• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The Official Paracast Political Thread! — Part Three

Free episodes:

Status
Not open for further replies.
The alt-right named themselves the alt-right.

Specifically a white nationalist several years ago, long before Hillary Clinton used the term. You need to get this correct.

So:

Alt-right - Wikipedia

Much of the rest of your stuff is just nonsense. Again, you are repeating the Fox News mantra. That's why I don't believe you. Give it up and stop trolling please.
 
That sounds real logical, but it's not "the truth" about fake news. Hillary herself started this misdirection and red herring in Las Vegas, when she named the "alt right". These are part of her made-up terms she used to smear new and powerful online media players like BreitBart and Drudge. It's all an attempt to discredit new media that is neutralizing Hillary and the DNC. And, because the old LSM/MSM lame-stream media is dying, they are only too happy to comply with Hillary's game plans. They love her vs Trump.

Fake news are Hillary's "monkey see monkey do" in the MSM throwing turds at their new competition that is laying waste to their MSM fake news agendas. It's exactly like the Russians are coming! People see straight through this, and we know full well the LSM/MSM produces tons and tons of fake news and we're not buying it anymore.

People know there's plenty of click bait and watch bait to be had from both sides, but it's none other than Hillary and her MSM/LSM minions propagating this BS.

There is indeed an alt-right and you have been snowed by it.
 
The alt-right named themselves the alt-right.

Specifically a white nationalist several years ago, long before Hillary Clinton used the term. You need to get this correct.

So:

Alt-right - Wikipedia

Much of the rest of your stuff is just nonsense. Again, you are repeating the Fox News mantra. That's why I don't believe you. Give it up and stop trolling please.
You're the one falsely accusing me of pushing some Fox News mantra, when I've already clearly stated that's not true with the clear evidence I already posted. I know you read that.

The only Fox News show I've watched since November was the interview with Assange, period. And, I would not have even watched that if I did not post it to this thread. That's the honest truth.

Yes, I know all about the crap the left was pushing onto BreitBart. It's called guilt by association, but, again, BrietBart was not going around calling itself the alt right. I proved it with what Hillary did in Las Vegas, and I can easily produce the video to back this up. Just because someone else called themselves "the alt right" from your Wikipedia and was racist too doesn't mean that applies to BrietBart as Hillary attempted to do.

Get real. And, if Wikipedia is calling BreitBart "the alt right" that doesn't make it so. It's not fact.

After all Gene, just to make my point an ex-KKK Grand Wizard was Hillary's mentor! Don't believe it? Also, a living KKK (Grand Wizard?) was also supporting Hillary too!!! Don't believe it? I do understand guilt by association that is false too. A common dirty trick the DNC and Hillary tried to use against BreitBart.

Losers! :D
 
I don't believe your excuses about Fox News. You repeat their mantra sometimes almost verbatim, but deny watching them. Maybe you just read the material at their site?
 
I don't believe your excuses about Fox News. You repeat their mantra sometimes almost verbatim, but deny watching them. Maybe you just read the material at their site?
I promise you Gene. No. I knew you might ask me that though, and I almost went back to edit my post to say I wasn't reading their site either. I haven't been to any Fox News website, since probably well before November -maybe July?

I really gave you my sources of information in that previous post, and even the Drudge links I follow don't go to Fox. In fact, seriously, I've taken a break from all political news since November. I didn't start reading and watching again until my first post here recently. I caught a link from Drudge about Assange, and then I found his interview with my post here. That's the honest truth.

Like most people, I was exhausted by the stress of the election and did not want anything to do with politics after election day. I didn't even follow all the recount crap that the Green Party lady (Stein?) started and Hillary hitched onto.

And no, I haven't even been watching political youtube or C-SPAN either.

I guess Fox News really did a number on me, because I watched it through youtube from September to the election. Before that I never watched Fox, but I was politically active since Obama's first election and before. I was brainwashed for decades by CNN and then MSNBC and Bill Maher and the two political comedy central shows for years. After I saw what Obama did with the Arab Spring I knew he was just another MIC puppet just as Bush was too! I consider them both (and Hillary too) War Criminals. I would have never gone to war after 911 the way these two idiots did.

Trump has actually stated some very good ideas about reforming the MIC, but I know he will probably be co-opted by the MIC or eliminated one way or another. There are too many enemies within the MIC Deep State we are all controlled by. IF Trump can't do it, then it's just going to get worse and worse with the Deep State MIC Matrix we live under.

Hillary would have been far worse and the MIC would love her go to war proven track record with the Russians and the Arab Spring. What a nightmare we awoke from, and we're saved from her insanity.
 
As I said, I don't believe you.
I guess you watch a lot of Fox News to somehow know this? Seriously? You do see the irony and the joke here, right? :)

Though I do know you've stated your wife is essentially a Fox News hound or junkie. Meaning, she is really into Fox News.

I don't know why you can't believe me Gene, but, again, I'm telling the absolute truth. I do plan to watch youtube Fox News tomorrow for the inauguration and any protest eruptions that turn violent, but I'm still very very exhausted by the election of 2016. In fact, I've really gone way overboard here to be posting this way about Hillary, and it's definitely stressing me out too. Hillary can't possibly be elected four years from now, so it's more a waste of my time to be posting here. And, I know the DNC will have to do some major changes and reforms to have any chance of winning the next cycle of elections.

I just hope Trump keeps improving as President, if that's even possible, and I do sympathize and "hope positive" for his safety and mental health. I think his closest family advisors will save us from some serious mistakes he would otherwise make, and he's got Bannon and Conway near his side to help too. I do trust those people and respect them highly. Ivanka can be a great positive force too.

Good Luck to President Trump as of tomorrow, and I hope he can do better than most since JFK.
 
You post here as a Fox News/Trump/alt-right sycophant and you are not credible in the least.

Since you have basically repeated the same things over and over again with a few different variations, give it a break.

Thank you.
 
This seems crazy to me: Obama Commutes Life Sentences of Four Mexican Cartel Leaders

Obama Commutes Life Sentences of Four Mexican Cartel Leaders

ROMA, Texas — Four family members who ran one of the largest cartel smuggling operations in south Texas had their life in prison sentences commuted and will likely be returning to this border city from where they ran their criminal empire. One of the main destinations that the criminal organizations delivered drugs to was Chicago, Illinois.

This week, outgoing President Barack Obama commuted the sentences of 209 convicted criminals and pardoned 64 others. The majority of the convictions were from drug trafficking or production offenses.

Four of those convicted criminals who had been sentenced to life in prison will be released by May 17. They ran a criminal organization made up of close to 80 men and women who worked with Mexico’s Gulf Cartel to move between 100,000 to almost 750,000 pounds of marijuana into the U.S. during a 10-year period. The drugs were moved into Houston and then distributed to Atlanta, Chicago, and other major metropolitan areas.
 
And so..a man who was considered a joke in 2015 will take the oath of office..we all need to watch I hope we can survive till 2020

Sent from my SCH-I435 using Tapatalk
 
Which is why he was elected, in part. The media took him as a curiosity, and thus gave him months of unfiltered coverage. Billions of dollars worth, and this is the result. The mainstream media is in it for the money, not the story. Fox News is in it for the Republican agenda.
 
Some help to trump
Huckabee: "hello Iowa" ad
Walker :canada wall
Bush: acting like a beaten sheep.
Cristie: kissing Trumps ring then kissing Trumps ---
Hillary Clinton NOT campaigning in Wisconsin. .
The Dems backstab Bernie. .

Sent from my SCH-I435 using Tapatalk
 
Why you should read this guy... He's smart, knows the Republicans, knows third parties, and he understands why Ross Perot could have been a great President far far greater than Clinton could have ever been and never was. Even if you're a Clinton supporter or solid Dem, I really think this guy is worth reading during Trump's Presidency. Here's a sample:

New president, new world

“Don’t make any sudden moves” is the advice offered to the new president by Richard Haass of the Council on Foreign Relations, which has not traditionally been known as a beer hall of populist beliefs.

Haass meant the president should bring his National Security Council together to anticipate the consequences before tearing up the Iran nuclear deal, moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem or shooting down a missile being tested by Kim Jong-Un.

In arguing against rash action, Haass is correct.

Where the CFR and the establishment are wrong, and Donald Trump is right, however, is in recognizing the new world we have entered.

The old order is passing away. Treaties and alliances dating from the Cold War are ceasing to be relevant and cannot long be sustained.

Economic patriotism and ethnonationalism, personified by Trump, seem everywhere ascendant. Transnationalism is yielding to tribalism.

The greater danger for President Trump is that the movement he led will be abandoned, its hopes dashed, and the agenda that Trump rejected and routed will be reimposed by a Republican Establishment and its collaborators in politics and the press.

Again, it was Trump who read the nation right, which is why he is taking the oath today.

The existential threat to the West no longer comes from the East, from a Russian army crashing through Poland and Germany and driving for the Elbe and Fulda Gap.

The existential threat to the West comes, instead, from the South.

The billion-plus peoples of the Maghreb, Middle East and sub-Sahara, whose numbers are exploding, are moving inexorably toward the Med, coming to occupy the empty places left by an aging and dying Europe, all of whose native-born populations steadily shrink.

American’s bleeding border is what concerns Americans, not the borders of Estonia, South Korea, Kuwait or the South China Sea.

When Trump calls NATO “obsolete,” he is saying that the great threat to the West is not Putin’s recapture of a Crimea that belonged to Russia for 150 years. And if the price of peace is getting out of Russia’s face and Russia’s space, maybe we should pay it.

George Kennan himself, the architect of Cold War containment of Stalin’s Russia, admonished us not to move NATO to Russia’s border.

Of Brexit, the British decision to leave the EU, Trump said this week, “People, countries want their own identity, and the U.K. wanted its own identity … so if you ask me, I believe others will leave.”

Is he not right? Is it so shocking to hear a transparent truth?

New president, new world

[Use link above to finish article.]
 
Trump Just Flip-Flopped, Admitted He WILL Slash Social Security & Medicare - January 19, 2017
LINK:
Trump Just Flip-Flopped, Admitted He WILL Slash Social Security & Medicare
TEXT Excerpted: "Trump administration officials have released an outline of their plan to take an axe to the federal budget, and they’re targeting everything – except military spending. Aiming to reduce spending by $10.5 trillion over ten years, they will accomplish this by gutting Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, breaking one of Donald Trump’s biggest campaign promises."
 
Trump Just Flip-Flopped, Admitted He WILL Slash Social Security & Medicare - January 19, 2017
LINK:
Trump Just Flip-Flopped, Admitted He WILL Slash Social Security & Medicare
TEXT Excerpted: "Trump administration officials have released an outline of their plan to take an axe to the federal budget, and they’re targeting everything – except military spending. Aiming to reduce spending by $10.5 trillion over ten years, they will accomplish this by gutting Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, breaking one of Donald Trump’s biggest campaign promises."
Coming from a website called occupy democrats and with no actual quotes from Trump himself, except to the contrary of what it is asserting, this is nothing but pathetic fear mongering! Laughable! AKA Click Baiting! All coming from the fringe of the DNC "occupy movement".

A Hail Mary posted on the eve of Trump becoming President! LOL. :)

You'll have to do far far better than this, AND quote Trump directly too before any of this crap gets traction.
 
Last edited:
Unparalleled Resistance Looms for Trump After Inauguration - Jan 10, 2017
LINK:
Unparalleled Resistance Looms for Trump After Inauguration
TEXT: "Remember, back in the day, when newly elected presidents enjoyed a honeymoon? Donald Trump isn’t getting one. His adversaries are in combat mode, as if the campaign never ended. Demonstrations are planned. Money is pouring into the coffers of liberal groups. Activists are calling for an ongoing 'resistance' movement.

"Mr. Trump is getting a taste of his own medicine because he, too, is behaving as if the campaign never ended. For weeks, he has continued to lob provocative tweets about his critics and the media, derided people who supported Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, reveled in his election victory and took a victory lap of 'thank you' rallies across the country in December."
 
A good set of points -

An open letter to Trump from the US press corps - January 17, 2017

LINK:
An open letter to Trump from the US press corps
TEXT: DEAR MR. PRESIDENT ELECT: In these final days before your inauguration, we thought it might be helpful to clarify how we see the relationship between your administration and the American press corps.

It will come as no surprise to you that we see the relationship as strained. Reports over the last few days that your press secretary is considering pulling news media offices out of the White House are the latest in a pattern of behavior that has persisted throughout the campaign: You’ve banned news organizations from covering you.You’ve taken to Twitter to taunt and threaten individual reporters and encouraged your supporters to do the same. You’ve advocated for looser libel laws and threatened numerous lawsuits of your own, none of which has materialized. You’ve avoided the press when you could and flouted the norms of pool reporting and regular press conferences. You’ve ridiculed a reporter who wrote something you didn’t like because he has a disability.

All of this, of course, is your choice and, in a way, your right. While the Constitution protects the freedom of the press, it doesn’t dictate how the president must honor that; regular press conferences aren’t enshrined in the document.

But while you have every right to decide your ground rules for engaging with the press, we have some, too. It is, after all, our airtime and column inches that you are seeking to influence. We, not you, decide how best to serve our readers, listeners, and viewers. So think of what follows as a backgrounder on what to expect from us over the next four years.

Access is preferable, but not critical. You may decide that giving reporters access to your administration has no upside. We think that would be a mistake on your part, but again, it’s your choice. We are very good at finding alternative ways to get information; indeed, some of the best reporting during the campaign came from news organizations that were banned from your rallies. Telling reporters that they won’t get access to something isn’t what we’d prefer, but it’s a challenge we relish.

Off the record and other ground rules are ours—not yours—to set. We may agree to speak to some of your officials off the record, or we may not. We may attend background briefings or off-the-record social events, or we may skip them. That’s our choice. If you think reporters who don’t agree to the rules, and are shut out, won’t get the story, see above.

We decide how much airtime to give your spokespeople and surrogates. We will strive to get your point of view across, even if you seek to shut us out. But that does not mean we are required to turn our airwaves or column inches over to people who repeatedly distort or bend the truth. We will call them out when they do, and we reserve the right, in the most egregious cases, to ban them from our outlets.

We believe there is an objective truth, and we will hold you to that. When you or your surrogates say or tweet something that is demonstrably wrong, we will say so, repeatedly. Facts are what we do, and we have no obligation to repeat false assertions; the fact that you or someone on your team said them is newsworthy, but so is the fact that they don’t stand up to scrutiny. Both aspects should receive equal weight.

We’ll obsess over the details of government. You and your staff sit in the White House, but the American government is a sprawling thing. We will fan reporters out across the government, embed them in your agencies, source up those bureaucrats. The result will be that while you may seek to control what comes out of the West Wing, we’ll have the upper hand in covering how your policies are carried out.

We will set higher standards for ourselves than ever before.We credit you with highlighting serious and widespread distrust in the media across the political spectrum. Your campaign tapped into that, and it was a bracing wake-up call for us. We have to regain that trust. And we’ll do it through accurate, fearless reporting, by acknowledging our errors and abiding by the most stringent ethical standards we set for ourselves.

We’re going to work together. You have tried to divide us and use reporters’ deep competitive streaks to cause family fights. Those days are ending. We now recognize that the challenge of covering you requires that we cooperate and help one another whenever possible. So, when you shout down or ignore a reporter at a press conference who has said something you don’t like, you’re going to face a unified front. We’ll work together on stories when it makes sense, and make sure the world hears when our colleagues write stories of importance. We will, of course, still have disagreements, and even important debates, about ethics or taste or fair comment. But those debates will be ours to begin and end.

We’re playing the long game. Best-case scenario, you’re going to be in this job for eight years. We’ve been around since the founding of the republic, and our role in this great democracy has been ratified and reinforced again and again and again. You have forced us to rethink the most fundamental questions about who we are and what we are here for. For that we are most grateful.

Enjoy your inauguration.

—The Press Corps
 
Unparalleled Resistance Looms for Trump After Inauguration - Jan 10, 2017
LINK:
Unparalleled Resistance Looms for Trump After Inauguration
TEXT: "Remember, back in the day, when newly elected presidents enjoyed a honeymoon? Donald Trump isn’t getting one. His adversaries are in combat mode, as if the campaign never ended. Demonstrations are planned. Money is pouring into the coffers of liberal groups. Activists are calling for an ongoing 'resistance' movement.

"Mr. Trump is getting a taste of his own medicine because he, too, is behaving as if the campaign never ended. For weeks, he has continued to lob provocative tweets about his critics and the media, derided people who supported Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, reveled in his election victory and took a victory lap of 'thank you' rallies across the country in December."
52% View Trump Favorably - Rasmussen Reports™

Considering the open warfare on Trump from Hillary's MSM/LSM I think he's doing pretty good with this rating from a VERY respected and accurate polling company that did well tracking Trump too... Also, if the MSM/LSM keeps this up I expect Trump will do better over time too. We'll see. :)

Voter attitudes about President-elect Donald Trump have changed little since Thanksgiving, with just over half of voters continuing to give him favorable marks.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 52% of Likely U.S. Voters share a favorable opinion of Trump, with 30% who have a Very Favorable one.
 
Intimidation begins. Would you remain silent?

Law Professors That Spoke Out Against Jeff Sessions’s Nomination Subjected To Records Request
January 18, 2017

LINK:
Law Professors That Spoke Out Against Jeff Sessions’s Nomination Subjected To Records Request
TEXT: "I have often asked myself the theoretical question: if I had lived in Nazi Germany, or in the McCarthy era, would I have remained silent or would I have taken the risk and spoken up. That question is no longer theoretical."
 
You'll have to take this back Gene, because your assertion is factually wrong. I'm quoting below directly from the WP article you refer to above, and it directly contradicts your assertion above. It is the opposite of what your suggesting. See bold text below. Here it is:

"A senior U.S. official with access to the document said that the allegations were presented at least in part to underscore that Russia appeared to have collected embarrassing information on both major candidates but released only material that might harm Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton — a reflection of Russian motivation that bolstered U.S. spy agencies’ conclusion that Moscow sought to help Trump win.

The inclusion of such unsubstantiated allegations in the election report, a development first reported Tuesday by CNN, adds a disturbing new dimension to existing concerns about Russia’s efforts to undermine American democracy."

This is just another great example of CNN = Clinton News Network = FAKE NEWS

You'd better check your sources Gene, because, right now, I'm convinced the CNN, the Clinton News Network, went with the Buzz Feed story from the beginning. The very WP article you cited says CNN did the initial television reporting on this, and I'm betting it started now because of the Buzz Feed release. Like, probably, duhhh!

Do I have to dredge-up the initial CNN video too for you to believe it or not?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top