It is classic Russian technique to blame on the other guy what they’re planning to do themselves.
— Victoria Nuland, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, 3/8/22

Here’s the PROOF in their own words….

NONE of the above footage has been shared on Fox News, CNN, ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, MSNBC, PBS, NPR, The New York Times, the Washington Post, Politico, The Hill, the Daily Beast, Huffington Post, Teen Vogue, or any other media entity. Had these been #MAGA Republicans and conservatives within the federal government, the headlines would have been deafening and the DOJ would be quite busy rounding up genuine insurrectionists. Had these liberal Democrats been pushed to launch their self-described “coup” against the Trump Administration, who knows what kind of carnage would have been unleashed upon the nation from Election Day on.

It is classic Russian technique to blame on the other guy what they’re planning to do themselves.
— Victoria Nuland, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, 3/8/22

The “Summer of 2020” would have been a mild pretext to the death and destruction that would have ensued.

So, what’s to say these same people are not preparing for Election Day 2024? To date, NONE of them have been arrested and charged with “insurrection” and it’s fair to assume that’s left them emboldened to plot another coup against an incoming Trump transition.

My guess is that the proverbial deep state within the intelligence community will reemerge because presumably a Republican candidate will again be seen as a threat to the internal policies that many intelligence people like.
— Dr. John Gentry, Georgetown University professor, 12-year CIA intelligence analyst

Democrats have a lot to lose in 2024, power being the top of the list but not most important to the apparatus.

Thousands of federal employees could lose their cush taxpayer-funded gigs within months of a Trump inauguration. Like it or not, they are employed to serve at the pleasure of the elected President of the United States. During the four-plus years of the Trump Administration, there were many public displays of insubordination and those efforts were cheered on by the media. President Trump signed a Schedule F executive order near the end of his first term, and that EO was quietly rescinded by Joe Biden almost immediately after he was sworn in.

While the left and their media enjoyed the persecution and imprisoning of Joe Biden’s political opponents, they will be the first to remind an incoming President Trump not to engage in petty, vindictive acts of revenge. But there will be lots to investigate. Many people who tried to disrupt the 2016 Trump Transition Team and his presidency with false claims from dirty tricks have yet to lawyer-up and face the music for the drama (including undeserved impeachments) they created and the “baggage” Trump is said to have because of those dirty trick slanders.

It is classic Russian technique to blame on the other guy what they’re planning to do themselves.
— Victoria Nuland, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, 3/8/22

The media will again go into 24-7 anti-Trump mode despite the fact most repeated lies for years and have yet to admit and apologize for their misinformation. They will double down and further prove they don’t deserve the First Amendment protections afforded a free and fair watchdog media. These are partisan activists and ignorant college hires who’ll repeat falsehoods who, despite the fact they’ll now be called on their lies on Elon Musk’s X, will continue to fan partisan flames to those who are too stupid and/or arrogant to admit they’re being used.

Will we have an actual coup d’etat November 5, 2024? Given the determination of those unpunished leftists, I say the chances are very good.

The left has no problem taking to the streets, vandalizing public and private property, disrupting traffic, burning down black neighborhoods, looting, assaulting law enforcement and killing private citizens.

Taking over the federal government to stop the “peaceful transition of power” is a simple task when that transition will be “mostly peaceful”….

Let’s get this out of the way from the onset: this is AGAIN about sore-loser Hillary Clinton supporters’ continuing whine about Donald Trump.

Half of white women continue to vote Republican. What’s wrong with them?
For the past two years, the American left has been haunted by a number: 53. It is the percentage of white women who voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. In the sectors of the left where the figure and its implications have become a perennial theme, the number is treated both as disappointing and darkly unsurprising, a reflection of the conventional wisdom that white women would rather choose the racism espoused by the Republican party than join in the moral coalition represented by men of color and other women.
— Moira Donegan, The Guardian

More times than not, the condescending may reluctantly admit they know very few of the people they publicly demonize. They’d never admit they’re speaking out of ignorance, thus their statements are totally irresponsible while borderline slanderous. No, it’s easier to point a finger of condemnation towards one group while conveniently ignoring the many factors that should be considered.

Women Can Be Racists, Too
After the 2016 election, many Americans expressed shock that large numbers of women voted for Donald Trump, a man known for vulgar sexism, anti-feminist positions, and admitted groping. Many experts had therefore predicted women would rally around Clinton in a display of gender solidarity, yet in 2016 she got only 54 percent of women’s vote. And among white women, Trump beat Clinton 53 to 43 percent.
— Marjorie J. Spruill, University of South Carolina

Of course Professor Spruill, like most sanctimonious liberals, omit the offenses of liberal Hollywood pigs like Harvey “#MeToo” Weinstein, not to mention the racist past of the Democrat Party and relies on the ignorance she and many others are responsible for when it comes to trite matters like… teaching.

In her piece, the headline photo used was captioned, “Klu Klux Klan members march in Washington, D.C., 1928.”

Did she also point out that the Klan was the enforcement wing of the Democrat Party? Of course not because that would require explanations not convenient to the discussion. It would require honest introspection but as the liberal wing of today’s Democrat Party STILL lies about their racist, murderous past that “both parties switched positions”, which requires a total suspension of common sense, Spruill can safely join those who feel safe in pointing out accusations against President Trump while omitting the many documented sexual offenses committed by President Bill Clinton, who is still a warmly invited guest to any and all progressive events and ventures.

White Women: We Need To Talk About Race
“White women like me” is a phrase you hear often when you talk with Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner. In this book, she calls on white women to engage in difficult conversations with one another and to become change agents to dismantle racism in America. Keep Marching is a how-to guide for doing just that.

From the outset, Rowe-Finkbeiner explores the feminist movement’s legacy of prioritizing the experience of white, cisgender, middle-class women above all others. In the book and throughout her work, she uses her own identity and experience to engage other white women in a conversation about race and class that prioritizes the experiences of women of color, of low-income women, of trans and gender-nonbinary people.
— Lelia Gowland, Forbes

Liberals love to define the rules on their terms without any negotiation. Especially when it comes to millennials, they introduce terms they were indoctrinated with as societal norms that must be observed.

While many liberal women, not only white women, say they have no issues with “women of color” and are hypersensitive to something they will never have to live with, it also doesn’t take much for them to say what they really feel within the comfort of like-minded and excuse the racism within their own ranks.

Had ANY Republican, Trump supporting woman publicly said what Hillary Clinton said, that white woman would have been crucified in the media, would have lost her job, would be forced to offer mea culpas that would never be acknowledged as enough, and the motivations for her apologies would always be questioned.

But if you’re a privileged white liberal woman, you always get that pass from the very people attacking others who they don’t know and could never understand.

Why are White Women So Terrified of Being Called Racist?
First of all, we are the most likely to be around people of color. And to the degree we think we already know all this, we have nothing more to learn, we’re woke—to the degree we think that, we’re going to put all our energy into making sure that YOU know that we’re woke, and YOU know that we’re not racist. So racism comes up and what do I do? Oh, well, “I tutored on the reservation, I’ve been to Costa Rica, I marched in the sixties, I was in Teach for America, I went to a really diverse high school.” We give this evidence that in our minds establishes that we can’t be racist, and it’s actually absurd evidence if we take the time to think about it, which we rarely do, right?
— Sady Doyle, ELLE Magazine

Maybe that should’ve been titled, “Why are Liberal White Women So Terrified of Being Called Racist?” Aside of being able to reflexively list their black friends off on more than the fingers on one hand, there are also some very dark realities they won’t admit in front of others, let alone in Elle Magazine.

Liberal white women are more likely to make false allegations of a sexual nature against innocent men.

Seriously, we all know how our national media would react if a female member of a college Republican group was caught making a false rape accusation. She’d be pounced upon via social media vitriol, she’d “setting women back decades”, making it harder (from here on) for any woman wanting to come forward, yada yada.

And the nastiest dirty secret liberal women that would leave them running from the room flailing their arms: should they need an alibi or are in need of personal attention, the first person that comes to their minds to blame a rape on is a black man. For some strange reason, they seem to believe they’ll be believed and if an innocent black man’s freedom is imperiled or even taken away, that collateral damage is totally inconsequential in their narcissism of questionable import.

Being black in a world where white lies matter
Whether it’s a woman in Michigan falsely claiming that a group of black men kidnapped, beat and raped her; another woman claiming a black man kidnapped her 3-year-old and 14-month-old sons (whom she actually killed); the infamous Amanda Knox accusing a black man of the heinous murder she was initially convicted of; or even a man claiming that black men stabbed his wife to death (whom he actually killed). In each instance, the initial story was believable because of the troubling belief that a black man is capable of such a thing.

It’s because we’ve always been told this is what black men do.
— Martenzie Johnson, The Undefeated

Sounds a tad bitter and deservedly so.

Have you noticed when liberal feel-your-pain women talk about Emmett Till, they NEVER mention how it was the false allegation of a white woman that contributed to his killing? No, it was that faceless systemic racism that was easier to blame instead of the word of a white woman whose word and perceptions were accepted without question.

Rape has historically been a crime in which the victim is scrutinized in intense detail. In cases of black-on-white rape, however, the victim was almost immediately believed and the assailant assumed guilty. The myth of the “black beast rapist” grew out of perceived threats from a free, politically empowered black population after the Civil War. Black-on-white rape, the embodiment of the black rapist myth, threatened the patriarchal privileges possessed by white men, privileges dependent upon perceived notions of white femininity. Specifically, the myth depended upon the idea that white women were symbols of racial purity and virtue, and should be protected chivalrously by white men. The myth also depended upon the idea that white women were sexually desirable.
— Lisa Lindquist Dorr, University of Virginia

Interesting how black men became threatening to white women after “an empowered black population after the Civil War”. That war was a fight for or against slavery and the Union, led by Republicans, won. So, logically, the animosity against an empowered black population came from liberals.

Let’s be real; the physical attributes of white women who falsely accuse black men of rape are normally not in that “sexually desirable” column. These are frustrated, angry liberal white women and again, their kneejerk accused-of-choice is that worthless black man.

And again, if Republican women were making racist false accusations against black men, THAT would be the national headline and deservedly so. To date, can you name ONE instance where that’s happened? Oh, and what ever happened to all those women who came out of the woodwork to accuse Herman Cain of sexual assault during his 2012 presidential campaign? As usual, the damage was done and they all went away which, if you look at the aftermath of the Brett Kavanaugh drama, is a pattern they use because it works.

White Women, Come Get Your People. (But Who Are Your People?)
On Wednesday, I was on no fewer than three group texts between white women asking what they could do about white women.

It was the day after the midterm elections, and the exit poll numbers showed, once again, that more than half of white women voters voted Republican in key races in Florida and Texas, and that more than three-quarters of white women voters had voted against gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams in Georgia.
— Emma Gray, Huffington Post

These narrow-minded liberals don’t realize they are making the same assumptions of ignorance with white women that they’ve always made with blacks.

We have the latest salvo “The Other Trent Lotts” by New York Times columnist Bob Herbert, in which we get an example of lazy, emotionalism in print that makes his editor masters happy and should keep him employed another day. It’s obviously supposed to give the readers the continued impression that “since we all look alike, we all think alike.”
— Bob Parks, 12/24/02

Over the next few years, I modified that line to read, “Since we all look alike, we’re supposed to think and vote alike” which is apropos to this discussion. But as is the case with blacks, it’s also predicated by having to insulate oneself of the accusations made of others.

These are the same caring white liberal women who go batshit crazy at the possible peril of losing that “right to choose”. They’ll also be the last to admit (if they even know) that abortion was normalized via a false rape accusation but was originally aimed at black people and continues to be to this day.

Liberal Democrat white women who are now coming off as morally righteous are every bit as condescending, if not outright racist in their dealings with minorities. Very few would narrow their hiring to the qualified. Instead they embrace the mediocre and presenting them as the “voice” of people white women should be voting for; not because of their political accomplishments but because of a vagina; original or installed.

Screaming misogyny against one man while giving another a longing pass is the height of hypocrisy but is the sad norm for those looking down on others.

We’re thrilled to announce that Ali Watkins of Politico is joining the Washington Bureau as a national security reporter.

Ali, who covers intelligence and national security for Politico, has had a series of important scoops. She broke news that Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser, met with a Russian spy in 2013. She also had exclusive new details on China’s harassment of American spies. Last month, she was the first to reveal the name of the Russian woman, Olga Vinogradova, who met with the former Trump adviser George Papadopoulos during the 2016 campaign.

Ali arrived in Washington in 2013 as an intern covering national security for McClatchy, where she was part of a Pulitzer-finalist team that uncovered the C.I.A.’s spying on Senate Intelligence Committee computers.

After McClatchy, Ali covered national security for The Huffington Post and then Buzzfeed before going to Politico.
— New York Times, 12/5/17

Ever since the Harvey Weinstein saga broke, we’ve argued that some women were willing to cozy up to a pig in order to have a shot at a lucrative career in Hollywood. However, you’re only as good as your professional talent and when some of the careers didn’t blossom as desired, many of these women are now screaming rape.

The template’s not been thrown out the window altogether….

What is known today is that in December 2013, the Temple University intern had begun a romantic relationship with James A. Wolfe, a man 30 years her senior. He happened to sit amid a flow of juicy information as director of security for the same Senate committee. The reporter-source romance would last four years. Then the FBI intervened.

From McClatchy, she went on to land jobs in quick succession at HuffPost, BuzzFeed, Politico and finally the New York Times, where she resides today at the Washington bureau.
— Washington Times, 6/9/18

That’s not to say everyone in high-profile journalism screwed their way to the top, but many did, and it prompted us to do some digging on their qualifications to occupy the most prominent positions in the profession; qualifications that can legitimately be questioned.

In most professions, one needs to at least have an educational background, if not a degree, in that chosen profession. However that doesn’t seem to apply to those who work in the highest seats of broadcast journalism.

For some, nepotism and/or sexual favoritism didn’t hurt either.
— On-Air ‘Journalists’ Are Lib-Trained, Poli-Sci Hacks

Of course, this is not to imply that ALL women, especially now millennial women who occupy a growing number of very influential positions in the media and in-and-around Capitol Hill, screwed their way to jobs that they’re relatively inexperienced to have acquired. It does show lazy journalism on Ali Watkins’ part as she found a shortcut to doing her job instead of that “shoe leather” journalism; a shortcut she was rewarded for.

Worked out for some people, and for Ali, once was not enough.

The New York Times published a damaging feature about its own reporter, revealing new details of Ali Watkins’ affair with former Senate Intelligence Committee aide James A. Wolfe.

“Last fall, after Ms. Watkins and Mr. Wolfe had broken up and while she was still reporting on the intelligence committee for Politico, she briefly dated another staff member at the committee, friends said. That relationship, which has not been previously reported, ended when the two decided not to pursue something more serious,” the Times wrote.
— Fox News, 6/25/18

“Dated”…? Fucked.

Will we see Ali Watkins being stripped of her co-Pulitzer Prize as quickly as Bill Cosby was of his many recognitions? Probably not because women are always the victim. She simply did what she had to do in a man’s profession, even though the numbers are narrowing.

And like a federal government agency, Watkins was not fired for wrongdoing but… reassigned.

The New York Times demoted a reporter who acknowledged a romantic relationship with a Senate staffer who is suspected of leaking information to journalists. Times editor Dean Baquet said Tuesday he would reassign the reporter, Ali Watkins from the paper’s Washington bureau to New York in the wake of revelations that she had been involved with James Wolfe, the former head of security for the Senate Intelligence Committee. Watkins covered the committee for a number of publications, although not the Times.

In a staff memo on Tuesday, Baquet said Watkins would be reassigned to an unspecified position in New York “where she will be closely supervised and have a senior mentor.”
— New York Times “Style” section, 7/3/18

Thanks to Ms. Watkins, all women (especially younger women) will be looked at with that “What did she do to get there?” There was a time when you had to pay dues that required years, if not decades of hard work, to get the attention of the big house on the hill. If you’re a young woman, no matter how much she’ll commiserate with the #MeToo screamers, all it takes is spread your legs.

There are takers and rewards.

Some sites offer a premise and then embed numerous Tweets from the questionable-important to back them up. Also noticeable is the millennial tendency of applying violent imagery to self-congratulate themselves for offering up a counter argument.

Wrecked: Ben Shapiro Destroys Stelter for Denying Media’s Liberal Bias
PA-POW! Ben Shapiro SHREDS Chelsea Handler in just 7 little words for bad Pence joke
Trevor Noah Destroys Sean Hannity For His Delusional Las Vegas Response
Seth Meyers Shreds ‘Lowlife’ Donald Trump For ‘Lying To The Elderly’
‘Morality of abortion does not change’: Ben Shapiro destroys case for abortion after rape
Is Jenna Jameson crushing on Ben Shapiro after he ‘destroyed’ The Young Turks’ head lib?
Blac Chyna’s Lawyer Shreds Rob Kardashian for ‘Hate Filled Lies’
Oh SNAP! Brit Hume SHREDS Samantha Power over her pathetic Hillary-loss sads in just 3 WORDS
WATCH: Ben Shapiro goes to Congress & DESTROYS campus snowflakes
Ben Shapiro Nails Exactly Why CNN’s Anti-Gun Town Hall Will Backfire in a Huge Way
Watch: Ben Shapiro uses facts to skewer Linda Sarsour supporter who defends call for jihad against Trump
Shapiro shreds idea CA not spending enough
Watch: Steve Forbes destroys the GOP tax plan — and explains how Republicans ‘betrayed’ Trump
Ben Shapiro nails truth about dangerous ‘alt-right’ movement in fiery tweet storm
‘I’m not going to modify basic biology’: Ben Shapiro destroys transgender, pro-abortion arguments

Whether they’re destroying, killing, shredding an opposing point of view, does applying violent verbs to their headlines imply their counters are unassailable and if you dare question them, you’ll be destroyed?

This kind of runs contrary to their demands that all points of view be respected. They consistently demand all points of view be observed, whine about being excluded from oppressive progressive venues, yet they “stun”, “nail”, “destroy”, “shred” and “kill”, armed with “backfires” and “bombshells” for opinion that differs from their own as a way of further diminishing their opponents personally. Not to exclude their constant need to make their intellectually superior retorts portrayed as “epic”.

Talk about the need to boost fragile egos.

I think a lot of this younger generation were brought up to believe that it’s very important that their voices be heard, and so I think it’s a bit harder to fit into an institution where it’s less than democratic in some ways. One generation came of age where they entered this esteemed institution and tried to find a way to fit into it, and this other generation has an expectation that the institution will change to accommodate them. That’s the essence of the tension.
— “Institutional” New York Times “person”

Is THIS the future of journalism, led by the generation that snorts Tide pods and inhales condoms? Disagree with them at your own peril? While leading assaults against teenage online bullies like David Hogg, our side counters with those whose prime motivation is self-promotion using the worst of the English language to force us to notice them, when they want us to notice them, for as long as they want us to notice them.

This is just one of the reasons we don’t open their “news” alerts and when we do, it’s for comic relief or a sense of pity for what was once a respected craft.