The FCC obviously pushed back, but the people leading the FCC now pointing out Trump’s wishes obviously is anti-constitutional, will not be there once Donald Trump retakes power.
As I’ve said before, the First Amendment is a cornerstone of our democracy. The FCC does not and will not revoke licenses for broadcast stations simply because a political candidate disagrees with or dislikes content or coverage. – FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel
In the authoritarian playbook, clamping down on independent media will happen quick and we’ll never get it back. Recall when Hugo Chavez in Venezuela sent forces to take over independent private news agencies and brought them back online as propaganda outlets.
It wasn’t that long ago that the last independent news agency in Hungry was kicked off the air when Viktor Orban revoked all broadcast licenses of a free and open press, and now all Hungry has is pro-Orban propaganda outlets. Orban was recently a featured speaker at CPAC, the largest gathering of conservatives, on how to successfully import authoritarianism in a Western democracy.
So far Trump has previously threatened the broadcast licenses of ABC, NBC, PBS, NPR and simply for reporting on the things he says and does. And now Trump is threatening CBS because he ducked out of 60 Minutes like the pussybitch he is because they wouldn’t agree to not fact check him.
In a recent campaign event in Iowa, Donald Trump responded to a high school shooting in Perry by urging the audience to “get over it” and emphasized the need to move forward. Trump’s comments, coming about 36 hours after the incident, marked his first public address on the violence. This echoes a pattern observed in his past remarks, particularly during an April 2023 speech to the National Rifle Association, where he attributed school shootings to factors like Democrats, mental health issues, marijuana, and the transgender community, deflecting from a substantial discussion on gun violence.
Criticism for Trump’s recent comment poured in from the Democratic Super PAC American Bridge, with their communication director Brandon Weathersby condemning Trump’s lack of empathy and asserting that telling Iowans to “get over it” was beyond acceptable even for Trump. Despite facing multiple legal challenges, including 91 criminal charges, civil litigation, and a rape allegation deemed “substantially true” by a judge, Trump maintains strong support in polling for the Republican presidential nomination in the upcoming primaries. The Perry school shooting left one sixth grader dead and seven others injured, with the perpetrator identified as a 17-year-old student who later died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
This incident, coupled with Trump’s response, raises questions about the political discourse surrounding gun violence and the adequacy of leadership responses to tragic events. While some may view Trump’s approach as pragmatic, others argue it lacks the necessary empathy and depth needed in addressing the complex issue of school shootings.
Donald Trump’s new ad “God Made Trump” which he promoted on Truth Social reads like a biblical fanfic, casting Donald Trump as America’s divinely ordained hero battling wicked forces. Think a mashup of Adam’s creation (“God looked down…needed a caretaker. So God gave us Trump”) and Moses parting the Red Sea, only instead of Pharaoh, it’s “those darn Marxists.” This potent cocktail of biblical imagery and cult-like persuasion demands a closer look.
The ad employs the classic “Chosen One” trope, imbuing Trump with near-sacred authority. It invokes Genesis, framing his birth as God’s deliberate act, not a mere coincidence. References to John 10:11 paint him as a shepherd guiding his flock through perilous times, fostering a sense of dependence and unquestioning loyalty among supporters. This blurring of the lines between leader and divinely-ordained savior echoes the tactics of biblical cults, where charismatic figures wielded religious authority to control their followers.
But beneath the divine veneer lies a troubling “us vs. them” narrative. The ad paints a dystopian picture of America besieged by “Marxist vipers” and the “deep state serpent,” reminiscent of biblical battles between God’s chosen and their enemies. This stark division solidifies a sense of belonging and exclusivity within the Trump camp, but at the cost of silencing dissent and stifling critical thinking. This tactic mirrors the isolation and groupthink common in biblical cults, where members are encouraged to distrust outsiders and unquestioningly accept the leader’s pronouncements.
Remember, this ad is a masterclass in persuasive messaging, not a factual biography. Fact-checking reveals Trump’s “divine mandate” often translated to late-night tweets and Fox News marathons, not celestial guidance. His self-proclaimed messianic achievements demand nuanced analysis, not divinely-attributed magic. Ultimately, discerning voters, not divine intervention, are the architects of our democracy. Let’s keep faith in the pews and critical thinking in the voting booth. Just because the ad depicts Trump parting America’s political Red Sea doesn’t mean we should blindly follow him into the promised land.
“GOD MADE TRUMP”
“And on June 14th, 1946, God looked down on his planned paradise and said, I need a caretaker.
So God gave us Trump.
God said, I need somebody willing to get up before dawn, fix this country, work all day, fight the Marxists, eat supper, then go to the Oval Office and stay past midnight at a meeting of the heads of state.
So God made Trump.
I need somebody with arms, strong enough to rustle the deep state and yet gentle enough to deliver his own grandchild. Somebody to ruffle the feathers, tame cantankerous World Economic Forum, come home hungry, have to wait until the first lady is done with lunch with friends, then tell the ladies to be sure and come back real soon. And mean it.
So God gave us Trump.
I need somebody who can shape an axe but wield a sword, who had the courage to step foot in North Korea, who can make money from the tar of the sand, turn liquid to gold, who understands the difference between tariffs and inflation, will finish his 40-hour week by Tuesday noon, but then put in another 72 hours.
So God made Trump.
God had to have somebody willing to go into the den of vipers, call out the fake news for their tongues as sharp as a serpent’s, the poison of vipers is on their lips, and yet stop.
So God made Trump.
God said, I need somebody who will be strong and courageous, who will not be afraid or terrified of the wolves when they attack. A man who cares for the flock, a shepherd to mankind who won’t ever leave nor forsake them. I need the most diligent worker to follow the path and remain strong in faith and know the belief of God and country. Somebody who’s willing to drill, bring back manufacturing and American jobs, farm the lands, secure our borders, build our military, fight the system all day, and finish a hard week’s work by attending church on Sunday. And then his oldest son turns and says, dad, let’s make America great again. Dad, let’s build back a country to be the envy of the world again.
Former President Trump’s recent Truth Social post concerning immigration has drawn critical attention for echoing a dangerous and unfounded conspiracy theory – the “Great Replacement.” This theory, alleging a coordinated effort to replace white Americans with immigrants, has long been a cornerstone of white nationalist and far-right ideologies. Its presence in a mainstream political figure’s post demands careful analysis.
It’s becoming more and more obvious to me why the “Crazed” Democrats are allowing millions and millions of totally unvetted migrants into our once great Country. IT’S SO THEY CAN VOTE, VOTE, VOTE. They are signing them up at a rapid pace, without even knowing who the hell they are. It all makes sense now. Republicans better wake up and do something, before it is too late. Are you listening Mitch McConnell?
While concerns about immigration trends and their potential impact on society are legitimate topics for discussion,Trump’s post utilizes inflammatory language and unsubstantiated claims. The assertion that millions of immigrants are being deliberately “unvetted” and signed up to vote solely for partisan gain fuels xenophobia and undermines trust in democratic processes. This narrative conveniently omits the complex web of economic, social, and political factors driving immigration patterns, instead choosing to paint a picture of nefarious outsiders infiltrating American society.
Trump’s post echoes disturbing historical rhetoric with its coded language and divisive framing. Phrases like “millions and millions” and “totally unvetted” bear striking resemblance to slogans chanted by white supremacist groups like those who marched in Charlottesville. Their hateful chants targeting Jewish communities openly invoked the “Great Replacement” theory, highlighting its dangerous potential to incite real-world violence and discrimination.
Dismissing such language as mere political rhetoric carries significant risks. Normalizing these narratives, even unintentionally, emboldens extremist groups and provides validation for their hateful ideologies. It has the potential to further erode social cohesion, fuel animosity towards immigrants and minorities, and ultimately weaken the fabric of American society.
Instead of indulging in fear-mongering and unsubstantiated claims, responsible political discourse should prioritize facts and evidence-based solutions. By addressing legitimate concerns about immigration while rejecting harmful stereotypes and conspiratorial narratives, we can foster a more informed and inclusive national conversation. Let’s focus on building a stronger nation where all members feel welcome and contribute to its shared future, rather than succumbing to the shadows of hate and division.
Former President Trump’s recent Truth Social post, declaring illegal immigration to be “poisoning the blood of our nation,” reverberates with disturbing historical echoes. The language, while veiled, taps into a wellspring of dehumanizing and exclusionary rhetoric used throughout history to ostracize and discriminate against marginalized groups. Examining the post through this lens reveals the potential dangers of such inflammatory language and underscores the importance of responsible political discourse.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS POISONING THE BLOOD OF OUR NATION. THEY’RE COMING FROM PRISONS, FROM MENTAL INSTITUTIONS — FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD. WITHOUT BORDERS & FAIR ELECTIONS, YOU DON’T HAVE A COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
Firstly, the stark metaphor of “poisoning the blood” is deeply concerning. It dehumanizes immigrants, reducing them to a toxic threat infiltrating the nation’s very core. This echoes similar language used throughout history to demonize groups based on ethnicity, religion, or origin. Nazi propaganda, for instance, frequently depicted Jews as a “poisonous bacillus” infecting the Aryan body politic. Such language not only creates a stark “us vs. them” dichotomy but also lays the groundwork for justifying discrimination, hostility, and even violence against the targeted group.
Furthermore, the post’s claim that immigrants come from “prisons, mental institutions, and all over the world” further fuels harmful stereotypes. This paints a generalized picture of immigrants as criminals, deviants, and outsiders, fostering fear and distrust. It disregards the vast diversity of experiences and circumstances among immigrants, reducing them to a monolithic threat instead of recognizing them as individuals seeking a better life. Such generalizations often stem from xenophobic sentiments and lack factual basis, contributing to an atmosphere of prejudice and discrimination.
Ultimately, Trump’s post exemplifies the perils of employing divisive and dehumanizing language in political discourse. It stokes fear, fosters prejudice, and risks normalizing dangerous rhetoric with historical roots in exclusion and hate. As responsible citizens and journalists, we must critically analyze such language, expose its harmful origins, and advocate for a more inclusive and fact-based political discourse. Only then can we truly build a nation where all members, regardless of their background or origin, feel welcome and valued.
Donald Trump’s latest social media diatribe directed at the media unleashed a wave of condemnation, raising a potent red flag about his authoritarian tendencies. In a late-night rant on Truth Social, Trump accused MSNBC of “election interference” through “constant attacks” on him and the Republican party, labeling its CEO a “slimeball” who needs to be punished by the “so-called government.” He ominously promised “much more to come,” leaving observers deeply troubled by the implications for press freedom and democratic values.
This outburst isn’t an isolated incident. Trump’s repeated attacks on the media, his labeling of journalists as “enemies of the people,” and his efforts to undermine institutions like the judiciary paint a disturbing picture of someone comfortable with suppressing dissent and consolidating power. His language echoes tactics used by authoritarian regimes, aiming to delegitimize criticism and sow fear amongst journalists and the public.
The chilling aspect of Trump’s threat lies in his explicit call for the government to “come down hard” on his critics. This statement goes beyond mere rhetorical bluster; it’s a direct attack on a cornerstone of democracy – a free and independent press. If acted upon, such measures could cripple the ability of journalists to hold power accountable and inform the public, paving the way for unchecked abuses and undermining the very checks and balances that safeguard democratic norms.
Trump’s authoritarian inclinations aren’t merely a matter of fiery rhetoric; they represent a tangible threat to the fabric of American democracy. These latest attacks serve as a stark reminder of the potential dangers posed by a leader who sees dissent as an enemy and prioritizes personal vendettas over the principles of a free and open society. Recognizing and resisting these encroachments upon our fundamental rights is crucial to protecting the future of American democracy.
Donald Trump’s potential return to the White House paints a grim picture for the future of our planet and the health of its inhabitants. Advisers close to the former president confirmed plans to dismantle Biden’s landmark climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), in favor of policies that would “maximize fossil fuel production.” This blatant disregard for scientific evidence and the well-being of future generations is nothing short of reckless and dangerous.
The scientific consensus is undeniable: human activity is driving climate change, with devastating consequences already unfolding worldwide. Rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and mass extinctions are just a few of the repercussions we face if we fail to act decisively. Yet, Trump’s proposed policies cater solely to the interests of his oil industry donors,prioritizing short-term profits over the long-term survival of our planet.
Gutting the IRA would cripple America’s progress towards a clean energy future. This legislation represents a crucial step in curbing greenhouse gas emissions and investing in renewable energy sources like solar and wind. Trump’s proposed cuts would not only jeopardize these advancements but also send a chilling message about America’s commitment to combating climate change.
The health impacts of continued fossil fuel dependence are equally alarming. Air pollution from burning coal, oil, and gas contributes to millions of respiratory illnesses and deaths each year. Trump’s policies would exacerbate these problems,disproportionately harming vulnerable communities already burdened by environmental injustices.
In conclusion, Donald Trump’s climate denial and fossil fuel obsession pose a dire threat to our planet and its inhabitants.His proposed policies prioritize corporate greed over scientific facts and public health, jeopardizing the progress made under the IRA and putting the future of our planet at stake. We must stand united against this dangerous agenda and demand leaders who prioritize science, reason, and the well-being of all over the interests of a select few. The future of our planet and the health of our communities depend on it.
Over the past several years, a number of prominent Republicans and right-wing commentators have called for a civil war or have used coded language like “national divorce.” This rhetoric is dangerous and anti-democratic, and it is important to be aware of it.
It is important to call out this rhetoric whenever we hear it or see it from our friends and family on social media or in person. We need to make it clear that violence is not the answer, and that we are committed to resolving our differences peacefully through the democratic process.
The examples are many, but include:
Trump tweeted during his first impeachment, “If the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office (which they will never be), it will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal.”
Greg Gutfeld called for a new Civil War because “elections don’t work.”
Marjorie Taylor Greene claimed on Hannity, “The last thing I ever want to see in America is a civil war … but it’s going that direction.”
Ned Ryun on Jesse Watters’ Fox News show said “we are in a cold civil war with the left” as a reaction to Donald Trump’s arrest and mugshot.
Chip Roy said if Warnock and Ossoff win Georgia: “If we have a Democratically-controlled Senate, we’re now basically at full-scale hot conflict in this country, whereas right now we’re in a cold civil war.”
Clay Higgins made a call to arms over Trump’s indictment for stealing America’s classified documents.
Greg Gutfeld said gender affirming care will cause Christians to engage in a civil war.
Tucker Carlson threatened civil war if Republicans did not win in 2020.
Tucker Carlson said any gun control legislation should result in a second civil war.
Peter Navarro says a Second Civil War is coming because of Trump’s indictments, and says to Democrats that what they are doing “will come back to haunt you as soon as Republicans take back Trump’s America from your cold, woke hands.”
Marjorie Taylor Greene said “We need a national divorce where we can split into red states and blue states. No, that doesn’t mean civil war. Doesn’t mean you can’t travel to different states. There would still be trade and commerce.”
Republican State Senator Colton Moore said on Steve Bannon’s podcast he was ready to take up arms and said a civil war was coming if Trump was convicted.
At a fundraiser for the indicted Michigan fake electors, State Rep Matt Maddock, the husband of one of them, is on audio tape saying that if the government keeps prosecuting right-wingers then someone is going to get shot or a civil war will happen.
Has-been actor Jon Voight responded to Trump’s trial date announcement by claiming only Trump can lead Republicans in Civil War 2.0.
Conservative commentator Doug Hagmann called for violence against poll workers in the next Civil War, which he was bringing his own guns and providing body bags for his victims.
The mother to murderer and conservative hero Kyle Rittenhouse, said lawyer Lynn Wood left Rittenhouse in jail despite having bail money to save him from Civil War and Armageddon. In reality Wood was grifting the Rittenhouses out of money.
Actually, Lynn Wood, who was part of Trump’s failed “Kraken” team has been promoting a Civil War against liberals, independents, and non-Trump loyal Republicans quite regularly.
Domestic terrorist and Proud Boy leader, regularly promoted by Fox News and right wing media, Enrique Tarrio, expected a Civil War before January 6th which he tried to accelerate.
January 6th rioters were seen wearing Civil War shirts.
Fox News says itâs okay to investigate man-not-in-government Hunter Biden with completely unverified allegations and unreliable sources because of the Steele Dossier, and itâs okay to go tit-for-tat.
One problem, those two are not the same. All of the crazy Hunter Biden allegations that have *already* been looked at by Bill Barrâs DOJ and found to be bunk, Lev Parnas who Rudy Giuliani tasked to lead the Hunter Biden investigation in Ukraine testified this was all bunk, and when the Steele Dossier was leaked it was not yet investigated but still raw intelligence, some of which turned out to be true.
