‘Our state director is Indian American, but he does an amazing job…’
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) President Donald Trump has faced plenty of attacks in the left-wing media for what they characterize as inflammatory, xenophobic remarks.
Now, as Sen. Joe Donnelly faces the prospect of losing his seat in the battleground state of Indiana, the incumbent Democrat seems to be asking himself, “What would Donald do?”
Like other red-state Democrats, Donnelly is paying for his polarizing vote against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and frantically trying to backpedal on his more liberal positions.
His Republican challenger, businessman Mike Braun, has surged ahead after running behind for the past several months, according to RealClearPolitics.
But while many of Indiana’s conservative voters may applaud Donnelly’s working with Trump to address issues like illegal immigration, his cavalier attitudes toward race may raise some eyebrows.
At a debate Tuesday night, in response to a question about the diversity of his staff, Donnelly seemed to imply that his minority workers were excelling in spite of their racial identity.
“Our state director is Indian American, but he does an amazing job,” he said. “Our director of all constituent services, she’s African American. But she does an even more incredible job than you could ever imagine.”
In context, Donnelly seemed to be making the broader point that their race was irrelevant.
But others, like U.S. News & World Report writer David Catanese, certainly took note of the awkward phrasing.
Some odd phrasing from @SenDonnelly attempting to highlight the diversity of his staff:
“Our state director is Indian American, but he does an amazing job.”#INSEN
Donnelly isn’t the only Democrat this week to face heat over a potentially racist, insensitive remark.
Hillary Clinton, who some have speculated may be gearing up for a 2020 presidential run, made an apparent racial joke during an interview with tech website Recode.
In response to interviewer Kara Swisher mixing up the violent rhetoric of Sen. Cory Booker and former Attorney General Eric Holder, Clinton quipped, “I know they all look alike.”
‘When you’re in that pen, you really do feel like a zoo animal…’
CNN’s Brian Stelter checks his phone before going on camera at a Trump rally in Charlotte, N.C. on Oct. 26./PHOTO: Ben Sellers/Liberty Headlines
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) For someone whose title is “chief media correspondent,” CNN’s Brian Stelter raises a lot of questions about how much he really understands the media.
On Friday, as his colleague, frequent White House antagonist Jim Acosta, headed to California to receive a press award, Stelter took the reins covering a rally in Charlotte by President Donald Trump.
I was there, as well.
On Sunday, Stelter posted what might best be described as a firsthand anthropological study of what he said was his first Trump rally.
“I was two years too late,” he said. “I should have gone to a rally in 2016. I’m a media reporter, after all, and Trump is putting on a show at these campaign events, complete with a booming soundtrack and a grand finale that regular rallygoers know by heart.”
The details he included in his rehashing of it—my first Trump rally as well—were familiar, but the experience was far from it.
“When you’re in that pen, you really do feel like a zoo animal,” Stelter said. “Rallygoers gawk at you, take pictures of you, and sometimes sneer while they walk by, saying things like, ‘You’re fake news’ and ‘enemy of the people.'”
In some ways, CNN was the star of its own side-show. Fewer people recognized Stelter than would have Acosta, although many scanned the “press pen” for signs of the network, which had its place-marker—right beside Fox News at the specially designated network table—turned over backward.
CNN’s Brian Stelter goes largely unnoticed during a live shot./PHOTO: Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines
What perhaps Stelter and other members of the press found jarring was that it was an inversion of the usual situation, for journalists accustomed to pointing the lens at other people to have the tables turned. But as possibly the second most “famous” guy in the room (arguably of higher profile than Sen. Thom Tillis and other North Carolina politicians, as well as a NASCAR driver or two) Stelter of all people should not have found the fishbowl to be anything out of the ordinary.
Stelter noted that during the rally, a handful of friendly campaign staffers ushered the media to and from the bathrooms upstairs, presumably to ensure they were granted access back into the secure press area, where cameras and tables were set up.
However, the experience in no way seemed unusual for those who frequent press events. And it hardly felt restrictive—if anything, the metal barriers were there for the media’s convenience, allowing journalists and cameramen to move about and do their jobs with relative freedom—although it was still a tight squeeze at times.
The biggest amenity, by far, was bypassing the entry line on the cold and rainy afternoon, but otherwise, the press were treated no differently than the commoners who surrounded them.
CNN’s Brian Stelter interacts cordially with rally-goers at a Trump event in Charlotte, N.C. Oct. 26./PHOTO: Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines
I met a student reporter from Elon University who said she had been given media credentials and then subsequently got booted from the “pen.” We both agreed that there was little advantage in where I stood from where she was.
As far as I know, nobody kept Stelter, either, from going into the audience if the media “zoo” grew to claustrophobic.
For the most part, Stelter got right the fact that many of the people, there for the spectacle above all, were more curious than hostile. They were genuinely interested in being a part of that moment in history—and maybe getting on TV to boot, whether it was the real news or the “fake news.” Just as with a professional wrestling event, the line between fact and fiction was sort of blurry, but that didn’t seem to matter.
By the following day, however, Stelter’s tone seemed to have changed. He unleashed on Twitter, saying, “I left the rally in Charlotte even more certain that Trump is leading a hate movement against the media.”
I left the rally in Charlotte even more certain that Trump is leading a hate movement against the media. No, not everybody at his rallies buys into it. But some do. That’s dangerous. https://t.co/WVdxEsB1PN
I, for one, stood in the same place, met and interacted with the same people, and saw the heart and soul of America represented in the crowd’s passion.
Although I had the benefit of identifying myself as local media instead of a major network, I felt far more simpatico with the gawking crowd than with the camera-laden platform of media tourists applying makeup before their stand-ups.
I am fairly confident to say that the way Brian Stelter left the rally (before the speech was over) was with the same biases and assumptions he entered it with—but for a brief, fleeting moment, maybe even he was moved by the cameraderie.
‘This is nearly the same as a bundle of road flares wrapped together with an old-timey alarm clock ticking away….’
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) At a press conference Friday afternoon, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and FBI Director Christopher Wray addressed the suspicious packages allegedly sent by right-wing extremist Cesar Sayoc to prominent Democrats.
In addition to providing details of Sayoc’s arrest, which the FBI said came about with the help of a fingerprint, one of the main objectives was attempting to bring closure to the speculation that it may have been a hoax or a false-flag stunt so close to the midterm election.
In the conference and a follow-up press release, Wray reiterated in no uncertain terms that the improvised explosive devices were real. “Though we’re still analyzing the devices in our Laboratory, these are not hoax devices,” he said.
Wray said the devices each contained about six inches of PVC pipe, a small clock, a battery, wiring and ‘energetic material,’ which, he explained, “is essentially potential explosives and material that gives off heat and energy through a reaction to heat, shock, or friction.”
But despite the FBI’s explanation, many doubts still lingered.
To begin with, as conservative radio pundit Rush Limbaugh had observed prior to the arrest, it didn’t add up that someone on the Right would seek to slow the tremendous momentum that Republicans nationwide were feeling. At best, it was a distraction; at worst, negative optics that would undermine the GOP’s valid criticism of violent rhetoric on the Left—largely driven by many of the purported bombing “victims.”
Many in the media also observed that Wray’s statement was a direct contradiction, of sorts, to a tweet that President Donald Trump had issued at 7:30 Friday morning, putting the word “Bomb” in quotation marks.
Republicans are doing so well in early voting, and at the polls, and now this “Bomb” stuff happens and the momentum greatly slows – news not talking politics. Very unfortunate, what is going on. Republicans, go out and vote!
With the FBI’s credibility already strained under the scandals surrounding top officials James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr and others, it didn’t seem a far stretch to wonder if any members of the “deep state” resistance still lingered in the agency’s upper echelon.
However, even among those less inclined toward the conspiratorial, several pieces of information simply didn’t seem to pass the smell test.
To begin with, some noted that the bombs themselves were so amateurishly designed that even if the ingredients were correct, they seemed highly unlikely to detonate.
A story from Twitchy compiled the tweets of former bomb-disposal officer Tom Sauer, who questioned their cartoonish appearance.
3. Bottom Line: Whoever made that wanted it to be painfully obvious to anyone and everyone that it’s a “bomb.”
This is nearly the same as a bundle of road flares wrapped together with an old-timey alarm clock ticking away.
Many also puzzled over the fact that images of the packaging itself, provided both by CNN and by the FBI, showed that the suspicious-looking parcels not only failed to raise any red flags at USPS processing centers up and down the East Coast, but the stamps weren’t canceled.
Although the package sent to CNN appeared to show only $3 in postage, the lowest price for a 1-pound package from Aventura, Florida to New York City would be more than double that.
Moreover, others pointed out that the postal service would not have delivered packages to the addresses of former presidents Obama and Clinton due to Secret Service screening policies. Even left-wing “fact checking site” Snopes, in dutifully attempting to debunk the hoax claim, could not explain how they would have gotten there, only that they did.
Cesar Sayoc/PHOTO: Twitter
Details about Sayoc also were a bit over-the-top, including his van, which seemed glaringly obvious for someone engaged in a one-man conspiracy to murder top politicians and intelligence officials. “I thought he looked like a shooter,” Paul Bilodeau told the Sun Sentinel.
Not only did Sayoc’s behavior attract the attention of common-folk, but also professional photographers, filmmakers and even liberal activist Michael Moore, who conveniently released footage of Sayoc at a rally, which Moore said was an outtake from his new anti-Trump documentary.
Although several social media accounts that were purported to belong to Sayoc quickly went dark on Friday, inaccessible even via Archive.org, his Facebook page, when active, appeared to show very little except for pro-Trump messages and rally photos—and yet those close to him said his personality had only recently changed under the influence of steroids.
Some online sleuths—such as Shad Olson, who was able to capture screenshots of Sayoc’s accounts—said a deeper investigation revealed him to have been rabidly anti-Bush and that key details online about his political leanings changed shortly after his arrest.
Tragically, a real example of violence from an anti-Trump, anti-Semitic neo-Nazi in a Pittsburgh synagogue on Saturday made skepticism of the FBI’s bombing explanation seem both tasteless and irrelevant.
It is hard to question the slaughter of 11 innocent people in what should have been their sanctuary from the evils of the world—even while callous liberal media and politicians spun the massacre as confirmation of a right-wing undercurrent of violence propelled by Trump.
But the thread throughout all of the conspiracy speculation seems to be that, despite the many unanswered questions, the very implausibility of such a politically motivated stunt—the ridiculous and audacious quality of it—are precisely what might make it an effective smear campaign and/or cover-up.
‘My mouth gets me in trouble with some regularity. I am not afraid to tell people where I stand…’
Sen. Claire McCaskill/IMAGE: Project Veritas
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) As polls showed GOP candidate Josh Hawley beginning to pull ahead in Missouri’s Senate race, incumbent Democrat Claire McCaskill took to Fox News in an apparent effort at damage control.
McCaskill took direct aim at “crazy Democrats” who have promoted incivility, as well as obstructionist politicians like her Senate colleagues Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who resist the efforts of Congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump under any circumstances.
“Some of my colleagues are knee-jerk against the president,” she said. “I don’t get up every day figuring out how I can fight the president. I get up every day figuring out how I can fight for Missourians.”
McCaskill hoped to counter claims from a recent video produced by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas that she attempted to conceal a radical liberal agenda from conservative voters. In it, she acknowledged having voted for Draconian gun control measures, while staff members in her campaign said she would support impeachment, oppose a border wall and had quietly accepted funds from Planned Parenthood.
But while she was forceful in some areas, she hedged in others, making it unclear whether the message might resonate with her constituents or backfire against her.
On the surge of illegal immigration, McCaskill said, “I do not want our borders overrun. And I support the president’s efforts to make sure they’re not.”
However, she stopped short of mentioning the funding of the wall, focusing instead on using technology to streamline the asylum process.
McCaskill also did not refute her positions on gun control, although she said she had never attempted to mislead.
“My mouth gets me in trouble with some regularity. I am not afraid to tell people where I stand—and Missourians know that,” she said. “The NRA’s come after me in every single election—this isn’t like some state secret.”
She implied that she was at odds with some of her fellow Democrats, such as Warren and Sanders.
“I would not call my colleagues crazy, but Elizabeth Warren sure went after me when I advocated tooling back some of the regulations for small banks,” she said. “… I certainly disagree with Bernie Sanders on a bunch of stuff.”
However, when questioned by Fox’s Bret Baier about how she had only supported Trump about 45 percent of the time while voting with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., 80 percent of the time, McCaskill said it was because there had not been enough votes on the Senate Floor since Trump took office.
And despite Missouri having gone for Trump by a margin of more than 20 percent, McCaskill stopped short of repudiating Hillary Clinton. “I thought she certainly had the breadth and depth of experience that qualified her, but I’d rather look forward and not backward.”
She also took to the spin zone to explain her costly vote against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, saying it was his position on campaign funding and not the uncorroborated sexual assault allegations against him that caused her to oppose.
“I’m watching this tsunami of dark money that is drowning our process,” she said.
McCaskill touched on the Project Veritas video also. In its immediate aftermath, she called on her opponent Hawley, who is currently the state attorney general, to investigate it as fraudulent under a law that regulates deceptive business practices.
Unable to get in front of the narrative, however, she told Baier it was not what was said in the video itself that was at issue so much as the devious way it was produced.
“The thing about those films that bothered me is not what was on them … it was that they had embedded themselves into our office for weeks on end and that guy had accessed our computers. He wasn’t in our computers to help me,” she said. “There was fraud, and I think that’s a ‘new normal’ that we’ve gotta do something about.”
‘After past tragedies, the president has been wary of arriving too quickly for fear of diverting resources from the local investigations…’
Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh/IMAGE: CBS Sunday Morning via Youtube
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) In a scurry to point fingers and deflect blame, liberal groups found themselves delivering mixed messages after the horrific murder of 11 people by an anti-Semitic extremist at a Pittsburgh synagogue Saturday.
In addition to glossing over their own troubled relationship with anti-Semitism, Democrats savaged President Donald Trump for issuing precisely the same type of response they had heaped effusive praise on former President Barack Obama for in the aftermath of the 2015 Charleston church shooting.
Following months of brushing aside anti-Semitism within their own ranks— including Twitter giving Louis Farrakhan a pass on hateful remarks and left-wing leaders openly associating with the Nation of Islam leader—the Left’s efforts to bring Jewish voters back into the fold by evoking Nazi fearmongering already had begun on Friday, before the synagogue shooting.
In what seemed like a non-sequitur at the time, Alexander Soros, the son of pipe bomb “victim” George Soros (who has frequently been a supporter and benefactor of violent mob demonstrations) was already levying charges of anti-Semitism related to Trump’s criticisms of the Federal Reserve and Goldman Sachs, accusing him of using “dog whistle language” for opposing “global special interests.”
Trump supporters embrace at a rally in Charlotte, N.C., Oct. 26./PHOTO: Ben Sellers/Liberty Headlines
The former builder spent considerable time at the Friday rally beaming over the successes in the embassy’s construction process, including the use of local materials like Jerusalem stone.
But as news broke of the Pittsburgh shooting, left-wing opportunists saw their opening to link the president to it. The Huffington Post quoted a progressive activist group, Bend the Arc, which refers to itself as the “Jewish Resistance,” effectively dis-inviting Trump from visiting Pittsburgh before the president even released details about his plans to go.
Meanwhile, others in the liberal media, including the Associated Press, criticized him for not clearing his schedule of commitments to go immediately to Pittsburgh.
“[F]aced with another national tragedy, he did not long turn his focus away from the midterm elections or himself,” said AP editorialist-reporter Catherine Lucey.
Although many noted that Trump sharply condemned the “evil, anti-Semitic attack,” repeatedly expressed his sympathy to victims and families of the shootings throughout the day, and promised swift and severe justice for the alleged perpetrator, it was not enough to placate disingenuous politicos and journalists seeking a smear to any cost.
The irony was especially pronounced given the media’s rush only three years ago to lay cover for Obama, who following the shooting at an African-American church in Charleston, S.C., decided his priority was to do a humorous podcast and then attend several fundraising events with big California donors, including one at the San Francisco home of billionaire Tom Steyer.
“Time and again, Obama has carried on business as usual — with only brief interruptions — in the face of crisis or tragedy,” The Washington Post dotingly wrote at the time. “He often makes a statement to the public , as he did Thursday at the White House, speaking emotionally about the Charleston killings, but soon resumes his regularly scheduled programming.”
It went on to explain that Obama, respectfully, didn’t want to get in the way of authorities. “After past tragedies, the president has been wary of arriving too quickly for fear of diverting resources from the local investigations.”
The Charleston massacre, by 21-year-old white supremacist Dylann Roof, came a mere week after Trump had announced his candidacy for president. Although the alleged second coming of Hitler had hardly hit the campaign trail, already racial tensions were peaking amid violent riots in cities like Baltimore, St. Louis, Dallas and Baton Rouge, all of which Obama’s divisive rhetoric helped to exacerbate.
Polls by major outlets, including Rasmussen, CNN and The New York Times/CBS revealed strong public perceptions that race relations worsened considerably under Obama, with some indicating that they had reached an all-time low. By contrast, the strong economy and record unemployment have helped improve voter perceptions of race relations under Trump.
Charlottesville/IMAGE: Journalism 101 via Youtube
The Democrats, in response to the Charleston shooting, waged an all-out war on Confederate symbols and statues—including those in Charlottesville, Virginia, which in turn triggered yet another violent protest, organized by a former Obama supporter, in April 2017.
Although Antifa protestors responded to the presence of demonstrators wearing Nazi and KKK regalia by hurling bricks and newspaper racks, and using homemade flamethrowers, Trump was roundly criticized for pinning blame for the violence on both sides.
Unsurprisingly, forgetting that past is prologue, leftist fearmongers, including Steyer, found ways of pinning the most recent violence on Trump’s campaign speeches.
“There’s something much bigger than [the synagogue shooting] going on here,” Steyer said, “which is the atmosphere that he’s created and that the Republican Party has created in terms of political violence.”
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) CHARLOTTE—President Donald Trump was the main attraction at a rally Friday supporting two North Carolina Congressional candidates, Mark Harris and Ted Budd, but the main question on the minds of rally-goers like George Prisco was “Where’s Jim Acosta?”
Some tried in vain to scour the press bullpen at the Bojangles Coliseum, but the long-suffering—and often equally antagonizing—CNN White House correspondent was not to be found on the cold and rainy afternoon.
Acosta’s Twitter account placed him on the opposite end of the country, receiving a journalism award from San Jose State University.
Proud to be honored with the William Randolph Hearst Award at @SJSU this week. I dedicated the award to all of my fellow journalists at @CNN. As I told the crowd, we will not be terrorized. The events of this week have put steel in our spines. https://t.co/0V55NN3mQu
Pinch-hitting for Acosta was CNN’s chief media correspondent, Brian Stelter, who took the heckles in stride with a sheepish smile as a “CNN Sucks” jeer from the crowd broke out several times.
Tension at the network may have been even more elevated than usual as suspicious packages were delivered to prominent liberal public figures—including CNN, which received one addressed to contributor and former CIA Director John Brennan.
Perhaps as an extra layer of precaution, CNN had its name card turned over at a table reserved for network news correspondents, and Stelter appeared to take advantage of his relative anonymity in an audience that, for the most part, had probably never seen his Sunday morning show “Reliable Sources” on television.
As Stelter himself said, however, despite all the ribbing his network received, many in the audience were eager to shake hands and engage with the media that were present, welcoming the opportunity to have their voices included in the national dialogue.
For Brooke Guidebeck, a North Carolina native now living in Atlanta, who drove four hours to attend the rally, the Trump phenomenon truly is about having an elected leader who speaks for the common man—or woman.
“People are just fired up about having their constitutional rights stay intact,” said Guidebeck. “… We’ve never had a president who was one of us.”
But Guidebeck, a military veteran covered with tattoos, including one of Carolina Panthers quarterback Cam Newton on her left hand, did not seem like a ‘typical’ Republican.
Brooke Guidebeck moves in to embrace a fellow nontraditional Trump supporter at a rally in Charlotte, N.C., Oct. 26. PHOTO: Ben Sellers/Liberty Headlines
As other nontraditional GOP voters walked by, she eagerly high-fived and embraced them. Spotting one who wore a shirt that said “Proud Gay Trump Supporter,” she chased him down to give him a hug.
It was a far different reception than gay Trump supporters received last year at a Charlotte “Pride” celebration, where they were denied entry over their political beliefs.
Guidebeck said the collegial feeling within the audience was “like going to your next-door neighbor’s house and having dinner.”
Trump, for his part, seemed mostly to resist the siren call of trolling the media, a few days after he took criticism for making light of an incident in which Montana congressional candidate Greg Gianforte body-slammed a reporter.
However, he managed a few underhanded digs while calling on the media to share in the accountability for a more civil discourse.
“We must unify as a nation in peace, love and in harmony,” Trump said. “The media has a major role to play… as far as tone and as far as everything. And we all say this in all sincerity, but the media’s constant unfair coverage, deep hostility…… and negative attacks only serve to drive people apart and to undermine healthy debate.”
Trump cited an unspecified source saying that 94 percent of the press he receives is negative. “Even when I do something wonderful, it’s negative,” he said.
Despite teeing up the audience on several occasions to boo political adversaries like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Maxine Waters while discussing Budd’s opponent, Kathy Manning, as an “extreme liberal,” he claimed to be holding back on Waters, a perennial target due to her bombastic rhetoric—and also one of the suspicious package recipients.
“Maxine Waters,” Trump said. “I’m going to be nice tonight, so I won’t say it. I won’t say it. I won’t say it. I’m going to be nice. I want them to say, ‘he was so nice tonight.’”
President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally in Charlotte, N.C. Oct. 26. PHOTO: Ben Sellers/Liberty Headlines
His wide-ranging talk did cover a few hot topics, such as the prompt arrest of the pipe-bomb suspect, for which Trump commended law enforcement.
However, it was North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis in his opening remarks who had the strongest words for alleged right-wing extremist Cesar Sayoc, calling him an “animal” in a statement that echoed Trump’s description of MS-13 gang members, widely excoriated by the Left.
Whether Democrat leaders would respond the same to Sayoc’s ‘de-humanization’ by Tillis remained to be seen.
Trump spent more time in his speech, which ran slightly past an hour, covering policy details, such as the improvements he implemented to the health-care system after falling one vote short in repealing the controversial Obamacare.
“Think of it. One Democrat would have repealed and replaced, but we’re essentially doing the same thing anyway. It’s been decimated by us,” he said, touting among his accomplishments lower premiums and the repeal of the individual mandate penalty for those who do not have insurance.
In a throwback to his days as a builder, Trump fawned over the construction of a brand new embassy in Jerusalem. “We ended up spending $400,000, and we opened it four months after I agreed to do it in the first place.”
Trump also touched on other issues, including the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, that he has said would define the midterm election, 11 days from Friday.
“Nobody has ever been treated more unfairly than Brett Kavanaugh,” he said. “What happened to him and his family was an absolute disgrace… We have many women—and as I’m saying how unfairly he’s been treated, they’re all nodding.”
On cue, Guidebeck and others vociferously affirmed the statement.
Guidebeck said her own experiences as a woman had helped inform her perception of the contentious confirmation hearings and the he-said/she-said testimony of Kavanaugh versus sexual-assault accuser Christine Blasey Ford.
“Sometimes, when women don’t get what they want, they lie,” Guidebeck said. “Sometimes, when men don’t get what they want, they lie. This is definitely a case of not getting what they want.”
‘The time when Republicans and Democrats went on TV and fought about taxes is dead…’
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) In the years after losing a primary battle to George W. Bush, Sen. John McCain is said to have considered switching political parties and to have openly courted liberal running mates.
Now, those close to the late Arizona senator are working overtime to finally fulfill that legacy.
The latest is Nicolle Wallace, a former McCain campaign adviser and current MSNBC host, who visited Seth Meyers’s talk show to explain why Democrats must win Congress.
“I think that any White House is improved by having a check and a balance—this White House more than any other,” she said.
Wallace made clear what sort of checks and balances she meant: “I think it’s really important that Democrats take over the House and/or the Senate,” she said.
It marked just the latest example of what some have seen as the mercurial and vindictive McCain trying to settle scores with Trump from beyond the grave.
What began with McCain’s melodramatic, “thumbs down” vote on Obamacare repeal continued with the parade of left-wingers schmoozing at his funeral, which McCain meticulously planned, according to daughter Meghan, a co-host on “The View.”
Another pet project of McCain’s, Arizona State University’s McCain Institute, now appears to have crossed the threshold from academic thinktank into political action committee with a series of “Mavericks Needed” billboards it plans to run in battleground states, mostly where Republicans are ahead, prior to the Nov. 6 midterm election and leading up to the 2020 presidential election.
Wallace told Meyers that—apart from a staff mutiny invoking the 25th amendment, which she also advocated—the only way to check Trump was by empowering Democrats, who have threatened to bring the president’s agenda to a halt using subpoenas, investigations and possibly even impeachment proceedings.
“More often than not, people that have seen American presidents up close and know what the conduct is supposed to be like will ultimately decide that a check on this administration is urgent,” she said.
A UC-Berkeley graduate who was communications chief for George W. Bush before becoming a senior adviser for McCain’s 2008 campaign, Wallace now considers herself a “nonpracticing Republican”—but she told Meyer she has no intention of returning.
“The time when Republicans and Democrats went on TV and fought about taxes is dead,” she said.
Apparently, such policy debates have been replaced with former Republicans instead getting invited to schmooze liberal hosts with wistful discussions of how best to thwart the president.
Wallace’s interview with Meyers, lacking considerably in self-awareness of her own contributions to the partisan rancor and to Trump’s ascension within GOP ranks, left no doubt that while working for a left-leaning cable outlet, she has gone full-native.
She cast the recent string of Democrats who had received homemade “explosive devices” in the mail as “victims” even though many have publicly endorsed the incivility and political violence on the Left.
Wallace also condescendingly claimed that the current conservative movement was the result of a “grievance” culture (appropriating a popular buzzword often used to criticize the Left) that began when former McCain running mate Sarah Palin started pandering to the baser instincts of her audience.
“I saw that her crowds were bigger and louder and more animated by her speaking to their grievance, speaking to their nativisms, speaking to their feeling about being angry about immigration and other issues, but John McCain didn’t embrace any of those. That’s probably why, ultimately, the two of them ended up not on the same page.”
‘A genie was let out of the bottle, which may take generations to put back in…’
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Both Democrats and Republicans are currently holding their breath to see what unfolds following a series of suspicious packages, presumed to be explosive devices, delivered to left-wing targets.
CNN, which received one of the packages addressed to ex-CIA Director John Brennan—a former correspondent there—tweeted out a photo of the apparent bomb:
This is the suspicious package received this morning at the Time Warner Center, which houses the CNN New York bureau.
Others who were reported to be targets of the packages by Thursday included the Obama and Clinton families, former Vice President Joe Biden, Rep. Maxine Waters, former Attorney General Eric Holder, former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and actor Robert DeNiro. On Friday morning, New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker and former Intelligence Director James Clapper reported similar packages.
It should be no mystery as to why those on the list were included: All in the past have contributed, on some level, to escalating the heated national discourse by fomenting divisiveness and identity politics. Many have openly expressed a support for violence and incivility, and can now tangibly see the consequences of those words.
So, the bigger question is, with the midterm less than two weeks away, where will this hot-potato Hail Mary land and who will take the blame?
George Soros/photo by boellstiftung (CC)
Some, such as CNN’s Jeff Zucker and George Soros’s son Alexander have done what they do best—never let a crisis go to waste when you can deflect it to Trump.
Unsurprisingly, many in the media echo chamber have dutifully toed the line, citing stale and innocuous examples of Trump’s rhetorical animus while ignoring their more alarming liberal antecedents.
After years of shadowy political subversion that has included actively undermining efforts to enforce immigration laws—both at the border and the polling place—and paying often disruptive, sometimes violent protestors to appear at political events—Soros Jr., deputy chairman of his dad’s Open Society Foundations, sobbed to The New York Times that under Trump, “a genie was let out of the bottle, which may take generations to put back in.”
Suffice it to say, when it comes to politics, the Left is not above acts of self-sabotage or, in the words of Nancy Pelosi, “collateral damage.”
With such a group of “victims” involved, including several who have been caught on record lying and establishing elaborately contrived “bait and switch” operations, it would be imprudent to dismiss the possibility that the bomb spectacle was an inside job.
Even Vanity Fair acknowledged the rampant speculation, with conservative figures such as Rush Limbaugh pointing out how coincidental that it would happen in October, just as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, among others, has promised a few ‘October surprises.’
The aim, then, would be to get Republicans off-message—to put them on the defensive, or to engineer another Kavanaugh or caravan scenario that would generate negative optics regardless of the truth. But as with those other efforts, barring any real injury, it could easily backfire.
If the Democrats wind up being implicated in the scheme, they will simply lick their wounds, gather whatever ill-gotten gains they can from the smear, leave up in the air the accusations of Trump’s rhetoric as the cause and not a coordinated false-flag campaign, and begin the process anew.
Of course, there is also the possibility that the bomber may be a loose cannon on the Right, and if so, how does the GOP—seeing such an event as the inevitable outcome of the rhetoric and hostility on the Left—defuse it without conceding any moral high ground?
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders began by issuing an unequivocal condemnation of the attacks:
This is an ongoing situation that President Trump and his admin are monitoring closely. Our condemnation of these despicable acts certainly includes threats made to CNN as well as current or former public servants. These cowardly acts are unacceptable and wont be tolerated. https://t.co/YbMbCUWMPC
Soon, however, she was obliged to respond to Zucker’s specious finger-pointing by firing back:
.@realDonaldTrump asked Americans “to come together and send one very clear, strong, unmistakable message that acts or threats of political violence of any kind have no place in the USA” Yet you chose to attack and divide. America should unite against all political violence. https://t.co/Dlo3xwHyKi
There is not much that can be done to stop a rogue terrorist from perpetrating acts of violence, apart from condemning all politically motivated personal attacks and offering full support for the investigation and prosecution of responsible parties.
In the meantime, the Right can only hold its breath and hope that no tragedy results, while having faith in in the electorate that its message will prevail.
‘If and when she gets re-elected—she’s gonna be super-liberal…’
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp/IMAGE: Project Veritas via Youtube
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) If James O’Keefe’s headline-grabbing undercover exposés on the radical leftist positions of “battleground” Democrats Phil Bredesen (Tennessee) and Claire McCaskill (Missouri) helped give an edge to the Republican challengers in those states, the latest release on North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp will likely seal the deal for the already faltering incumbent.
Heitkamp, in her first re-election race as a senator, has increasingly lagged behind her opponent, Kevin Cramer, in a state that supported President Donald Trump in 2016 by a margin of 36 percent with all but two counties voting red.
A decision to vote against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation in September increased Cramer’s lead into double digits. Heitkamp defended her decision by saying it was a matter of conscience, questioning Kavanaugh’s temperament after saying she “saw rage” in his demeanor and body language, forcing her to turn off the volume.
A poorly conceived ad in which Heitkamp’s campaign outed abuse victims without first seeking their permission sent her farther into a quagmire last week.
The video released by O’Keefe’s Project Veritas, touched on a familiar format: interviewing campaign staff who, believing they were addressing a sympathetic audience, acknowledged the dissonance between what the candidates told their conservative-leaning voters and the issues they actually supported.
It opens with Heitkamp’s campaign digital director, Jesse Overton, explaining that Heitkamp’s current priority was to exercise caution. “It’s an election year for her. She’s being careful about pissing people off, and what’s funny is she said basically, like, after the election—if and when she gets re-elected—she’s gonna be super-liberal.”
Another campaign staffer in the Fargo office copped to the efforts to conceal Heitkamp’s liberal support and deceive the public, even going so far as to take down a poster of President Barack Obama during a visit from the media.
“We had press here because we had a lot of volunteers, so we take it down,” explained Hallie Skripak-Gordon. “… It’s just better to not have to deal with,” she said.
The video then shows the Project Veritas journalist being coached in messaging that is designed to purposely obfuscate Heitkamp’s position on building a wall at the Mexican border. Although the campaign did not encourage outright deception, Regional Field Director Lauren Dronen said “she supports effective border security” was a preferred method for circumventing the question.
“Unfortunately, people don’t understand that there’s more nuance,” Dronen said.
To Heitkamp’s credit, staff assistant Prescott Robinson indicated that her votes supporting Trump’s policies and agenda were in deference to the will of her constituents. However, he said that with a blue wave from other parts of the nation, she would likely be emboldened to abandon North Dakotan values to vote with the liberal majority.
“If the country moved further to the left, she would move to the left,” he said. “If we had a Democratic Senate, she would vote for more policies that you see Democrats support.”
Although Heitkamp has an aversion to being perceived as an obstructionist, she would readily back New York Sen. Chuck Schumer’s agenda if he were to become Senate majority leader and control what bills got introduced, Robinson said.
“The thing with politicians is that they’re politicians,” he said.
‘Because it’s not about left or right … it’s about right and wrong…’
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Is it possible to manufacture a “maverick”? Can those qualities be taught and cultivated, or does doing so, like Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, exert an outside influence that removes the very essence of maverickness?
Former NATO ambassador Kurt Volker, the institute’s executive director, said the ad blitz is targeting 18-35 year-olds in order to “build a constituency behind civic engagement and activism without it being partisan.”
It calls upon potential mavericks to sign a pledge in which they:
Stand up to bullies
Defend the dignity of all people
Champion ideas even when they’re unpopular
Have the courage to challenge the status quo
Work in service of a cause greater than myself
Go to the polls and vote
Because it’s not about left or right … it’s about right and wrong.
In light of McCain’s acrimonious relationship with President Donald Trump, however, it is easy to read certain partisan dog-whistles into the message.
Adding to the intrigue is the institute’s choices on where it intends to run digital ads and billboards prior to the Nov. 6 election: Texas, Missouri, Minnesota, Tennessee and, of course, Arizona.
With the exception of Minnesota, all are “battleground” states that broke for Trump in 2016 and have recently seen Republican candidates either pull ahead or else narrow a formerly large gap against their Democratic opponents.
Another aspect of the McCain Institute that is not entirely free from political influence its donor list, which runs the gamut from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations to the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia, along with an array of corporate and lobbying interests.
MGM Resorts—currently involved in a major lawsuit that could have Second Amendment and anti-terrorism implications—also makes the list, as do philanthropies devoted to “women’s health” and a number of globalist initiatives.
But it seems fitting that the complex—almost schizophrenic—legacy of McCain should be thus represented.
Not only did he routinely switch alliances and base political decisions on his personal vendettas, but he found no trouble pivoting from being embroiled in his own personal banking scandal with the Keating Five to becoming the sharpest advocate for campaign finance.
For McCain, bipartisanship meant playing both sides of the field, and being a maverick meant that whatever cause he invested in that was greater than himself, he was first to receive the dividends.
