
Remember them?


Trolling used to be the pastime of a subculture that considered itself apolitical, and that claimed to be interested in provoking everyone. But for Michael and Sloane, the jokes are part of how they practice their politics—the only fun part, they say. Similarly, many politically minded young people have come of age with an innate understanding of how antisocial behavior online can be used to win attention for and participation in a chosen cause. “Trolling has a long and noble history, and shitposting can be useful,” says Talia Lavin, the author of Culture Warlords: My Journey Into the Dark Web of White Supremacy. She took part in an attempt to troll Trump’s “Voter Fraud Hotline,” she told me, by submitting a long video in which she described being intimidated by the sexual attractiveness of an antifa operative at her polling place.
But trolling can have especially unpredictable results when it engages with hateful rhetoric and conspiratorial thinking. It might even help spread and amplify misinformation or extremist beliefs. Some r/ParlerTrick members, for example, created memes that, per Michael, had “some racist stuff” in them, or might have stoked “unnecessary hate.” The forum has struggled with this issue, he said. “It’s a thin line. You have to really pay attention to what you’re doing.”
YouTube has removed another interview with former President Trump, continuing its pattern of blacklisting Trump from its platform, even when appearing as a guest on other channels.
This time, Trump’s interview with David Brody on “The Water Cooler” show on the Real America’s Voice news network has been purged after the tech giant claimed that the video contained “content that advances false claims that widespread fraud, errors, or glitches changed the outcome of the U.S. 2020 presidential election.”
During the interview, Trump responded to headlines that claimed he’d admitted he lost the 2020 US presidential election by saying: “I never admitted defeat.”
He also said it’s up to the public and “perhaps, politicians” to decide wether the election was fraudulent and added: “I don’t think there’s ever been a case like this where hundreds of thousands of votes will be found. So we’ll have to see what happens.”
Not only was this Trump interview scrubbed but the Real America’s Voice YouTube channel was also hit with a strike which blocks it from uploading or live streaming for seven days.
Real America’s Voice program director Roger Hudson described the censorship of this Trump interview as “a little heavy-handed and probably inappropriate” and said Trump “didn’t say what they [YouTube] said he said.”
The nation’s top psychologists, entrusted with executive decisions on the treatment of mental health, are exposed in private email exchanges obtained by The Gateway Pundit pathologizing all conservatives as mentally ill and untreatable.
No amount of therapy can remedy “ignorant,” “paranoid,” “strange” “delusional,” “stupid,” “narcissist” conservative Americans who support “corruption and incompetence,” the executive board members of the National Alliance of Professional Psychology Providers contend.
In a June 4 email, executive director of NAPPP Dr. John Caccavale warns: “Trump supporters may share some of the narcissistic traits that were exhibited by the former president himself during his 2020 re-election campaign.”
Remember that time when the mainstream media lied about former President Donald J. Trump, only to have Trump proven correct afterwards?
“Can you be more specific,” you ask?
Good point.
There are so many to mention, we need to be more precise, so let’s narrow the list down to five, and let’s consider the true impact of their dishonesty.
While the media may have been successful in sustaining political damage against Trump, the Republican Party, and the conservative movement – which was their ultimate goal, no doubt – they also caused significant collateral damage, either unwittingly or uncaringly.

Alina Chan is a biologist at the Silver lab at the Harvard School of Medicine.
Chan is one of 18 scientists who finally admitted in the journal of Science last month that the Wuhan coronvirus likely originated in a Wuhan, China virology lab.
Chan says liberal scientists lied to the American public for months about their beliefs on the origination of the virus. They did this because they didn’t want to be associated with President Trump — who was right about the virus all along.
These people are disgusting!
Insisting that President Donald Trump had politicized the Department of Justice was a regular part of the media assault on him, yet a host of recent developments proves it was all in the press’ fevered, hyperpartisan imagination.
The big one, of course, is the Interior Department inspector general report on the Lafayette Park incident: The IG thoroughly vindicated Trump and then-Attorney General Bill Barr, saying the federal Park Police had decided all on their own last June to clear protesters out of the area to install fencing after several nights of violence and vandalism. It was indeed sheer coincidence that Trump went to the area later that day for a photo op.
Then and since, outlets from CNN and MSNBC to The New York Times and Washington Post repeatedly reported as fact the claim that Trump had demanded the protesters be cleared out of his way.
Some headline samples: “Officers fire tear gas on peaceful protesters to clear the way for Trump’s photo op” (Vox); “Analysis: How the clearing of Lafayette Square made the White House look a bit more like the Kremlin” (Washington Post); “The day police charged a peaceful protest for Trump’s photo-op” (CNN). Heck, a Washington Post “fact checker” is still trying to insist the IG’s report doesn’t really debunk the months of misreporting.
But that’s not the only Trump vindication. President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice is standing with the Trump DOJ on a couple of high-profile controversies. It’s gone to court to continue blocking access to internal government documents relating to the Trump International Hotel in DC and to keep secret most of a memo sent to then-AG Barr arguing that Trump should be cleared of obstruction-of-justice charges after the Mueller report refused to take a position on the issue.
Yesterday, Biden promised world leaders at the G7 summit that the United States of America would finance the purchase of 500 million COVID-19 vaccines to be given to poor countries at almost precisely the same time the White House budget office approved Biden’s plan to slash a Trump-era program that provided low cost insulin and epinephrine pens to low income Americans.
On the ending of the Trump-era program, Fox Business reported, “The measure, signed off on under the previous administration in December, aimed to require some 340B community health centers to deliver savings to low-income patients for insulin and epinephrine in a bid to bring down unaffordable prices.” Fox Business notes that the Biden administration refused to offer a comment when asked by the cable network.
Hours earlier, Biden promised to unveil an American-led worldwide program to address COVID-19 vaccines as he prepared to leave the United States for the United Kingdom to meet with world leaders. After arriving, and only an hour before the White House budget office would make its announcement regarding insulin and epinephrine pens, the Washington Post revealed the administration’s plan to buy 500 million Pfizer vaccines, and reported that “President Biden is slated to announce the plan this week at the Group of Seven meeting in Britain, where he is expected to be joined by Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla.”
This happened earlier today, with Biden appearing before the international media to make the announcement. Today we’re taking a major step that will super charge the fight against the global pandemic. “At my direction, the United states will purchase an additional half billion doses from Pfizer, Pfizer vaccine, that will donate nearly 100 low and lower middle income countries, they will be the beneficiaries. Let me say that again, the United States will purchase a half a billion doses of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine to donate to nearly 100 nations that are in dire need in the fight against this pandemic.”
The Trump Justice Department in 2017 and early 2018 issued subpoenas to Apple to obtain the communications records of at least two Democratic members of the House Intelligence Committee, Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Eric Swalwell (D-CA). According to The New York Times, DOJ prosecutors attempting to determine who leaked classified information to the media about Russiagate suspected the two House Democrats were the culprits, and to prove that, they obtained their communications records as well as those of family members, including minor children.
A DOJ leak investigation aimed at sitting members of Congress is highly unusual. Both the Obama and Trump administrations, in a hunt for leakers, created controversy by obtaining the communications records of journalists, including — in the case of the Obama DOJ — the family members of those journalists. But investigating members of the House Intelligence Committee for leaking crimes — as opposed to corruption or other standard criminal charges — can present different dangers. Neither Congressman was charged with any crimes and the investigation reportedly bore no fruit.
The two House Democrats, among the most fanatical disseminators of baseless Russiagate conspiracies and long known to serve as anonymous sources of leaks to liberal media outlets, reacted with predictable outrage. “This baseless investigation, while now closed, is yet another example of Trump’s corrupt weaponization of justice,” Schiff intoned on Thursday night. As difficult as it is, Swalwell, as he often does, found a way to be even more melodramatic than Schiff: “Like many of the world’s most despicable dictators, former President Trump showed an utter disdain for our democracy and the rule of law.”
Investigating possible crimes — such as leaking classified information — is the job of the Justice Department. To accomplish that, FBI agents and prosecutors often obtain personal communications records about their suspects. But invading the communications records of journalists, as both the Obama and Trump DOJ did, can create serious threats to press freedom and the possibility of abuse and retaliation. The same is true for invading the communications records of members of the legislative branch, particularly ones hostile to the president. An investigation is certainly warranted to determine the propriety of these subpoenas.
But like so many politicians before them, Schiff and Swalwell have zero credibility to object to this targeting. When it comes to ordinary Americans, both have been long-time champions of expanding domestic spying powers and blocking efforts at reform designed to curb abuses of the type they claim took place here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.