Connect with us

Opinion

New York Times Gets Trashed on Twitter After Revealing Details of Whistleblower’s Identity

This is not about politics  or partisanship; this is about the greed of the media machine and their willingness to subvert their ethics in order to make a buck.

Published

on

Thanks to the toxic and vitriolic nature of the naturally-divisive mainstream media, a great many Americans have completely forgotten what it means to be American first.

Instead, we see venom being spit at one another from the far corners of our political spectrum.  Democrats and republicans are now somehow worse than the metaphorical cats and dogs that are often used to describe warring factions of the population.  We act as if our neighbors and our loved ones are somehow on a different team from us – a false dichotomy being propped up by the infotainment industry for their financial gain.

Politics on television is nothing more than sport.  The media pits us against one another in order to exploit our emotions.  We watch pundits scream at one another in primetime, under the lights, hoping that our side can muster a solid defense, score a few points, and maybe land that knockout haymaker.

We live vicariously through this rollercoaster of rhetoric, and the fat cats atop the infotainment industry use their emotional exploitation to sell commercials and advertising space.

Trending: Army Officer Who Knew Him Says Lt. Col. Vindman Has History of Anti-American Behavior

Too often, these media miscreants go too far, as the New York Times learned this week after revealing information that could be used to identify a White House whistleblower.

We The People were furious, and took to Twitter to let that sentiment be known.

This is not about politics  or partisanship; this is about the greed of the media machine and their willingness to subvert their ethics in order to make a buck.

President Trump has indicated that nothing untoward occurred during the phone call mentioned in the whistleblower complaint, and has taken the appropriate steps toward transparency in this matter.  He is not concerned about what the left is alleging, and is working to prove that he has acted only in the best interests of our nation.

Ergo, the President is unafraid of this whistleblower.  There is no need for their identity to become known, as the truth shall set Trump free.

Instead of allowing this latest scandal to become more water-off-the-back of the President, the New York Times has eschewed every bit of their journalistic integrity to partially out a legally-protected whistleblower for either money or fame – with either decision being a disgrace to this nation.

The Washington Post was quick to take advantage of the scandal.

It seems as though the Twitter revolt created real-world results as well.

Again, we must remove our partisan goggles to fully understand what is at stake here.

We, as Americans who wish to preserve our inalienable freedom, must protect the rights of whistleblowers of the past, the present, and most importantly of the future.  This is The Golden Rule come to life.  We want government employees in the years to come to be able to come forward with information about any wrongdoing, regardless of whether that information may harm Team A or Team B, because the truth cannot harm Team America.

The President is not concerned.  He is not frazzled.  He is cooperating with this investigation, as ugly and as partisan as it may be, and the truth shall set him free.

And, as we stare down the inevitable failure of the democrats’ latest impeachment push,  we realize that this will be just another feather in Trump’s MAGA cap heading into 2020.

The exposure of this whistleblower, however, is a sin that we as a nation must never again commit.  This unfathomable betrayal could forever harm the oversight capabilities that We The People have over our government, which, might I remind you, will not be led by Donald Trump forever.

One day in the future, there may be another Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton-type character at the helm, committing actual nefarious misdeeds.  We need the potential whistleblowers in those hypothetical cases to be unafraid of the New York Times in order to preserve our sacred liberty.

 

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Advertisement

2020

Yet Another Mainstream Stunt by Clinton Bolsters Belief That She’ll Crash 2020

Hillary has only a few days left to file her paperwork for the all-important state of New Hampshire, so we’ll have our answer soon enough.

Published

on

Some people just don’t know when to leave well enough alone.  Former First Lady Hillary Clinton is just such a person.

Back in 2016, Clinton cemented her reputation as that of a sleazy and conniving political lifer; the kind of character that would put any of the antagonists from House of Cards to shame.  Her rigging of the Democratic primaries, with the assistance of the DNC, was seen as a betrayal by the left’s base.  The former Secretary of State quickly became a persona non grata within the party itself.

That’s why there was no uproar from the Democrats when Hillary looked to be sitting out 2020.  They were likely glad to be rid of her.

Unfortunately for them, they may have spoken too soon.

Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton joined James Corden on Tuesday’s edition of the Late Late Show to mock President Donald Trump, fuelling speculation that she may be preparing a 2020 presidential run.

Hillary Clinton made a surprise appearance alongside her daughter Chelsea during Corden’s monologue, with the pair receiving a prolonged standing ovation from the audience.

“I’m really fed up with all your Trump jokes. Every single night,” Hillary joked. “If anyone should be telling Trump jokes … it’s me.”

With that, Corden stepped aside and gave the two women a chance to take shots at Trump and his former press secretary Sean Spicer, who has received support from Trump as he continues to compete and win on the dance competition show Dancing on the Stars. 

Clinton recently responded to a tweet by President Trump, daring her to run again in 2020, with “don’t tempt me” – the first of several indications that 2016’s runner up may be getting the band back together.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Cuban Democratic Socialists Rip AOC’s Democratic Socialists For Supporting Cuban Regime

Published

on

Cuban Democratic Socialists Rip AOC’s Democratic Socialists For Supporting Cuban Regime

Cuban Democratic Socialists rip AOC’s Democratic Socialists for supporting Cuban regime: You’re either ignorant, not Socialist or not Democratic.

I’ll go with ignorant. Not even foreign supporting Democratic Socialists can stomach Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her buddy Rashida Tlaib.

TDW:

Nine Cuban democratic socialists wrote a blistering open letter condemning American democratic socialists such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), blasting the Democratic Socialists of America, a group both women belong to, for their support of Cuba’s Communist government. The nine Cubans writing the letter stated that the American democratic socialists either did “not know the Cuban reality or they are not socialist or democratic,” calling them “poorly-informed.”

The Blaze reported of the letter, in which the nine Cubans wrote:

The support for Castroism revealed in resolution 62 of the recent Convention of the Democratic Socialists of the United States, held in Atlanta, Georgia, can only be explained by two reasons: either the American Socialist Democrats do not know the Cuban reality or they are not socialist or democratic.

Resolution 62 of the DSA said:

Be it resolved, the DSA formally declares itself in solidarity with the Cuban socialist struggle. The DSA unequivocally condemns the economic blockade imposed on Cuba by the United States and its allies, the American military presence in Guantanamo Bay, and any sanctions and actions that would undermine the self-determination of the Cuban people. Be it further resolved, the DSA will move to join the National Network on Cuba (NNOC), an American progressive organization dedicated to opposing acts of imperialist aggression against the Republic of Cuba. Be it finally resolved, within thirty days after passing, the DSA will submit its application for full membership to the National Network on Cuba (NNOC), and will take active measures to pursue full membership status.”

More

These nine Cuban socialists along with AOC are all wrong. Any type of socialism sucks the life out of people. Sucks the urge of betterment yourself and all hope for a better life.

AOC and her squad should all move to Cuba or Venezuela so they can experience first hand what a socialist government is all about.

 

Continue Reading

2020

Biden and Bernie Overtake Warren in Latest Polling as Hillary Threatens to Enter Race

The Democrats got the message loud and clear from Hillary Clinton:  Get on the same page for 2020 or she will enter the race and doom you all.

Published

on

The Democrats got the message loud and clear from Hillary Clinton:  Get on the same page for 2020 or she will enter the race and doom you all.

Clinton is a curse on the Democratic Party.  Her rigging of the 2016 primaries against Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders should have been enough to banish her into the deepest dungeons of the DNC, with the ever-more progressive party moving far away from the career politicians and colluding connivers that the former First Lady represents.

Hillary has never been one to take a hint, however, and her recent flurry of activity has suggested that she will soon be jumping into the 2020 race for a potential third attempt at taking the Oval Office.

This comes amid a lengthy, heavily populated race in which Democrats seem unable to choose even so much as a frontrunner.

But now, under the threat of having to deal with Hillary Clinton again, Democrats are getting their ducks in a row.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) slow, steady rise in national polls is hitting a snag, as the latest National Emerson College poll shows the presidential hopeful falling to third place, behind Joe Biden (D) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

The post-debate survey, taken October 18-21, 2019, among 430 Democrat primary voters, shows Biden regaining his frontrunner status with 27 percent support. Sanders, who has struggled in recent national polls, saw a spike, jumping to second place with 25 percent support. The survey shows the Massachusetts senator dropping to third place with 21 percent support. With a margin of error of +/- 4.7 percent, the three are statistically tied.

The poll reflects Sen. Kamala Harris’s (D-CA) continued tailspin, dropping behind Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s (D), who saw six percent support to Harris’s five percent. Andrew Yang (D) experienced a slight bump, garnering four percent support, followed by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) with three percent each. The remaining candidates saw two percent support or less.

As the Democrats hope to avoid the spoiling effect of a Hillary Clinton run in 2020, their galvanized support of Biden and Bernie demonstrates that they are not interested in dealing with such foolishness.

This latest polling stands as a statement to Hillary Clinton:  No thanks.  We’ll handle it.

 

Continue Reading

Opinion

The Impeachment ‘Inquiry’ is Nothing More Than a 24/7 Anti-Trump Campaign Ad for 2020

From perjury traps to being ‘guilty until proven innocent’, this entire debacle is little more than a 2020 PR stunt.

Published

on

While it may seem as though the mainstream media is a skipping record these days, with impeachment being the song that we’re currently stuck on, the left side of the aisle are dragging their feet on the matter…and it’s all a part of their plan to meddle in the 2020 election.

Every day it seems as though another high level official is getting grilled in front of Congress, yet we hear very little about what was said.  If the Democrats had the open-and-shut, slam dunk sort of case that they are bragging about, why the secrecy?

This molasses-inspired pace, and this molasses-like transparency, are one in the same, and the sort of tactic that we would expect to see in the crooked corners of the American justice system – not on Capitol Hill.

The left is taking things very slowly, tortoise-like even, because they need to drag this entire meandering malfeasance long into the calendar year – and perhaps even beyond.  President Trump will certainly be the GOP nominee for 2020, and moving the epicenter of the impeachment explosion ever closer to November of next year behooves the Democratic political cause.  Should Trump come out of this mess unscathed and early, (as the Senate would vote to end this joke rather handily), it would be an enormous feather in the MAGA cap that Trump wears into the meat-and-potatoes of the election season.

For the Democrats, the longer this takes, the better.

When it comes to the timing, there is yet another aspect that few are willing to discuss, and that is the possibility that the Department of Justice will be unleashing a bombshell of their own in the coming weeks regarding the mysterious origins of the “RussiaGate” probe that sought to take down President Trump shortly after his election.

In terms of public perception, the enormity of “SpyGate” will wholly eclipse whatever Ukrainian phone call nonsense the left can conjure up.  This means that, in the timeline of “impeachment”, the Trump administration has an ace up their sleeve.  As soon as Nancy Pelosi is finally forced to pull the trigger on an impeachment vote, our nation will become privy to information that sets the Democratic Party on fire – stealing the thunder from this “inquiry”, despite how “formal” the left is insisting that it is.

The secrecy employed by the Democrats in this matter is an affront to the American ethos of justice, however, and should be dealt with immediately.

This “inquiry” is occurring behind closed doors, despite the fact that nearly everyone involved is a public servant who serves We The People.  The entire thing is being bankrolled by us, the US taxpayers, and we have every right to know what is happening.  This has not only left We The People in the dark, but also the President.  It’s the equivalent of a police officer separating all of the witnesses, hoping that someone misremembers something, blowing an inadvertent hole in their alibi.

When this sort of thing occurs behind closed doors on Capitol Hill, we call it a “perjury trap”.

Furthermore, by refusing to hold a vote to authorize the “inquiry”, the Democrats have stolen the President’s right to defend himself against the allegations at hand – something that flies in the face of the American tenet of being “innocent until proven guilty”.  In this case, the left will eventually have a trial in the Senate in which they will level a mass of guilt at the President and expect him to fully exonerate himself.

That is not how justice works in the United States.  Here, in the freest nation to ever exist, the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the defendant.  This entire “impeachment inquiry” is a mockery of that very ideology.

And, as if these reasons weren’t enough to call shenanigans on the entire farce, we mustn’t ignore that, with an election fast approaching, the “inquiry” itself is nothing more than taxpayer-funded opposition research for 2020.  Whatever supposedly “damning” information that is revealed, in secret, to the Democrats will undoubtedly surface in campaign ads and stump speeches during the run-up to next November’s election.

This isn’t an impeachment proceeding as the founders intended; it’s a 24-7 anti-Trump campaign advertisement.

 

Continue Reading

Media

Manufactured Media Narrative on Impeachment Exposed by Dueling Poll Results

The media wants chaos in the capital.

Published

on

There is a new frustration sweeping the nation this week, as Americans from far and wide continues to find themselves befuddled by the mainstream media.

They turn on their televisions or log into Facebook to see a litany of literature regarding what seems like the inevitable impeachment of President Donald Trump.  That narrative is bolstered by the infotainment industry and their bloodthirsty quest for ratings.  Just today, after a cabinet meeting, Donald Trump was asked if he believed that a House vote on impeachment was a “foregone conclusion”.

Even uttering the phrase “foregone conclusion” in relation to impeachment is a bit of the media’s brainwashing at work, as it forces the President to make a soundbite that will be played ad nauseam for next day and half, continuing to pound the phrase into the minds of We The People.

And the media seems to be having some success in their pursuit of tanking Trump, as a number of recent polls show a slight uptick in support for impeaching and possibly removing the President.

At least, that’s what they want you to believe.  The reality of the situation is far more complicated.

Voters in the states likeliest to decide the 2020 presidential election support the impeachment inquiry that House Democrats began last month, but a majority still opposes impeaching President Trump and removing him from office, according to a New York Times/Siena College survey.

In the six closest states carried by the president in 2016, registered voters support the impeachment inquiry by a five-point margin, 50 percent to 45 percent. The same voters oppose impeaching Mr. Trump and removing him from office, 53 percent to 43 percent.

The survey depicts a deeply divided electorate in battleground states a year from the election, with the president’s core supporters and opponents exceptionally energized and unified. Yet at the same time, a crucial sliver of relatively moderate voters — just 7 percent of the electorate — support the inquiry without backing Mr. Trump’s impeachment and removal from office.

Furthermore, it appears as though all of this impeachment-fever is actually backfiring on the Democrats as it galvanizes the President’s base.

Mr. Trump’s supporters from 2016 are nearly unanimous in their opposition to removing him. Over all, 94 percent of respondents who said they voted for him four years ago said they opposed his impeachment and removal. It is possible that Trump voters who have soured on him are less likely to divulge their 2016 preference to a pollster. (Crosstabs available here.)

Trump voters are not convinced that the president’s conduct was atypical for politicians in Washington. Only 11 percent of Mr. Trump’s 2016 supporters believe that his Ukraine-related conduct is worse than the conduct of most politicians, while 75 percent said it was typical.

Make no mistake about it; the distortion that we see here, this incongruity, can be blamed nearly entirely on the mainstream media’s wanton desire for chaos and anarchy in Washington DC.  They are the catalysts for this cacophony of anti-Trump tirades, and we must remember that always when peering through their liberal lens.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Friday Google Outages Reignite Concerns Over Consolidation of Power Online

All of our eggs are in Google’s basket…and you know what they say about that sort of thing.

Published

on

Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.

It’s a saying that we’ve heard time and time again throughout our lives, from any number of sources.  It’s the sort of cliché that has a place in almost any workplace or strategic planning session.  It’s simple to understand, and it cuts to the core of individual responsibility.

Heck, we’ve even used this principle in our legislative efforts, particularly in the realm of avoiding monopolies and taking up anti-trust efforts against those who look to consolidate any market into submission.

One place where we’ve failed to keep all of our eggs out of one basket is on the internet.  Part of the reason for this is that the world wide web itself boomed swiftly and uncontrollably, much like the early days of the California gold rush, where shrewd businessman understood the value of lawlessness and greed.  Get your fortunes while the gettin’s good, because soon, the law will come to town and button up the easy money, and make things fair.

Google is just that baron of bandwidth, soaking up an inordinate amount of the traffic online and redirecting it wherever they please.  Looking for a home assistant?  They’re not likely to steer you toward an Amazon Alexa.  Searching for a new cellular device?  You can bet that the iPhone doesn’t get the same algorithmic advantages as Android devices do.

And, of course, when exploring the wide world of news, Google is only going to give you what they want you to see.

This manipulation of our assumed freedom online is a travesty, and is indoctrinating those too naive to recognize the biases into believing that Google is a fair reputation of the world at large.  Worse still is the fact that Google is nearly inescapable.

Case in point:  This afternoon, a worrisome email chain began coursing throughout the workplace here at The Washington Sentinel.  We, along with our allies in the fight for alternative media’s rights, noticed that Google Analytics was behaving strangely.  Across the board, and across a number of websites in and outside of our purview, an 80% drop in traffic took place at precisely the same time.

Were we being throttled?  Not likely, (at least in this instance), as the reporting parties had no real common denominator other than their conservative roots.

No, Google Analytics was simply FUBAR, and for some time.  The folks at DownDetector.com reported several issues with the world’s most powerful online corporation, starting on the 17th and continuing through today.

And while the search engine leviathan was eventually able to bring its services back up to speed, the fact that this minor hiccup had such wide-ranging ramifications should, in and of itself, be cause for concern.  What if the next glitch at Google comes in the form of a Maps outage during rush hour, or a Google Pay fiasco on the first of the month?  What happens if a terror group decides to annihilate Google’s server farms one afternoon?

All of our eggs are in Google’s basket…and you know what they say about that sort of thing.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Dems Wear ‘Small Donor’ Numbers Like a Badge of Pride, But Ignore the Big Business Behind Them

ActBlue is big-money politics in disguise, and not unlike the “healthy” option at a drive-thru burger joint:  A charade.

Published

on

Politics is a game of perception.  It’s the popularity contest that we aren’t supposed to refer to as a “popularity contest”.  We hold elections in such high regard that we refuse, as Americans, to believe that they are little more than weathervanes of our nation’s whims.

In 2016, We The People told the world that we have had enough of the political establishment’s tireless corruption and conniving.  We were, instead, willing to roll the dice with a non-politician in the Oval Office, effectively putting the rest of The Beltway on notice:  Slight us again, and you too could be replaced by anyone.

In an effort to remain in power while somehow appealing to the anti-establishment trends of the populace, Democratic candidates of all shape and size have been hanging their hat on the idea of “small donor” statistics.  In the eyes of their public relations teams, taking less money individually from more donors is better than having more money from less donors.

This feeds into the left’s wealth-guilt, and their narrative that paints success as having some sort of terminal usefulness.  The Democrats, particularly in the socialist wing of the party, tend to see wealth as a sin, with Bernie Sanders even declaring that there is no reason for billionaires to exist.  This, despite Bernie’s status as a three-home-owning millionaire.

The Democrats lining up for 2020 having been wearing their small donor statistics like a Scouts’ merit badge as of late, equating this to some sort of antidote to the “corporate cash” they see infecting the national political discourse.

But the machine behind this pursestrings-centric virtue-signaling is anything but small, and belies yet another hypocrisy of the liberal left.

Meet ActBlue.

“Folks have used our platform to donate over $3.8 billion, with an average contribution size of $35,” said Erin Hill, ActBlue’s executive director.

What’s more, Hill notes proudly, every Democrat seeking the presidency is a client — along with a dizzying array of individuals and groups operating at the federal, state and local levels. ActBlue’s Massachusetts directory alone runs 45 pages.

The core premise that governs everything ActBlue does is straightforward: giving money to a political candidate should be simple and nearly instantaneous.

“If you get to a point where a donor says, ‘Yes, I want to be part of what you’re building; yes, I believe in what you’re doing,’ we see it as our role to make it as frictionless as possible,” Hill said.

Hence, fundraising pages that load extremely quickly, before would-be donors can get cold feet, and “Express Accounts” that let die-hards save their information with the tap of a finger.

Not only is ActBlue a money-funnel operating under the auspices of their non-profit status, but they also dabble in one of the modern age’s most sinful practices:  Data harvesting.

Since ActBlue is a nonprofit, its services come cheap; clients just pay a small processing fee on each transaction — Hill says administrative costs are largely covered by tips that donors can leave if they so desire. That, in turn, means lots of clients, who provide massive amounts of data, which ActBlue can analyze to make the entire process even more seamless.

And you can forget about candidates opting out of using ActBlue anytime soon…

In addition, Hill notes, the Democratic National Committee is requiring that candidates receive a certain number of direct contributions before they’re allowed on the presidential debate stage — giving an establishment stamp of approval to ActBlue’s approach.

The Democratic Party is essentially telling candidates that, without using ActBlue, they will find themselves running uphill every step of the way.

Worse still, the entire perception of ActBlue as a tool for Joe and Jane Everyman to have their voices heard above the corporate class is simply not accurate.

A report from BigLeaguePolitics.com claims that since 2015, over 1,000 executives and employees from tech giants such as Facebook, Google, Twitter, and Apple have all donated to ActBlue, a pro-Democrat super PAC that has raised $1.5 billion since 2015. Details of the super PAC’s fundraising activities were gathered by the Federal Elections Commissionand compiled by watchdog website Campaign Money. The data shows that executives, vice presidents, managers, and regular employees at major tech firms were behind a large number of donations to the PAC.

According to Big League Politics reporter Tom Pappert, some of the donors to the PAC include:

  • Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg
  • Twitter co-Founder Evan Williams
  • Google senior executives Urs Holzle, Vinton Cerf, and Jennifer Fitzpatrick
  •           Apple senior executives Angela Ahrendts and Lisa Jackson

ActBlue isn’t special.  It isn’t the end-all, be-all of campaign contribution transparency, and no amount of well-placed soundbites on Democratic debate stages is going to change that.

ActBlue is big-money politics in disguise, and not unlike the “healthy” option at a drive-thru burger joint:  You may feel better about your choice, but that’s only because someone told you that you should.

 

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Become an insider

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Pin It on Pinterest