MSNBC’S JOY REID LIKENS TRUMP’S BORDER FENCE TO BERLIN WALL


On Saturday’s “Melissa Harris-Perry” on MSNBC, guest host Joy Reid remembered the construction of the Berlin Wall, “one of the world’s most infamous symbols of oppression and division,” by comparing it to proposed fencing along the US-Mexico border.

Reid first explained how the Berlin Wall was constructed overnight without much warning, and even though friends and family were separated, soldiers were ordered to shoot anyone who tried to cross.

“In effort to stop the exodus, late one August night, East Germany began constructing a barrier, first with miles of barbed wire, but within days that was replaced with concrete walls. With little warning, Berliners found themselves cut off from friend, family, and work. The barrier continued to grow, eventually comprised of a series of concrete walls, standing up to 15 feet high, heavily fortified and stretching more than 100 miles. soldiers stationed along the wall were under orders to shoot anyone who attempted to defect. And yet, some East Germans risked their lives to continue trying to cross the border.”

Connecting the Berlin Wall to the wall that GOP presidential hopeful Donald Trump would like built along the United States-Mexico border, Reid said that “walls, as a means of separating and isolating people, countries, and cultures are still a thing, including in the United States, as evidenced by Donald Trump’s plan for the US-Mexico border.

Reid concluded, “History has taught us building a wall, whether to keep people out, or to lock them in, can have far reaching, and sometimes devastating consequences, just like that wall bisecting Berlin, which the government of East Germany began building on this day, August 15, 1961.”


http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/08/15/msnbcs-joy-reid-likens-trumps-border-fence-to-berlin-wall/

Trump: Illegal Immigrants ‘Have to Go,’ ‘We Either Have a Country or We Don’t Have a Country’


Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump argued that illegal immigrants “have to go” in a preview of his interview set to air on NBC News’ “Meet the Press” released on Saturday.

Trump said that if he is president, “The executive order gets rescinded.”

Trump added, “We’re going to keep the families together. We have to keep the families together, but they have to go.” And “They have to go.” Trump also said that if illegal immigrants don’t have a place to go, “We will work with them. They have to go. Chuck, we either have a country, or we don’t have a country.”

According to NBC News, Trump also stated, “‘we have to’ rescind Obama’s executive order offering those brought to the U.S. illegally as children — known as DREAMers — protection from deportation, as well as Obama’s unilateral move to delay deportation for their families as well.”



http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/08/15/trump-illegal-immigrants-have-to-go/

For almost a year, video game consumers have been at war with the media thanks to the latter’s repeated attempts to smear gamers as angry white male misogynists for having the temerity to point out the very real ethical lapses in journalism both inside and outside of the video game industry.

That’s about how my “#GamerGate’s one year anniversary” post would start, to answer one of many questions members of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) asked a panel of #GamerGate supporters at a debate in Miami today.  The event, called SPJ Airplay, was created by SPJ Region 3 director Mike Koretzky to give #GamerGate a chance to talk directly to journalists so that they might figure out a way to move the conversation forward.

Originally it was supposed to be a debate between the pro and anti sides of #GamerGate, but as usual the antis refused to show up.  So instead it featured two segments with a panel of pro-#GamerGate speakers making their case to two journalists and one neutral game developer.  The morning segment seemed to go well enough (despite some pretty horrendous audio issues) with the pro-#GamerGate panel of Washington Examiner’s Ashe Schow, Breitbart’s Allum Bokhari, and Gather Your Party’s Mark Ceb looking a little nervous as they tried to distill all of #GamerGate down for someone who knew nothing about it.  As someone who’s tried that before, I understand why they had some difficulty.

Despite that, they had some reasonably productive exchanges with the non-#GamerGate side of the room, namely journalism ethics expert Lynn Walsh, journalism trainer Ren LaForme, and independent game developer Derek Smart.  Koretzky took the moderating duties and guided them through a discussion of some of the potential ethical lapses the pro-#GamerGate panel had seen in the past, with the journalists largely agreeing that they were serious lapses and laughing at the notion that Gawker Media outlets should be taken seriously.

It was after the break when the real fireworks began. Tagging in for the #GamerGate side were Breitbart’s Milo Yiannopoulos, AEI’s Christina Hoff Sommers, and Reason’s Cathy Young.  They started by working to unravel the media narrative that #GamerGate is a hate group, only to be repeatedly shut down by Koretzky who didn’t want to hear any of that.  He only wanted to talk about how the media should approach situations like #GamerGate going forward, and it was mostly downhill from there.

The panelists tried to explain that no discussion of what to do right would make sense without talking about what had gone wrong in the first place, particularly as #GamerGate itself is very much a reaction to media malpractice. Even Smart jumped in to make this point, but it was continually brushed aside as no longer relevant.  Instead Koretzky continued to press the pro-GG panel on how a mainstream journalists should cover #GamerGate, which began a bizarre exchange wherein the journalists seemed not to understand even the most basic notion of observing a group of people online and using those observations to locate people who could give them a solid idea of what exactly the group wanted.  This was considered too time consuming or too difficult to accomplish for a mainstream outlet, but as Milo ultimately retorted, “you just do the work.”

As this back and forth intensified, with Yiannopoulos and Young tag teaming Koretzky, it seemed the whole thing was headed straight off the rails.  Fortunately, Milo was able to redirect things by turning the question back on the journalists, asking them how they would want or need gamers to approach them.  That led to a discussion of the problems with anonymous sources, and right about as Walsh was wondering what would actually be worth covering about #GamerGate, the answer provided itself because the entire facility had to be evacuated due to bomb threats.

Apparently several calls had been made to the Miami PD and Miami Herald indicating that a bomb would go off at 2:45 PM, and though apprised that this has happened before to #GamerGate, the authorities weren’t taking any chances.  They sent everyone back a couple blocks and cleared the entire neighborhood surrounding the venue.

Stuck standing outside in the 96 degree Miami heat, suddenly the journalists present were extremely interested in what #GamerGate had to say, and many of them were seen giving interviews there on the street.  After about an hour, the attendees who remained decided to finish their discussion outside, which was recorded and will hopefully be posted later.

Meanwhile the #SPJAirplay tag had hit the top spot trending on Twitter, and gamers have planned to meet up later this evening to eat, drink, and generally be the merry bunch they are.  We’ll see if they can get through the night without being driven out of yet another place thanks to anonymous trolls on the Internet.

All in all, Airplay seems to have been a mixed bag, but now that journalists have gotten a little taste of how much people want to shut down #GamerGate’s attempts to have rational discussion, maybe they’ll be more inclined to make the effort to get to know some gamers before they write their next pieces on the subject.


http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/15/gamergate-debate-at-spj-airplay-broken-up-by-bomb-threats/

That's a poor excuse to NEVER talk about them. The so called sisters and brothers of the western movements...

If Your Name Isn't Hillary, the Hammer for Mishandling Secrets
The double standard is obvious, says a former diplomat pounded by Clinton State Department.






Peter Van Buren can’t wait for the court-ordered release of Hillary Clinton’s work emails from 2011, a nearly ruinous year for him that resulted in a negotiated retirement from the State Department.

The foreign affairs arm of the federal government, then led by Clinton, had accused the longtime foreign service officer of mishandling classified information and unsuccessfully asked the Justice Department to prosecute him.

Van Buren says his travails demonstrate a double standard at the State Department, which now defends Clinton’s use of a private email system that this week was revealed to contain highly classified top secret information.

At the same time Clinton, now the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, was using her private and apparently unsecure email system, Van Buren lost his security clearance and then his job as a result of what he views as false allegations of mishandling information that wasn't secret at all.


The problems began in late 2010 when Van Buren wrote a book titled “We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People.” He submitted it to the department for prepublication review and, after a mandatory waiting period in 2011, it was shipped to bookstores. Just before it hit the shelves, his publisher was urged to hit the brakes.

There were three allegedly classified details, the department claimed about the book poised to sharply criticize U.S. diplomatic efforts. The details including mention that an unnamed CIA officer who had worked in Iraq and Afghanistan had also worked in Somalia, that the CIA controlled the budget of Iraqi intelligence services – a rehash, the author says, of mainstream press reporting – and that the CIA had once worked with Saddam Hussein.

Van Buren's publisher concluded the contested passages “clearly did not contain classified information” and brushed off the threat without legal consequences.

Then a ton of bricks fell on Van Buren. His security clearance was suspended. His access to State Department facilities was restricted. He was essentially unable to work. The reason he was given, he recalls, was that he linked to a WikiLeaks cable on his personal blog.

The cable, with the low classification "confidential," recounted an apparently chummy visit that Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., had with Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi in 2009.

The State Department told Van Buren, a 24-year diplomat, in 2012 he was being fired.

The Washington Post reported eight alleged infractions, including linking to WikiLeaks on his blog, not clearing blog posts with the department, exhibiting a “lack of candor” with diplomatic security officers, allegedly leaking classified information in his book and showing “bad judgement” by criticizing Clinton and then-Rep. Michele Bachmann on his blog.

The revelation that the State Department’s diplomatic security branch requested Van Buren be prosecuted came later, after his negotiated exit.

Van Buren believes the emails in Clinton’s private server that contained highly classified information did not include documents, but the information itself, and that the State Department is being deceptive in making the true but incomplete statement that the messages “were not marked as classified” when they were sent, as spokesman John Kirby said Wednesday.

Low-level diplomats who do so much as leave a document of low classification on a guarded embassy desk, Van Buren says, risk demerits that jeopardize future job prospects.

“I cannot conceive any other person in government being able to do what she did without being punished,” he says. “Lots of people have lost their clearances, lost their jobs and in some cases lost their freedom and gone to jail” for allegedly being careless in protecting classified documents.

Van Buren isn't sure how closely Clinton followed his case, but he heard through the rumor mill that Clinton became aware of it in October 2011 when The New York Times reported on his book and State Department pushback.

The man he believes led the investigation into him, Van Buren says, reported to Clinton and “is not a bureaucrat who sticks his neck out unwisely, and he would not proceed in something as public as my case was without keeping her office informed.”

Mishandling classified documents often is alleged when authorities seek to punish embarrassing leaks to the press, but also appears in lesser-known cases, such as the prosecution of Arabic translator James Hitselberger, who was fired and criminally charged for printing two classified documents and attempting to leave a Bahrain naval base. He pleaded guilty to mishandling documents last year.



http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/08/14/if-your-name-isnt-hillary-the-hammer-for-mishandling-secrets



-----------------------------------------------------
She was the secretary of state... Server professionally wiped clean.

Do you have links of those polls?


Fox poll: Two percent of voters think Hillary told the truth about e-mail server — and only three percent of Democrats


[...]
A Fox News poll released Friday finds a 58 percent majority thinks Clinton “knowingly lied” when she announced in a March press conference that no emails on her private server contained classified information.  A third says there is “another explanation” for internal government investigators determining secret info was in fact on Clinton’s server (33 percent).

Moreover, by a 54-37 percent margin, voters feel Clinton put our national security at risk by using a private email server.


The poll gave three options: Clinton lied, There’s another explanation, and Clinton told the truth. Only 2% overall think Hillary told the truth, a staggeringly bad number, and only 33% overall think there’s another explanation than Hillary lying.  On option 3, the internals on this poll are instructive. The highest that Clinton told the truth polls in the demographics is 5% among black voters, where 63% choose another explanation. Among Democrats, the number is a whopping three percent. And among younger voters — who are presumably very familiar with e-mail — the “Hillary’s honest” option didn’t get enough responses to register.

Frankly, this question is designed to let respondents get off the hook for deciding whether Hillary lied or not. The middle option of another explanation implies incompetency — not exactly a good look for a presidential candidate — or some milder form of dishonesty. And yet, not many voters took the middle option. Self-described liberal, Democrats, and black voters all had majorities choosing the less-bad option, but almost none of them chose told the truth.

Instead, majorities in almost all other demos believe Hillary lied, even when given a softer option. Younger voters under 35 years of age were especially harsh on this judgment at 63/30/0, but the next age demo (35-54) was almost as dismissive, 61/31/2. In a rare show of consensus, those with (59/34/1) and without (58/33/2) college degrees agree on Hillary’s dishonesty. Two-thirds of independents believe she flat-out lied (67/23/2), and even a majority of women agree (51/40/2).


http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/15/fox-poll-two-percent-of-voters-think-hillary-told-the-truth-about-e-mail-server-and-only-three-percent-of-democrats/


----------------------------------------------------------------------
The democrats have only one candidate: hillary. Of course they will vote for her, no matter what. The thing that's changing is... The law is catching to her, even if all of them are democrats. She needs to be president so she can pardon herself, then destroy anyone who went after her...

Good.

Cuba also scores a pretty number in literacy. It did not stop women with PHDs in physics from whoring in the streets of havanas at night but... I guess that's a start as a good example for socialism...

Real time TV is so 2006. Ten of thousands of people are using their own time watching TV 24/7 and save the best bit on youtube, so a creature like Wilikon can copy paste it here....

July 29, 2015 - ( Fox News - The Five ) - Greg Gutfeld was excellent on The Five today as he destroyed the arguments that liberals like Julie Roginsky make in favor of harvesting aborted baby parts. His main point was that they argue on one hand that it’s not a baby, that it’s just a clump of cells and it’s garbage. But when it comes to harvesting these baby parts for medical research, all of sudden it’s not garbage, but rather something valuable and necessary. Julie Roginsky tries to counter him, but ends up making his point at the end. And while she wouldn’t cede defeat to Gutfeld, Kimberly Guilfoyle chimes in, rendering judgment. But you’ll have to watch to see what she says.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZJJaONji9Y


Exactly the point some here are defending: whole living baby= garbage. Baby body parts = precious commodity for sale.

I gave up posting massacres of gays and women in "some specific cultures". We know we have strong gay and strong feminist rights defenders here on this forum. I am not gay nor a defender of 3rd wave feminism. But I realized it is the better to ignore and let them die policy that suits them the best.

They. Just. Don't. Care.

Erick Erickson,

Today a friend forwarded your apology for mocking my family – again – and in answer to your point, yes, I do remember people taking repeated potshots at my family, friends, and supporters (many of whom politely pointed out to you and your staffers that the sleazy photoshopped picture you ran of me was indeed fake, but were dismissed and mocked repeatedly for doing so.) Also, in your summary of our interactions, you forgot to mention things like your public comparison of me to L. Ron Hubbard (and not in a way that would make Tom Cruise proud). Apparently you’ve forgotten your other indiscretions, including elevating your staffer, Mr. Wolf, who has been trashing my daughter and entire family on Twitter for days now. Adult males like y’all are just delightful to work with in that GOP machine. Since your man there appears to be your go-to-guy when you want to diss me or my family, try telling him that your organization’s gleeful perpetuation of your problems involving taking unwarranted shots at various conservatives makes it almost silly to take seriously your after-you’ve-been-busted apologies. But thanks for suggesting one anyway today; it’s accepted.

And since we’re clearing the air here, you need to make peace with Mr. Trump and Dr. Carson, whom you also delight in besmirching. They are obviously very sharp, successful, courageous men who certainly did not draw first blood in the battles you picked with them. Do it, so we may have a strong, positive, uncensored primary to elect the strongest nominee to assure there is no “third term” for Barack Obama. And just so you know going forward, a mama grizzly is always going to defend her cubs – especially from a Wolf.

- Sarah Palin

PS: By the way, Erick, it’s August. Why don’t you chill out while Donald Trump brings 24 million people to watch Republican debates, when these debates are full of talented, well-spoken individuals advocating beautifully for our shared values?


https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153564010673588

Also, bernie does not represent the democrat party. Hillary does. O'Malley does. Not bernie.

Yes, I get you...  But in this case that's the dude's name. Really.

http://www.cnn.com/profiles/dan-merica-profile


I thought it was a 'clever' insult like "damn america".. but noooo.

And who is "We"?

Socialism is good for creating weapons and invading countries? There must be other examples other than those "vectors of creativity"...

So, since 1917 what are examples of socialism being implemented properly?

 

I did not remember as I am not watching TV, but the whole internet remembered when I googled kelly "Karma! Biatch!" osborne...