White House Correspondent Dinner Celebrates Freedom Of Speech While Destroying Ours

[mudwhistle]

The word police had a dinner the other night. Usually the president attends. This time he told them to shove it. Why? Because these narcissistic assholes probably had a setup prepared for him. Why would anyone want to be in the same room with a bunch of liars and criminals that are trying to destroy you, and in the process, screw over the American people.

The theme chosen for the dinner clearly vindicated Trump's decision.

To understand the theme's utter hypocrisy, let's review President Barack Obama's eight years in office, which saw unprecedented attacks on basic press freedoms. They included, but were certainly not limited to:


Michelle Malkin Nails the Two-Faced History of the WH Correspondents' Dinner

• More use of the Espionage Act against whistleblowers and reporters "than all previous administrations combined."
• The Justice Department's secret acquisition of call records "for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP (the Associated Press) and its journalists in April and May of 2012" (acknowledged in May 2013) involving over 100 reporters' work and personal phone numbers.
• A years-long effort to put then-New York Times reporter James Risen in jail for receiving and reporting leaked information.
• Its Federal Communications Commission's clear desire, which would likely have been carried out had Donald Trump not been elected, "to regulate websites based on political content," and, with the help of the Federal Elections Commission, "to regulate content online."
• Its record denial rate (77 percent as of March 2016) for Freedom of Information Act requests, while, as reported by the Associated Press, setting "a record for times federal employees told citizens, journalists and others that, despite searching, they couldn’t find a single page of files that were requested."

The Obama administration's unprecedented hostility toward press freedoms was certainly well-known during at least the previous three White House Correspondents' dinners. But of course, Obama had nothing to fear in attending them, because the Stockholm Syndrome press fervently supported his politics and ideology.

Thus, despite all the abuse, the WHCA waited until this year to decide that their event prominently needed the following theme — framed by the friendly Washington Post "as a triumphant refocus on what the dinner was always supposed to be about":​

​

CELEBRATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT




Does anyone think these jokes are funny?????

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Doubtful drumpf will have the balls to attend next year either. No wonder he hasn't been able to stand up to even one foreign leader. So far, he's flip flopped and backed down from each one. For that matter, he backed down from Mexico before he was elected.

But hey, he liked that chocolate cake and from the looks of him, he eats a lot of it.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[IsaacNewton]

drumpf pussied out it's as simple as that. He likes to puff up his chest but he's too much of a snowflake to take some scathing jokes. He's a pussy.

 

[JoeMoma]

Doubtful drumpf will have the balls to attend next year either. No wonder he hasn't been able to stand up to even one foreign leader. So far, he's flip flopped and backed down from each one. For that matter, he backed down from Mexico before he was elected.

But hey, he liked that chocolate cake and from the looks of him, he eats a lot of it.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

He has the balls not to attend. As far as not standing up to a foreign leader, 59 Tomahawk Cruise missiles say you are wrong about that.

 

[mudwhistle]

Doubtful drumpf will have the balls to attend next year either. No wonder he hasn't been able to stand up to even one foreign leader. So far, he's flip flopped and backed down from each one. For that matter, he backed down from Mexico before he was elected.

But hey, he liked that chocolate cake and from the looks of him, he eats a lot of it.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

He has more balls than Obama Osama ever will.
The truth is...he's too smart to allow those cocksuckers to pull any shit on him.
I can imagine what they had planned for him. What kind of setup they were gonna pull.
I wouldn't trust one of them within 500 meters from him.
Every one of them a serious security risk.

 

[mudwhistle]

drumpf pussied out it's as simple as that. He likes to puff up his chest but he's too much of a snowflake to take some scathing jokes. He's a pussy.

Obama would never show up at an NRA convention.......so.......PHHHHHHFFFFFFFFffffffffffffft.

 

[mudwhistle]

Doubtful drumpf will have the balls to attend next year either. No wonder he hasn't been able to stand up to even one foreign leader. So far, he's flip flopped and backed down from each one. For that matter, he backed down from Mexico before he was elected.

But hey, he liked that chocolate cake and from the looks of him, he eats a lot of it.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

He has the balls not to attend. As far as not standing up to a foreign leader, 59 Tomahawk Cruise missiles say you are wrong about that.

Yup...................

 

[mudwhistle]

b

 

[frigidweirdo]

The word police had a dinner the other night. Usually the president attends. This time he told them to shove it. Why? Because these narcissistic assholes probably had a setup prepared for him. Why would anyone want to be in the same room with a bunch of liars and criminals that are trying to destroy you, and in the process, screw over the American people.

The theme chosen for the dinner clearly vindicated Trump's decision.

To understand the theme's utter hypocrisy, let's review President Barack Obama's eight years in office, which saw unprecedented attacks on basic press freedoms. They included, but were certainly not limited to:


Michelle Malkin Nails the Two-Faced History of the WH Correspondents' Dinner

• More use of the Espionage Act against whistleblowers and reporters "than all previous administrations combined."
• The Justice Department's secret acquisition of call records "for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP (the Associated Press) and its journalists in April and May of 2012" (acknowledged in May 2013) involving over 100 reporters' work and personal phone numbers.
• A years-long effort to put then-New York Times reporter James Risen in jail for receiving and reporting leaked information.
• Its Federal Communications Commission's clear desire, which would likely have been carried out had Donald Trump not been elected, "to regulate websites based on political content," and, with the help of the Federal Elections Commission, "to regulate content online."
• Its record denial rate (77 percent as of March 2016) for Freedom of Information Act requests, while, as reported by the Associated Press, setting "a record for times federal employees told citizens, journalists and others that, despite searching, they couldn’t find a single page of files that were requested."

The Obama administration's unprecedented hostility toward press freedoms was certainly well-known during at least the previous three White House Correspondents' dinners. But of course, Obama had nothing to fear in attending them, because the Stockholm Syndrome press fervently supported his politics and ideology.

Thus, despite all the abuse, the WHCA waited until this year to decide that their event prominently needed the following theme — framed by the friendly Washington Post "as a triumphant refocus on what the dinner was always supposed to be about":​

​

CELEBRATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT




Does anyone think these jokes are funny?????

Oh, playing the boohoo, I'm the victim game.

Where have I seen that before? Oh, yeah, there was a guy called Nick Griffin, in charge of the far right BNP in the UK. Got invited on Newsnight and then boohooed his way home saying how it was all a set up because, because.... people asked him questions..... er... what?

Yep, let's all pretend that the president is mentally deficient and that he shouldn't have to play the game properly.

 

[Muhammed]

It is obvious that all they were there for is to repeat crude defamatory anti-USA disinformation that Trump has heard a kajillion times already. If I was him I wouldn't bother to make time in my schedule to attend that.

 

[mudwhistle]

The word police had a dinner the other night. Usually the president attends. This time he told them to shove it. Why? Because these narcissistic assholes probably had a setup prepared for him. Why would anyone want to be in the same room with a bunch of liars and criminals that are trying to destroy you, and in the process, screw over the American people.

The theme chosen for the dinner clearly vindicated Trump's decision.

To understand the theme's utter hypocrisy, let's review President Barack Obama's eight years in office, which saw unprecedented attacks on basic press freedoms. They included, but were certainly not limited to:


Michelle Malkin Nails the Two-Faced History of the WH Correspondents' Dinner

• More use of the Espionage Act against whistleblowers and reporters "than all previous administrations combined."
• The Justice Department's secret acquisition of call records "for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP (the Associated Press) and its journalists in April and May of 2012" (acknowledged in May 2013) involving over 100 reporters' work and personal phone numbers.
• A years-long effort to put then-New York Times reporter James Risen in jail for receiving and reporting leaked information.
• Its Federal Communications Commission's clear desire, which would likely have been carried out had Donald Trump not been elected, "to regulate websites based on political content," and, with the help of the Federal Elections Commission, "to regulate content online."
• Its record denial rate (77 percent as of March 2016) for Freedom of Information Act requests, while, as reported by the Associated Press, setting "a record for times federal employees told citizens, journalists and others that, despite searching, they couldn’t find a single page of files that were requested."

The Obama administration's unprecedented hostility toward press freedoms was certainly well-known during at least the previous three White House Correspondents' dinners. But of course, Obama had nothing to fear in attending them, because the Stockholm Syndrome press fervently supported his politics and ideology.

Thus, despite all the abuse, the WHCA waited until this year to decide that their event prominently needed the following theme — framed by the friendly Washington Post "as a triumphant refocus on what the dinner was always supposed to be about":​

​

CELEBRATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT




Does anyone think these jokes are funny?????

Oh, playing the boohoo, I'm the victim game.

Where have I seen that before? Oh, yeah, there was a guy called Nick Griffin, in charge of the far right BNP in the UK. Got invited on Newsnight and then boohooed his way home saying how it was all a set up because, because.... people asked him questions..... er... what?

Yep, let's all pretend that the president is mentally deficient and that he shouldn't have to play the game properly.

Actually, most of the people that buy the media's bullshit are mentally deficient. They actually feel that a bunch of snobbish, stuck up media elitists that will be most likely be protesting like communists today on May Day, better represent the American public.

 

[mudwhistle]

The media is predictable. If Trump had shown up....the media would have said that he's not serious about calling them "Fake News". They would have said that because he showed up it only proves he's lying to the American public.

Nope.....instead the media is repeating the same lie "Trump only causes this media hate himself".

 

[mudwhistle]

B

 

[frigidweirdo]

The word police had a dinner the other night. Usually the president attends. This time he told them to shove it. Why? Because these narcissistic assholes probably had a setup prepared for him. Why would anyone want to be in the same room with a bunch of liars and criminals that are trying to destroy you, and in the process, screw over the American people.

The theme chosen for the dinner clearly vindicated Trump's decision.

To understand the theme's utter hypocrisy, let's review President Barack Obama's eight years in office, which saw unprecedented attacks on basic press freedoms. They included, but were certainly not limited to:


Michelle Malkin Nails the Two-Faced History of the WH Correspondents' Dinner

• More use of the Espionage Act against whistleblowers and reporters "than all previous administrations combined."
• The Justice Department's secret acquisition of call records "for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP (the Associated Press) and its journalists in April and May of 2012" (acknowledged in May 2013) involving over 100 reporters' work and personal phone numbers.
• A years-long effort to put then-New York Times reporter James Risen in jail for receiving and reporting leaked information.
• Its Federal Communications Commission's clear desire, which would likely have been carried out had Donald Trump not been elected, "to regulate websites based on political content," and, with the help of the Federal Elections Commission, "to regulate content online."
• Its record denial rate (77 percent as of March 2016) for Freedom of Information Act requests, while, as reported by the Associated Press, setting "a record for times federal employees told citizens, journalists and others that, despite searching, they couldn’t find a single page of files that were requested."

The Obama administration's unprecedented hostility toward press freedoms was certainly well-known during at least the previous three White House Correspondents' dinners. But of course, Obama had nothing to fear in attending them, because the Stockholm Syndrome press fervently supported his politics and ideology.

Thus, despite all the abuse, the WHCA waited until this year to decide that their event prominently needed the following theme — framed by the friendly Washington Post "as a triumphant refocus on what the dinner was always supposed to be about":​

​

CELEBRATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT




Does anyone think these jokes are funny?????

Oh, playing the boohoo, I'm the victim game.

Where have I seen that before? Oh, yeah, there was a guy called Nick Griffin, in charge of the far right BNP in the UK. Got invited on Newsnight and then boohooed his way home saying how it was all a set up because, because.... people asked him questions..... er... what?

Yep, let's all pretend that the president is mentally deficient and that he shouldn't have to play the game properly.

Actually, most of the people that buy the media's bullshit are mentally deficient. They actually feel that a bunch of snobbish, stuck up media elitists that will be most likely be protesting like communists today on May Day, better represent the American public.

Well, of course. There are many people, what, 90% or more of the population who get fed their news. They don't want to have to think about it. When they do think about it, they're in outrage, more than likely because they don't understand the issue because they only read the headline and first paragraph.

This isn't the fault of the media. It's the fault of the people. But the very same people can NEVER, EVER be wrong. So they'll put the blame where they want to put it, which isn't at their feet. And when Trump comes along and tells them "it's not your fault, it's the fault of the media", they're all too willing to agree with him.

 

[mudwhistle]

The word police had a dinner the other night. Usually the president attends. This time he told them to shove it. Why? Because these narcissistic assholes probably had a setup prepared for him. Why would anyone want to be in the same room with a bunch of liars and criminals that are trying to destroy you, and in the process, screw over the American people.

The theme chosen for the dinner clearly vindicated Trump's decision.

To understand the theme's utter hypocrisy, let's review President Barack Obama's eight years in office, which saw unprecedented attacks on basic press freedoms. They included, but were certainly not limited to:


Michelle Malkin Nails the Two-Faced History of the WH Correspondents' Dinner

• More use of the Espionage Act against whistleblowers and reporters "than all previous administrations combined."
• The Justice Department's secret acquisition of call records "for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP (the Associated Press) and its journalists in April and May of 2012" (acknowledged in May 2013) involving over 100 reporters' work and personal phone numbers.
• A years-long effort to put then-New York Times reporter James Risen in jail for receiving and reporting leaked information.
• Its Federal Communications Commission's clear desire, which would likely have been carried out had Donald Trump not been elected, "to regulate websites based on political content," and, with the help of the Federal Elections Commission, "to regulate content online."
• Its record denial rate (77 percent as of March 2016) for Freedom of Information Act requests, while, as reported by the Associated Press, setting "a record for times federal employees told citizens, journalists and others that, despite searching, they couldn’t find a single page of files that were requested."

The Obama administration's unprecedented hostility toward press freedoms was certainly well-known during at least the previous three White House Correspondents' dinners. But of course, Obama had nothing to fear in attending them, because the Stockholm Syndrome press fervently supported his politics and ideology.

Thus, despite all the abuse, the WHCA waited until this year to decide that their event prominently needed the following theme — framed by the friendly Washington Post "as a triumphant refocus on what the dinner was always supposed to be about":​

​

CELEBRATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT




Does anyone think these jokes are funny?????

Oh, playing the boohoo, I'm the victim game.

Where have I seen that before? Oh, yeah, there was a guy called Nick Griffin, in charge of the far right BNP in the UK. Got invited on Newsnight and then boohooed his way home saying how it was all a set up because, because.... people asked him questions..... er... what?

Yep, let's all pretend that the president is mentally deficient and that he shouldn't have to play the game properly.

Actually, most of the people that buy the media's bullshit are mentally deficient. They actually feel that a bunch of snobbish, stuck up media elitists that will be most likely be protesting like communists today on May Day, better represent the American public.

Well, of course. There are many people, what, 90% or more of the population who get fed their news. They don't want to have to think about it. When they do think about it, they're in outrage, more than likely because they don't understand the issue because they only read the headline and first paragraph.

This isn't the fault of the media. It's the fault of the people. But the very same people can NEVER, EVER be wrong. So they'll put the blame where they want to put it, which isn't at their feet. And when Trump comes along and tells them "it's not your fault, it's the fault of the media", they're all too willing to agree with him.

The media is good at creating false impressions. Like implying that the review of past presidential land grabs is wrong or dangerous to the environment. Millions of acres of land put off limits by Democrat presidents just to prevent it's use by the people of this country. That's the big push right now.
Trump is evil and hates nature (bullshit)
Trump is attacking the media unfairly (bullshit)
Trump refuses to work with congress (double bullshit)
Trump can only blame himself for hatred by the media (5 Pinocchios)

 

[Moonglow]

The word police had a dinner the other night. Usually the president attends. This time he told them to shove it. Why? Because these narcissistic assholes probably had a setup prepared for him. Why would anyone want to be in the same room with a bunch of liars and criminals that are trying to destroy you, and in the process, screw over the American people.

The theme chosen for the dinner clearly vindicated Trump's decision.

To understand the theme's utter hypocrisy, let's review President Barack Obama's eight years in office, which saw unprecedented attacks on basic press freedoms. They included, but were certainly not limited to:


Michelle Malkin Nails the Two-Faced History of the WH Correspondents' Dinner

• More use of the Espionage Act against whistleblowers and reporters "than all previous administrations combined."
• The Justice Department's secret acquisition of call records "for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP (the Associated Press) and its journalists in April and May of 2012" (acknowledged in May 2013) involving over 100 reporters' work and personal phone numbers.
• A years-long effort to put then-New York Times reporter James Risen in jail for receiving and reporting leaked information.
• Its Federal Communications Commission's clear desire, which would likely have been carried out had Donald Trump not been elected, "to regulate websites based on political content," and, with the help of the Federal Elections Commission, "to regulate content online."
• Its record denial rate (77 percent as of March 2016) for Freedom of Information Act requests, while, as reported by the Associated Press, setting "a record for times federal employees told citizens, journalists and others that, despite searching, they couldn’t find a single page of files that were requested."

The Obama administration's unprecedented hostility toward press freedoms was certainly well-known during at least the previous three White House Correspondents' dinners. But of course, Obama had nothing to fear in attending them, because the Stockholm Syndrome press fervently supported his politics and ideology.

Thus, despite all the abuse, the WHCA waited until this year to decide that their event prominently needed the following theme — framed by the friendly Washington Post "as a triumphant refocus on what the dinner was always supposed to be about":​

​

CELEBRATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT




Does anyone think these jokes are funny?????

Who is the tranny next to the bald guy?

 

[frigidweirdo]

The word police had a dinner the other night. Usually the president attends. This time he told them to shove it. Why? Because these narcissistic assholes probably had a setup prepared for him. Why would anyone want to be in the same room with a bunch of liars and criminals that are trying to destroy you, and in the process, screw over the American people.

The theme chosen for the dinner clearly vindicated Trump's decision.

To understand the theme's utter hypocrisy, let's review President Barack Obama's eight years in office, which saw unprecedented attacks on basic press freedoms. They included, but were certainly not limited to:


Michelle Malkin Nails the Two-Faced History of the WH Correspondents' Dinner

• More use of the Espionage Act against whistleblowers and reporters "than all previous administrations combined."
• The Justice Department's secret acquisition of call records "for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP (the Associated Press) and its journalists in April and May of 2012" (acknowledged in May 2013) involving over 100 reporters' work and personal phone numbers.
• A years-long effort to put then-New York Times reporter James Risen in jail for receiving and reporting leaked information.
• Its Federal Communications Commission's clear desire, which would likely have been carried out had Donald Trump not been elected, "to regulate websites based on political content," and, with the help of the Federal Elections Commission, "to regulate content online."
• Its record denial rate (77 percent as of March 2016) for Freedom of Information Act requests, while, as reported by the Associated Press, setting "a record for times federal employees told citizens, journalists and others that, despite searching, they couldn’t find a single page of files that were requested."

The Obama administration's unprecedented hostility toward press freedoms was certainly well-known during at least the previous three White House Correspondents' dinners. But of course, Obama had nothing to fear in attending them, because the Stockholm Syndrome press fervently supported his politics and ideology.

Thus, despite all the abuse, the WHCA waited until this year to decide that their event prominently needed the following theme — framed by the friendly Washington Post "as a triumphant refocus on what the dinner was always supposed to be about":​

​

CELEBRATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT




Does anyone think these jokes are funny?????

Oh, playing the boohoo, I'm the victim game.

Where have I seen that before? Oh, yeah, there was a guy called Nick Griffin, in charge of the far right BNP in the UK. Got invited on Newsnight and then boohooed his way home saying how it was all a set up because, because.... people asked him questions..... er... what?

Yep, let's all pretend that the president is mentally deficient and that he shouldn't have to play the game properly.

Actually, most of the people that buy the media's bullshit are mentally deficient. They actually feel that a bunch of snobbish, stuck up media elitists that will be most likely be protesting like communists today on May Day, better represent the American public.

Well, of course. There are many people, what, 90% or more of the population who get fed their news. They don't want to have to think about it. When they do think about it, they're in outrage, more than likely because they don't understand the issue because they only read the headline and first paragraph.

This isn't the fault of the media. It's the fault of the people. But the very same people can NEVER, EVER be wrong. So they'll put the blame where they want to put it, which isn't at their feet. And when Trump comes along and tells them "it's not your fault, it's the fault of the media", they're all too willing to agree with him.

The media is good at creating false impressions. Like implying that the review of past presidential land grabs is wrong or dangerous to the environment. Millions of acres of land put off limits by Democrat presidents just to prevent it's use by the people of this country. That's the big push right now.
Trump is evil and hates nature (bullshit)
Trump is attacking the media unfairly (bullshit)
Trump refuses to work with congress (double bullshit)
Trump can only blame himself for hatred by the media (5 Pinocchios)

Okay, and? They state their story the way they want to state it. Who's fault is it if they get the wrong impression? Yes, it's the person who READ the thing and didn't see it for what it was.

 

[mudwhistle]

The word police had a dinner the other night. Usually the president attends. This time he told them to shove it. Why? Because these narcissistic assholes probably had a setup prepared for him. Why would anyone want to be in the same room with a bunch of liars and criminals that are trying to destroy you, and in the process, screw over the American people.

The theme chosen for the dinner clearly vindicated Trump's decision.

To understand the theme's utter hypocrisy, let's review President Barack Obama's eight years in office, which saw unprecedented attacks on basic press freedoms. They included, but were certainly not limited to:


Michelle Malkin Nails the Two-Faced History of the WH Correspondents' Dinner

• More use of the Espionage Act against whistleblowers and reporters "than all previous administrations combined."
• The Justice Department's secret acquisition of call records "for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP (the Associated Press) and its journalists in April and May of 2012" (acknowledged in May 2013) involving over 100 reporters' work and personal phone numbers.
• A years-long effort to put then-New York Times reporter James Risen in jail for receiving and reporting leaked information.
• Its Federal Communications Commission's clear desire, which would likely have been carried out had Donald Trump not been elected, "to regulate websites based on political content," and, with the help of the Federal Elections Commission, "to regulate content online."
• Its record denial rate (77 percent as of March 2016) for Freedom of Information Act requests, while, as reported by the Associated Press, setting "a record for times federal employees told citizens, journalists and others that, despite searching, they couldn’t find a single page of files that were requested."

The Obama administration's unprecedented hostility toward press freedoms was certainly well-known during at least the previous three White House Correspondents' dinners. But of course, Obama had nothing to fear in attending them, because the Stockholm Syndrome press fervently supported his politics and ideology.

Thus, despite all the abuse, the WHCA waited until this year to decide that their event prominently needed the following theme — framed by the friendly Washington Post "as a triumphant refocus on what the dinner was always supposed to be about":​

​

CELEBRATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT




Does anyone think these jokes are funny?????

Oh, playing the boohoo, I'm the victim game.

Where have I seen that before? Oh, yeah, there was a guy called Nick Griffin, in charge of the far right BNP in the UK. Got invited on Newsnight and then boohooed his way home saying how it was all a set up because, because.... people asked him questions..... er... what?

Yep, let's all pretend that the president is mentally deficient and that he shouldn't have to play the game properly.

Actually, most of the people that buy the media's bullshit are mentally deficient. They actually feel that a bunch of snobbish, stuck up media elitists that will be most likely be protesting like communists today on May Day, better represent the American public.

Well, of course. There are many people, what, 90% or more of the population who get fed their news. They don't want to have to think about it. When they do think about it, they're in outrage, more than likely because they don't understand the issue because they only read the headline and first paragraph.

This isn't the fault of the media. It's the fault of the people. But the very same people can NEVER, EVER be wrong. So they'll put the blame where they want to put it, which isn't at their feet. And when Trump comes along and tells them "it's not your fault, it's the fault of the media", they're all too willing to agree with him.

The media is good at creating false impressions. Like implying that the review of past presidential land grabs is wrong or dangerous to the environment. Millions of acres of land put off limits by Democrat presidents just to prevent it's use by the people of this country. That's the big push right now.
Trump is evil and hates nature (bullshit)
Trump is attacking the media unfairly (bullshit)
Trump refuses to work with congress (double bullshit)
Trump can only blame himself for hatred by the media (5 Pinocchios)

Okay, and? They state their story the way they want to state it. Who's fault is it if they get the wrong impression? Yes, it's the person who READ the thing and didn't see it for what it was.

The fault of the person who wrote the misleading article. That's who.

What's wrong with writing misleading articles?
It's dishonest for one thing.

 

[mudwhistle]

The word police had a dinner the other night. Usually the president attends. This time he told them to shove it. Why? Because these narcissistic assholes probably had a setup prepared for him. Why would anyone want to be in the same room with a bunch of liars and criminals that are trying to destroy you, and in the process, screw over the American people.

The theme chosen for the dinner clearly vindicated Trump's decision.

To understand the theme's utter hypocrisy, let's review President Barack Obama's eight years in office, which saw unprecedented attacks on basic press freedoms. They included, but were certainly not limited to:


Michelle Malkin Nails the Two-Faced History of the WH Correspondents' Dinner

• More use of the Espionage Act against whistleblowers and reporters "than all previous administrations combined."
• The Justice Department's secret acquisition of call records "for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP (the Associated Press) and its journalists in April and May of 2012" (acknowledged in May 2013) involving over 100 reporters' work and personal phone numbers.
• A years-long effort to put then-New York Times reporter James Risen in jail for receiving and reporting leaked information.
• Its Federal Communications Commission's clear desire, which would likely have been carried out had Donald Trump not been elected, "to regulate websites based on political content," and, with the help of the Federal Elections Commission, "to regulate content online."
• Its record denial rate (77 percent as of March 2016) for Freedom of Information Act requests, while, as reported by the Associated Press, setting "a record for times federal employees told citizens, journalists and others that, despite searching, they couldn’t find a single page of files that were requested."

The Obama administration's unprecedented hostility toward press freedoms was certainly well-known during at least the previous three White House Correspondents' dinners. But of course, Obama had nothing to fear in attending them, because the Stockholm Syndrome press fervently supported his politics and ideology.

Thus, despite all the abuse, the WHCA waited until this year to decide that their event prominently needed the following theme — framed by the friendly Washington Post "as a triumphant refocus on what the dinner was always supposed to be about":​

​

CELEBRATING THE FIRST AMENDMENT




Does anyone think these jokes are funny?????

Who is the tranny next to the bald guy?

That's a woman....I think.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Oh, playing the boohoo, I'm the victim game.

Where have I seen that before? Oh, yeah, there was a guy called Nick Griffin, in charge of the far right BNP in the UK. Got invited on Newsnight and then boohooed his way home saying how it was all a set up because, because.... people asked him questions..... er... what?

Yep, let's all pretend that the president is mentally deficient and that he shouldn't have to play the game properly.

Actually, most of the people that buy the media's bullshit are mentally deficient. They actually feel that a bunch of snobbish, stuck up media elitists that will be most likely be protesting like communists today on May Day, better represent the American public.

Well, of course. There are many people, what, 90% or more of the population who get fed their news. They don't want to have to think about it. When they do think about it, they're in outrage, more than likely because they don't understand the issue because they only read the headline and first paragraph.

This isn't the fault of the media. It's the fault of the people. But the very same people can NEVER, EVER be wrong. So they'll put the blame where they want to put it, which isn't at their feet. And when Trump comes along and tells them "it's not your fault, it's the fault of the media", they're all too willing to agree with him.

The media is good at creating false impressions. Like implying that the review of past presidential land grabs is wrong or dangerous to the environment. Millions of acres of land put off limits by Democrat presidents just to prevent it's use by the people of this country. That's the big push right now.
Trump is evil and hates nature (bullshit)
Trump is attacking the media unfairly (bullshit)
Trump refuses to work with congress (double bullshit)
Trump can only blame himself for hatred by the media (5 Pinocchios)

Okay, and? They state their story the way they want to state it. Who's fault is it if they get the wrong impression? Yes, it's the person who READ the thing and didn't see it for what it was.

The fault of the person who wrote the misleading article. That's who.

What's wrong with writing misleading articles?
It's dishonest for one thing.

Is it? Is having a different opinion on something dishonest? If it were full of lies, then yes, but if it's just a matter of opinion, then no.

People can get their information from many sources, and they can use their brains to see whether it's right or wrong, but they don't. They sit back, read something and say "oh, it must be right" and then just accept.

Why do you think we have right and left wing press? We have it because people want opinionated news, they want news that tells them what they want to hear. The whole media is full of it, because this is what the people actually WANT.

Then they blame others for it.