Blog

08/10/2018 by The Doctor Of Common Sense

President Trump Attacks Phony Social Warriors In The NFL Again

FILE – In this Nov. 7, 2016 file photo Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump reads a letter from New England Patriots NFL football coach Bill Belichick to a campaign rally in Manchester, N.H. In the six New England states that voted for Hillary Clinton, some Patriots fans are trying to reconcile their team allegiance with their distaste for Republican President Trump. The New York billionaire has made it no secret he’s good friends with team owner Robert Kraft, head coach Bill Belichick and quarterback Tom Brady. New England faces the Atlanta Falcons in the Super Bowl on Feb. 5, 2017 in Houston. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa, File) ORG XMIT: BX704

Millionaire NFL players are once again furious that President Trump has spoken out against the protests of players who either kneel, or raise a fist during the playing of the national anthem.

Even as the NFL’s ratings continue to crash, several members of the Miami Dolphins took a knee during the national anthem, and one raised a militant black power fist during this week’s pre-season game. Dolphins wide receiver Kenny Stills and receiver Albert Wilson took a knee during the anthem, while defensive end Robert Quinn raised his fist as the nation’s theme played.

The league quickly put out a statement insisting that “all player and non-player personnel on the field at that time are expected to stand,” but clearly the players don’t agree and the rule seems totally toothless.

Meanwhile, President Trump spoke out about the renewed NFL protests delivering two tweets saying:

The NFL players are at it again – taking a knee when they should be standing proudly for the National Anthem. Numerous players, from different teams, wanted to show their “outrage” at something that most of them are unable to define. They make a fortune doing what they love…

Be happy, be cool! A football game, that fans are paying soooo much money to watch and enjoy, is no place to protest. Most of that money goes to the players anyway. Find another way to protest. Stand proudly for your National Anthem or be Suspended Without Pay!

Naturally, the president’s criticism did not sit well with many players and members of the left-wing sports media.

Leading the attack on the president was the inventor of the anthem protests himself, former player Colin Kaepernick, who praised Dolphins player Albert Wilson for taking a knee:

Another loud NFL protester, former San Francisco 49er Eric Reid, also took to Twitter over the protests and echoed Kaepernick’s tweet:

Saints defensive end Cameron Jordan was also triggered by Trump’s tweets:

cameron jordan

✔@camjordan94

Guy who won the presidential election… how about we get a statement on the “unite the right” rally 2 being held in DC this weekend… a yr after the first one in Charlottesville???

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

The NFL players are at it again – taking a knee when they should be standing proudly for the National Anthem. Numerous players, from different teams, wanted to show their “outrage” at something that most of them are unable to define. They make a fortune doing what they love……

9:04 AM – Aug 10, 2018

3,331

1,479 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

The liberal sports media also got hot under the collar over Trump’s comments:

Robert Littal

✔@BSO

· 7h

I wonder if people have caught up to Trump’s con game yet. He doesn’t care if players are protesting or not. He cares how his MAGA base reacts to it so that’s why he keeps egging it on. It’s a distraction to keep his dumb as bricks fan base from seeing how terrible a Prez he is.

Robert Littal

✔@BSO

That’s always been the con game from Trump he knows the people who voted for him are dumb. He doesn’t even like them. But a con man always knows what audience to manipulate. It’s basically a cult at this point. They are puppets and Trump just pulling their strings

11:19 AM – Aug 10, 2018

78

53 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

In another case, it appears that being an NBC News “White House correspondent” means pushing agendas instead of reporting on anything if the tweet by NBC’s Geoff Bennett is any indication:

Geoff Bennett

✔@GeoffRBennett

While Trump is renewing attacks on NFL players, there’s still no public repudiation of the white supremacists/nationalists who are set to rally in front of the White House on Sunday. Sometimes what Trump *doesn’t say is as illustrative and instructive as what he does say.

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

…..Be happy, be cool! A football game, that fans are paying soooo much money to watch and enjoy, is no place to protest. Most of that money goes to the players anyway. Find another way to protest. Stand proudly for your National Anthem or be Suspended Without Pay!

10:21 AM – Aug 10, 2018

45

44 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy

Meanwhile, former NAACP president Cornell Brooks calls Trump’s tweets, what else, but “racism”:

08/10/2018 by The Doctor Of Common Sense

Communist Democrats Have Plans For The Government To Take Over The Internet

It Is True They Are FULL Blown Communist.

All your base are belong to us. A leaked memo circulating among Senate Democrats contains a host of bonkers authoritarian proposals for regulating digital platforms, purportedly as a way to get tough on Russian bots and fake news. To save American trust in “our institutions, democracy, free press, and markets,” it suggests, we need unprecedented and undemocratic government intervention into online press and markets, including “comprehensive (GDPR-like) data protection legislation” of the sort enacted in the E.U.

Titled “Potential Policy Proposals for Regulation of Social Media and Technology Firms,” the draft policy paper—penned by Sen. Mark Warner and leaked by an unknown source to Axios—the paper starts out by noting that Russians have long spread disinformation, including when “the Soviets tried to spread ‘fake news’ denigrating Martin Luther King” (here he fails to mention that the Americans in charge at the time did the same). But NOW IT’S DIFFERENT, because technology.

“Today’s tools seem almost built for Russian disinformation techniques,” Warner opines. And the ones to come, he assures us, will be even worse.

Here’s how Warner is suggesting we deal:

Mandatory location verification. The paper suggests forcing social media platforms to authenticate and disclose the geographic origin of all user accounts or posts.

Mandatory identity verification: The paper suggests forcing social media and tech platforms to authenticate user identities and only allow “authentic” accounts (“inauthentic accounts not only pose threats to our democratic process…but undermine the integrity of digital markets”), with “failure to appropriately address inauthentic account activity” punishable as “a violation of both SEC disclosure rules and/or Section 5 of the [Federal Trade Commission] Act.”

Bot labeling: Warner’s paper suggests forcing companies to somehow label bots or be penalized (no word from Warner on how this is remotely feasible)

Define popular tech as “essential facilities.” These would be subject to all sorts of heightened rules and controls, says the paper, offering Google Maps as an example of the kinds of apps or platforms that might count. “The law would not mandate that a dominant provider offer the serve for free,” writes Warner. “Rather, it would be required to offer it on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms” provided by the government.

Other proposals include more disclosure requirements for online political speech, more spending to counter supposed cybersecurity threats, more funding for the Federal Trade Commission, a requirement that companies’ algorithms can be audited by the feds (and this data shared with universities and others), and a requirement of “interoperability between dominant platforms.”

The paper also suggests making it a rule that tech platforms above a certain size must turn over internal data and processes to “independent public interest researchers” so they can identify potential “public health/addiction effects, anticompetitive behavior, radicalization,” scams, “user propagated misinformation,” and harassment—data that could be used to “inform actions by regulators or Congress.”

And—of course— these include further revisions to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, recently amendedby Congress to exclude protections for prostitution-related content. A revision to Section 230 could provide the ability for users to demand takedowns of certain sorts of content and hold platforms liable if they don’t abide, it says, while admitting that “attempting to distinguish between true disinformation and legitimate satire could prove difficult.”

“The proposals in the paper are wide ranging and in some cases even politically impossible, and raise almost as many questions as they try to answer,” suggested Mathew Ingram, putting it very mildly at the Columbia Journalism Review.

https://reason.com/blog/2018/07/31/democrats-tech-policy-plans-leaked

08/08/2018 by The Doctor Of Common Sense

Alex Jones And InfoWars Has Been Banned On FaceBook, YouTube, And Apple

No Body Said Anything When They Too The Doctor Of Common Sense Of YouTube.

Big tech’s coordinated purge of InfoWars — which was hit by bans from Apple, Facebook, Spotify and YouTube in rapid succession — did not occur in a vacuum. On this issue, Silicon Valley bowed to CNN journalists and Democrat politicians who ceaselessly lobbied for the site to be censored.
It’s a sign of how the concentration of power in America has shifted from big government to big tech that politicians are now lobbying tech companies rather than the other way round, but that’s exactly what happened over the course of the past few months, as Democrats applied relentless pressure on Facebook and other Silicon Valley giants to censor InfoWars.
Chief among them was Democratic Congressman Ted Deutch (D-FL), who demanded that a Facebook representative “explain” their decision not to ban InfoWars at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on social media censorship last month. Calling Jones as “well-known conspiracy theorist” whose “brand is bullying,” Deutch also demanded Google’s representative explain how many strikes it would take for a channel on Google-owned YouTube to be deleted.

He then asked Google’s representative if they thought conspiracy theories were a “problem,” and asked her to explain the company’s planned solutions. It seems that YouTube has now come up with a solution: ban the channels that Rep. Deutch objects to.
At a previous hearing on social media censorship, Deutch, who represents Parkland, Florida, attacked tech companies for allowing “vile and outrageous and offensive garbage” on their platforms.
Multiple other congressional Democrats, including Reps. Jerrold Nadler, Jim Hines, and Ted Lieu have attacked the very idea of big tech censorship, calling Republican concerns a “conspiracy theory” and defending the right of tech giants to censor whomever they want.
Far-left media also played a role in demanding tech giants appoint themselves as the arbiters of free speech. Here’s the Guardian attacking Facebook for continuing to host InfoWars, and here’s BuzzFeed’s Joe Bernstein wondering why Twitter hasn’t followed Facebook, YouTube, Spotify and Apple in today’s purge. Bernstein was retweeted by CNN’s Oliver Darcy by the way.

Joe Bernstein
✔
@Bernstein

All of these removals put @Twitter and @Jack in the very uncomfortable position of being the only major social network to disseminate @infowars. Imagine explaining that to your employees!
12:16 PM – Aug 6, 2018
7,122
2,316 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

“Facebook Wants To Cut Down On Misinformation. So Why Isn’t It Doing Anything About InfoWars” was the not-so-subtle headline at the Washington Post last month.
Perhaps the most strident was CNN, which repeatedly lobbied YouTube to demonetize InfoWars and ban Alex Jones. They also went after Facebook on the same issue, stating the social media “struggles to explain why InfoWars isn’t banned.” News Corp’s Rupert Murdoch has also attacked big tech for allowing “scurrilous news sources” to gain traction on the web.

What does this mean? It means that Democrats are pressuring social media companies to give them free political favors by granting them a free platform while denying one to their critics.
It also means that the corporate media are all working overtime to remove their competitors on social media.
And it’s working.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/08/06/infowars-ban-cnn-democrats-successfully-lobby-big-tech-to-censor-their-critics/

Alex Jones Gets to Declare a ‘Real Info War’ Against Big Tech ‘in It Together

Leftist website Slate recently published an article titled “Alex Jones Gets to Declare a Real Info War Now” in which the publication described the actual censorship that Jones suffered while claiming that he has not really been prevented from airing his ideas.
Slate published an article recently discussing the recent purge of Alex Jones and InfoWars pages across social media. Facebook, Youtube, and Apple all removed InfoWars content from their platforms in the space of a single day, which seems to imply that tech companies may be colluding with each other when they decide who should be de-platformed.
The Slate article states:
War or not, Alex Jones fans still have plenty of options to get their fix of right-fringe conspiracy-laden news: Beyond Infowars’ website, there’s the organization’s mobile app, which is still currently available for download in Apple’s App Store and Google’s Play Store. Slate first reported Monday morning that the Infowars app was still up in the Apple App Store despite the Apple podcast removal. At that time, the app ranked No. 56 in the App Store among news apps. By Monday evening, following the removals from Facebook and YouTube, Jones’ app had climbed to No. 7.
Though Apple might merit credit for giving the other platforms some cover to take more serious action against Jones, who has been using the sites to disseminate frequently harmful false stories for years, the fact that Infowars continues to have an app on Apple’s App Store is glaring. For what it’s worth, Infowars still has a presenceon LinkedIn and Instagram, too. But Monday’s bannings—and Jones’ response to them—raise a new question: Will the platforms’ actions diminish the reach of Jones’ conspiracy theories? (The more infamous of them include the false assertions that the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax and that the survivors of the Parkland, Florida, shooting are crisis actors.) Or will Jones be able to use the bans to paint himself as a free-speech martyr, further cementing his audience’s devotion?
According to Slate, because Infowars can still use its LinkedIn account, they haven’t reallybeen censored. While Infowars may retain access to its LinkedIn and Instagram profiles, the majority of its social media following was based around Facebook and YouTube. While it may still have access to those that follow on LinkedIn, its YouTube subscribers and Facebook follower figures far outweigh the LinkedIn following.
Slate then bemoans the fact that these platforms didn’t ban InfoWars earlier, calling Jones a “bigoted fabulist.”
One of the great ironies in this mess is that YouTube, Facebook, and Apple are all deciding to enforce community moderation policies against hate speech that they’ve long had on their books. Any one of them could have taken this action years ago. But they didn’t, perhaps fearing that they’d be labeled as censorious liberals executing a political agenda, as if there’s anything particularly partisan about preventing a popular and bigoted fabulist from using your services to spread lies that are leading to real-world harm. They helped Jones exit the fringe and penetrate the mainstream. Now their fear could be realized—they’re being labeled as left-wing tech companies acting out a political agenda by right-wing media critics.
And almost proving the collusion that many have feared, Slate states that big tech companies are “in it together,”
At least the tech companies are in it together. And, of course, Jones’ fans aren’t at a total loss: Their favorite broadcaster spent the day posting videos on Twitter, collecting likes and retweets by the thousands.
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/08/07/slate-alex-jones-gets-to-declare-a-real-info-war-against-big-tech-in-it-together/

6 Questions that Tech Giants Refuse to Answer About the InfoWars Ban

InfoWars
7 Aug 20186,349
Even though the internet is aflame with controversy over the coordinated purge of Alex Jones and InfoWars from Facebook, YouTube, Spotify, and Apple, there is no real transparency over their decision and the process by which it was made.
Alex Jones and InfoWars have been top Twitter trends for hours, and even some left-wing journalists like Michael Tracey are decrying Silicon Valley’s Masters of the Universe appointing themselves the arbiters of free speech on the web.
But Apple, Facebook, Spotify, and YouTube have offered, at most, only copy and paste explanations for why they banned InfoWars content from their platforms — or why, after months of pressure from the Democrats and CNN, they all came to the same decision on the same day. Questions about transparency have a much broader scope that just the case of InfoWars and Alex Jones. Beyond the banning of other individuals such as Tommy Robinson, the same questions apply to a whole host of actions by the Masters of the Universe, including partnering with foreign governments to shut down accounts, shadowbanning users to limit the scope of their engagement, and mass user purges.

Breitbart News sent the following questions to Facebook, YouTube, Spotify, and Apple earlier today, and have yet to receive a real answer for most of them. Apple and YouTube chose to provide the same canned statement they provided to all other media outlets who contacted them, while Facebook and Spotify ignored our request entirely.
THE QUESTIONS SILICON VALLEY WON’T ANSWER
1) What content specifically from InfoWars/Alex Jones was found to be”hate speech” and otherwise rule breaking?
InfoWars editor-at-large Paul Joseph Watson confirmed to Breitbart News that none of the tech giants that targeted InfoWars and Alex Jones over the past 24 hours pointed to specific content that violated their terms of service.

2) When was the decision to ban them made? What changed over the course of a few days from when you defended not banning Infowars content?
Just a few weeks ago, Mark Zuckerberg defended InfoWars in an interview, saying: ” “The approach that we’ve taken to false news is not to say, you can’t say something wrong on the Internet… Everyone gets things wrong, and if we were taking down people’s accounts when they got a few things wrong, then that would be a hard world for giving people a voice and saying that you care about that.”
So what changed, why suddenly, and why concurrently with most other major platforms?
3) Who made the decision to take down Infowars?
It’s unlikely that the decision to ban InfoWars was taken by a rank-and-file content reviewer.
4) Will you provide clear guidelines on “hate speech” including defining hate speech in a manner that is clear to all users?

When pressed by a member of Congress earlier this year, Mark Zuckerberg admitted that he couldn’t define “hate speech.” Yet that is the reason that Facebook and other platforms gave for banning InfoWars and Alex Jones today. Do they now have a definition? If so, what is it?
5) How does big tech plan to manage the incoming wave of demands to censor and remove content from other conservative sites?
Like this one, for example:

Hilary Rosen
✔
@hilaryr

These companies (Facebook, Apple, YouTube, etc) will remove Alex Jones #InfoWars (and I agree) from their content offerings but not a know sexual predator? #MuteRKelly. RT if you are confused about how seriously they take sexual assault #TimesupWOC
11:55 AM – Aug 6, 2018
72
101 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy

6) Did Facebook/YouTube/Apple/Spotify communicate or coordinate with Google/YouTube, Apple, Spotify, or any other tech platform that recently banned InfoWars content prior to the takedown of Alex Jones and InfoWars’ content? Did any representative or employee of those companies reach out to Facebook/YouTube/Apple/Spotify before they undertook similar bans?
There was no apparent catalyzing event immediately prior to the censorship.
Here are the responses Breitbart News received from two of the companies contacted in their entirety.
YouTube:
All users agree to comply with our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines when they sign up to use YouTube. When users violate these policies repeatedly, like our policies against hate speech and harassment or our terms prohibiting circumvention of our enforcement measures, we terminate their accounts.

Apple:
Apple does not tolerate hate speech, and we have clear guidelines that creators and developers must follow to ensure we provide a safe environment for all of our users. Podcasts that violate these guidelines are removed from our directory making them no longer searchable or available for download or streaming. We believe in representing a wide range of views, so long as people are respectful to those with differing opinions
The other companies contacted by Breitbart News did not respond.
On a day that has left evening left-wingers like the HuffPost asking “why now?” the one thing that is clear is that the tech Masters of the Universe have some explaining to do.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/08/07/zero-transparency-6-questions-that-tech-giants-refuse-to-answer-about-the-infowars-ban/

08/06/2018 by The Doctor Of Common Sense

DOJ Refuses To Produce Records Regarding James Comey Leaker Friend From Columbia University

Indict Comey and Investigate Daniel Richman for the damn leaks.

The Daily Caller News Foundation is suing the Department of Justice for failing to produce records regarding the Columbia University professor who received four memos from former FBI Director James Comey, one of which was leaked to The New York Times.

Cause of Action Institute, a conservative nonprofit watchdog, filed the lawsuit on behalf of TheDCNF Monday after the Justice Department and the FBI failed to produce any records related to Daniel Richman in response to the news organization’s April 25 Freedom of Information Act request.

Richman is a long-time friend and confidante of Comey and obtained at least four of the former FBI director’s memos about his conversations with President Donald Trump, two of which contained classified information, according to news reports. He leaked at least one Comey memo to The New York Times. (RELATED: Congress Wants Details Of Comey Friend’s Handling Of Trump Memos)

Meanwhile, Comey, in a July 5, 2016 press conference, absolved then-Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton of any criminal activity in using her private server for government business while she served as secretary of state, saying that she was “extremely careless,” but not grossly negligent in using a private server for official government business. Gross negligence would constitute a federal offense tied to the mishandling of classified government secrets.

Comey hired Richman as a special government employee, or SGE, to conduct an assortment of personal duties for him, including the task of developing “talking points” about the bureau’s investigation of Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Richman served on “special projects” as an SGE for at least 19 months and “served at the pleasure of” Comey, FBI records show, according to Fox News.

Richman also gave multiple interviews to reporters between July 2015 and February 2017 defending Comey’s handling of the Clinton email case.

TheDCNF seeks all of Mr. Richman’s work product developed on behalf of the former FBI director. It also seeks “all communications between the bureau and Mr. Richman concerning his SGE work assignments, all intra-bureau communications about Mr. Richman and his assignments and activities, as well as all work product delivered to Director Comey or to others within the bureau.”

The suit was filed under FOIA before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The Justice Department released some information about Richman to Congress after both House and Senate members waged a bitter campaign to obtain them, along with Comey’s private memos. Some of the documents were released beginning last April.

But the FBI and the Justice Department have hidden the full range of Richman’s activities on behalf of Comey and his interactions with the former director and other bureau officials.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/08/06/comey-leaker-lawsuit/

08/06/2018 by The Doctor Of Common Sense

Fraud Obama Wins The Rights Ripple Of Hope Peace Prize Award

This proves that most awards don’t mean a damn thing.

Former President Barack Obama has received another peace prize.

The former president was named a Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope laureate Monday. The award honors those who “work toward a more just and peaceful world.” The RFK nonprofit tweeted that it is “honored to present Barack Obama” with the award.

View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter

RFK Human Rights
✔
@RFKHumanRights
We are honored to present @BarackObama with our 2018 Ripple of Hope Award. #RFK50

9:15 AM – Aug 6, 2018
8,893
3,238 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Obama responded that Kennedy was one of his heroes. “Bobby Kennedy was one of my heroes,” Obama said, “He was someone who showed us the power of acting on our ideals, the idea that any of us can be one of the “million different centers of energy and daring” that ultimately combine to change the world for the better.”

Barack Obama
✔
@BarackObama
Bobby Kennedy was one of my heroes. He was someone who showed us the power of acting on our ideals, the idea that any of us can be one of the “million different centers of energy and daring” that ultimately combine to change the world for the better.

RFK Human Rights
✔
@RFKHumanRights
We are honored to present @BarackObama with our 2018 Ripple of Hope Award. #RFK50

View image on Twitter
10:53 AM – Aug 6, 2018
106K
23.2K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Obama will officially be presented with the award by Ethel Kennedy in December at the organization’s annual gala. Obama infamously was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize just months into his presidency. Obama faced criticism for multiple human rights abuses during his tenure as commander in chief. Obama was criticized harshly for pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq and creating a vacuum that was filled by ISIS. He has also been harshly condemned for his embrace of drone warfare. According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, Obama killed nearly 1,000 civilians in more than 500 drone strikes during his presidency.

“There were ten times more air strikes in the covert war on terror during President Barack Obama’s presidency than under his predecessor, George W. Bush,” the Bureau report states. “Obama embraced the US drone programme, overseeing more strikes in his first year than Bush carried out during his entire presidency. A total of 563 strikes, largely by drones, targeted Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen during Obama’s two terms, compared to 57 strikes under Bush. Between 384 and 807 civilians were killed in those countries, according to reports logged by the Bureau.”

http://dailycaller.com/2018/08/06/barack-obama-rfk-human-rights-award/

08/05/2018 by Angela Collette

Jesus – From Genesis to Revelation

Genesis: the seed of the woman

Exodus: the passover lamb

Leviticus: the atoning sacrifice

Numbers: the brazen serpent lifted

Deuteronomy: the promised profit

Joshua: the unseen captain

Judges: our deliverer

Ruth: the kinsman redeemer

Song of Solomon: my beloved

Samuel/Kings/Chronicles: the promised king

Ezra and Nehemiah: the restorer of the nation

Esther: my advocate

Job: my redeemer

Psalms: my all in all

Proverbs: my pattern

Ecclesiastes: my goal

Song of Solomon: my beloved

Minor profits: the coming prince of peace

Matthew: the king

Mark: the servant

Luke: the man

John: the very God

Acts: the risen and seated king

Epistles: dwelling and filling us

Revelation: HE IS COMING SOON!

Blog

Millionaire NFL players are once again furious that President Trump has spoken out against the protests of players who either kneel, or raise a fist during the playing of the national anthem.

Footer