A must-read essay about the damage caused by "fake news"
While we wait for the results of the midterm elections, I have to share with you some important reading material from THE AMERICAN SPECTATOR. This essay by Dov Fischer makes the case for Trump’s use of the term “enemy of the people” to describe members of the media who tell lies and weave false narratives to sow social discord. He offers a historical perspective by explaining how such tactics have been used to prop up dictatorial regimes, and he provides examples of the damage caused by “fake media” in our country today, most notably in labeling the President –- bizarrely –- as an anti-Semite and trying to keep us from healing in the aftermath of the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting and Trump’s compassionate response. They don’t want the nation to heal; they just want to stir the pot and tear down this administration at any cost.
If you read just one thing today (aside from my newsletter), please make it this. And share it with all your friends, liberal and conservative, as I have with you.
Brett Kavanaugh Effect
Some political analysts claim that the “Brett Kavanaugh effect” is waning with the passage of time (and with the media’s attempts to bury that story now that he’s taken his place on the SCOTUS and the shakiness of the accusations against him is becoming more apparent), and that it won’t make as big an impact on the election as predicted. I personally don’t believe that. But if you were fired up to vote Republican by the injustice of those hearings, the trial by innuendo and Twitter mob, and the assault on due process – but now, your passions are cooling – then read this. It will make you willing to crawl over broken glass to vote Republican if you have to:
From the “Believe All Women” Desk: Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, who referred sleazy lawyer Michael Avenetti and his client Judy Swetnick to the Justice Department for allegedly attempting to mislead Congress with false charges against Kavanaugh, has referred another accuser to the DOJ for the same reasons. This time, it’s a woman named Judy Munro-Leighton, who admitted to writing an anonymous letter to Sen. Kamala Harris, claiming that Kavanaugh and a friend had repeatedly raped her in a car.
You might not have heard about this accusation (it wasn’t sent confidentially to Diane Feinstein, so it stayed confidential), but Kavanaugh certainly heard about it. He was privately grilled by Congress about it and said this, with his shock obvious by his response:
“The whole thing is ridiculous. Nothing ever — anything like that, nothing. The whole thing is just a crock, farce, wrong, didn’t happen, not anything close.”
And he was telling the truth. Turns out Munro-Leighton is a leftwing activist decades older than Kavanaugh, who had called Congress multiple times to protest his nomination. She’s now admitted that the rape accusation was a complete lie. She’s never even met Kavanaugh. She admitted that she “just wanted to get attention,” and it was a “tactic” and “a ploy” to stop his confirmation (you probably haven’t heard much about this part in the media, either, and for obvious reasons.)
To those who criticized Justice Kavanaugh’s “temperament” during his testimony: imagine that you had been falsely accused of repeatedly raping a woman you’d never even met, that high-ranking members of government and the media were declaring you guilty without a trial, your good name was being slandered and your family threatened. Would you have been calm, or would you have been justifiably furious?
Well, you should be furious now. There’s nothing “progressive” about saying that members of a protected class must always be believed and members of an unprotected class are guilty without evidence. That’s incredibly “regressive”: it’s a return to the type of class system that existed before the Founders recognized every American’s due process rights. Every accuser has the right to be heard, but everyone accused has a right to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty and to face their accuser in court. That’s worked pretty well for over two centuries – up until now.
Don’t let the left sweep their scurrilous lies and assaults on our rights into the media memory hole. If you haven’t already voted, then go vote tomorrow as if the very concept of American justice depended on it, because it does. If you are a man, remember, if they would try to destroy Brett Kavanaugh with lies for political gain, they would do it to you. And if you are a woman, remember that they would do it to your husband, sons, father or brothers.
A No Show
On a subject related to the latest Kavanaugh accuser being exposed as a liar, the woman who was allegedly going to accuse Special Counsel Robert Mueller of rape failed to show up at a press conference last week. See, when you unleash a weapon like accepting sexual assault allegations without question or evidence, you give up control of who it’s going to end up targeting. More details at the link.
Obama: Vote for Cuba
Former President Barack Obama, campaigning in Florida, told voters to elect Democrats because they won’t be hard on the oppressive communist government of Cuba and impose sanctions to force them to give their people human rights. As Obama put it, “We need to get back to politics that’s for the Cuban people, make their lives better. That’s change.”
Well, it’s change, all right. One could argue that it’s a big “change” for a United States President to urge Americans to elect people based on how much better they’ll make the lives of residents of other countries. Of course, it’s not a change from what he did, which was give us eight years of American decline and acquiescence to tyrants in other nations. I can only remind voters that that’s why so many of you were so anxious for a big “change” from him just a couple of years ago.
This headline is probably true, and if so, it’s a harsher assessment of the state of the Democratic Party then I could ever manage: “Hillary Clinton remains the Democrats’ best chance to defeat Trump in 2020.”
This past week wasn’t an auspicious one for NBC’s “Saturday Night Live.” First, Alec Baldwin, beloved by the left for his crude, one-dimensional cartoon impression of President Trump, was arrested for allegedly punching a man in New York in a dispute over a parking space. This was ironic, since Baldwin has repeatedly assailed Trump as a thug, fascist and bigot, even though this is hardly the first time he’s been accused of acting violent and saying offensive things. The latest incident prompted ABC News White House correspondent Tara Palmeri to recall how he once responded to her covering a story about him by tweeting to her, “I hope you choke to death.”
Doubly ironic, while Baldwin preaches that Trump should not be allowed to keep his job because Baldwin thinks he’s a crude, combative jerk who abuses people on Twitter, at this writing, Baldwin reportedly still has his job at “SNL.”
But “SNL” has an even bigger controversy on its hands over Saturday’s show, in which cast member Pete Davidson did a bit on “Weekend Update” giving his “first impressions” of various Congressional candidates. One was Texas Republican Dan Crenshaw, who wears an eye patch. Davidson mocked him, saying, “You may be surprised to hear he’s a congressional candidate from Texas and not a hit man in a porno movie…I’m sorry, I know he lost his eye in war or whatever...”
Yes, he did lose his eye in war. To be precise (and this takes all of two minutes of Googling to find out), Crenshaw is a former Navy SEAL who lost his eye when he was injured by an I.E.D. explosion in Afghanistan.
The ill-considered mockery of a veteran's wound drew an angry response from Republicans (watch the media try to make "Republican backlash" the focus of the story rather than the original comment), but as you’d expect, Crenshaw took the high road. He tweeted, "Good rule in life: I try hard not to offend; I try harder not to be offended. That being said, I hope @nbcsnl recognizes that vets don’t deserve to see their wounds used as punchlines for bad jokes."
I’d like to give Pete Davidson the benefit of the doubt that the line was written by someone else and maybe he didn’t realize how offensive it was. I say that because I did do two minutes of Googling and learned that Davidson’s father was a New York City firefighter who died on 9/11, while climbing upstairs at the Marriott World Trade Center to save others. Davidson was only seven at the time, and he’s talked about how deeply it affected him and even made him feel suicidal.
I'certain he knows that those who are willing to sacrifice their bodies or their lives to protect others are the greatest heroes on Earth, and should never be made fun of for their sacrifices. I hope this will serve as a reminder to whoever was responsible for “SNL” airing that bit that neither politics nor the pursuit of cheap laughs are justification for forgetting that.