Joe Cooper
2017-06-10 14:19:55 UTC
A New York Times story about alleged Trump team contacts with Russian
officials was in the main not true. (The New York Post quoting James
Comey, 6/8.)
Now over to the opposite end of the medias political spectrum:
"The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers
(especially The New York Times) is that somewhere along the line in the
last year the president had something to do with colluding with the
Russians and yet what came apart this morning was that theory," (Chris
Matthews, MSNBC 6/8.)
In brief, after this weeks Senate hearings (and especially after Little
Marcos gutsy performance) it looks like we have (at least a semblance)
of a media consensus regarding the famous claims by The New York Times
against Trump and his team. The claims involved collusion with the
Russiansand they appear bogus.
In many circles Little Marcos stature seems to have shot up faster
than Jacks beanstalk. Those knock-down and drag-out Republican debates
suddenly seem like ancient history.
Interestingly, earlier this week in an editorial The New York Times
bewailed the lack of collusion between Trump and Russias historic
colluders on our doorstep.
To the long list of Barack Obamas major initiatives that President
Trump is obsessed with reversing, we may soon be able to add Cuba Mr.
Trump promised in his campaign to return to a more hard-line approach. If
he does, as seems likely, he will further isolate America, hurt American
business interests and, quite possibly, impede the push for greater
democracy on the Caribbean island.(New York Times, 6/5)
Its a fascinating thing to watch. And it never fails. Let the issue of
American robber-barons doing business with the Stalinist/kleptocratic
Castro family (who already stole $8 billion from U.S. businessmen and
tortured and murdered a few who resisted the burglary)let this issue
pop-up and PRESTO!
Like clockwork, the most historically pinko, the most relentlessly anti-
business entities in the U.S.-- from Bernie Sanders to The New York
Timesthe very folks who habitually foam-at-the-mouth for keelhauling and
tar & feathering all greedy businessmen! suddenly morph into Calvin
Coolidge.
Recall President Coolidges famous (and universally denounced by
liberals) quip: The business of America is business. Lets also throw
in General Motors CEO Charlie Wilsons famous, if its good for GM its
good for America-and vice versa. You might call these the favorite
captions when liberal demonize greedy U.S. robber-barons!
But POOF! Like magic, all these captions and caricatures do a screeching
180 in liberal pronouncements when it comes to U.S. businessmen
partnering with the multi-millionaire Castro-Family to profit from Cuban
slave labor on the Castro plantation.
If Saturday Night Live scriptwriters actually had a sense of humor they
could have a ball with the spectacle of diehard Bolshevik Bernie Sanders
suddenly morphing into Gordon Gekko and championing obscene profits for
American capitalistsbut only in partnership with the slaveholding Castro
family. I offer SNL this script on the house.
Not that impediments to the profits of patriotic American capitalists is
the only thing keeping The New York Times editorial board awake at night.
Notice that they also bemoan President Trumps forthcoming Cuba policy as
a potential impediment to democracy on that Caribbean island.
As it happens, The New York Times does not have a stellar record of
forecasting impediments to democracy on that Caribbean island. So
lets address the theme of this columns title about The New York Times
special talent for detecting Russian colluders:
This is not a Communist Revolution in any sense of the term. In Cuba
there are no communists in positions of control. Fidel Castro is not only
not a Communist, he is decidedly anti-Communist. (Herbert Matthews, New
York Times, July 1959.)
(Fidel Castro, by the way, had seriously colluded with KGB agent
Nikolai Leonev and his Cuban KGB colleague Osvaldo Sanchez since 1955
when they seriously colluded in Mexico City. These collusion sessions
involved setting the stage for the future Stalinization of Cuba.)
Fidel Castro has strong ideas of liberty, democracy, social justice, the
need to restore the Constitution .but it amounts to a new deal for Cuba,
radical, democratic and therefore anti-Communist. (Herbert Matthews, New
York Times, February 1957.)
Leaving no stone unturned, The New York Times also embraced Ernesto Che
Guevara as an unimpeachable liberty-lover and truth-teller:
I am not a communist and have never been a communist It gives me great
pain to be called a communist, (Ernesto Che Guevara who had a KGB
handler since 1956 as eagerly and trustingly quoted by The New York
Times, January 4th, 1959.)
And speaking of Fake News:
One Thousand Killed in 5 days of Fierce Street Fighting! read a New
York Times headline on Jan 4, 1959 about the battle of Santa Clara in
central Cuba where Ernesto Che Guevara earned much of his enduring (and
utterly bogus) martial fame. Commander Che Guevara appealed to Batista
troops for a truce to clear the streets of casualties, continues The New
York Times article. Guevara turned the tide in this bloody battle and
whipped a Batista force of 3,000 men.
A year later, Ches own diaries revealed that his forces suffered exactly
one casualty during this Caribbean Stalingrad, as depicted by The New
York Times. Your humble servant interviewed several eye-witnesses (on
both sides) to this battle and their consensus came to about five
casualties total for this Caribbean Gettysburg/Verdun, as depicted by The
New York Times.
True to New York Times-form, during this battle, the paper didnt have
a reporter within 300 miles of Santa Clara. Instead, it relied on trusty
Cuban Castroite correspondents.
And true to Che Guevara-form, the genuine bloodbath in Santa Clara came a
week after the (utterly bogus) battle, when Ches opponents (real and
imagined) were utterly defenseless. Thats when Che sent his goons to
drag men and boys from their homes and set his firing squads to work in
triple shifts.
But absolutely nothing appeared in the trusty New York Times on the
genuine bloodbath at Santa Clara. True to Castroite practice, only when
Peace was Given a Chance, only when their enemies were utterly
defenseless, did the bloodbath crank into high gear.
And true to (proud Walter Duranty employer) practice, The New York Times
helped cover-up yet another communist atrocity.
Source: http://bit.ly/2sO5zVX
officials was in the main not true. (The New York Post quoting James
Comey, 6/8.)
Now over to the opposite end of the medias political spectrum:
"The assumption of the critics of the president, of his pursuers
(especially The New York Times) is that somewhere along the line in the
last year the president had something to do with colluding with the
Russians and yet what came apart this morning was that theory," (Chris
Matthews, MSNBC 6/8.)
In brief, after this weeks Senate hearings (and especially after Little
Marcos gutsy performance) it looks like we have (at least a semblance)
of a media consensus regarding the famous claims by The New York Times
against Trump and his team. The claims involved collusion with the
Russiansand they appear bogus.
In many circles Little Marcos stature seems to have shot up faster
than Jacks beanstalk. Those knock-down and drag-out Republican debates
suddenly seem like ancient history.
Interestingly, earlier this week in an editorial The New York Times
bewailed the lack of collusion between Trump and Russias historic
colluders on our doorstep.
To the long list of Barack Obamas major initiatives that President
Trump is obsessed with reversing, we may soon be able to add Cuba Mr.
Trump promised in his campaign to return to a more hard-line approach. If
he does, as seems likely, he will further isolate America, hurt American
business interests and, quite possibly, impede the push for greater
democracy on the Caribbean island.(New York Times, 6/5)
Its a fascinating thing to watch. And it never fails. Let the issue of
American robber-barons doing business with the Stalinist/kleptocratic
Castro family (who already stole $8 billion from U.S. businessmen and
tortured and murdered a few who resisted the burglary)let this issue
pop-up and PRESTO!
Like clockwork, the most historically pinko, the most relentlessly anti-
business entities in the U.S.-- from Bernie Sanders to The New York
Timesthe very folks who habitually foam-at-the-mouth for keelhauling and
tar & feathering all greedy businessmen! suddenly morph into Calvin
Coolidge.
Recall President Coolidges famous (and universally denounced by
liberals) quip: The business of America is business. Lets also throw
in General Motors CEO Charlie Wilsons famous, if its good for GM its
good for America-and vice versa. You might call these the favorite
captions when liberal demonize greedy U.S. robber-barons!
But POOF! Like magic, all these captions and caricatures do a screeching
180 in liberal pronouncements when it comes to U.S. businessmen
partnering with the multi-millionaire Castro-Family to profit from Cuban
slave labor on the Castro plantation.
If Saturday Night Live scriptwriters actually had a sense of humor they
could have a ball with the spectacle of diehard Bolshevik Bernie Sanders
suddenly morphing into Gordon Gekko and championing obscene profits for
American capitalistsbut only in partnership with the slaveholding Castro
family. I offer SNL this script on the house.
Not that impediments to the profits of patriotic American capitalists is
the only thing keeping The New York Times editorial board awake at night.
Notice that they also bemoan President Trumps forthcoming Cuba policy as
a potential impediment to democracy on that Caribbean island.
As it happens, The New York Times does not have a stellar record of
forecasting impediments to democracy on that Caribbean island. So
lets address the theme of this columns title about The New York Times
special talent for detecting Russian colluders:
This is not a Communist Revolution in any sense of the term. In Cuba
there are no communists in positions of control. Fidel Castro is not only
not a Communist, he is decidedly anti-Communist. (Herbert Matthews, New
York Times, July 1959.)
(Fidel Castro, by the way, had seriously colluded with KGB agent
Nikolai Leonev and his Cuban KGB colleague Osvaldo Sanchez since 1955
when they seriously colluded in Mexico City. These collusion sessions
involved setting the stage for the future Stalinization of Cuba.)
Fidel Castro has strong ideas of liberty, democracy, social justice, the
need to restore the Constitution .but it amounts to a new deal for Cuba,
radical, democratic and therefore anti-Communist. (Herbert Matthews, New
York Times, February 1957.)
Leaving no stone unturned, The New York Times also embraced Ernesto Che
Guevara as an unimpeachable liberty-lover and truth-teller:
I am not a communist and have never been a communist It gives me great
pain to be called a communist, (Ernesto Che Guevara who had a KGB
handler since 1956 as eagerly and trustingly quoted by The New York
Times, January 4th, 1959.)
And speaking of Fake News:
One Thousand Killed in 5 days of Fierce Street Fighting! read a New
York Times headline on Jan 4, 1959 about the battle of Santa Clara in
central Cuba where Ernesto Che Guevara earned much of his enduring (and
utterly bogus) martial fame. Commander Che Guevara appealed to Batista
troops for a truce to clear the streets of casualties, continues The New
York Times article. Guevara turned the tide in this bloody battle and
whipped a Batista force of 3,000 men.
A year later, Ches own diaries revealed that his forces suffered exactly
one casualty during this Caribbean Stalingrad, as depicted by The New
York Times. Your humble servant interviewed several eye-witnesses (on
both sides) to this battle and their consensus came to about five
casualties total for this Caribbean Gettysburg/Verdun, as depicted by The
New York Times.
True to New York Times-form, during this battle, the paper didnt have
a reporter within 300 miles of Santa Clara. Instead, it relied on trusty
Cuban Castroite correspondents.
And true to Che Guevara-form, the genuine bloodbath in Santa Clara came a
week after the (utterly bogus) battle, when Ches opponents (real and
imagined) were utterly defenseless. Thats when Che sent his goons to
drag men and boys from their homes and set his firing squads to work in
triple shifts.
But absolutely nothing appeared in the trusty New York Times on the
genuine bloodbath at Santa Clara. True to Castroite practice, only when
Peace was Given a Chance, only when their enemies were utterly
defenseless, did the bloodbath crank into high gear.
And true to (proud Walter Duranty employer) practice, The New York Times
helped cover-up yet another communist atrocity.
Source: http://bit.ly/2sO5zVX
--
"A lot of people may mouth agreement, but I suspect many even of these
know leftism is largely a virtue-signaling, power-grabbing scam." (Andrew
Klavan)
"A lot of people may mouth agreement, but I suspect many even of these
know leftism is largely a virtue-signaling, power-grabbing scam." (Andrew
Klavan)