• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Fascists at PBS NewsHour Election Coverage 2016 Working Overtime

Leftist CNN, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, ABC, BLOOMBERG, AND Chris Wallace’s  FOX  “news” performers, not reporters, announced  the election results as they came in  that evening nearly all giggly confident of a Crooked Hillary victory!   The most profoundly leftist,   the weepiest, the most stunned, the most elite of these spoiled fascistic news bigots came from PBS…..the Judy Woodruff crowd.   All fascistic nations control their means of communication by “owning” how news is presented to their public.   Human females world-wide including voters in America, generally  don’t oppose fascism, socialism, or communism as a state system of political control whether right or left wing!

Security, NOT any of the traditional  freedoms,  is the human females major concern regarding quality of life.   Feminism’s noise  in America for state- forced equality is proof of this pudding.   Ditsies are not expected to solve problems….they add to them.


Google Caught Playing “Soviet Union”! Stalin Would Love Them!

Google’s Foul Play

by Adriana Cohen  at realclearpolitics:

For generations, parents taught children “You can’t believe everything you read.”

Now they ought to teach their offspring they can’t trust everything they search on the internet because Google — run by anti-conservative, anti-Trump elites — is manipulating search results to advance a political agenda.

In a damning new video obtained and released by Breitbart this week, Google’s top executives, including its founders, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, are heard lamenting the victory of Donald Trump following the 2016 presidential election. Brin kicks off their weekly company meeting by saying the meeting is “probably not the most joyous TGIF we’ve had” and that “most people here are pretty upset and pretty sad.”

Clearly he doesn’t speak for the roughly 63 million Americans who voted for Trump.

Notwithstanding, in the video, co-founder Brin describes Trump’s supporters as fascists and extremists and vows to thwart the rise of populism. He adds that he is “deeply offended” by the Trump’s victory and that the election conflicts with many of Google’s values. Google’s CFO, also saddened by Trump’s win, promises that America’s most highly trafficked search engine will “use the great strength and resources and reach we have to continue to advance really important values.”

Perhaps this could explain why a Google News search on Trump churns out mostly negative stories about the president and his administration. In fact, a media research study conducted PJ Media found that 96 percent of the top 100 search returns on President Trump are from left-wing media outlets. Conservative outlets that would provide voters with a more balanced and positive analysis of the Trump administration are — surprise! — virtually invisible.

How is that possible when every major media outlet on all sides of the political spectrum is covering the Trump administration round the clock?

You don’t need an Ivy League degree to see foul play.

But that’s not all. A newly released email by another Google executive following the 2016 election reveals a get-out-the-vote effort directed toward Latino voters to benefit Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Add to it that during the election, Google was accused of burying information from search queries damaging to its candidate of choice, Hillary Clinton.

And then there’s the boycott of the recent congressional hearing on foreign election interference and digital media bias against conservatives last week. Facebook and Twitter participated. Google did not.

Perhaps America’s top search engine is scrambling to contain the public relations mess it has created — or it’s busy mounting a legal defense.

With the Department of Justice investigating all of the above, that’s probably not a bad idea.


Fraud Robert Mueller Still Conducting Mueller’s Fraud….

Robert Mueller Is an Unconstitutional Check on the President

by Rush Limbaugh of Rush Limbaugh Show:

RUSH: The more this goes on, the more we lose sight of the real abomination that all of this is. This entire investigation that Mueller is conducting is bogus. It is predicated on nothing but a made-up allegation for which no evidence has ever been found or cited, and therefore the investigation should never have begun! If you ask me, we’re now two years into this investigation with Mueller’s phase of it at a year and a half or close to it — 16 months, something like that.

It is simply unacceptable. It ought not be tolerated that a 16-month investigation that itself is the result of the Obama DOJ and FBI planting evidence and creating false claims about people… We don’t know what this is about! What crimes is Donald Trump under investigation for committing? Can somebody tell me? What is the crime Trump’s being investigated for committing? There isn’t one, folks. There is no crime that has been mentioned as the reason for any of this investigation, even that which preceded Mueller starting.

After two years of investigating — when there was no crime to begin with — why does this continue? It has no basis in law to continue. It has no basis in evidence to continue. Exactly what is Robert Mueller investigating Donald Trump for doing? We’ve said this I don’t know how many times. Department of Justice regulations involving a special counsel demand a crime. They require. It isn’t a suggestion! There must have been, in order to appoint a special counsel — there must be — a crime, a crime alleged to have been occurred, and the special counsel is then given a charge, instructions, to investigate that crime.

When Mueller was appointed, no crime was specified. As such, what Mueller is conducting is not even a criminal investigation. We have a special counsel who has been allowed to be set up as essentially an ongoing check and balance on a daily basis of the president of the United States. What Mueller is doing is not mentioned in the Constitution. It’s not specified. It’s not referenced in any way. Our Constitution does not provide a fourth branch of government which does nothing but follow and pass judgment every day on the president of the United States.

He runs the executive branch, and there isn’t a single person in it who has any power over him. Yet Robert Mueller has been set up as the great overseer who has the guillotine, and he can drop it any day he wants and ruin the Trump presidency. Way too many people have accepted this premise. It is unconstitutional. It is extraconstitutional. There is no crime! Now, after two years of an investigation that does not have a crime in it, isn’t it time to shut it down? It never should have begun in the first place.

Every day it continues is a massive fraud. It’s a massive fraud, and it’s an assault on the Constitution — not to mention the Trump presidency and the executive branch — and it is being sponsored and energized and conducted by underlings in the executive branch at the Department of Justice primarily with friends and associates in the FBI working with accomplices in the mainstream media to continue the illusion that some vast crime has occurred here and we just need to keep looking to find it.

Well, that’s not how it works! No special counsel is given the job and told, “Go find a crime,” except this one, except Robert Mueller. It is not a criminal investigation. That’s why there will not be an impeachment. Well, I can’t say that. I mean, we’re talking politics here. There will not be an indictment of the president of the United States. There is no crime. (interruption) No, I know. No, there was an allegation that Trump colluded with Russia. Well, collusion isn’t a crime, and we’ve gone blue in the face saying so.

But that’s not even what is being looked at anymore, because if it were, we would have heard evidence ’cause nobody can stop leaking. We would have had all kinds of evidence and the media would be doing orgasm after orgasm after orgasm if there were really any proof that its happened. But it didn’t! So why is this continuing? It is continuing because it is what it is. It is a coup — and now with that New York Times op-ed, it’s not silent. It is an out-in-the-open, admitted-to coup to get rid of Donald Trump.

It proceeds without any legality. It proceeds without any substantial foundation to it. There’s no reason for the Mueller investigation. There is no justifiable reason for Robert Mueller to have an office and a team of anti-Trump investigators with an unlimited budget to go run around and keep ruining people’s lives and threatening to ruin the lives of others in order to get somebody to pop up and say, “Yeah, they know Trump cheated because he colluded with Russia.” They haven’t even been able to find anybody to do that yet.

There isn’t anybody willing to be paid enough to lie about it. The best they’ve got is Bob Woodward and Omarosa whatever her name is. They don’t have jack! But stop and think. We don’t even… There isn’t even an answer to a simple question: What is Trump being investigated for? Don’t tell me, “He’s being investigated for colluding with Russia,” because he’s not. They’re hoping to find evidence of that, but they haven’t been able to because it didn’t happen! There is no crime Donald Trump is alleged to have committed here!

Meanwhile, we have the Obama Justice Department and the FBI corrupting themselves left and right to try to create the illusion that some crime has taken place here. The thing is, this has been going on for so long that people just accept it. Despite the abomination that it is. Despite the illegality that surrounds it and defines it. Despite the literal unconstitutionality of it. Despite the pure bogus intent, which is to drive a president out of office and to overturn or nullify the results of the 2016 election. It’s been going on so long that people have ceased looking at it — if they ever did — for what it really is.

But nowhere in our Constitution does it say that we can appoint some guy to sit in daily, permanent judgment of a sitting president and to have at his disposal a guillotine to end that presidency. That’s what Robert Mueller is, and I keep hearkening back. We keep hearing, “Mueller is a man of deep integrity, unchallengeable honor.” I don’t believe it. If he were, none of this would have been happening, and he would have rejected it. If he really cared about the law? If all these people really cared about the law as the backbone of our society, our country and justice and the rule of law?

If they really believed it, this thing would have never gotten off the ground, and after it did, they would have shut it down. The fact that it continues is evidence that it is purely 1,000% political. It’s occurring outside the system of justice in this country. It is not warranted. It is not justified. But as I say, the longer it goes on, the less people become sensitive to what it really is and just end up accepting it. That’s why I think it’s horrible what’s happening. Mueller is just running roughshod right through the Constitution, right through the office of the presidency.

For a bunch of totalitarian authoritarians and those leaning that way like the Democrats are, a precedent like this whenever there’s a Republican president, they live and die for it. If you can get a special counsel appointed when there is no crime, then you can do it again the next time there’s a Republican president. It will never happen when there is a Democrat president. Even with clear-cut evidence that crimes are being or have been committed, it will never happen with a Democrat president. So we have a two-tiered system of justice which destroys our system of justice.

RUSH: Here’s Jim in Eagleswood, New Jersey. This is a good point, Jim. I’m glad you called to remind me of this. What’s up?

CALLER: Mr. Limbaugh, I know my time is limited but let me just tell you that next to the birth of my children, this is one of the biggest moments of my life. You are a true American. But I fear that you have fallen into a trap that has been perpetuated on most of the talk shows in this country —

RUSH: Ah, ah. Be very, very, very careful before you include me in that bunch.

CALLER: (laughing) I’m sorry. I’m sorry.

RUSH: Because what did I say when I introduced you? “I’m glad you called to remind me, because I myself have said what you’re gonna say.” I could have said, “I don’t need the call. I’ve already said it.” But you’ve been on hold a long time, and I wanted to reward you —

CALLER: Thank you.

RUSH: — by giving you the opportunity to say it. So say it.
CALLER: The trap is this. Bob Mueller has no intention whatsoever to ever try President Trump for anything because — you’ve talked about it all morning — there is nothing. There are no witnesses. There is no collusion. The only collusion exists between him and the news media to make us think that he’s going after Donald Trump. He is purely cleaning up the mess since the Clintons have basically been in office.

RUSH: Well, that’s 95% true. If they can find something in all this that they could use to send Trump packing, they would do it. But you’re right.

CALLER: There’s nothing there.

RUSH: What this really is — and I’ve said this. This is why I’m glad that you called. What this actually is is a cover-up of the exoneration of Hillary Clinton from real crimes that she committed. These people exonerated her in order to make sure she would remain the Democrat nominee. They did that so that she could get elected president and they would stay in their positions or gain others, and the whole point of this investigation is to cover up the crimes that Hillary committed was and exonerated for and these people’s participation and role in that.

CALLER: They’re cleaning up Obama’s mess. They’re cleaning up the Iranian billions. They’re cleaning up Russian uranium. They’re cleaning up… No, they’re cleaning up 20 years’ worth of crap, and that’s how long it takes Mueller… You think Hillary Clinton erased a lot of emails? Wait ’til you find out what Bob Mueller erased, because here’s the trick: They do not care that you know they’re guilty, they care what you can prove, and this is history since Arkansas. They don’t care that you know they’re criminals. They just care what you can and can’t prove, and that’s the uranium.

RUSH: I know that. Nothing has gotten past me. I was trying to illustrate all this by pointing out that there isn’t a crime that Trump has committed. There’s in justification for this whatsoever. But the longer it goes on, people just accept that it’s part of politics in Washington now, to have a guy like this who’s gonna be riding herd on Republican presidents each day — and Mueller is not going away, by the way, as long as Trump’s in office.

If Trump runs in 2020 and gets reelected — and if Mueller hasn’t been dispatched or fired or shut down — he’s still gonna be there, because the objective of this is to get rid of Donald Trump. Do not think that’s not part of this. This is a two-pronged effort. Get rid of Trump and to cover up what these people did, exonerating Hillary. That is so important in this, folks. Hillary Clinton committed real crimes, crimes for which others who’ve been convicted are in prison. They revolve around her illegal private server and the trafficking of classified, top-secret data.

And the president of the United States was doing so with her, knowingly, even though he has lied and said he didn’t know she was using a private server until he saw it on the news. But that’s not true because her email address did not have .gov on the end of it. It was a private email. He knew. They all knew. So it was time to get in gear. Whether it was Trump or anybody, they would still have done what they’re doing. They had to exonerate Hillary Clinton.

She was the Democrat nominee. That was preordained. Crazy Bernie was blowing against the wind here. No matter what he did, he wasn’t gonna get the nomination. She was it. She had committed crimes. All of them were on her team. They wanted to maintain their jobs or get promotions. She had to be cleared. She had to be exonerated by the highest authorities in the land, and they set out to do that. Comey officially made it happen on July 5th of 2016 and then reaffirmed it later on in October of that year.

So everything that was done to exonerate Hillary is being covered up in this investigation (so-called) of Trump for which there is no crime being pursued; there was no crime specified. Donald Trump has not committed a crime. Hillary Clinton committed many, and not just the server. The crimes that Hillary Clinton committed in dealing with Russians and Christopher Steele and collecting all this so-called opposition research on Trump, and the potential criminality of lying to FISA court judges in order to get warrants to spy on people who were not spies.

And then the question becomes… Everybody’s asking, “Why aren’t the FISA judges ticked off? They’ve been lied to! The FBI, these people went up there and lied to ’em.” What if the FISA judges are in on it? What if they don’t care? We’re talking about the Washington swamp. There’s a lot of things that don’t have any rational explanation. And when that happens, that’s when people start conjuring up weird stuff. In the real world, a judge who is lied to by any lawyer to get a search warrant or worse, that lawyer is in heap big trouble once the judge finds out he’s been lied to.

Well, these FISA judges were obviously lied to, and they may have taken action against these lawyers that we don’t know about. But because we don’t know it, if they have, we’re left to assume that everybody involved in this got away with it and continues to get away with it, and the Mueller investigation is to ensure that they do get away with it! So I have no doubt that that’s what this is about. But there’s also a large part of it that’s getting rid of Trump at the same time. It would be a twofer. But just because there’s no crime and just because there’s no this or that doesn’t mean that they’re not really trying to get rid of Donald Trump, because they most certainly are.


RUSH: Donald in Orange County, California. Quickly, how are you doing, sir?

CALLER: Hi, Trump! (laughing) I mean, hi, Rush. Hey. Listen. Hillary did not erase the emails. She kept copies of the incriminating emails that she has on everybody and that’s why they all are protecting her. It’s the only thing that make sense. Democrats, Republicans, DOJ, FBI. They have to protect her to keep her silent. She has the proof. She’s not stupid. She kept it. She did not erase it. That’s the point I want to make.

RUSH: Wait, wait, wait. Proof of what?
CALLER: In other words, everybody going through that server. Every dirty deal that went down came through that server. They all thought she’d gonna get the reelected, nothing would ever come out. But when it didn’t and she did not erase it. She’s not stupid. She kept incriminating evidence from anybody and all the emails, all of the payoffs. Everything went through that server. So now it’s the only thing that makes sense. Why do they all…? Ray Charles can see that she committed crimes. They won’t do anything ’cause she has proof and she can put ’em all in jail. That’s what’s going on, I believe.

RUSH: I find this fascinating. What this is is a holdover. People of a certain age have this impression of the Clintons. When they were in office, there was this story that they had 500 FBI files on people. Members of Congress, Republicans, members of the media. They were blackmailing people left and right. That’s how they got away with everything. This sounds like a continuation of that.

They’ve moved on from 500 FBI files to every bit of dirt that anybody in the Obama administration ever did. Hillary’s got it in her emails. She didn’t erase ’em, and she can nail anybody any time she wants. So they’ve gotta go to the end of the earth to protect her. I don’t think that’s what’s going on. If it were, I wouldn’t be surprised, but I think there’s much more happening here than that.


These Democrats Aren’t Crazy….They Are Becoming Fascists!


by John Hinderaker   at  Powerline:

I was working today and couldn’t watch the Brett Kavanaugh hearing, but Paul provided the best blow-by-blow summary I have seen. He saved me a lot of pain!

It strikes me that the Democratic Party crossed a Rubicon of sorts today. They abandoned all norms not just of civility–something they purported to yearn for just a few days ago!–but of sanity. They deliberately turned a Senate confirmation hearing into a farce. There was no distinction between the howling left-wing mob that infiltrated the hearing room and the Senate Democrats.

Not long ago, some Democrats resisted the crazier fringes of their party. No longer. There is no daylight among the violent fascist group Antifa, the crazed Democratic activists bleating about impeachment, and the establishment Democratic Party. They are now one and the same. So, disgusting as today’s hearing was, it at least achieved some clarity. There is no longer any wing of the Democratic Party that can be described as sane.

Here is a parting image from today’s hearing: courtesy of the New York Post, a group of women who dressed up as characters in the dystopian Handmaid’s Tale to crash the Kavanaugh hearing.


Needless to say, I haven’t read the book, seen the movie, or whatever. But Wikipedia says that The Handmaid’s Tale describes a future in which “women are forbidden to read,” homosexuals are hanged, “women are forcibly assigned to produce children for the ruling class,” and much more. So the Democrats apparently want us to believe that judges like Brett Kavanaugh are just itching to ban reading by women, among many other things.

Which is to say, they are insane.

Someday, historians will try to explain what caused the Democratic Party to go nuts. At the moment, I don’t have a theory. In the meantime, if you want to counter the Democrats’ hallucinations with a dose of sanity, Ann Althouse has Kavanaugh’s opening statement–a little too conciliatory for my taste–and her own comments thereon.

(I happened to endure nearly the entire Dem Fascist performance on television yesterday displayed by the Charle Schumer  show of Democrat Senators, star fascsitics,  Dianne Feinstein,  Amy Klobuchar,  Richard  Blumenthal, Dick Durbin, Mazie Horono, Cory Booker and others with organized  rabble-rousers screaming them on from the  audience.
Every American should review this evil Schumer Soviet show to sabotage the chances of President Trump”s nominee to fill the vacancy on our nation’s Supreme Court!
No freedom for thought and honesty left in this neofascist gang.   Fascism’s hate America hysteria owns  university and schools, the nation’s press from Los Angeles, New York,  to Washington to  Minneapolis, Google, Facebook, PBS, MSNBC, CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, to everywhere except its Churches,  Dennis Prager and talk radio in general but not SRN radio.  It is the future President Obama promised  when he swore he would fundamentally change his United States of America.
All Minnesotans should know and NEVER FORGET that our Senior Senator, Amy Klobuchar starred as a member among these FASCISTS!

Hollywood’s Soviet Model is at It Again with “First Man”…


by  John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

A movie titled “First Man” is about to be released. It has been described as a “biopic” about Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon. So the 1969 moon landing by Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin is presumably the high point of the film.

When Armstrong and Aldrin emerged from the moon lander, the first thing they did was to plant an American flag:

The second was to receive a congratulatory telephone call from President Richard Nixon:

“First Man” is being criticized for not showing the astronauts planting the American flag. I assume it also leaves out the Nixon phone call, but I don’t know that. The actor who plays Armstrong, Ryan Gosling, a Canadian, defends the film’s omission of the flag:

“I think this was widely regarded in the end as a human achievement [and] that’s how we chose to view it,” he explained. “I also think Neil was extremely humble, as were many of these astronauts, and time and time again he deferred the focus from himself to the 400,000 people who made the mission possible.”

“So I don’t think that Neil viewed himself as an American hero,” he continued. “From my interviews with his family and people that knew him, it was quite the opposite. And we wanted the film to reflect Neil.”

But Neil’s first act was to unfurl the flag, so the film doesn’t reflect him.

We all know the biases that underlie Hollywood’s editorial decisions. There is no need to belabor that point here. What bothers me most about this incident is the rewriting of history. When most people watch “First Man,” they will assume that depictions of actual, historic events in the movie are accurate. If there is no flag in the film, it will not occur to them to wonder whether there was a flag in real life. If Armstrong is depicted in the movie as a citizen of the world, it will not occur to them to wonder whether in real life, he was an American patriot.

We see this transmutation of history in films all the time, often in more brazen forms. Oliver Stone made “JFK,” which depicts the crazed and despicable Jim Garrison as a hero and peddles absurd conspiracy theories about the Kennedy assassination. The movie “Truth” enacts a wholly false account of the Rathergate controversy, and portrays Mary Mapes, who tried to swing a presidential election by publishing smears against President Bush that she had good reason to know were false, as a heroine.

The problem with such fantasy productions is twofold. First, the lies always lean in the same direction. Hollywood changes history to promote left-wing narratives. Second, movies live on more or less forever. An insomniac businessman turns on the TV set in his hotel room. He scans the movies available for in-room viewing and comes across “Truth.” Hmm. Sounds interesting. He watches it. A young couple has decided to spend the evening chilling with Netflix. There is a film on a subject they have vaguely heard about, the Kennedy assassination, but about which they know nothing: “JFK.” They watch it.

Hollywood’s lies are forever. As time goes by, and fewer people remember the truthful version of events, their capacity to deceive probably grows rather than diminishing. “First Man” represents a more subtle deceit than “JFK” or “Truth,” but it is deceit nonetheless.



Hate Speech According to Facebook

Facebook’s Definition Of “Hate Speech” Grows Even More Bizarre

by Jazz Shaw  at HotAir:

We’ve touched on this story here already but it’s since spiraled a bit further outside the boundaries of reality. Facebook recently deleted a post from William Gheen, of the Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee (ALIPAC). The post had to do with the murder of Mollie Tibbetts by an illegal alien (who actually was an illegal alien, despite coverage you may have seen in the MSM to the contrary) and how it related to problems with our current immigration law enforcement efforts. The social network giant eventually apologized for doing so, and for suspending Gheen’s account in the process, but their explanation of how the “mistake” took place actually seemed to make things worse. (Washington Times, emphasis added)

The admission came hours after William Gheen, head of Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee, said he’d had his post removed and been slapped with a 24-hour ban for posting what Facebook said was “hate speech.”

Mr. Gheen was surprised by the move because his post had talked about illegal immigration but he didn’t think it crossed any lines.

Facebook now agrees.

We mistakenly removed a comment by William Gheen and restored it as soon as we were able to investigate because it did not violate our community standards,” the company said in a statement to The Washington Times. “Our team processes millions of reports each week, and sometimes we get things wrong. We are sorry this happened.”

Keep those last two sentences in mind for a moment. We might write this off as a simple clerical error (or the digital equivalent thereof) but it would be a mistake to look at this incident in a vacuum. Consider also the question of what happened to Salena Zito’s column at the New York Post.

Within two hours I started receiving a handful of notes from people who are friends on my personal Facebook page that their posting of my piece, entitled “Why Trump’s supporters won’t care about Cohen and Manafort,” telling me it had been removed.

Sometimes the removal was accompanied by a message from Facebook. “Spam” was the most common reason given, but a couple of people were told Facebook removed the post because “it did not follow our Community Standards.” …

The post was gone.

Posts and links to Zito’s column were also later restored after people complained. But in each case, it was reported that these deletions for “violations of community standards” were not carried out by an algorithm, but rather when some other Facebook user flagged the message and an employee of Facebook removed it after determining that it qualified as “hate speech.”

This means that there are two avenues for the removal of “offending” content on Facebook. They’ve already admitted to algorithm alorithm which scans the billions of updates every day looking for certain keywords and phrases. But there are also customer service employees manually looking at items flagged by the community and making the determination as to whether or not the content is offensive and worthy of suppression. Neither of these methods is worth a hill of beans and I’ll tell you why.

Taylor wrote about this alleged algorithm problem on Friday, but I think he was being a bit too generous. True, some of these issues may have been caused by a new automated function, but the high profile articles and links that draw a lot of traffic shouldn’t have been caught in that trap. Taylor also mentioned that human monitors would be better than algorithms. True in theory, but they could only (at most) handle entries which are drawing massive numbers of complaints and flags. The number of new updates on Facebook each day would require roughly 91% of the population of the planet to work for Facebook screening content full time to keep up.

I think we’ve been able to glean enough information from Facebook’s frequently cryptic responses to complaints to verify what I was guessing at above. There are two channels to handle “hate speech.” One is automated and one requires human agents responding to complaints to evaluate the content. But there’s zero question that the amount content being flagged and the number of users being suspended skews wildly toward conservative voices. If you hire coders who build the algorithm to primarily squelch conservatives and you hire liberal “customer service” people to handle complaints, that’s a wholly predictable result.

It’s not that Facebook’s code is flawed. It’s not that their monitors are somehow innocently ignorant. It’s that the company is populated by liberals with an agenda, regardless of what Mark Zuckerberg attempts to claim to the contrary. They’re using content monitoring systems which could, perhaps, work if they could somehow be made ideologically neutral. But under the current leadership, it’s destined to fail from the start. And at the risk of being a bit too harsh, this failure isn’t a bug. It’s a feature.


(I believe Prager University is presently suing prejudiced Facebook censors for zapping dozens of Prager University five minute lessons from its world of “communication”.   Prager University  underscores traditional American values,  learnings, and freedoms apparently foreign to Zuckerberg Facebook leftist fascistics.)


What if Donald J. Trump, the present 45th President as he IS, had won the Democrat Party nomination this past presidential election cycle and happened to be BLACK?

How  would 90% of today’s American  news columnists, those  same fascistic Leftist  Party quite uneducated  bigoted bulldogs whether newsprint or television now covering our nation’s news about the Presidency in today’s United States of America be reporting if President Trump  happened to be black?

Would today’s Black Racist Eugene Robinson still be a Black Racist?  What about all of those white today’s New York Times, NBC, CBS, PBS, MSNBC, ABC, etc. one party fascistic reporters?  Would their fingers “tone” any different lies and distortions?

Trump Doesn’t Care About Justice — Only Protection

by Eugene Robinson at realclearpolitics:

 There’s a reason why President Trump increasingly sounds like the mob boss in a cliche-ridden gangster film: That’s basically what he is — and he must know how such movies usually end.

On Wednesday morning — a day after his former campaign chairman was convicted of felonies in one federal courthouse and his longtime lawyer pleaded guilty to felonies in another — Trump issued this statement on Twitter:

“I feel very badly for Paul Manafort and his wonderful family. ‘Justice’ took a 12 year old tax case, among other things, applied tremendous pressure on him and, unlike Michael Cohen, he refused to ‘break’ — make up stories in order to get a ‘deal.’ Such respect for a brave man!”

A few days earlier, Trump had referred to John Dean, the White House counsel whose truth-telling was instrumental in Richard Nixon’s downfall, as a “RAT.” And in a Fox News interview broadcast Thursday, he complained at length about defendants who “flip” and inform on higher-ups in exchange for leniency at sentencing: “This whole thing about flipping, they call it, I know all about flipping. For 30, 40 years I have been watching flippers. Everything’s wonderful and then they get 10 years in jail and they flip on whoever the next highest one is or as high as you can go. It almost ought to be outlawed.”

Those are not the words of some two-bit hoodlum who feels the law closing in. They are the words of the president of the United States — who apparently feels the law closing in.

Trump speaks as if the Trump Organization, the Trump campaign and the Trump administration were one long continuing criminal enterprise. The man charged with faithfully executing the nation’s laws paints his own Justice Department as a villain and celebrates criminals who stoically go to prison rather than inform on higher-ups. Nixon talked that way in private, among friends and co-conspirators; Trump just blurts it out. He makes no bones about valuing loyalty over respect for the law.

Manafort, who might have much to tell about contacts between the campaign and the Russians, has been silent thus far. But he was convicted in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia, on eight counts of bank and tax fraud, and could receive what amounts to a life sentence for a 69-year-old man. Now he faces another trial, this time in federal court in Washington, on conspiracy and other charges stemming from the influence-peddling work he did for Russia-backed politicians in Ukraine.

The second trial could produce even more jail time — and definitely will generate another crushing pile of legal bills for a man whose finances were shown to be in tatters. After Tuesday’s verdict was read in Alexandria, a statement from Manafort’s defense team said nothing about possible appeals or the looming court proceedings. Instead, it said Manafort was examining his options.

Perhaps that is why Trump is going so far out of his way to praise Manafort’s virtue — and why, when asked if he will grant Manafort a pardon, the president never says a discouraging word.

Cohen, on the other hand, used the occasion of his guilty plea in federal court in Manhattan to directly implicate Trump in two felony crimes. He said Trump directed him to arrange six-figure payments, in the days leading up to the election, to guarantee the silence of Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels — two women who say they had extramarital liaisons with Trump.

Cohen has offered full cooperation to authorities, including special counsel Robert Mueller, and Cohen’s attorney has strongly suggested his client might have evidence bearing on the question of collusion. Perhaps that is why Trump was up at 1 a.m. Thursday, angrily tweeting: “NO COLLUSION — RIGGED WITCH HUNT!”

Look at the people Trump surrounds himself with. So far, four men with high-level roles in his campaign and one with a more junior role have pleaded or been found guilty of federal crimes.

Look at the people who are drawn to him. The first sitting member of Congress to endorse his candidacy, Rep. Chris Collins, R-N.Y., was indicted earlier this month on charges of insider trading. The second sitting member to endorse Trump, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., was indicted Tuesday on charges of illegally using more than $250,000 in campaign funds to underwrite his lavish personal lifestyle.

Responding to criticism from Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions declared Thursday that the Justice Department “will not be improperly influenced by political considerations.” He must understand by now that Trump doesn’t care about justice. The president wants only protection.