Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,387
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 130:
Line 130: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Main Page/Archive index/155 (view source)
Revision as of 19:25, June 16, 2017
, 19:25, June 16, 2017→This just in: Kathy Griffin has gone certifiable
::I took her apology as being sincere - when she was trying to save her job. Then at the press conference this morning, she unloads '' more'' abuse and blaming ''him'' for her getting fired (kinda like Hillary blaming Putin & Comey for her own stupidity and incompetence). Looks like we have to add Jim Carey to the boycott list. Oh, somebody should add this incident to the [[CNN]] article. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:12, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
::I took her apology as being sincere - when she was trying to save her job. Then at the press conference this morning, she unloads '' more'' abuse and blaming ''him'' for her getting fired (kinda like Hillary blaming Putin & Comey for her own stupidity and incompetence). Looks like we have to add Jim Carey to the boycott list. Oh, somebody should add this incident to the [[CNN]] article. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:12, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
:::It is arguable that Kathy Griffin is a public figure and that there is a low risk a suit for republication of libel or slander. Please be careful to limit your remarks to clearly proveable facts and avoid personal opinion. A public figure can recover for defamation if he can show "actual malace" toward the person being defamed. (A private citizen can recover without regard to "actual malace.") Ms. Griffin was accompanied by her attorney at her last press conference. I doubt that she will sue the Trump family because of their extensive legal resources, but CP could make an easier alternative target. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 20:25, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
:::It is arguable that Kathy Griffin is a public figure and that there is a low risk a suit for republication of libel or slander. Please be careful to limit your remarks to clearly proveable facts and avoid personal opinion. A public figure can recover for defamation if he can show "actual malace" toward the person being defamed. (A private citizen can recover without regard to "actual malace.") Ms. Griffin was accompanied by her attorney at her last press conference. I doubt that she will sue the Trump family because of their extensive legal resources, but CP could make an easier alternative target. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 20:25, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
== Trump a man of his word ==
Despite the backlash, despite the lobbyists, the globalists, the socialists, the RINOs all begging for Trump to stay in the Paris Climate Accord, he breaks with it. The election of Jeb or any of the 16 other candidates would have seen us sticking to the accord. The left hook came with ending the TPP. The right upper cut was ending the Paris Accord. The people that lord over us are on the ropes. My confidence in Trump has reached a new level. --Jpatt 00:21, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
:In the big scheme of things, Trump had nothing to lose by keeping his promise about this matter. It is not as if his decision is going to cause him to be even more hated by liberals/RINOS. I think he has pretty much plateaued when it comes to liberal/Democrat/RINO hatred towards him. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 07:15, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
::A serious attempt to control the climate would involve jobs lost and enormous costs. Yet the Paris Accord was the most popular treaty in history. From Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, from Albania to Yemen, the planet was awed by the sheer brilliance of an idea whose time had come: "Uncle Sucker pays." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:32, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
:::I agree that Trump is a man of his word. However, the Paris Accords were non-binding and voluntary targets, so this is more about setting a tone for international cooperation than it is about on-the-ground energy policy. Someone should write a series of articles about different energy options, carbon-capture, "clean coal", electric storage options, REGI, carbon tax, geothermal, and the various international treaties. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 21:12, 2 June 2017 (EDT)
::::In the next 20 years, energy use is expected to increase dramatically, especially in the non-OECD countries. It certainly won't decrease anywhere. We will need more of everything -- including coal, according to [http://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/pdf/energy-economics/energy-outlook-2015/Energy_Outlook_2035_booklet.pdf these projections]. My favorite is a nuclear reactor redesigned to be nonproliferating. China is working on a thorium molten salt reactor.
::::In case anyone thought I was exaggerating when I wrote that this was the Uncle Sucker pays accord: "[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/06/03/u-s-paid-1-billion-to-paris-agreement-green-fund-all-other-nations-combined-0/ U.S. Paid $1 Billion To Paris Agreement Green Fund – All Other Nations Combined $0]" The only country that made a serious attempt to comply with the carbon reductions required by the Kyoto Agreement was New Zealand. They nearly went bankrupt as a result. In the Paris Accord, the proposed reductions were voluntary. Assuming every country complied 100 percent and that the AGW theory is correct, the Accord would leave the world 0.6 degrees to 1.1 degrees Celsius cooler than it would otherwise be in 2100.[http://news.mit.edu/2016/how-much-difference-will-paris-agreement-make-0422] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 18:30, 4 June 2017 (EDT)
== London Bridge ==
Theresa May is in way over her head. She is blaming the internet for spreading Islamic terror and it must be regulated. [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-internet-regulated-london-bridge-terror-attack-google-facebook-whatsapp-borough-security-a7771896.html] May is no Thatcher that much is for sure. That is exactly the kind of Mealy-mouthed, 1000 words but no answer, statement we rejected with the election of Trump. In fact, that excuse aligns more with what a President Pelosi would say. Sad, UK citizens should take matters into their own hands in order to save their daughters from Muhammad's death cult. Drive them back to the Middle East. --Jpatt 11:42, 4 June 2017 (EDT)
:Looks good - she even admits that "tolerance" is not meant for extremists. But what's the terrorist attack that galvanized this reaction? Is London Bridge really falling down?--[[User:Abcqwe|Nathan]] ([[User talk:Abcqwe|talk]]) 11:47, 4 June 2017 (EDT)
==Qatar==
Let me present a narrative which hopefully will help make sense out of many unresolved and unanswered questions over many years.
Donald Trump met with Arab leaders in Riyadh. Within days of his leaving several broke diplomat relations with Qatar. ''Why?'' and ''What was discussed?'' Trump laid down the law -- the weapons supply program that [[Obama]], Hillary, and [[John Brennan]] covertly established about March 2011 to groups in Libya and Turkey that evolved into [[ISIS]] is over. The Pentagon was out of the loop, that's why the Pentagon could not send assistance during the [[Benghazi massacre]] because the Pentagon was unaware US facilities in Benghazi were being used for storage of captured weapons from the Gaddafi regime, or that Benghazi airport was being used for transfer of the weapons to Incirlik in Turkey, near the Syrian border where jihadis were being trained. [[Michael Flynn]], head of the [[DIA]], became aware of the program when a Chinook helicopter was shot down in Afghanistan with a Stinger missile whose serial number matched a batch of Stinger missiles the Pentagon transfered to the CIA. Flynn was outraged, but kept out of the loop. The Obama administration (Hillary's State Dept. and Brennan's CIA) arranged for the return of some of the Stingers from the Taliban, through Qatar, by trading 5 Taliban commanders from [[Guantanamo]] for return of the Stingers. The episode had a demoralizing effect on the military - the fact that Obama, Hillary, and Brennan (a) were supplying weapons to jihadists, and (b) Obama, Hillary, and Brennan were releasing captured jihadist commanders back to the battlefield. Tensions between Flynn on one hand, and Hillary/Brennan on the other, led to Obama siding with Hillary/Brennan and firing Flynn.
Flynn, unemployed, went to work for Trump and told him the whole story. The Obama administration, principally Obama, Hillary, Brennan, and Susan Rice, knew that Trump now had full knowledge of what Flynn knew. Flynn also had a vendetta against Obama, Hillary, and Brennan for treating the lives of US military personal so recklessly. This led to efforts to silence Flynn further, discredit both Flynn and Trump, cover the conspirators tracks for their war crimes, and frame both Trump and Flynn up on bogus garbage by further misuse of US intelligence agencies.
Trump served notice face-to-face on Arab leaders (where the NSA can't monitor his calls) and told them "game over." Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, and UAE severed relation with Qatar within 30 minutes of each other. Hillary & Obama's ISIS program -- intended to remove Hezbollah from Israel's borders and weaken Iranian influence in region - is now dead meat. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:40, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
==Sanders slight==
:''NSA Leaker Is A Bernie Sanders Supporter Who ‘Resists’ Donald Trump.[2]''
:''Another defeat for liberals who want to sabotage the Trump administration.''
Why would we want to offend Sanders backers? to drive them back into the arms of Hillary or Elizabeth Warren? Wouldn't it be enough to the point out a member of the #Resistance is a traitor? or a climate change activist? or supporter of Iranian terrorism? There's plenty of ammunition to choose from, nonetheless we (again) take the path of isolating ourselves. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:26, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:I changed the title. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
::Sanders attracts the unhinged. Jeremy Christian, the perpetrator in the Portland train knife attack, is a Bernie bro. On Facebook he wrote, "I gonna kill everybody who voted for Trump or Hillary!!!"[http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2017/05/who_is_jeremy_christian_facebo.html] As far as the media is concerned, he is just another Muslim-bashing Trump supporter. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:48, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::Sanders won the DNC nomination, and was cheated by Hillary. Hillary won the popular vote in the general. From a Sanders backer perspective, neither one is legitimate and Bernie should be president. And very very much like Trump supporters, they do not believe a word of MSM reporting, and look for alternative sites. The hardcore Sanders backers are more concerned about [[Deep State]] cover up of the [[Murder of Seth Rich]], and like all Republicans, concerned about DNC corruption, than the supposed Trump-Russia scandal, which they rightly see as more manufactured lies by the Hillary-swooning media. Sanders supporters, and Sanders himself, have been victimized the by the same group of corrupt media, Democrat establishment types, and Deep State operatives. Giving in to media lies is a betrayal of all they believe in. We need to court them in common cause, not ridicule or offend them. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 22:00, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::::I despise Sanders and everything he stands for. However those that sided with him rejected the corruption of Hillary, the Democrat Party for what they've become. Rob is right for the most part, especially if those corrupt Democrats keep holding onto their power, keep winning super delegates and not the people, put in charge those rejected by the people- like Perez, nominate the next presidential nominee because it was their turn in the hierarchy. It's an opportunity for Trump to show progress in his fight against the Swamp. To win over those that reject the political machine and all it stands for.--Jpatt 22:33, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::Seth Rich was 26, Reality Winner, a Farsi speaking Air Force volunteer is 25. Among those people under 30 who grew up since 9/11, there is a deep strain of patriotism and love of country, although it became very corrupted under Obama. While I'm unconvinced someone is going to volunteer to serve their country and risk their life to protect the God-given constitutional right of one man sodomizing another in Afghanistan, we should avoid debating such issues with them for the next two election cycles, over the next three years. Pelosi, Sanders, and Hillary are in their 70s. We are on the cusp of generational change of leadership in the DNC. The next generation of DNC leaders are even more wacko. We need steer this younger generation - who genuinely love their country and want to be involved - away from corrupted ideals. It begins with engaging with them, and right now we have more in common and the same opponents. We should not focus on differences. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:31, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::I see your point, but I'm still not supporting Bernie Sanders, because he's a card carrying socialist, and I have absolutely no intention of supporting socialists after what they did to those of my religion or, heck, ANY religion whatsoever. They dug their own grave the moment they decided to make mass graves of various religions, especially us Christians, simply to prove there is no such thing as a religion or deity in the name of "scientific materialism." Even if it is to take down any corrupt democrats, siding with socialists is a very bad idea, since they generally turn out to be just as corrupt as the corrupt democrats we removed. Rob, remember how we sided with Stalin just to stop Hitler, and how that ended badly even after Hitler was deposed? Siding with Bernie Sanders is essentially the same as trying to side with Stalin during World War II, and will achieve the exact same bad results. Besides, as PeterKa pointed out, the Jeremy Christian guy was a Bernie Supporter. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 06:15, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::No, we should neither support Sanders nor attack Sanders, we should show solidarity with (a) the DNC is corrupt, (b} Seth Rich murder is being covered up, (c) the media is biased toward Hillary and the corrupt DNC machine. If you can't do these things, at a bare minimum stop attacking Sanders and alienating people who love the guy. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:31, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::::Sorry, but no. We made that mistake with the French Enlightenment Philosophers such as Sade, Voltaire, Diderot, and Rousseau, and later Karl Marx, and both times we paid for it dearly with multiple mass graves. I have no intention of allowing us to make the same mistake three times. Quite bluntly, anyone who knowingly supports a guy who [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK5yB9-6O9A knowingly supported a communist group during Vietnam and tried to demonize Americans during that time], is automatically an enemy. They are either for us or against us. I'll avoid alienating those who don't know how Sanders is evil when they support him. But I WON'T stop attacking Sanders, or alienating those who do knowingly support such an evil man like him. The only way to truly stop evil is to fight it and destroy it. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 11:48, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::::This has nothing to do with Sanders ''per se'', it has everything to do with Sanders supporters '''''in a limited capacity for a limited time spanning two election cycles in three years.''''' Nobody gives a rip what their ideology is. We share common aims in taking down the corrupt DNC establishment, the corrupt mainstream media, and the corrupt Clinton machine. Period. Sanders himself won't last (he's 76), but Elizabeth Warren, the heir apparent, already cast her lot with the corrupt Clinton machine and corrupt DNC. The corrupt mainstream media will not trash her like they did Sanders & Trump. There's a limited window of opportunity right now, to poach ''some'' Sanders backers to the conservative movement. And it's not done by insulting them or debating ideology. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:39, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::::Same goes for the Jill Stein/Gary Johnson voters, who are the stubborn, hardcore, anti-Hillary, anti-DNC, anti-MSM, left-wing idealogues and Sanders movement remnant whom we not only want, we need to put together an electoral coalition over 50%. Sound crazy? The Hillary/DNC/Deep State/MSM is the main opponent which is intent on destroying ''both'' the Sanders movement ''and'' the Trump movement. Look at the power they wield. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 15:04, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::::::Yeah, and we operated with that exact same idea when we aided Stalin to take out Hitler. Guess how well that turned out? Most of Eastern Europe and even parts of the Third World subjected to the horrors of Communism, millions more killed for that sick ideology, the whole Domino Theory ultimately coming to pass, letting them even HAVE our nuclear secrets, and right now most of our education systems and media being so entrenched with communist ideology that it is practically anti-American in all but name. Aiding them, even in the name of stopping Clinton, the corrupt DNC, the MSM, and all of that, will only get us back where we're started, start the cycle again with little change except for who is ultimately pulling the strings there. My idea is to outright get rid of leftist ideology, permanently, which means fighting against both those elements AND the Sanders movement, even the Gary Johnson elements if I must, in order to ensure any threats to God's iron-fisted rule over this planet are extinguished, not stopping until the left itself is completely and utterly DEAD. And yes, I mean exactly what I say about that. We've let Gramsci, the Frankfurt School, Marx, Nietzsche, and the French Enlightenment Philosophers (or, perhaps, the Enlightenment philosophy itself) get away and worked with them in promoting their ideologies for far TOO long, and have caused countless damage as a result. It's time we stopped giving them ANY support at all. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 15:23, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::::::To do that you still need a couple million more votes. You have three choices where they come from: (a) hardcore Democrats and Hillary backers; (b) Sanders/Stein/Johnson voters; (c) immigration.
:::::::::::And we're not talking about fighting WWII. We're talking about an electoral coalition for the [[2018 Midterm elections]] and the [[2020 Presidential election]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 15:38, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
===Opportunity===
After yesterday's blowout of James Comey, where many young liberal millennials ''again'' were led down the garden path by the DNC & MSM, [that's strike three: (1) Sanders stolen nomination; (2) Hillary as gonna win big; (3) Comey was going to get Trump impeached] we need to give the smarter ones credit for some intelligence. I find it hard to believe an under 35 ideological liberal Sanders/Stein/Johnson supporter is that shallow or ignorant to not see what is happening, and will blindly surrender their idealism to a demonstrably corrupt media and DNC. We should reachout to them, less we suffer a Theresa May-type setback. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:40, 9 June 2017 (EDT)
==Breitbart==
I doubt Breitbart moved leftist and it keeps growing exponentially, far from dead. They canned a reporter for Muslim political correctness. I've read stories completely the same as a liberal journalist would create (title was clickbait but the story was a non-story). They pushed rising homosexual journalist Milo. To jump out and say they are leftist is just insulting and false. [[Mike Cernovich]] has commented about issues with Breitbart's leadership. We need to stop dividing the right into factions based solely on who is pure. It's another reason why a true conservative can't gain the highest office. The struggle on the right is real. --Jpatt 22:10, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
:Amen. Bottomline: if Trump is ever to break the 50% mark in approval ratings or a general election, it can only come from Sanders supporters. The sooner we accept this and start acting on it, the better. All else is peeing in the wind. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</port Breitbart]].sup> 22:21, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
::Is it right to abandon [[Breitbart]] news? Please read: [[Essay: Why I no longer support Breitbart]].
::A farther right-wing alternative to Fox News and Breitbart News is going to spring up. It is not a matter of if. It is a matter of when. The political center is shrinking. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:58, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
:::You are projecting again user:Conservative. You don't support it doesn't mean it's dead. Nothing in life is perfect and there will never be a perfect conservative candidate nor conservative news source. Critique them is fine, explain their failings and weakness, I am alright with that. Calling them liberal would be a credibility mistake. --Jpatt 10:16, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
::::A balance needs to be restored. The Bush administration very effectively created the division between Muslims, and radical Muslim terrorists. Unhappy with the status quo, the Obama extremists erased ''all'' references to Islam or Muslims. Now the pendulum has swung back to where McHugh of Brietbart did wholesale Twitter postings attacking ''all'' Muslims. She's probably too young to remember 9/11, so we are right back where we started in 2001-2003, educating people about terrorists and their motivations.
::::The big problem is, which Obama exacerbated, there are more of them (terrorists), and they are more widespread. Brietbart is taking the lead in educating people on these issues. The mainstream media sure hasn't, and can't, and won't. They exacerbated the situation along with Obama. McHugh was rightly fired, as Kelly Griffen was, too.
::::We need to show leadership, as Brietbart has done, and educate people on (1) the true nature of Islam, and (2) the true nature of the terrorist threat. Sanctioning wholesale bigotry, which is what McHugh did, should not be tolerated. The only solution to the problem as she stated it would be Hitler-style round-ups of 2.7 million Muslims based on identity cards, and ship them Allah-knows-where, or put them behind barbed wire. This is insanity. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:26, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::Balance? BALANCE?! I don't recall Jesus ever asking for Balance. If anything, his exact words was that he'd spit out the lukewarm, ie, those who believe in balance between two extremes. And for the record, balance won't educate people on the fact that Islam has its adherents practicing Taquiyya, which literally means they are allowed to lie to a non-Muslim to screw them over. In other words, that makes them inherently untrustworthy. And God never wants balance, he wants the whole pie to himself. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 15:28, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
I would not call Breitbart a liberal news outlet. But after they lost Bannon, this most recent event shows that Breitbart went from being a right-wing news website to being a [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/28/cuckservative-is-a-gloriously-effective-insult-that-should-not-be-slurred-demonised-or-ridiculed/ cuckservative] news website. I already found replacement news sources which are far better. It is just a matter of time before they lose a large chunk of their audience.
I am spending less time following the news anyways. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:43, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
:Yeah, and it doesn't help that Internet Explorer currently has trouble allowing me to read their articles without freezing up and reloading the page anyways. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 13:45, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
::Pokeria1, I had the same problem with Internet Explorer. Now I use Chrome, and it works much better when I read Breitbart or other news sources.
::Regarding Breitbart, yes, I am also getting the impression that it is sliding towards the Left, but it is still pretty conservative overall. I happen to agree with Jpatt on this. The great thing about the present day is how many news outlets exist. If Breitbart ever becomes liberal, I can still go to Fox, the Washington Times, the Washington Examiner, or the Washington Free Beacon, among other sites. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 15:34, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
:::I don't rely on any single one source. I have individual journalists (whoever they work for) and news organizations rated on a scale of reliability. The trap a consumer of news falls into is, swallowing whatever garbage any organization puts out daily to meet a deadline and collect revenues from advertisers for that days' 24 hour cycle. Once you fall into this rut, you loose perspective of the larger picture.
:::One must learn to pick up on news stories were a reporter is focused on a large, ongoing story, and deem the credibility of it's reporting (for example, ''Daily Caller'' is the only source focused on the huge [[Awan investigation]] scandal right now, with ''Politico'' doing some peripheral reporting aimed at cover up for the Democrats, not informing at all). When a breaking story occurs, instinctively you'll learn which timely source to use.
:::Brietbart & InfoWars I seldom use for anything, except when they come up on a research project. You would never want to use Brietbart or InfoWars as a source on breaking news, even FOX is risky, because you know dang well you'll have CNN & the ''New York Times'' refuting it within hours, and the whole world calling you am idiot (as just happened recently on FOX's Seth Rich story). You need about 72 hours for those stories to ripen and develop. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:04, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
::::Muslim terrorism/rapists/rioting/etc. being avoided by not bringing in tons of Muslims into your country is Right-Wing 101. Breitbart isn't even getting that right.
::::And previously, their leading spokesman was a homosexual who recently advocated pederasty in certain cases.
::::Breibart has failed Civilization 101. And there is no indication they are moving in the right direction as far as righting the ship. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:08, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::I realize that Breitbart was a big help in getting Trump elected. I am grateful that Steve Bannon created Breitbart. It is a pity that he didn't find a replacement as good as himself. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:25, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::Louise Mensch, who re-started the Trump-Russia hacking scandal on election Eve, hoping to jumpstart Hillary's campaign after Comey reopened the email investigation, the first to leak about FISA warrants in ''Heatstreet'' on Nov. 7th and an authority on the alleged details of Trump-Russia, on obvious Deep State mouthpiece, claims [https://mobile.twitter.com/louisemensch/status/835153463248105472?lang=en Vladimir Putin murdered Andrew Brietbart.] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:26, 7 June 2017 (EDT)
I thought about my commentary on Breitbart. While I will no longer use Breitbart as a primary source of information, I think they still have a lot of useful content. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:53, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
:I am glad that you are not abandoning the website. Clearly there are issues but they're still a right-wing source with a real journalism taking place. [http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2017/06/15/breitbart-editor-in-chief-alex-marlow-to-headline-bill-maher/] --Jpatt 09:30, 16 June 2017 (EDT)
::@Conservative, ''[http://dailysignal.com Daily Signal]'' is an excellent source for general news. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:21, 16 June 2017 (EDT)