Georgetown U. Frosh Trumpster Falls Flat Trying To Defend His Hero In WSJ Op-Ed

"If da mainstream media go after the Donald, dey is me enemy!"

Samuel Dubke is reportedly, from his WSJ op-ed bio,  "a freshman this fall at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service".    This brief description appearing at the end of his piece entitled 'Why The Young Tune Politics Out' (p. A15, August 4).    This title supposedly bolstered by his 800 word essay and the "young" (mainly college age) demographic being turned off - according to Dubke - by the "mainstream media".  At the end of the op-ed I wondered whether Georgetown would withdraw its acceptance based on one of the most pathetic, ill thought out works to appear in public in a long time. But then again, maybe we can't hold a college freshman's naïveté  against him. It comes with the age, so to speak.

Young Dubke claims to be fairly saturated by news from MSNBC which is "turned to full volume" at the new organization for which he labors as an intern "5 days week, eight hours a day". Most kids his age would consider themselves lucky to have such a summer gig - especially in terms of experience - but the crass and callow Dubke is hard pressed to be grateful.  For him, he "would rather press the mute button and never have to listen to any of it".

One may inquire then as to what exactly is his problem?  Evidently we can sum it up from his own whining words as follows:

-  He's "dumbfounded by how obfuscating the media has been toward any news that contradicts their neatly packed punditry".   Oh and "how they have ignored much of the public's desire for unbiased an unsensational content".

First, let's recognize how off point his vocabulary is. By "obfuscating" we mean  - from any standard lexicon - the  obscuring of the intended meaning of communication by making the message difficult to understand.   So Frosh Dubke seems to be complaining the mainstream media, in his experience, is obscuring all the communications concerning "contradictory news".    But what is the contradictory news? In fact, as I have shown, it is almost entirely balderdash, i.e. fake news. See e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2017/07/skewering-another-right-wing-conspiracy.html


In fact, what young Dubke regards as "contradicting news" basically falls into the categories of half-baked conspiracy ideations - such as pizzagate and the Fusion GPS -DNC conspiracy rubbish, or out and out dissembling by  their hero. Into the latter we find the bunkum that he really won the popular vote, that he really won New Hampshire (which he also called a "den of drug abuse"), that Obama wiretapped him, and he had the biggest Inaugural crowds ever.

In each case had  this news intern done the most minimal research he'd have learned how the mainstream media fact-checked each and every one of those, showing how all were Trumpian BS,   horse pockey, nonsense, out right lies. So why in hell would any self-respecting news organization publish such bollocks?  Why would a respectable cable news venue broadcast it?  Just to appease dunderheads too lazy to check facts themselves? Dubke doesn't ask himself such questions. He's more miffed that the mainstream press has ignored proven dreck.

Which suggests to us one of two things:

Dubke can't recognize dreck when he sees it, hears it, or -

Dubke believes dreck ought to get a hearing, maybe for the weaker- minded,  to enhance their gullibility.

As for "ignoring the public's desire for unbiased (and unsensational) content", WHICH public? Are we talking about the serious, level-headed public that watches Rachel Maddow's excellent analyses of the Trump-Russia money laundering links on MSNBC? OR, are we talking about the low information, borderline uneducated who go to Breitbart New and FOX - as they feast on Pizzagate,  Alex Jones' Mars' child sex slave conspiracy crappola and other refuse?   It appears to me that our illustrious WSJ author Dubke is appealing for the mainstream media to descend to the same level of the fake news sites.   From this it appears he could sit right alongside other WSJ traders in pro-Trump bunkum such as Holman Jenkins, Kimberly Strassel and Dan Henninger.

Also,  what he's really jaundiced about is that the news organization for which he interns isn't tuned to FOX as opposed to MSNBC.

But this next chestnut really takes the cake - and makes one truly question this kid's basic competence and how he even managed to get an internship at a news organization:

"Every day we hear reports on another bombshell allegation about the Trump administration. Every day more Americans turn their televisions off."

Note the sequence of the two sentences, then their similar starting words "every day". This tells us the frosh is enlisting the  post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy. That is,  trying to entice his readers to assume a causal relationship from a merely sequential one: Bombshell allegations about Trump.....Young Americans turning their TVs off.

The sequence is quite evident from the order in which he sets up the two sentences.  After all, it works against his modality to put the second sentence first. He obviously wants the careless reader to say "Oh yeah! Those bombshell allegations cause the young to turn off their televisions!"

But this also elicits the question of whether the intern and soon -to- be Georgetown frosh can even distinguish between an allegation and a fact. He doesn't cite any examples so we are clearly left to ferret them out for him. That is,  those of us who see his WSJ essay as merely a brief for accepting fake news. (Oh, and btw, if you are granted the privilege of writing in the esteemed Wall Street Journal we presume you have on your "big boy pants" so can sustain a proper criticism of what you put to paper.  No kid gloves!)

Let's look at a few of the "bombshells" the mainstream media highlighted this past week.

1) The contradictions of two claims made by Trump, concerning calls received from the head of the Boy Scouts, and the President of Mexico. In the first case, Trump claimed:

"I got a call from the head of the Boy Scouts saying it was the greatest speech ever made to them."

The Boy Scouts responded:  "We are unaware of any such call."

Ouch! A bold faced LIE.  Press Secretary  Sara "Huckleberry" Sanders later admitted no such call was made by the Scouts to lying Trump.   And, btw, if Dubke believes this lying by Trump is small potatoes and a chief executive's truthfulness is of minor import, then he has no business in any news capacity, period. I'd also say he has no business in any foreign service capacity.  But it doesn't stop there. We then beheld:

2)Trump's claim at a cabinet meeting:

"Even the president of Mexico called me. They said for their southern  border very few people are coming because they know they're not going to get through out border. Which is the ultimate compliment."

But, the Mexican Foreign Ministry responded that President Enrique Pena Nieto "has not recently spoken to Donald Trump over the telephone".

So, another lie. Once more these lies disclose Trump a compulsive, pathological liar. This is of utmost importance, because if a president can't be trusted to speak the truth in everyday affairs how the hell can we trust him when a crisis erupts? I for one wouldn't trust a damned word he says if he asserted the North Koreans were planning an attack. Given his background I'd chalk it up to another lie. Why believe a compulsive, pathological liar?

Again, let us note these phone call claims made by Trump were not "allegations" but stone cold fact, although lies.  He did make the claims, the media didn't invent that, it's just that the claims of the calls' content were untrue. The same goes for the transcripts released concerning earlier conversations Trump had in January with President Pena Nieto and Australia's Malcom Turnbull.  Those were actual classified transcripts which some fearsome patriot leaked to show Trump's innate instability and not "allegations".

They each showed a chief executive with impaired speech as well as intellectual disability - a person who has no business being anywhere near nuclear codes.  Dubke may not like this exposure, in fact he may hate it, but ....tough shit. It's the truth.

The intern frosh from Georgetown also claims he "voted for Trump reluctantly" but this is hard to believe given how hard he's sucking up to him now, in his essay.   Indeed he admits:

"Like much of my family since the election I have been drawn toward nontraditional news sources from Fox News to Breitbart."

In other words, the kid gobbles up fake news.. His justification is even more incredible and outright hair raising:

"They may peddle biased and occasionally incorrect information but at least conservative news outlets welcome me with open arms."

And why do you think that is, sonny?  Because of your peerless news savvy and skills?  Or is it that they recognize a fellow  gullible low information moron and dummy?

More revealing still is this next bit of whining:

"I feel marginalized when I watch NBC or CNN or when I read the New York Times and Washington Post."

Why does the kid feel marginalized? If we set aside the possibility that he feels challenged by greater reading demands this leaves  only one logical explanation: young Dubke is afraid of the truth. (And the kid has admitted the news sources he favors "peddle fake news and incorrect information")

Dubke attempts to gain a sense of objectivity for himself by admitting "Donald Trump was a flawed candidate and is a flawed President"  but then seeks to deflect the issue by writing that he'd "like to repeat to journalists what I've been told in school: Show, don't tell".

Wowser! How original!   So Donald Jr's emails - which he himself exposed for all the world to see aren't showing? Trump's claims of phone calls received (which were outright lies) don't make the cut for showing? The transcripts leaked that show Trump's pathetic responses to Nieto and Trunbull aren't showing?

Trump, for god's sake, couldn't keep loyalty with his own AG Jeff Sessions. He humiliated ol' Jeff for most of the week before last, calling him a "loser" and musing about firing him. And doing so in tweets no less!

I would say the "showing" standard to meet the kid's demands was met and then some.

Reading the end of his essay is even more disheartening than the preceding segments. We are asked to believe or accept this new generation of young conservatives is simply too weak, unprepared or lacking in knowledge to take on liberals in hearty, no holds barred debate. They'd rather retire to a corner and whine and pout. He claims most of his peers "don't pay attention to politics" because they "don't want to get into an argument". As for himself:

"The reasons for staying informed are gradually being outweighed by the desire to be accepted...or at least left alone with our world view".

Which is perhaps the most pathetic statement ever made by an incoming college freshman, and one which one hopes Dubke can dispense with by the time he reaches senior year.  What "Mr. Right Snowflake" intern needs to ask himself is why so many millions of youth on the left - like my niece Shayl and sister Rori  - are highly engaged and energized with the resistance.  Say like being involved in the Indivisible Movement, see e.g.

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/karin-kamp/71133/how-the-indivisible-movement-is-fueling-resistance-to-trump

 Why the difference between the left's youth and the right's? Why are the former willing to argue, be politically active and ignore fake news? What is that "magic" ingredient that makes the difference?

Maybe they recognize what the devoted Trumpsters like Dubke do not. That Trump has done absolutely nothing for the average working man or woman. He has instead  championed his own Trump corporate kingdom and the  wealthy.  In other words, his presidency to date is grounded in ignorance, immorality, irrationality and ineptitude.

Maybe, to use Shayl's parlance, it's past time those like Dubke finally "wake up and start facing reality instead of running away from it."

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/p-m-carpenter/74393/the-light-at-the-end-of-trumps-dark-tunnel

John Brennan Schools House Committee - And How The 2016 Election Was Tossed To Trump

Former CIA Director John Brenna at yesterday's open Senate Hearing.

"Frequently, individuals on a treasonous path do not even realize they're on that path until it gets to be too late,"   - Former CIA Director John Brennan yesterday before the House Intelligence Committee

Yesterday,  speaking before the House Intelligence Committee, John Brennan offered a frank assessment of Russia's aggressive approach to meddling in the 2016 election and, in the process, complicated Donald Trump's attempts to cast the whole thing as "fake news".  Brennan's statement below put the kibosh on this nonsense:

"I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and US persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals. It raised questions in my mind about whether Russia was able to gain the cooperation of those individuals."

While Brennan would not specifically identify any individuals associated with the Trump campaign who had contacts with Russian officials and would not speculate as to whether there was any collusion or collaboration, he did tell lawmakers why he was concerned about the contacts occurring against the general background of Russian efforts to meddle in the election. Brennan said he'd studied Russian intelligence activities over the years, and how Russian intelligence services have been able to get people to betray their country. "Frequently, individuals on a treasonous path do not even realize they're on that path until it gets to be too late," he said.

Brennan also told the committee he believed that Russia anticipated that Clinton would be the likely winner of the presidential race, and that Russia tried to "damage and bloody" her before Election Day.  Most of this I'd written about in blog posts over the campaign including that Clinton would be the more "warlike" against the Russians. I cited for reference  her saber -rattling AIPAC speech, e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2016/03/as-predicted-hillary-panders-to-aipac.html

HRC delivering her warnings at CA military base last year

Noting in particular, Clinton's  words:

"The best way to help Israel deal with Iran’s growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad."

I added in my post at the time: "Seriously? And you think the Russians will just sit by, smile and allow you to do that? (As you think they'd allow you to implement 'no fly' zones)  You have to be kidding. Again, this is what Bernie referred to in the debates as lack of judgment. "

 Of course, this would have sent red alarms to the Russians too. I'd also delivered a number of posts on Clinton regarding her staunch neoconservative position  - more likely to incite a war with the Russians. All of this, btw, would have been known by anyone following Hillary Clinton's speeches and interviews.  All of it is also factual, based on HRC's actual speeches, events - not fake news!  (In the interests of full disclosure I subsequently came to see Hillary as the more responsible candidate, especially after Trump's "pussy grabbing" video with Billy Bush emerged, and the debates - which found Hillary as far more prepared and Trump trying to "wing it".)

The point I'm making is there was more than ample basis for the Russians to 'go for it' in ensuring the 2016 election outcome went to Trump. On one level there is the issue of "collusion" or conspiracy of actual Trump campaign people with Russian intel or other officials. As Brennan voiced his own concerns yesterday:

"I was worried about the number of the contacts the Russians had with U.S. persons in the Trump campaign".

His primary worry was focused on the Russians "suborning" the latter, which means inciting them to "commit wrongful acts".   In his words:

"I know what the Russians try to do. They try to suborn individuals They try to get individuals including U.S. persons to act on their behalf either wittingly or unwittingly."

We do not have the exact plan or what the Trump bunch agreed to with their Russian counterparts, but it is possible to "reverse engineer" what transpired. This is what I call the "second level" or recruiting American voters themselves to act as a weaponized faction against Clinton. Specifically, it seems voters in the three critical states (WI, MI, PA) which tossed the election to Trump had their brains 'jacked' by sophisticated propaganda stories like "pizzagate", e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2016/12/crackpot-pizzagate-bollocks-promoted-by.html

As noted in a recent TIME account, ('Mocking Democracy- Inside Russia's Social Media War On America', May 29, p. 30)  "counterintelligence officials saw evidence of Russia using algorithmic techniques to target social media accounts of particular reporters".  Thereby, false stories could be seeded into media enclaves where - according to one CI official "the specific reporter might be slightly slanted to believing things".

With such a reporter's mind in the proverbial 'crapper', the mind virus would then easily be disseminated as the fake story - say Pizzagate- was maliciously spread.

But did this throw the election to Trump? It may well have. While the skinny is that the Russians alone sowed false stories, the TIME account identifies two Trump-linked outfits under probe as well: Cambridge Analytica - partly owned by Trump backer Robert Mercer, and Breitbart News, associated with Steve Bannon.   In effect, the collusion would have theoretically been between Russian fake news sources and the Trump-leaning organizations.

Evidence? Well so far it's indirect not direct. Examining the statistics for Google searches in the three states that tipped the election to Trump, Dem operatives found fake news searches (e.g. for "Pizzagate") were disproportionately higher in swing districts. These searches were not found in districts likely to vote Trump. Why would they? If indeed the purpose of the social media assault was to change brain orientations and beliefs against Hillary, it would not have been necessary to waste energy on the already converted. (E,g. Trump voters).

The Democratic operatives, as it turns out, created a package of background materials indicating that "someone had successfully altered the behavior in key voting districts in key states".

The notion that 77,000 voters' minds might have been changed in the 3 key states to toss the election to Trump is therefore not without some basis.

Most disturbing is that all that was needed for Trump to win the electoral vote race, and hence presidency, was for 77,000 brains to be jacked and their voting preferences altered.  Of course, I'm not saying other factors didn't also play a role, including voter suppression used on African Americans in WI who didn't have the "correct" ID and were not allowed to vote. Some estimates (e.g. in The New Republic) put that total as high as 300,000.

But the sadder aspect is how right thinking, intelligent American voter could remotely believe any of the codswallop such as peddled in the fake pedophilia story of Pizzagate. This means that unless Americans get much smarter and more percipient in future elections, we may see this sordid media gaming play out again.  The key threshold that must be crossed is more Americans being able to spot fake news garbage, as opposed to believing it and worse, acting on it.  To that end, readers might wish to circulate the link below to anyone they believe might be susceptible:

http://politics.flackcheck.org/how-to-spot-fake-news-factcheck/

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/douglas-blackmon/73024/russiagate-has-become-a-catastrophic-failure-of-leadership-and-a-debacle-from-which-the-trump-pres

Trump Reverts To Psychotic - Blames Obama For Wiretap Conspiracy

"Those who said Trump finally made the presidential pivot last Tuesday in his speech, now need to recant. Trump can't help himself. Claiming Obama bugged him is an extremely serious charge.  Trump needs to put up or shut up." - Political Science Prof. Larry Sabato, quoted in The Financial Times

"The demagogue is one who preaches 'facts' he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." - H.L. Mencken

Well, it wasn't long before the unhinged Trump came through again, after he'd managed to control himself Tuesday night - likely with the help of a medley of anti-psychotics (and some ECT).  Recall, he for once remained to "work" in the White House last weekend, as opposed to wasting taxpayer money jetting to Mar-a -Lago. The strain showed, and finally erupted yesterday morning when he  launched a series of tweets that began at 5.35am. In one he wrote: “Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!”

He followed up with a string of tweets in the next half-hour that claimed Obama had "defied a court rejection to tap his office", and invited a “good lawyer” to make a case against the alleged process. In fact, as NBC legal expert Ari Melber pointed out, IF there was a wiretap it was more plausibly ORDERED by a judge on account of suspicion of criminal activity or collusion - possibly with a foreign power.  So in fact, Trump's tweets - as opposed to any victimization - may actually be open admissions that he has something to be guilty about, if such wiretaps were actually FISA -warrant approved. As for the lamebrain SC Reepo Lindsey Graham, who promised an angry SC town hall he'll "look into it". There's nothing to look into. If there were any legal wiretaps, and they were ordered by a judge through a FISA warrant, Trump is likely in deep shit. A FISA warrant isn't issued casually.

Obama’s former deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, had to impart some badly needed education - and  tweeted back at Trump: “No president can order a wiretap. Those restrictions were put in place to protect citizens from people like you.”

Later an Obama spokesman, Kevin Lewis, issued a statement which read:.

“A cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice. As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any US citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false.””

That statement by Lewis did not deny there was a wiretapping but did deny that Obama ordered one.

But my suspicion is that it's all just Trump's runaway paranoia at work. What would you expect from a nutball who fancies that conspiracy freak Alex Jones is some kind of oracle? In fact, this guy defines what it means to be a conspiracy fruitcake, i.e. a whacko who accepts conspiracies without an iota of evidence. (Like asserting Sandy Hook being a "false flag" where all the kids were actors).

The most way out Trump claim was the  comparison of the alleged surveillance of his Trump Tower communications to Watergate. This was  the conspiracy in which a 1972 break-in at Democratic National Committee headquarters led to revelation of crime and cover-up at the highest level of government and, ultimately, the resignation of Richard Nixon.. Trump, no avid history reader, doesn't seem to know that the Watergate break -in was actually mounted to stop leaks with which Nixon had become obsessed. This is analogous to Trump's current obsession with the ongoing leaks out of the White House, and from intelligence operatives. According to WH insiders, Trump is beset with rage and paranoia as he's become fixated on a "death by a thousand leaks".  But the question Trump and his surrogates need to ask is 'why are people leaking?'  It must be because they are appalled by what they are seeing with an unstable fruitcake in the seat of power.

Most of us who studied Trump's pathetic excuse for a teleprompter speech, which a well-trained ten year old could give, were not surprised by his tweet storm outburst.  We knew that "Agent Orange", as this asshole has come to be known, wouldn't be able to contain his psychotic demons forever. Also, he was still smarting after one of his "pets" - Alabamy cracker Jeff Sessions- recused himself from investigating the Russkie ties. This was the final straw and likely led to his nutso charges yesterday which have most serious, politically savvy folks acknowledging he needs to be fitted for a straight jacket.

Of course, there is still that contingent of the media that inevitably overthinks Trump. They have this psycho fucker playing "three dimensional chess" in a strategic deflection move.  Thus many critics dismissed Trump's tweet storm  as an attempt to deflect attention from investigations of his ties to Russia.  This could be true as well, but I suspect it is more true that this nut we have occupying the White House is simply 52 cards short of a full deck. He lacks any impulse control whatsoever, and anybody that rises that early to tweet rage about a wiretapping conspiracy he read about on Breitbart.com, can't be all there.  As Dr. Pat Bannister would put it: "He is definitely suffering from paranoid psychotic ideations that require at least four sessions of electroconvulsive therapy each day."

Trouble is, this deranged psycho occupies the most powerful position on the planet and has access to the nuclear codes.  Make no mistake that this is an unprecedented attack by a president  (in name only basically)  on his predecessor. That alone is scary, apart from a lunatic like that having access to our nuclear triad when he should be strapped down for ECT.  But the other aspect is that the whackjob accusations were made in a series of early morning tweets, and as we know psychopathic individuals are prone to tweet their psychotic fancies early in the a.m.  Usually, they can't sleep, so they toss fitfully entertaining the paranoid fantasies in their febrile brains - and then let loose.  Which is what this turkey did.

In Trump's case as WaPo writer Chris Cillizza wrote, the "conspiracy theory candidate has become the conspiracy theory President". Adding that if Trump has evidence of this "grand wiretapping conspiracy" it's his duty to present all the facts given the burden of proof is squarely on him. . Except that what Trump is tweeting doesn't even make the threshold of a putative conspiracy theory. The latter requires - as Dr. Pat Bannister has noted- at least some basis in coherent reasoning and evidence, even if sketchy. What is on offer from Trump's Twitter account is paranoid ideation and groundless suspicion.

Of course, it wasn't long before a parade of imbeciles and like-minded screwballs tried to come to his defense and even intimated there "might be something to investigate".  Really? You mean like the grade A Repuke asshole from Iowa, Steve King, who insisted on CNN that Trump wouldn't just tweet these things "out of the blue". Oh yes he would, and for making that claim on national TV you need to be dispatched to a rubber room and put in a straightjacket too. 

Eventually, sober media heads - who finally pulled their heads out of their asses after heaping praise on Trump's "presidential" Tuesday performance - realized and showed the source of Trump's ideation were stories circulating in rightwing media, namely Steve Bannon's former fake news playground, Breitbart.    One of these farcical sites (and authors) actually  claimed Obama was attempting a “silent coup” against Trump.

Why would he do that? Obama was just elated to leave the place Jan. 20th to go off on his new life, liberated from unwarranted criticism from imbeciles and psychotic imps like Donald Trump and the Trumpies.  Obama wouldn't waste time on a fool and psycho like Trump, to tell the truth, realizing from the moment he met with him in the White House that he'd bring himself down by his own hubris.  However, and this is important, another concerned authority - maybe the former Deputy AG Sally Yates, if she suspected criminal hijinks on the part of Trump and his gang- might have gone to a FISA court for a warrant.. After all, his recent tarmac meets include with  a Russian "fertilizer" king visible on assorted runways as documented by David Cay Johnston.. Most recently at a Concord NH airport. Why would a Russian oligarch go to an obscure NC airport at the same time Trump's there? Coincidence? Yeah, and I suppose all those dead JFK assassination witnesses were coincidences too.

Clearing away the haze of spin and clutter in this case, here's what we do know: Just before last November’s election, the British former MP and novelist Louise Mensch reported that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court had granted a warrant to enable the FBI to conduct surveillance of “US persons” in an investigation of possible contacts between Russian banks and the Trump Organization.

Two months later the BBC published an article backing up Mensch’s original story about the FISA court warrant issued in October to allow the justice department to scrutinize transfers and communications between Trump associates and Russian banks. US intelligence agencies were investigating the link, it added.

The issue resurfaced this week in rightwing media, in Breitbart, and by conservative talk show  host Mark Levin. This Dodo made claims on his Thursday night show about alleged steps taken by the Obama administration to undermine Trump’s campaign to win the White House. Levin called the effort a “silent coup” by the Obama administration and said this, rather than Trump’s Russian ties, should be the subject of a congressional investigation.

As reporter Chris Cillizza has pointed out (ibid.) the error of Levin and his cohort has been to take a series of independent events, including Trump's joking about Russians hacking Hillary's emails during one campaign stop. the actual hacking and later Wikileaks' publishing of John Podesta's emails, as evidence of a conspiracy.

Of course, this "grand conspiracy" is all bull pockey.  If there is any deflection at work, it is definitely via the Reich wing media which more and more bears disturbing similarity to the Third Reich's after the Reich Press Law was passed on October 4, 1933.  Levin, like the Third Reich's propagandists, is playing the role of agent provocateur.

Of course, as Josef Goebbels - supreme propagandist of the Third Reich knew - the best propaganda always contains a kernel of truth. This is to make it more believable to the Munchkin imbecile contingent, and a bit harder to pierce for more intelligent, higher information folks. In this case, Levin's play hued to Goebbel's template since his comments were subsequently summarized by Breitbart News, in a report that also made reference to the FISA warrant reported by Mensch and the BBC.

Yesterday, Robert Costa, a Washington Post reporter, tweeted: “Per an official, I’ve confirmed that several people at the White House have been circulating this Breitbart story.” On Friday night and Saturday, Fox News hosts whom Trump is known to watch also remarked on the issue, with presenter Sean Hannity tweeting: “What did OBAMA know and when did he know it??”

Yeah, right! And uttered with the same frenzy as the nuts who travel to near Area 51 each year convinced there are buried alien bodies there. And they're prepared to try to see them even if they get arrested first for trespassing.

On another note, it appears the strain has been all too much for little Donnie the Psycho who had to take yet another weekend  vacay  to Mar-a-Lago. I supposed to clear out what few working brain cells he has left.  As usual, the spin is he is taking "a working vacation" - which I guess his PR toadies have to say given they are blowing $3 m each time Trump jets down to "White House South". But as I already observed this doesn't wash. If you are incapable of putting a full day's work in your normal work environment (White House) , you will not do it once you leave to go to a spacious hacienda with golf course, hot tubs and fancy restaurants.

Again, this is the same guy who bragged during the campaign:

"I would rarely leave the White House because there’s so much work to be done. I would not be a president who took vacations. I would not be a president that takes time off. You don’t have time to take time off."

It truly is a wonder anyone believes anything this guy says anymore, he's such a compulsive liar.

Especially when he tweets bollocks. Or wait, maybe he isn't lying. In which case he's a paranoid nut who needs to be put into a straight jacket.

Update:

Former Director Of National Intelligence James Clapper has flatly denied Trump's lame claim of a FISA warrant to bug Trump Tower. Read the details and see the interview on 'Meet the Press' Here:

http://www.salon.com/2017/03/05/watch-clapper-denies-trumps-wiretap-allegations-sunday-pundits-say-tweet-storm-meant-to-sidetrack-russia-probe/

In addition, FBI Director James Comey asked the US justice department to publicly reject claims made by Donald Trump that Barack Obama ordered his phones to be tapped during the 2016 election campaign. Comey made the request on Saturday because of his concern that the allegation was false and suggested the FBI had broken the law, according to the New York Times. Unnamed US officials confirmed Comey’s move to the Associated Press, NBC News and the Wall Street Journal..

With the responses of Clapper and Comey we can see where this is going and now more than ever it is evident that Trump's rash tweets are the manifestations of a paranoid psychotic embolism in his own brain.

See also:

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-reich/71489/3-terrifying-reasons-for-trump-s-latest-rant