wide refusal to protest garnered praise from President Trump, who tweeted that he was "proud" of supporters and fans who "won't put up with disrespecting" the flag. As the final game of NFL Week 3 commences Monday night, many are wondering if the Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones—who contributed $1 million to Trump's inauguration fund—will protest alongside his players before taking on the Arizona Cardinals in Phoenix. What do you think?


Let America be America again. Let it be the dream it used to be. Let it be the pioneer on the plain Seeking a home where he himself is free. (America never was America to me.) Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed-- Let it be that great strong land of love Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme That any man be crushed by one above. (It never was America to me.) O, let my land be a land where Liberty Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath, But opportunity is real, and life is free, Equality is in the air we breathe. (There's never been equality for me, Nor freedom in this "homeland of the free.") Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark? And who are you that draws your veil across the stars? I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart, I am the Negro bearing slavery's scars. I am the red man driven from the land, I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek-- And finding only the same old stupid plan Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak. I am the young man, full of strength and hope, Tangled in that ancient endless chain Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land! Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need! Of work the men! Of take the pay! Of owning everything for one's own greed! I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil. I am the worker sold to the machine. I am the Negro, servant to you all. I am the people, humble, hungry, mean-- Hungry yet today despite the dream. Beaten yet today--O, Pioneers! I am the man who never got ahead, The poorest worker bartered through the years. Yet I'm the one who dreamt our basic dream In the Old World while still a serf of kings, Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true, That even yet its mighty daring sings In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned That's made America the land it has become. O, I'm the man who sailed those early seas In search of what I meant to be my home-- For I'm the one who left dark Ireland's shore, And Poland's plain, and England's grassy lea, And torn from Black Africa's strand I came To build a "homeland of the free." The free? Who said the free? Not me? Surely not me? The millions on relief today? The millions shot down when we strike? The millions who have nothing for our pay? For all the dreams we've dreamed And all the songs we've sung And all the hopes we've held And all the flags we've hung, The millions who have nothing for our pay-- Except the dream that's almost dead today. O, let America be America again-- The land that never has been yet-- And yet must be--the land where every man is free. The land that's mine--the poor man's, Indian's, Negro's, ME-- Who made America, Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain, Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain, Must bring back our mighty dream again. Sure, call me any ugly name you choose-- The steel of freedom does not stain. From those who live like leeches on the people's lives, We must take back our land again, America! O, yes, I say it plain, America never was America to me, And yet I swear this oath-- America will be! Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death, The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies, We, the people, must redeem The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers. The mountains and the endless plain-- All, all the stretch of these great green states-- And make America again!


Jimmy Kimmel addressed crestfallen Clinton supporters on Wednesday night in the hopes of helping them cope with Trump’s election victory. “A lot of voters woke up this morning happy that Donald Trump had won the election, but the other half of them, especially here in California, were very upset,” Kimmel noted. “People were shocked, despondent, some were even crying.” As a result, the late-night host decided to walk his viewers through the five stages of grief. The first stage in the process is denial, which Kimmel summarized as “no, the host of Celebrity Apprentice can’t possibly be our president, CNN must have the math wrong.” After that comes the anger stage: “Who do I blame for this?” Kimmel wondered. “Bernie? The FBI? Gary Johnson? Jill Stein?” “How is it possible that half the country is too busy to even vote?” he continued. “They all managed to play Pokémon Go.” After getting that out of his system, Kimmel moved on to the third stage: bargaining. “Maybe this needed to happen to wake up everyone up,” he reasoned. “Maybe this is a good thing. Maybe he’ll only build the wall waist high, to keep short people out.” This rationalization period was quickly followed by depression, “where you get a spoon and you just eat peanut butter out of the jar.” Finally, many jars of peanut butter later, Kimmel suggested that tearful voters will eventually reach acceptance – possibly with the aid of some narcotics. “No matter how you feel about it, Donald Trump is the president of the United States of America,” Kimmel said. “So thank god we legalized marijuana yesterday.” California passed Proposition 64, a law legalizing recreational marijuana. Watch here.


Brits travelling to America could be subject to Muslim Labour MP Tulip Siddiq has called on Trump to clarify whether to not Brits travelling to the US will be subject to ideological tests in order to gain entry. Back in August, Trump spoke about introducing “extreme vetting”, which would involve would-be immigrants being questioned on subjects such as their religious freedom, gender equality and gay rights. But his campaign team were not clear on whether this process would apply to the millions of tourists who visit the country each year. Trump did state that if he was elected, those excluded from visiting the country would include people who didn’t believe in the U.S Constitution, support bigotry and hatred, believe Shariah law is more important than US law, or would not “flourish in the country”. Trump spoke about bringing in the vetting process back in August Tulip, the Labour MP for Hampstead and Kilburn, told the Telegraph: “With the stark reality of the American election now beginning to settle in, Mr Trump needs to clarify immediately whether or not British tourists will have to take these so-called ‘ideological tests’ before being able to continue on their holidays in the US. “Millions of British Muslims will feel feel despair at the possibility of being singled out for this sort of prejudiced scapegoating, which will only encourage division and hatred in society.” Jack Dromey, a shadow Labour business minister, added: “Is Donald Trump really saying that a proud British Muslim mum and dad travelling to America to their daughter’s wedding will have to undergo extreme vetting first? “He needs to clarify whether or not he will treat a million Muslims in Britain as second class citizens, potentially a risk to American security? Tue, October 18, 2016 The smartest travel hacks that everyone should know. The best hacks for smart travellers Muslim Labour MP Tulip Saddiq is now calling on Trump to clarify whether the screenings will happen “It is foolish and irresponsible behaviour which can only feed fundamentalism.” Those planning to travel to the US soon may find immigration changes will have passengers speeding through customs. Anyone who has travelled to the US will know the queues in the airport for their passports to be inspected are long. It is the last thing people want to be doing after a long-haul flight and a dose of jet lag. If it does come into force, immigrants would have to believe in US law, not Shariah law But now, travellers will find this process has just got a lot faster. The Department of Homeland Security has announced plans to expands pre-clearance programme. The pre-clearance programme will see passengers going through the immigration and customs inspection before they board the flight to the US. This in turn will mean that once they arrive, they can move swiftly on to collect their baggage.


Ever since Kimmel became a DNC talking head, he’s become America’s “moral conscience.” — But now the host isn’t so sure! He claims he isn’t — and therefore need not crack jokes about Harvey Weinstein. That’s rich! “First of all, the Harvey Weinstein thing, people like this false equivalence of that’s somehow equivalent to what happened in Las Vegas,” Kimmel added, arguing that the alleged assault of dozens of women does not deserve the same reaction as the killing of nearly 60 people. He said that Weinstein is “not a friend of mine,” adding, “I’m not in the movie business.” As a once and future Oscar host who is friends with many of the movie stars in Weinstein’s orbit, that claim is a hard one to buy. On GMA, Kimmel went on to accuse “gun nuts” of “trying take any comedy bit I did out of context and use it as some kind of proof” that he is not an ally for women, including some pretty gross moments from The Man Show. […]“They’re saying that I’m calling myself the moral conscience of America, which I most certainly never did and most certainly never would,” he declared. Kimmel doesn’t seem at all bothered that conservatives want nothing to do with him and his show now. Washington Examiner reports: Critics like conservative commentator Ben Shapiro have slammed Kimmel for parading as a “moral arbiter.” “I’m not. I mean, I agree with him. I’m nobody’s moral arbiter,” Kimmel told CBS. “You don’t have to watch the show. You don’t have to listen to what I say.” A defiant Kimmel added that he doesn’t say “I don’t mind” because he preferred “everyone with a television to watch the show.” “But if they’re so turned off by my opinion on healthcare and gun violence then, I don’t know, I probably wouldn’t want to have a conversation with them anyway,” he continued. “Not good riddance, but riddance.” The last place you want to be is on the receiving end of Ben Shapiro’s laser sharp tongue. The Daily Wire founder obliterated late night host Jimmy Kimmel’s “abhorrent,” and “nasty” gun control views. Almost two weeks after demolishing Jimmy Kimmel over his asinine health-care tirades, conservative star and podcast host Ben Shapiro obliterating the ABC late-night host on Tuesday for an “abhorrent, “gross,” and “nasty” gun control rant touting confiscation and mauling those against his views as monstrous. “Jimmy Kimmel should not cheered for what he did last night. Jimmy Kimmel should be asked to provide the evidence for his suppositions rather than the evidence for his emotions. Again, I believe he’s sincere. Sincerity does not make what you’re saying smart,” Shapiro argued at the end of his podcast, which featured over 20 minutes on Kimmel’s post-Las Vegas shooting rant. Shapiro noted at the onset that “Kimmel did something last night that I find truly abhorrent” which was discard any and all facts as part of his effort to “become the social justice king of late-night television” and “all-heart representation of all leftist causes.” Key highlights below: Shapiro on leftists dividing America: “Last night, he did a long shitck about gun control that was entirely based on emotion and it was really nasty. It was really nasty. I don’t think it was nasty because he doesn’t care. He cares. It’s really nasty because he’s suggesting that you and I don’t care. It doesn’t matter that you lost sleep last night and I lost sleep because of what happened. It doesn’t matter that we’re all heartbroken over what happened. We don’t agree with Jimmy Kimmel’s evidence-less suggestions about gun control. That means that we don’t care. We are bad people. You want to know why the country is not unified? It’s because of stuff like this. It’s not because we disagree on policy. We’ve been disagreeing about policy forever. It’s because there are certain people in the American public discourse who feel it necessary to impute bad motives to people who disagree and that’s what Kimmel’s doing here.” Shapiro on Kimmel’s take about AR-15s: “So, number one, the Founders would have wanted us to have AR-15s because the fact is, back in the day, all the weapons that people had were military grade weapons, right? A musket was a military-grade weapon. Now, AR-15s aren’t military grade…Civilian guns are very different from military-issued guns. For him to say the Second Amendment doesn’t cover things like AR-15s — a semi-automatic rifle, is akin to me saying the First Amendment doesn’t cover TV because the Founders hadn’t seen a TV, would never know what it’d look like, and don’t understand how it works. It’s a silly argument. As far as the idea that ARs aren’t used for home defense, again, asinine. I have a bunch of friends who use ARs for home defense.” Sponsored Sponsored


Pamela Engel Deputy Editor, Politics and Military & Defense Pamela Engel Pamela is the deputy editor overseeing the Politics and Military & Defense sections of Business Insider. She was previously the politics editor, and before that was a senior reporter covering domestic politics, foreign policy, and national security. Before BI, she worked for the Associated Press in Indianapolis. She has also written for The Columbus Dispatch, the Scripps Howard news wire, and the New York Observer. Sort: Newest Oldest Most Read The backstory behind the shocking Bill Cosby rape allegations Trump ousts Secretary of State Rex Tillerson Police are warning Austin, Texas, residents not to open unexpected packages amid spate of deadly bombings Trump polls audience at conservative conference on whether they'd have the 2nd Amendment or tax cuts People are wondering if there's a hidden meaning in the suit Melania Trump wore to the State of the Union The explosive new book on Trump's presidency is so popular that it's selling out online and bookstores have a waitlist to get it Trump wishes the media a happy Thanksgiving, tells them: 'You're fired' Trump congratulates troops on military progress and touts stock market performance: 'You're fighting for something real' 39 photos that show why everyone misses George W. Bush A Twitter employee on their last day of work took down Trump's account for 11 minutes ISIS and Al Qaeda have specifically called for the type of attack that just happened in New York City CIA chief says US won't release Osama bin Laden's porn stash What happened on 9/11, 16 years ago Here's what it was like to be trapped in a house for five days during Hurricane Harvey Trump called New Hampshire a 'drug-infested den' and claimed he won the state in call with Mexican president A study estimated that as few as 29 military service members would seek gender-transition care Trump goes on wild riff to Boy Scouts about a real estate developer and a party with 'the hottest people in New York' Trump kicks off healthcare speech by erroneously saying Obamacare has been in place for '17 years' 'Just look at his ratings!': Trump praises Spicer on his way out of the White House Kellyanne Conway just escalated the White House's campaign against Robert Mueller TRUMP: French president Macron 'loves holding my hand' The man who offered Donald Trump Jr. dirt on Clinton almost sent the information to Trump himself Pence distances himself from latest Russia bombshell, saying Trump Jr. meeting was 'before he joined the campaign' 'Morning Joe' hosts accuse Trump of blackmailing them with negative National Enquirer story Trump lobs attack at 'low I.Q.' Mika Brzezinski, says 'Morning Joe' host was 'bleeding badly from a face-lift' at Mar-a-Lago A legal expert explains how Trump could have landed himself in more trouble by admitting he misled Comey about the tapes State Department releases strongly worded statement on Russia: 'Let's remember that these sanctions didn't just come out of nowhere' Congress is increasingly becoming a counterweight to some of Trump's more controversial foreign policy instincts Trump calls Rep. Scalise 'a true friend and patriot' after congressional baseball shooting Trump on ISIS attack in Iran: 'States that sponsor terrorism risk falling victim to the evil they promote' Bill Cosby's sexual-assault trial starts today — here's the backstory of the allegations against him Bill O'Reilly says the 'hatred' former Fox News chief Roger Ailes experienced killed him Sean Spicer might not do daily press briefings anymore and could have his public role diminished 'People want it to be true': Inside the growing influence of a mysterious anti-Trump website Trump gets 2 ice cream scoops at White House dinners — everyone else gets 1 Trump makes first public comments on firing Comey: 'He wasn't doing a good job' 3 top GOP senators are questioning Trump's decision to fire Comey The deputy attorney general laid out why James Comey was fired Here’s the real reason why Clinton lost — it wasn’t just emails and Russia Here’s the biggest lesson Democrats need to learn from Clinton’s collapse if they want to win in 2020 Next


President Obama Male voters must break their sexist inclinations so the country can “get over the hump” and elect its first female president, President Obama said Tuesday. In a message directed “to the guys out there” at a campaign rally at Capital University in Columbus, Ohio, Obama said, “[T]here’s a reason why we haven’t had a woman president before…” “And we have to ask ourselves, as men — because I hope my daughters are going to be able to achieve anything they want to achieve — and I know that my wife is not just my equal but my superior,” he continued. “I want every man out there who’s voting to kind of look inside yourself and ask yourself, if you’re having problems with this stuff, how much of it is that we’re just not used to it. So that, like, when a guy is ambitious and out in the public arena and working hard, well, that’s okay; but when a woman suddenly does it, suddenly you’re all like, well, why is she doing that?” he added. Obama’s closing argument for his possible successor comes as GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump has a slight edge over Hillary Clinton in the Buckeye State. The RealClearPolitics average of Ohio pollsshows the mogul with a 2.5-percentage-point lead, with Trump getting 46.8 percent of the vote and Clinton 44.3 percent.


Body camera video released after verdict. (Screenshot) On Friday, a day after former Mesa, Arizona police officer Philip Brailsford was acquitted of second-degree murder charges, state officials released a graphic video of the shooting, showing the victim begging for his life. In the video, another officer, now-retired Sgt. Charles Langley, orders seemingly-terrified Daniel Shaver to cross his legs, crawl and keep his hands raised straight up in the air prior to the fatal shooting. The officers were responding to a call alleging a man was pointing a gun out of a window, The Washington Post reports: "After the officer involved was acquitted of second-degree murder charges, officials in Arizona released graphic video showing Daniel Shaver crawling on his hands and knees and begging for his life in the moments before he was shot and killed by police in January 2016." …. "The shooting, by Philip “Mitch” Brailsford, then an officer with the Mesa Police Department, occurred after officers responded to a call about a man allegedly pointing a rifle out of a fifth-floor window at a La Quinta Inn. Inside the room, Shaver, 26, had been doing rum shots with a woman he had met earlier that day and showing off a pellet gun he used in his job in pest control." Wrongful-death lawsuits against the city of Mesa have been filed by Shaver's family members. WARNING: Video contains graphic, disturbing content. test test Please support CNSNews today! (a 501c3 non-profit production of the Media Research Center) DONATE


Modal Trigger Tom Arnold Comedian Tom Arnold is claiming Hillary Clinton begged him to release footage of President Trump using racial slurs just days before the November election. The 57-year-old alleged last year he had video of Trump repeatedly saying “n—–” and “every bad thing ever, every offensive, racist thing ever,” but is now saying Clinton called him just two days before Americans went to the polls to plead for its release, the Telegraph reported. “I had all the outtakes from Trump saying the N-word on ‘The Apprentice,’” said Arnold, who was just voted off Australia’s “I’m A Celebrity … Get Me Out Of Here!” “[Clinton] called me two days before the election and said, ‘Please release that,'” Arnold claimed, alleging that the Democratic nominee said, “The weight of the free world is on your shoulders.” “I’d love to be a hero, but I can’t hurt these families,” he claimed to have responded. Arnold says he might still release the reel with “their permission,” thought it remains unclear if he was referring to the targets of Trump’s vitriol or “The Apprentice” producers. In an interview before going on the British sitcom, Arnold told a radio host he didn’t want to release the hate speech out of respect for those involved. “Well, now, these people — two editors and an associate producer — are scared to death. They’re scared of his people, they’re scared they’ll never work again,” he said on Dori Monson’s radio show. The American actor and comic, who starred alongside Arnold Schwarzenegger in the 1994 film classic “True Lies,” also said he didn’t think releasing the racist rant “would work.” “I don’t think people would care,” he said. Trump still managed to cinch the electoral vote despite national outrage surrounding the October release of the notorious “grab them by the p—-” video.


According to the latest damning snippet from Michael Wolff’s Fire and Fury, President Donald Trump tried to “rationalize” why people would join the K. From the New York Times review: There are lots of arresting details in the book. We learn that the administration holds special animus for what it calls “D.O.J. women,” or women who work in the Justice Department. Wolff writes that after the white supremacist mayhem in Charlottesville, Va., Trump privately rationalized “why someone would be a member of the K.K.K.” Many believe the anecdotes and quotes from Wolff’s book should be treated with a healthy dose of skepticism, but this one is not implausible. Trump went on the record in the wake of the Charlottesville white supremacy march that left Heather Heyer dead, saying he believed there were “ good people” on both sides of the protest, one side of which was rife with Neo-Nazis and white supremacists. Trump was widely criticized for the response, which many considered a tacit endorsement of white supremacy. During his presidential campaign, an old New York Times story was unearthed that reported Trump’s father, Fred, back in 1927, was arrested at a rally in 1927 where K members were present. It was never proven whether he was participating in the rally or a member of the group. David Covucci is the Layer 8 editor at the Daily Dot, covering the intersection of politics and the web. His work has appeared in Vice, the Huffington Post, Jezebel, Gothamist, and other publications. He is particularly interested in hearing any tips you have. Reach out at dcovucci@thedailydot.com.


INDIANAPOLIS (WTHR) - Former Colts head coach Tony Dungy announced on Twitter Thursday morning that he's donating money to help a city near Tampa Bay remove a Confederate statue. Dungy tweeted a picture of the front page of the Tampa Bay Times saying Hillsborough would need $140,0 in private funds in the next 30 days to move the statue. He said he and his wife "are in for $5K" and then challenged Tampa's sports teams to pitch in as well. Since Charlottesville, there has been a surge in efforts to move or outright destroy statues of Confederate war leaders from Gainesville, Florida to Baltimore, Maryland. There has also been a renewal of efforts to protect the monuments. President Donald Trump tweeted that it's "Sad to see the history and culture of our great country being ripped apart" with the removal of such statues around the country. Maine's Republican governor Paul LePage went so far as to say removing Confederate statues is "just like" removing a monument to victims of the 9/11 attacks.


Stinkin’ Dinkadoodles! Gupta Patel Slams New Bill Passed To Teach Your Kids Anal Sex In Public School And He’s Fired Up Like A Samosa Fresh Out The Pan! Want to advertise with Turtleboy? Email us at [email protected] for more information. Everyone knows and loves Gupta Patel – Turtleboy’s crazy Indian Tech Guy and proud convenience store proprietor. He’s never blogged for us before but something caught his eye in the news that sent him reeling. Let’s give him a warm welcome as he has a meltdown about the statehouse deciding to teach kids as young as 12 how to safely take it in the back door! Your uncle Gupta read this one news article last night and choke on his Vodka Slushee! Last Thursday, the Massachusetts Senate passed new sex education package by a 31-6 vote in favor. Look like the usual chutiyas in the statehouse been drinking the same strange flavor KoolAid again. Take a look at this nutty-ass booshit: From New Boston Post— As it did in 2015, the Massachusetts Senate passed a bill nearly entirely along party lines on Thursday dictating how school districts teach sex education; and just like two years ago, the biggest sticking point for the bill’s opponents was the lack of an opt-in stipulation for parents and guardians. Unlike in 2015, however, it is likely this version of the bill will reach the House floor for a vote, but it remains to be seen if lawmakers on the other side of the State House attach the failed parental opt-in amendment touted Thursday by House Minority Leader Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester). Following the 31-6 vote in favor that saw the only Democratic opposition come from state Senator Michael Rush of West Roxbury, Tarr praised the “robust and healthy debate” that transpired Thursday afternoon but expressed “hope that as it makes its way through the legislative process” that lawmakers outside the Senate will wind up adopting proposals like a parental consent stipulation. The bill’s lead sponsor, state Senator Sal DiDomenico (D-Everett) took issue with Tarr’s opt-in proposal. “This amendment would gut the bill,” DiDomenico claimed, noting that the legislation already features an opt-out amendment for both parents and school districts. “This amendment would effectively take all the work we put together and throw it out the window. “We do not have opt-in for science, math, English — we don’t have any opt-in initiative for any other subjects in our schools — this subject in particular could save lives.” Other Democrats who spoke out in opposition to Tarr’s amendment included state Senator John Keenan of Quincy, Worcester’s Harriet Chandler, and Boston’s Sonia Chang-Diaz. Keenan and Chang-Diaz added that a parental consent requirement would add an unnecessary level of bureaucracy, with Keenan claiming that it “would require school districts to chase down the parents of every single student” while Chang-Diaz noting that “many of my colleagues in the chamber in the minority are avid proponents of small streamlined government.” Chandler claimed that an opt-in provision would result in a “very limited number of people who would be taking advantage of it.” “The alternative of what we’re talking about is our children learning about these behaviors from what they hear on the school bus or read on the Internet,” she added. State Senator Vinny deMacedo (R-Plymouth), responding to Keenan’s point, used student field trips as an example of opt-in protocol. “I don’t think that’s an impossible hurdle to overcome,” he said. “The reality is that asking parents if they’re comfortable with this or not is not a stretch by any means.” Tarr appeared to take issue with the claim linking parental approval to an added layer of bureaucracy. “Well well well, it is interesting that some of these folks have stood at this microphone and suggested somehow that obtaining parental consent is so burdensome that we shouldn’t follow through with this,” Tarr quipped. “Suggesting that the role of a parent should be subordinate to the role of bureaucracy, now that’s a deeply concerning thought.” Tarr also challenged DiDomenico’s claim that an opt-in provision would “gut the bill.” “That somehow this bill is jeopardized by the fact that we might want to involve parents in the decision making — what does that suggest about the priorities of the bill?” Tarr questioned. “It suggests that somehow we ought to subordinate the role of the parent to the role of the state. “It’s also been suggested that we don’t have opt-in provisions for math, science, and other things, well that is true, but we also don’t have opt-out provisions for those things, because they don’t fit the same matter as the subject matter that we’re discussing here.” Conservative organizations, including the Massachusetts Family Institute, are vehemently opposed to the bill over the proposed curriculum’s subject matter, which suggests that instruction regarding sexual aspects such as anal intercourse is age-appropriate for children as young as 12.Some of the instructional material approved by state education officials was created by Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts. “If you have to have an affirmative act from a parent in order to go on a school trip, should you not have to have the affirmative act of a parent to be involved in education that involves morality, subjective judgment, and important health matters?” Tarr said. “I think the matter speaks for itself.” DiDomenico responded to Tarr’s argument by noting he is not looking to subvert the role of parents and countered that he “would put this in the same category as English, math, and science.” “In some respects I’d put it ahead of those subjects,” DiDomenico added. “There are life-ending, life-long consequences, and a critical mistake can change their lives forever.” State Senator Barbara L’Italien (D-Andover) also spoke, mentioning an incident in which her older sister became pregnant during high school. “Getting married at age 17 locked her into a life of virtual poverty,” L’Italien said. “I wish there had been accurate health information when she was a student back in the ’70s, I think her life might have changed dramatically. “There are times when government needs to be proactive, and protective, and this is one of those situations.” Sweet Baby Vishnu! The anal sex education is age appropriate for 12 year old? What fucking version of goddamn Kama Sutra they been reading? The Paul Georgio translation? This Hindu had the very very bad nightmares after reading this news! In my dream, my daughter, Gupta Jr, was back in the grade school. I was watching my favorite American movie “Mansion of Blood” and Mindy Robinson was just about to show all the peoples her hot hot Samosas when my daughter come running through the door, She say “Papa! Papa! I have the question about the sex!” And I say “Yes my little one, I have been preparing for this conversation long time. Ask your papa your questions”. She say “Papa, when will it stop hurting my ass so much?” Your old Uncle Gupta almost had the bad heart attacks! “As it did in 2015, the Massachusetts Senate passed a bill nearly entirely along party lines on Thursday dictating how school districts teach sex education; and just like two years ago, the biggest sticking point for the bill’s opponents was the lack of an opt-in stipulation for parents and guardians.” Really? Uncle Gupta think the biggest sticking point probably gonna be the anal sex. Seriously though. You can opt out of goddamn Pledge of Allegiance in school in Massachusetts without facing the punishments, but you can’t opt out of learning how to send your pork soldier to the battle in Brownsville? “The bill’s lead sponsor, state Senator Sal DiDomenico (D-Everett) took issue with Tarr’s opt-in proposal. “This amendment would gut the bill,” DiDomenico claimed, noting that the legislation already features an opt-out amendment for both parents and school districts. “This amendment would effectively take all the work we put together and throw it out the window. “We do not have opt-in for science, math, English — we don’t have any opt-in initiative for any other subjects in our schools — this subject in particular could save lives.” Ganesha, please take me now, These chutiyas gonna drive this humble Hindu to carnivorism. “Johnny, study the maths and the science good so you can be great physicist someday!” “Susie! finish your English homeworks so you can be excellent writer someday.” Mary! Make sure you don’t miss any of the Massachusetts mandated sex education class so you can be great wide receiver some day!” In the name of heavenly teacher Guru Deva please reincarnate these people as pimples on Kim Kardashian’s face at bukake session after Black Lives Matter rally. State Senator Barbara L’Italien (D-Andover) also spoke, mentioning an incident in which her older sister became pregnant during high school. “Getting married at age 17 locked her into a life of virtual poverty,” L’Italien said. “I wish there had been accurate health information when she was a student back in the ’70s, I think her life might have changed dramatically. Ms. Barbarabhen! Did you really just say “Damn, my sister’s life would be so much better now if only she had taken the rusty trombone in her swamp starfish that one time instead of in her hoo-ha.”? It Take one real classy lady to say she wishes her niece or nephew had taken a wrong turn down Willy Wonka’s garbage chute. Uncle Gupta don’t think it’s too strange that Barbara L’Italien advocating for taking it from the behind. Nobody gonna want to be looking at this in the face during the hot nookie-nookie session. Holy mother of Kali! Blowjob from this one probably count as anal anyways. No surprise here really . Both L’Italien and Chandler recently vote to give themselves fat pay hike, so they have lot of experience stuffing the pepperonis in the peoples hot pockets. This one Hindu here don’t know about you, but when I see Hariette Chandler’s face, the first thing that come to mind not going to be anal sex: Sweet baby Hannuman! Her ass probably look like dying Yoda’s forehead. Going to work up her Lincoln Log Factory probably sound like punching a fist into the open jar of Miracle Whip! (Miracle Whip! Two jars for five dollar at my Main South Happy Hindu Mart Convenience Store in Worcester. Next five minute only.) She so old her dunghole probably look like the hopper on a meat grinder after Porketta night. This one Sonia Chang-Diaz though? Would. This Hindu just saying. “There are times when government needs to be proactive, and protective, and this is one of those situations.” I agreeing that government should be protective and proactive. Maybe if they had voted to give the Police the Kevlar Vests instead of giving their fat samosa asses big raise it would have been good start. Educating the 12 years old child about anal sex? Not so much. You know what going to happen in the class full of 12 years old kids when teacher start talking about the anal and oral sex? Gonna be like comedy scene in bad Hindi movie. Maybe not during class, but afterwards they gonna make the fun. “Rectum? Damn near killed him!” joke gonna get old real quick in the cafeteria. State Legislators are calling this bill the “Healthy Youth Act”. That really nice way of putting it. As usual with these “Dheela Lund Ni Olaad” (That my Gujarati language for “Sons of the broken penis”), the devil is in the details…and Uncle Gupta all about the details! One of the textbooks approved in the bill is called “Get Real: Comprehensive Sex Education That Works,” put out by the Planned Parenthood. Book is only available in bundles of 50, and this thrifty Indian man not buying if he can’t find the coupon or get the good deal. I ferret couple passages out on the internets for you. You’re welcome. One lesson teaches the childrens that A dental dam is “placed over the vulva or anus during oral sex”. Then it goes on to say the people can also use the “Non-Microwaveable Saran Wrap”. Papa Gupta spend most of his daughter’s pre-teen years yelling at her to do the healthy things. “Don’t touch that! Do not step in the dog mess! Don’t put the statue of Baby Krishna in your mouth! Wash Your hands before eating! Use the Purell after shaking Senator McGovern’s hand!”. Now, she would have to go to school next day and learn how to toss the big salad? It’s ok though…. Happy Hindu Mart sell plenty of non-microwaveable Saran Wrap. This handsome Indian TurtleBoy don’t think Saran Wrap company be too happy knowing sex education class teaching the children to use their product to cover the chocolate cannoli. Another lesson talk about using the “ internal condom that is inserted into the anus.” They say it acts as a barrier but warns that “it may slip out of place during vaginal or anal intercourse and may be difficult to insert.” Wait…what you say? I had to call my cousin the Gastroenterologist about this one. Dr. Dharmendra Tubupyeresh. I say “Hey, Dharmendra, you ever hear of such thing?” He say to me “Gupta, you been lighting up the porn hub again? Yes there is such the thing.” He send me over this picture. “Insert two fingers inside the condom and gently push it into the anal cavity. The inner ring can be removed after inserted if desired.” Lovely. 12 year old gonna learn how to shove the ziplock bag up the friend’s wazoo before doing the zoom-zoom in the boom-boom. When Uncle Gupta first read this news, he knew something smell funny…and not just the anal sex! Then this bald prick rears his ugly head and everything make sense… Senator Jamie Eldridge. You might remember him from such blogs as these. This bhenchod one real professional turtle poking man! In my former country he would not have been problem because we would have already kill him already. Notice how he don’t tweet about the content of the bill…only that the Mass Senate GOP (all six of them) oppose it. Let me tell you something, Senator Jamie…nobody going to oppose young adults learning the safe ways to make the sweet nookie-nookie, but not letting parents opt them out? What kind of glass dinka-doodle you been smoking from? This Hindu gets it. Too many kids having the sex at young age… Definitely should be options available to teach healthy sexual practices to children, but if any citizen ever texted the contents of some of these lessons to a child, they would go to the prison. And we all know what happen in prison. Dunghole come out looking like Saarlac sand monster from the Return of the Jedi. Anyway, this Hindu try hard to reach these senators on Twitter but they not responding. Wonder why. Namaste TurtleBoy Nations! May the supple trunk of Ganesha goose your buttocks!


Save Photo by Franco Images On Thursday, President Trump signed an executive order that will begin to deplete the Affordable Care Act, and allow companies to offer cheaper healthcare plans with fewer benefits. Or, as he put it, he is “saving the American people from the nightmare of Obamacare.” Just a few hours later, the Trump administration announced it's ending federal subsidies for health insurance companies that help millions of low-income people pay deductibles and out-of-pocket costs. These subsidies were projected to cost about $9 billion this year, according to the New York Times, and nearly $100 billion in the coming decade. The new decision will go into effect immediately, the Health and Human Services Department announced on Thursday. According to the Times, without the subsidies, "insurance markets could quickly unravel." Insurers have already threatened to pull out of the insurance exchanges created under Obamacare if subsidies are cut off, because they said they will need much higher premiums. “The government cannot lawfully make the cost-sharing reduction payments,” the White House said in a statement. “Congress needs to repeal and replace the disastrous Obamacare law and provide real relief to the American people.” In a joint statement, Senate and House Minority Leaders Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi said Trump has “apparently decided to punish the American people for his inability to improve our health care system.” They consider Trump's decision "a spiteful act of vast, pointless sabotage leveled at working families and the middle class in every corner of America."


Flooded homes are shown near Lake Houston following Hurricane Harvey on Aug. 30 in Texas (Win Images). (GMG) - The question is going to be asked many times, by many people: Did global warming cause or have any impact on Hurricane Irma? What about Harvey? While there is tremendous agreement among scientists about the basic science of climate change, politics and social media have created an atmosphere where a lot of incorrect information is being bantered about. Here's the truth about the relationship between global warming and hurricanes Irma and Harvey. Scientists are uncertain about whether global warming will cause more hurricanes. In fact, some scientists say that a warmer planet will actually result in fewer hurricanes. However, that is not the entire story. A warming world means that ocean temperatures increase, too. And we all know that warm ocean water is the fuel that power hurricanes. So, even if the coming decades show a decrease in overall hurricanes, those hurricanes that do develop in otherwise favorable conditions will likely be stronger. The bottom line is that our future may be one of fewer but stronger hurricanes. Is that good or bad news? Fewer hurricanes mean a lower chance that one hits Florida. But a hurricane that does form and heads our way will likely be stronger, with a more severe storm surge and higher winds. Something else to consider is that, as the world warms, more ocean water evaporates into the atmosphere (which has been documented.it's happening). This water vapor is what hurricanes turn into rainfall. Our warmer world with higher atmospheric humidity means that tropical weather systems have more moisture to tap into, which means greater potential for increased rainfall. Statistics show that extreme precipitation events nationwide are increasing, and this also applies to tropical systems. What most people don't realize is that, as summer wanes and we transition into fall, hurricanes are the atmosphere's natural mechanism to return the summertime water vapor back into the ocean. So, hurricanes are necessary to balance the planet's water budget. The only problem is that people get in the way, and hurricanes of the future likely will have higher rainfall and increased potential for catastrophic flooding events -- also due to higher storm surges, resulting from higher sea levels from the warming climate. Now, let's apply all of this information to hurricanes Irma and Harvey: --------- Did global warming cause Irma or Harvey? No. Both hurricanes could have developed, regardless of the warming climate. Could global warming have affected Irma’s record strength, or Harvey's rapid intensification, just before landfall? Harvey strengthened rapidly from a Category 1 to a Category 4 storm in just over a day, undoubtedly due to very warm Gulf of Mexico waters it traveled over in otherwise favorable conditions. It was the first Category 4 storm to make landfall in Texas since Hurricane Carla in 1961. Irma became the strongest Atlantic basin hurricane when its winds increased to 185 mph, also due to very warm ocean temperatures and otherwise favorable conditions. There is no question that the warmer ocean temperatures we’re experiencing now have been impacted by the warming climate. So, global warming may have been part of the reason that Harvey rapidly intensified just before landfall, and Irma became a record-breaking hurricane. Did global warming cause the incredible rain amounts that Harvey produced? As we discussed above, increased atmospheric humidity due to global warming is making storms such as Harvey more predisposed to heavier rainfall. However, this is not the only reason Texas saw such extraordinary rain totals. Remember that most hurricanes (such as Irma) come and go: they make landfall and keep on moving. Hurricane Harvey became a tourist. It hung around for a while and meandered due to weak steering currents. While most people focus on wind, the true destructive power of that storm was water. Bands of torrential rain plagued southeast Texas for more than five straight days. Think about that for a moment: Hurricane and tropical storm-induced heavy rain bands, day after day. The bottom line is that, while global warming may have provided Harvey with extra water vapor to generate increased rainfall, the bigger reason for the catastrophic rain amounts was the storm's unusually slow movement. And by the way, there is no way to know, based upon our current knowledge, whether global warming had any impact on Harvey's slow movement. Hopefully, future research will answer that question. By Meteorologist Paul Gross Graham Media Group 2017


President Donald Trump took a new swipe at U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday, referring to him in a tweet as "beleaguered" and wondering why he isn't digging into Hillary Clinton's alleged contacts with Russia. ( P. Bernstein) President Trump took his criticism of Jeff Sessions to a. good grief, you're going to always have squabbles of course the president wasn't happy that Sessions recluse himself from the Russian investigation from the Russian investigation. it's one of those situations damned if you do and damned if you don't. User from CA 2017.7.25 You will not get another ine because the democrats will not put another attorney general through Get down to business now and let all this other junk go by the way side repeal obama care and put another health care in but if you guys do not get together and quit going against each other because you want more medical Vicky Walters 2017.7.25


Even Jerry Springer Thinks This Election Is Too Much © 2016 Bloomberg Finance LP A chat with the host of the trashiest talk show in television history about Trump, Hillary, and the State of the Union. You can see it, almost: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton sitting just a few steps from each other onstage, going at each other’s throats. “It’s just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country,” Clinton levels. Trump cuts in with a threat: “Because you’d be in jail.” The audience goes wild, collectively gasping, then cheering, either for their audacious, say-it-like-it-is savior, or because they’re just thrilled with the entertainment. Maybe a chair gets thrown. It’s not hard for Jerry Springer to picture some of the crazier moments from the 2016 presidential election on the set of his eponymous talk show. After all, the Jerry Springer Show traffics in drama and dysfunction, and that ugly scene—minus the chair throwing—played out live at the second presidential debate last week, one of the most brutal in recent history. “I've never had a guest on my show who I thought should be president,” says Springer, laughing. “Ever. Except the guy who married his horse.” Faced with the prospect of a Trump presidency, Springer, a former Democratic mayor of Cincinnati who once ran for governor of Ohio, has thrown his hat back in the political ring to make the case for Clinton. Last month, he tweeted his assessment of the options facing the American people: “Hillary Clinton belongs in the White House. Donald Trump belongs on my show.” We’ll let him explain. GQ: The second debate was one of the most savage—and personal—we’ve ever seen. How much did it remind you of your show? Jerry Springer: I mean, good God. Other than his money, how in the world is he different than people that are on my show? And that's not trying to be cute. That's the truth. I mean, I think about the issues of the people that come on our show, the language they use, the relationship dysfunctions. You know, other than your net worth, what is the difference, and why do people wind up calling people on my show trash? I've always said that wealthy people haven't cornered the market on propriety or morality or decency. We keep thinking, just because people are poor and maybe didn't go to college or something that all of the sudden they're trash, and then we see this running for president? The behavior's the same. After the first debate, you tweeted that Trump belongs on your show. In the style of segments like “My Girlfriend is a Man” and “I Married a Horse,” what would you call the episode starring him? [laughs] Great question. Oh gosh, I’ve gotta think…"I’ll Beat That Blank To The White House." A hallmark of your show is when people start throwing chairs at each other. Be honest: Do you ever feel like thwacking Trump with a folding chair? [laughs] Well, I’m nonviolent. I think he wouldn’t come on my show—nothing to do with chairs—he wouldn’t come on my show because he wouldn't want his hair pulled. You know, they're always pulling off the wig? That's why he wouldn't come on the show. There’s been speculation that Trump is planning a new media empire to capitalize on his momentum after the election. Are you worried he’s going to take your job? "I'm sorry. I've ruined the culture." TRENDING THIS VERY SECOND travel-and-eats Where to Eat and Drink in Houston, the New Capital of Southern Cool culture Serena Williams' Catsuit Is Banned from All Future French Opens news-and-politics No One Knows Why This QAnon Conspiracy Theorist Was in the Oval Office with Trump Well he’s far better on television than I am, so I'm not worried, because I'm 73 years old. [phone rings in the background] Some other person calling for money. [laughs] It's funny because, on a side note, and then I'll answer your question, once you're identified as being a Democrat and Hillary supporter, etc., then every Democrat running in the country starts calling you for money. WATCH Chris Hemsworth Goes Undercover on Twitter, YouTube, and Quora To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video WATCH Chris Hemsworth Goes Undercover on Twitter, YouTube, and Quora Share Tweet Email More. EMBED URL<script async src="//player-backend.cnevids. /video/5b7490bd8c1abc4fee00001d.js?iu=/3379/conde. "></script> VIDEO URL /chris-hemsworth-goes-undercover-on-twitter-youtube-and-quora Our bad! It looks like we're experiencing playback issues. This live video has ended. It will be available to watch shortly. See what else is new Loaded: 0%Progress: 0% MuteVolume 0% Back Caption Options Close Settings Language English Font Size Small Medium Large Position Auto Bottom Top Sample Caption Text0:0:0:00 The problem with him doing my show is you've got to be able to tell the difference between a host and the guests. So they would have to run a graphic, they would have to keep saying, "He's the host, he's the host, he's the host." But other than that, yeah, he's phenomenal on television. You’re an ardent Hillary Clinton supporter. Aside from “she’s not a demagogue,” what’s your case for her? Certainly in my lifetime, there’s never been a human being more prepared, and more knowledgeable and more balanced to be president of the United States who hasn't already been one. In other words, when you run for reelection for president, you already know all of the world issues. But for someone who hasn't yet been president, I don't think there's another human being that could sit down with her and would know as much about what's going on in the world, has thought more about all these issues for her whole lifetime, than she has. She really is the most qualified person ever to run for president who hasn't been president before. And there's no particular benefit for me other than I love my country. I mean, I'm not looking for a political job. I'm literally just a citizen. And I do take it seriously. I'm [from] an immigrant family. So I take the State of Liberty very seriously. I mean, my family was lost in the Holocaust. We believe in the State of Liberty. This was the place we were going to come. And then you have someone running for president who is opposed to the idea [of] America? Religious, ethnic and all that kind of freedom? And wants to replace the State of Liberty with a wall? So I compare that to the qualifications of a Hillary. You’ve talked about how the election is personal for you. How does it hit home? Someone comes to me and says, "Well, if you knew Trump, he isn’t personally bigoted." It doesn't matter—that's irrelevant. He’s smart enough to know that he is giving cover, he is giving voice to a very ugly notion that you will be judged in this country based on where you're from and what your religion is, what your ethnicity is, and in some instances, even what your color is. And gender. And your disabilities, if you have any. Well, we all have some disabilities. But it’s, like, oh my god, this is so un-American. It's, like, a cruel irony to say we're going to make America great again. Hey! First understand what America is. That is personal. You’re the former mayor of Cincinnati. What have you learned about politics in the two decades you’ve been doing your show that you didn't know during your political career? I always knew we were all alike and the only thing that separated us [is] some of us were luckier in the gene pool of parents, and some of us had more money, and stuff like that. And I saw that in politics, and I see it in the people on my show. . 99 percent of what we are, we had nothing to do with. Not one person you will ever meet had anything to do with the decision to be born, to whom you'd be born, what kind of health, what kind of brain, what era, what country. None of this stuff. The last one percent of what we become is maybe due to our own efforts. But even that is based on what we were born with. If you understand that, then you will never ever judge people based on what they are. You will only judge people based on what they do. I guess I kind of knew that all along, and every job I’ve ever had just confirmed what I've always believed, is that human beings are alike. Some are just luckier. Your show is in its 26th season— I apologize. [laughs] I'm sorry. I've ruined the culture. I'm so sorry. Oh, please, Rebecca, forgive me. I forgive you! What’s one moment from this election that would have been way better on your stage? Well, any of the debates, clearly. And obviously the video. I mean, really. You can’t even make a parody of it anymore. I can't—it's almost, they’re throwing softballs at me. It's, like, "Hey! Here's a show topic, here's a show topic." I mean, I could have done a whole season of shows just on this campaign. But again, it’s one thing to have a television [show] about that, which is the purpose of the show, to have it about dysfunctional behavior, and another thing to say, "Gee, why doesn't the person on this show run for president?" What? Who thought that was a good idea? You’ve said Trump’s blurring of politics and entertainment helped propel him to the GOP nomination. Are shows like yours to blame for Trump’s rise? No, no one show. Lots of people watch the show and behave properly.


Remember back in August of 2015, when Donald Trump's women problem was contained to calling Rosie O'Donnell a "pig" at the first Republican debate and saying Megyn Kelly had "blood coming out of her wherever" for asking legitimate questions about his sexist treatment of women? Fast forward to present day (or, more accurately, last night), and we now have former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (and current Trump surrogate) literally daring Kelly to call Bill Clinton a "sexual predator" on live television after trying to denounce the coverage of Trump's numerous sexual misconduct allegations as unfair and biased. Thank goodness there are only 13 more days till the election because, honestly, how much more of this can the American people take? What began as a conversation between the Fox News anchor and former speaker of the house about Donald Trump's dwindling poll numbers soon turned into a hostile exchange about sexism, media bias, and the election. Recent reports, including one conducted by Fox News, show Clinton's numbers growing in several key states, making Trump's chances of becoming president all the more slim. Gingrich quickly interjected that all these polls are biased—"Fox News? I don't think so," Kelly countered—before he launched into an attack on the media as a whole for focusing on the Access Hollywood tape and the numerous women who have come forward to corroborate the things Trump articulated on the leaked footage, rather than the leaked transcripts of Hillary Clinton's Wall Street speeches or her plans to allow "600 million people" to migrate to the country. "The three major networks spent 23 minutes attacking Donald Trump [after the third presidential debate] and 57 seconds on Hillary Clinton's secret speeches," Gingrich said. "You don't think this is a scale of bias worthy of Pravada and Izvestia?" (Quick history aside: Pravada and Izvestia were two newspapers published in Soviet Russia.) Kelly articulated that "if Trump is a sexual predator"—which Gingrich quickly denied—and was revealed to have a lengthy history of sexual misconduct, Americans—especially American women—have the right to know this about a presidential nominee and the media should be required to cover it. Or so she tried to articulate before Gingrich once again interrupted her for using "inflammatory" language "that is not true." "You are fascinated by sex and you don't care about public policy," said a man who spent his tenure as speaker of the house obstructing the president and twenty-plus years dwelling on Bill Clinton's sexual history. "Me? Really?" Kelly countered, before Gingrich doubled down, saying, "That's what I get out of watching you tonight." Kelly responded to this, saying, "You know, Mr. Speaker, I'm not fascinated by sex, but I am fascinated by the protection of women and understanding what we're getting in the Oval Office and I think the American voters would like to know." "Therefore we're going to send Bill Clinton back to the East Wing because, after all, you're worried about sexual predators?" Gingrich interjected. "Listen, it's not about me. It's about the women and men of America. The poll numbers show us that the women of America, in particular, are very concerned about these allegations, and, in large part, believe they are a real issue and don't want to dismiss the women." Kelly barely made her point before Gingrich once again interrupted, saying, "You want a comment on whether the Clinton ticket has a relationship to a sexual predator?" "We, on The Kelly File, have covered that story as well," she countered. "I want to hear you use the words 'Bill Clinton, sexual predator.' I dare you. Say 'Bill Clinton, sexual predator," Gingrich said, smirking all the while. Kelly, as expected, kept her cool, explained that she had, in fact, covered Clinton's past behavior on her show, before making the most sound counter-argument to Gingrich's challenge. "He's not on the ticket,” Kelly said. “The polls also show the American public is less interested in the deeds of Hillary Clinton’s husband than they are in the deeds of the man who asks us to make him president, Donald Trump.” As the segment drew to an end, Kelly bid farewell to her contentious guest, saying, "We’re going to have to leave it at that and you can take your anger issues and spend some time working on them, Mr. Speaker. Thanks for being here.” To which Gingrich replied, "And you too." Watch the full segment below.


Prior to Sunday's presidential debate, four women who have accused the Clintons of wrongdoing, including allegations of sexual deviancy, spoke at a press availability with Republican Donald Trump. Observers said Trump meant to contrast his vulgar leaked 2005 audiotape with the allegations from the women about their mistreatment at the hands of the Clintons. "It's so important.when people are talking about. the words that Donald Trump uttered--he's very embarrassed.he's apologetic for those words," Juanita Broaddrick, 73, told Sean Hannity. Broaddrick has accused Bill Clinton of sexually assaulting her in 1978, and has said that Hillary Clinton attacked her character after she came forward with the original accusations. "I've never heard one apology for what Hillary Clinton did to me after she threatened me after her husband raped me. I did have an apology from Bill Clinton, although he'll never admit it--I'd like to see him do it in-person," she said. Broaddrick added that she "feared" a Clinton presidency because she suspected that Hillary Clinton would seek retribution against her for speaking out once more. Watch the full clip above and let us know what you think in the comments. Krauthammer: Trump Threat to Prosecute Hillary Sounds Like a 'Banana Republic'


Hillary Clinton called Monica Lewinsky a “narcissistic loony tune.” She called Gennifer Flowers “some failed cabaret singer.” She said Republicans in Congress had organized “a vast right-wing conspiracy” against her husband, President Bill Clinton. And now the former secretary of state and defeated Democratic presidential candidate says those of us still interested in the investigating of her conduct are engaging in an “abuse of power.” Hillary Clinton expects special treatment. She always has. The real question is: why did the FBI give it to her? The FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton was referred to as “special” in an email sent by current FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. He was the assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office before his promotion to the second-ranking spot in the bureau. Despite a deep web of connections to Clinton, McCabe formally recused himself from the email investigation only a week before the 2016 election. McCabe’s admissions are telling, but not inaccurate. Four months have passed since 20 members of the House Judiciary Committee demanded a special counsel to investigate Hillary Clinton. No action from the Department of Justice has been taken. Only a special person could have her spouse meet with Attorney General Loretta Lynch on a tarmac in Phoenix during an ongoing criminal investigation. Recently released emails show that Bill Clinton purposely altered his departure to get time alone with Lynch. While the FBI was very concerned with punishing the agent who disclosed the Lynch-Bill Clinton meeting, the impropriety of the gathering garnered far less attention. When Lynch told then-FBI Director James Comey to refer to the Hillary Clinton investigation as a “matter” rather than an “investigation,” language had a special meaning. According to McCabe, “the decision was made to investigate (Hillary Clinton) at HQ with a small team.” The double standard is glaring. More prosecutors are currently investigating President Trump than were assigned to the Oklahoma City bombing, but Hillary Clinton got the small team at HQ. And how did the “small team at HQ” handle the investigation? In a word – special. Somewhere between the first and the final draft, Comey’s statement changed. He first wrote that Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server was “grossly negligent.” The final draft said she was “extremely careless.” Comey’s exoneration was drafted before the FBI interviewed key witnesses – including Clinton herself. When Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCullough confronted officials about the depth of Clinton’s crimes, he faced threats and “personal blowback” against him and his family. McCullough’s reports were delivered to then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Clapper spoke of the “heartburn” that exposure would create for Hillary Clinton’s campaign. In every instance, being special has redounded to Hillary Clinton’s political and legal benefit. Not so for President Trump. Some at the Department of Justice and the FBI seem to have a special bias against the president. FBI Agent Peter Strzok sent biased anti-Trump text messages. He worked on both the Clinton email scandal and the Mueller probe. It remains unclear what evidence he reviewed, generated or damaged in either investigation. Four months have passed since 20 members of the House Judiciary Committee demanded a special counsel to investigate Hillary Clinton. No action from the Department of Justice has been taken. As members of the Judiciary Committee, we have demanded an investigation into the FBI’s procedures, practices, oversight and reporting. If biased agents have tainted evidence, we need to see it. If politically-interested prosecutors have an agenda, we need to know it. If our government institutions are being undermined by the deep state, we must expose it. After all, equal treatment under the law is just one thing that makes America so special. Republican Matt Gaetz represents Florida's 1st congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives.


As seen on Justice With Judge Jeanine Issa: Comey Reopening FBI Clinton Email Probe 'Matter of His Integrity' In her Opening Statement last night, Judge Jeanine Pirro said FBI Director James Comey owes it to the American people to reveal what new information made him decide to reopen the Hillary Clinton email investigation. "He's got to tell us what was discovered what was so big that he violated Justice Department and FBI guidelines and alerted the nation. He cannot hide behind protocol," Judge Jeanine said. She also called for a "thorough, unbiased investigation," with search warrants, empaneling a grand jury and a deal with Huma Abedin to get the top Clinton aide to talk. "Jim, go back to your roots," Judge Jeanine said. "You were once a great prosecutor. Don’t let Washington ruin you, too. You need to send these Clintons back to where they came from." Read the full transcript below, and let us know what you think in the comments. Liberals Bash FBI Director Comey Over Clinton Probe After Praising Him in July Mother of Jailed Sailor: 'Hold Hillary to Same Standards' as My Son on Classified Info The FBI’s ability to get Huma Abedin- Hillary Clinton's closest advisor, confidante and State Department deputy chief of staff - to sing will make or break this election. Right now, reports are the FBI is negotiating with Huma's lawyers, stemming from her joint computer with pervert husband, disgraced ex -congressman Anthony Weiner. Here we go again: We are nine days from an election that will redefine this nation. And as I said last night, we're on the precipice of yet another constitutional crisis because of the Clintons. This time, involving an alleged pedophile, our nation's top secrets and a couple of grifters from Arkansas. You already know how I feel about all this from my open last night. The American people are entitled to know before we go to the voting booth what it was that caused FBI Director Comey to reopen the case. He's got to tell us what was discovered what was so big that he violated Justice Department and FBI guidelines and alerted the nation. He cannot hide behind protocol. The Justice guidelines 'don't let me talk' rule doesn't work anymore. The 'we don't comment on pending cases' doesn't work anymore. There are no ethical prohibitions. You have been invited by the target and her surrogates to release the information that caused you to reopen a closed case. If there is an indictment, Hillary is now foreclosed from objecting to such disclosure. My bet is, she knows you wont - but thinks that she’s calling your bluff. If she really wanted to know, all she has to do is sit down with Huma and ask her. The investigation is then not compromised, since documentary evidence - here emails - do not change. So it's time to do what you didn't do last year- a thorough unbiased investigation, using all the tools available search warrants and empaneling a grand jury. No more mother may I routine. You’re the one who got yourself in this mess. And now the American people are in a bigger mess. In 2013 Huma signed a document under penalty of perjury when she left the state department that she had turned over all classified materials and that she was not retaining copies. It seems that metadata on 650 thousand emails suggest otherwise. Huma swore under oath that she searched thru all her devices for anything state related. She had a chance to turn things over and she didn’t. Start your negotiation there, Mr. Director. You've got her in a corner. It's time to throw some punches. Make your deal with Huma now. If you don't and Hillary gets elected, no one will care. Hillary will do what she’s always done. She'll be appalled at Huma. She’ll say she didn't know. She didn't remember. She short-circuited. She had a brain clot. She had no idea. Look, the American people are already traumatized by the Clinton scandals and we just can’t take 4 more years of them. Word is that although Justice told your FBI guys to shut down the Clinton Foundation investigation, it’s still ongoing. The justice dept. is dirty and you know it. Our attorney general actually pleaded the fifth on the Iran ransom probe. Loretta Lynch meeting with the spouse of a target and then the target herself days later saying I will keep Loretta Lynch as my attorney general is bribery pure and simple. Jim, go back to your roots. You were once a great prosecutor. Don’t let Washington ruin you too. You need to send these Clintons back to where they came from. It’s time for you to buck up put on your big boy pants and make a deal with Huma for the sake of this nation. You've got till Tuesday.


The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops called out former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon just days after he accused the Catholic Church of having ulterior motives in helping undocumented immigrants. James Rogers, the USCCB's chief spokesman, called Bannon's comments "preposterous" in a interview on Sirius Radio. Rogers was referring to Steve Bannon's interview with Charlie Rose on "60 Minutes" where he claimed the Catholic Church only needs "illegal aliens" as worshipers. Rogers says Bannon's statements are untrue. "Our pro-immigration stance is based on fidelity to God's word and honors the American dream. For anyone to suggest that it is out of sordid motives of statistics or financial gain is outrageous and insulting," he added. "And the Bible is so clear, so clear, that to treat the immigrant with dignity and respect, to make sure that society is just in its treatment of the immigrant is Biblical mandate," Dolan said. "It's clear in the Old Testament -- my Jewish neighbors remind me of that all the time -- and it's clear from the lips of Jesus when he said, 'Whatever you do to the least of my brothers you do to me. When I was a stranger -- meaning an immigrant or a refugee -- you welcomed me.'" Bannon's comments have drawn widespread criticism. Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the Archbishop of New York, said in an interview on the Catholic Channel on Sirius XM, "I don't really care to go into what I think is a preposterous and rather insulting statement that the only reason we bishops care for immigrants is for the economic because we want to fill our churches and get more money." The full interview of Steve Bannon on "60 Minutes" will air this Sunday. Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon is accusing the Catholic Church of needing "illegal aliens" as worshipers. “The Catholic Church has been terrible about this,” he said while discussing immigration policy in a new interview Thursday. “The bishops have been terrible about this.” “[It’s] because [they’re] unable to really to – to – to come to grips with the problems in the church,” Bannon continued on CBS’s “60 Minutes.” “They need illegal aliens, they need illegal aliens to fill the churches.” “They have an economic interest. They have an economic interest in unlimited immigration, unlimited illegal immigration.” Bannon was discussing President Trump’s decision to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. DACA temporarily blocks undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children from deportation and lets them get renewable work permits. Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Tuesday announced that Trump’s administration would eliminate the program in six months. Nearly 800,0 “Dreamers,” or DACA recipients, have benefited from the program since former President Barack Obama’s administration implemented it in 2012.