Bombshell Expose’ – Conservative Radio: Limbaugh, Ingraham, Hannity and Levin Were All Part of Gang-of-Eight “Gaslighting”…

The New York Times has just laid virtually all of talk radio’s top conservative punditry naked to their enemies by revealing a coordinated effort, between them and top DC politicians, to “tamp-down” opposition to comprehensive immigration reform, and “gaslight” the national republican audience.  A brutal expose’…

rush-limbaughbill-oreilly egoMark Levine - Thumbs Up.

We already knew the aspect of Fox News via Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly meeting with Chuck Schumer, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio capturing promises to deliver favorable opinion for immigration reform.  – Outlined HERE –  We also knew, and wrote about how Fox Executives manipulated program content (including the blacklisting of amnesty critics) to support the collective agenda.

However, we did not know how far the scope of the influence was extended, nor did we know Rush Limbaugh was a direct participant.  We also did not know that Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin were lobbied to participate.

How would we know?  How would anyone know?  They never told their audience.

None of the aforementioned pundits ever disclosed the nature or content of the lobbying, nor their own independent determination whether to go along with the agenda, or remain willfully blind thereby benefitting the legislative agenda by omission.

In hindsight we can only accept silence as willful blindness.  

However, now we do know, many things make a lot more sense about how reactionary all the “conservative” pundits were, notably the Fox Group, when candidate Donald Trump announced his immigration platform to include a border wall, deportation and strict enforcement of immigration law.  Now we know why most pundits reacted with such disdain.

Their opposition, heck, their knee jerk attacks upon Trump for proposing immigration enforcement, seemed stunning in June/July 2015; but now takes on an entirely new light.

Via New York Times […]  The dinner at News Corporation headquarters — which has not been previously reported — and the subsequent outreach to Mr. Limbaugh illustrate the degree to which Mr. Rubio served as the chief envoy to the conservative media for the group supporting the legislation.

The bill would have provided a pathway to American citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants along with measures to secure the borders and ensure that foreigners left the United States upon the expiration of their visas.

[…] Details of the dinner, and a previous one in 2011, were provided to The New York Times by an attendee of one of the meetings and two people with knowledge of what was discussed at both get-togethers.

None of the attendees agreed to be identified for this article because the conversations were supposed to be confidential.

[…]  As early as March 9, 2011, Mr. Schumer joined Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and another eventual member of the Gang of Eight, at the Palm restaurant in Manhattan, where they made their case to Mr. Murdoch, Mr. Ailes and Mr. Limbaugh in a private room. The senators argued how damaging the word “amnesty” was to their efforts, and walked Mr. Limbaugh through their vision for an immigration overhaul.

[…] Mr. Rubio also reached out to other conservative power brokers, including the radio hosts Mark Levin and Laura Ingraham, telling them that the legislation did not amount to amnesty. The Fox anchors Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly became more supportive.

At the time, The Washington Post reported that Mr. Rubio’s advisers were monitoring to the minute how much time the hosts devoted to immigration, and that “they are heartened that the volume is much diminished.”

Mr. Rubio publicly and privately worked to assuage the fears of Mr. Limbaugh, who on air called him a “thoroughbred conservative” and assured one wary listener that “Marco Rubio is not out to hurt this country or change it the way the liberals are.”  (read full article)

Reid-Schumer

drowning-sea-of-lies

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Decepticons, Donald Trump, Election 2016, Marco Rubio, media bias, Notorious Liars, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Radio Shows, Ted Cruz, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1,518 Responses to Bombshell Expose’ – Conservative Radio: Limbaugh, Ingraham, Hannity and Levin Were All Part of Gang-of-Eight “Gaslighting”…

  1. manoagirl says:

    Why this article comes out now in the NYT, I haven’t a clue. But Trump is well-known in NY and liked. Maybe a dose of honesty feels refreshing to those poor jaded souls…

    Liked by 4 people

    • Raffaella says:

      Yes, this.

      Like

      • The Defiant One says:

        I think it’s two fold, 1) The NYT wants to hurt the Republican brand, and 2) Like all Political Punditary don’t understand Trump’s support and thing if Trump wins the Nomination he’ll lose to Killary.

        BUT, like all situations I think Trump will use this to his advantage, I mean seriously, when has he not? It’s analogous to Chuck Norris (Trump) fighting (physically) the actor who played Mark Zuckerberg in the “Social Network”.

        Because of Trump the rules have changed!

        Liked by 7 people

        • RM says:

          “The bill would have provided a pathway to American citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants along with measures to secure the borders and ensure that foreigners left the United States upon the expiration of their visas.”
          The NYT is definitely aiming this article at conservatives, Since when do those rumpswabs call “undocumented workers” “illegal immigrants” ? Not since the Twelve of Never.

          Liked by 6 people

    • jocaal3 says:

      Mr. Trump said on Fri. In OK that perhaps he shouldn’t do the upcoming debate in MI hosted by Fox News. In light of these revelations by the NYT, he could simply say, ” In light of these revelations regarding a possible conspiracy among lawmakers in Washington, Fox News, and Marco Rubio, I will not attend the next debate hosted by Fox as there is a conflict of interest regarding one of the candidates and Fox News.”. He would be so justified in doing so. Could potentially blow the whole thing open and certainly bring national attention to it.

      Liked by 24 people

      • patrickhenryrevisited says:

        Even better have rubio recuse himself.
        Checkmate!

        Liked by 5 people

        • Citizen Kane says:

          Challenge Rubio to a one-on-one debate the same night….hosted by Breitbart News….and CNN.

          Liked by 2 people

          • facebkwallflower says:

            Nope. Rubio is losing, is a loser and should not be treated as a close contender by garnering a one-on-one- with Trump. Rubio has proven already he does not know how to debate and thinks it is merely throwing daggers and mocking instead of actually a back-and-forth on two differing opinions about an issue. Trump does not need to take up his time, waste his time, lifting up a lightweight.

            Liked by 1 person

          • tellthetruth2016 says:

            I think I read the rules are , you cannot do your own debate……….

            Like

      • Raffaella says:

        Absolutely. The only way this news will be covered by all media is if Trump says something. I think he should do it ASAP. Before supperTuesday.

        Liked by 5 people

      • red6242 says:

        He really should not do anymore debates as they would serve no purpose for him other than to let them have more chances attack him and it will only get much much more with the attacks at them. I really think it would be best for him to not do anymore.

        Liked by 8 people

      • tellthetruth2016 says:

        I agree, these debates have been only about trying to take the Donald down anyway and Nothing else…….Fox if only looking at this as another chance to make more money off of Trump and to try once again to be “the one” to knock him out………They are nothing but entertainment for themselves and nothing else…….A waste of air time and Nothing for the voters…….But I will say I hope Levin, Limbaugh, O’Reily, Hannity and Ingraham lose all credibility and listeners for what they have done for their part in this……May the chains remain heavy upon their ankles and they choke on the money and lies that sold Americans down the river they received………..

        Liked by 3 people

      • Notmeagain says:

        He’ll have a bigger audience if he does go to the debate and brings it up over and over. Fox ought to cancel now before they get schlonged.

        Like

    • kittymyers says:

      They also want to destroy Rush Limbaugh’s enormous influence. Not so long ago, I would have thought that horrible. But I’ve been disturbed enough by him recently that I’ve stopped listening to him. One of the last times I listened to him he practically genuflected before the Bush family. The only ‘bad’ thing he implied about them was they swore when not in public.

      Rush would never consider the idea that GHW Bush attended the Texas debate to make sure Trump didn’t break his oath to President Reagan:
      “Have you asked yourself WHY, the RNC/GOP trotted out the feeble and ailing Elder George Herbert Walker Bush, to attend the GOP debate, AFTER Trump destroyed his son Jeb Bush? Read again AFTER Trump destroyed his son Jeb Bush?

      He was there to witness the “Polish attack” on Trump so that he could testify if Trump violated his Top Secret vow.

      Donald Trump employed an unusual number of Polish workers 38 years ago and even violated anti-discrimination laws to do so. AND paid a fine for doing so – all part of keeping the cover in tact.”

      http://lettersfromthegulag.blogspot.com/2016/02/trump-reagan-pope-john-paul-ii-and-lech.html

      Liked by 5 people

    • American Nationalist says:

      How about this hypothesis: by taking down Rubio, NYT wants to facilitate Romney’s entry into the arena.

      Liked by 2 people

    • chrystalia99 says:

      Strictly pragmatic–they are, after all, part of the kleptocracy and the uniparty, and they realize that their now overt lack of “journalistic integrity” is affecting their revenues.

      By dropping in the occasional good scoop like this, they will see a bump in sales/circulation and revenues–because it will cause a certain segment of their reader base that was moving away to come back to the fold.

      The Wall Street Journal does the same on a regular basis–sometimes subtly, by just changing the language in a piece, sometimes overtly, with a “scoop”. At the moment, they do it about 4 times a year. I believe the NYT does it about 3 times a year, but will have to go back through the archives for a year or two to double check the frequency.

      Once you get used to it, their random journalism is every bit as predictable as the sales cycles for staples at your local supermarket. Here, for instance, eggs and milk will be on sale at my regular store starting next Wednesday, as will soda. Yoguert will be on sale at another nearby store along with cake mixes. All stores currently have fresh brisket on sale, and this coming week will have Corned beef brisket, cabbage, and potatoes….

      So sadly, we can’t get our hopes up. The leopard hasn’t changed its spots at all…

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Athena the Warrior says:

    So much blood in the water. Rush was just calling Rubio a full throated conservative last week but was back to slobbering all over Cruz after the debate.

    Liked by 14 people

    • “full-throated” is very strange term to use, especially for a guy who has gay lifestyle rumors floating about. Was Rush trolling Rubio by implying Rubio’s throat became full after a meeting with Schumer, or was Rush just blissfully unaware of Rubio’s late night arrest in a dark Miami park known for cruising?

      Liked by 9 people

      • MB Miller says:

        Unfortunately, Rush believes Rubio is a full-throated conservative and compares him favorably to Reagan. He has said it repeatedly over the last few weeks.

        Liked by 4 people

        • The Defiant One says:

          The difference is that Reagan at Rubio’s age lived a full life of success and career lows. And life defining events like his failed marriage to Jane Wynman to being threatened by Hollywood Communists when he was SAG President.

          Outside of being being elect into the Senate what has Rubio accomplished that he can claim on his own? Remove “Senator” from Rubio and all you have are questions!

          Liked by 5 people

        • Big D says:

          Rush believes no such thing.
          He wants you to believe that marco ruby slippers has been adequately vetted by ‘talent on loan from God’.
          Rush elevates him psychologically to his victims, errr.. listeners, who disagree with the height of the elevation, but conclude that their differences with rush’s ‘analysis’ is minor and that marco is a ‘safe’ alternative to the ‘brash’, undisciplined Trump.

          Think asking for 3 times what you want, ( Full throated conservative ).

          To get what you want, ( Voters to have a favorable enough opinion of marco that they will vote for him ) .

          This approach opens up caller feedback / pushback, which gives elrushbo the opportunity to explain that marco is a bright young, upcoming star in the party who ‘fell off the wagon’ on the gang of 8, has been sufficiently spanked and has learned his lesson, so he can now be ‘trusted’ to follow the ‘conservative’ path, as he – marco has stated (que sound bites ).

          The fact that they’re all slopping at the same trough is no surprise to me.
          Again, hannity’s methods differ, but are designed to yield the same result.

          Liked by 3 people

    • boutis says:

      What difference does it make? Both Cruz and Rubio are open border, free trade globalists. They are only slightly different flavors. Traitor Rush the big mouth.

      Liked by 8 people

    • I remember exactly where I was when I listened to Rubio explain away his support for the Gang of Eight bill on Limbaugh’s program (in the dentist parking lot, ten minutes late for my appointment). Rush sounded deflated when he listened to Marco’s weaselly excuses, and I thought Limbaugh felt betrayed.

      So the “Full-Throated Conservative” line took me by surprise. I guess “Realsville” is a gated community.

      Liked by 6 people

    • longiron2 says:

      Said many times on here, RUSH, LEVIN, HANNITY have become what they supposedly hated and complained about for the last 20 years. THEY just LIED to their audience for the last 20 years. They are part of the REPUBLICAN Conservative Establishment which is nothing more than the UNIPARTY. Rush received a memo reminding him who pays the bills signed by the RNC. The supposedly conservative pundits, talk show hosts and conservative radio talk show are all FRAUDS. You can fool most of the people most of the time and personally thought RUSH was truthful and he fooled me for many years BUT you cannot fool ALL the people ALL the time. Their world is coming down. Thank You Mr TRUMP for exposing these frauds.

      Liked by 6 people

      • MB Miller says:

        They will no longer fool me. They are all dead to me now, and they will not be resuscitated.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Big D says:

        They’re opportunists who saw a ‘need’ and filled it.
        From there, they leveraged their influence to sway listeners into handsome payola.
        They do not need memos to remind them who made them and is master of them
        The only memos they receive are basic bullet point lists
        of positions that are desirable to their master’s.
        How they get the message out there, is up to them using their particular shtick.

        To be mildly crude, they are no different than a prostitute who moans a little knowing that it will yield a bigger payout, tip, or loyal customer.

        Like

      • Obomination says:

        Thank You Mr TRUMP for exposing these frauds.

        What Trump has set in motion in that regard is epic.

        Like

      • MVW says:

        I trust Rush as far as I can throw 100 pounds of oxycontin.

        It seems all American news media, radio, cable, TV, have been bought by foreign countries (using surrogates like a Saudi Prince), or ‘Social Justice’ Marxists (like Ted Turner), etc. or have gotten a Uniparty dog collar like Rush.

        What good is a 1st amendment if the media is flooded with duplicitous garbage? Answer: the internet is our only savior, it must not fall into the hands of a ‘Social Justice’ Google.

        Like

  3. LawrencePaul1 says:

    Well not guilty your honor. Not that it is worth boasting about but don’t do television or radio and have thought for most of my adult life that all of the media is 90% propaganda. You get the occasional Charles Hurt and Lou Dobbs leave the reservation but they are few and far between.
    To me the talk radio crowd are no better than televangelist who make a living telling people what they want to hear. I get all of my news from the net and before that it was just books.
    Old Al Gore changed the world when he invented the www.

    Liked by 12 people

    • wheatietoo says:

      Haa, well you do know that AlGore lied about that, right?

      TV and radio are good sources for breaking news & weather, and I am glad to have them when severe weather is on the way.
      But yeah, the propaganda pundits and spin doctors have proliferated since the 24 hour news channels were created.

      Liked by 8 people

      • LawrencePaul1 says:

        What do you think I think regarding Al and his invention?

        I get all that you mention apart from breaking news from the internet. I get my breaking news when it is well and truly broken. With my lifestyle I can live with getting my news a few hours after everyone else.
        I simply cannot listen to media types, never could. Hardly did before the internet, never do now.
        I take a quick look at people who break the mode like Lou Dobbs but only because there is an election going on. I’ll go back to hermitville once Donald is in the White House.

        Liked by 2 people

      • The Defiant One says:

        Wait? Seriously AlGore lied? But didn’t he personally design and make the circuitry of the Information Super Highway with his bare hands and chewing gum? And didn’t he also say he’d be married to Tipper for-EVER!

        Next you’ll be telling us that the Republican Party was working harder to destroy a Republican candidate than fight the Democrats as well as collude with them and Fox network to destroy American interest!

        [Truly life has gotten this bizarre]

        Liked by 10 people

      • If you live where sevre weather can happen quickly, like tonados, might want to invest in a good weather alert radio. Worth it as TV can’t stay on all the time and this way it won’t have to be on as much!

        Liked by 2 people

        • LawrencePaul1 says:

          I do (Ace Basin) and I have one, his name is John and he lives 500 yds from me. Actually we don’t get tornadoes just the very occasional hurricane (every 25 years or so at most)
          I also have radar and satellite on my catamaran for when I am crossing the Atlantic.
          So I do have a ship to shore radio but I do not have a radio or TV at home. Well that is a lie actually as I have one in my truck that is disconnected but left in place in case I ever want to sell it.

          Liked by 1 person

  4. Two Party Evil Money Cult

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Where is Drudge in all this?

    Liked by 1 person

    • grumpy70 says:

      Drudge already posted it.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Jayne says:

      Drudge isn’t to be trusted anymore. He has his minders, too.

      Lame Cherry says this about The Treehouse: The reason the Conservative Treehouse is being attacked maliciously by Mark Levin, as it is the one power site which is not under cartel control and it is undoing all of what the billions of Mockingbird are attempting to condition you with in Mark Levin.

      Lame Cherry and this blog are the only two places I trust anymore.

      Liked by 12 people

      • jackmcg says:

        What’s the dirt on Drudge? He’s been very pro-Trump so far.

        Liked by 1 person

        • georgiafl says:

          Drudge and Coulter are good friends – they are conservative-ish, fiscal conservatives, nationalists maybe, but not social conservatives.

          Liked by 3 people

        • Jayne says:

          I think he puts out there what he’s told to put out there like all the others. We’re fed enough to keep us happy to make us feel like we still have a voice.

          Like

      • carole says:

        I have been reading this stuff about Rush on Lame Cherry’s blog for months now. That blog and the Conservative Treehouse are the only ones I trust also Jayne.

        Liked by 1 person

      • boutis says:

        Levin is all butthurt because he thought he had gotten rid of a dependent sponging off of him. I understand the disappointment Levin but the price of it was too high to the rest of us. Just accept that the make work plan for Mark Levin’s girlfriend doofus kid didn’t work out. That is just how it goes sometimes. Get a grip.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Riddick says:

      Drudge BURIED this deep as a little link. How people already forgot that Drudge was the LOUDEST CHEERLEADER for Romney and HELPED Romney destroy Newt is beyond comprehension. Drudge is another Levin and Rush. Sorry to burst your bubble.

      What’s with the mass amnesia, people?

      Liked by 7 people

      • jackmcg says:

        Drudge has been unabashedly Trump and only Trump so far this election.

        Liked by 7 people

        • Riddick says:

          And that somehow atones for his GREAT INJUSTICE TO ALL OF US last time, right? As well as his HIDING this link as best he can without having no link at all so he can say “I posted it”.

          Just how much better off we ALL could have been had Newt succeeded, which he was until DRUDGE and LUBIO stepped in?

          Like I said, mass amnesia. And do not forget what Trump stated about people back stabbing him, since I also live by exactly same creed: “I trust people too much, but if they stab me once I NEVER forgive nor forget.” Man of my heart and my convictions.

          Drudge is no better than Rush or Levin to me.

          Drudge hitting us all with a large baseball bat in the head last time around should be forgiven. Got it.

          Unreal… And surreal…

          That’s why we loose, people. And will be losing until we STOP FORGIVING and FORGETTING.

          Liked by 12 people

          • Betty says:

            That fork in the road came way back when the Politicians told us they were not going to pursue charges against Nixon for the good of the country – when all they were doing was CYA. They probably said things like “we’re better then that” or “that’s not what America is about”.
            And because most Americans WERE better then that we believed that was their motive.

            Like

            • Big D says:

              What they said was, We need to put this behind us so the country can heal.
              Since Nixon’s pardon caused a lot of upheaval, they also granted amnesty to the draft dodgers who fled to Canada.
              That’s how they brought us together, by dividing us.

              IMHO, Nixon wasn’t the horrible ogre they made him out to be.
              If one were to look deeper into it, they might find the reason that he was taken out.
              My guess is that assassination might have been a little too obvious, in light of JFK, RFK, Martin Luther King.

              Liked by 1 person

              • Jayne says:

                Nixon is why I became a Republican. My grandmother was an unabashed Nixon supporter who said he got a raw deal. Look at Hillary now…she’s campaigning for the position he was forced to vacate and what he did was a drop in the bucket.

                Like

          • lastConservinIllinois? says:

            Drudge “buried” the link?

            When I saw the link to this story on Drudge last nite – approx 9pm central time – it was at the very top of the page.
            Above the “Hillary wins by 50 pct” story, even.

            I think you may have been a bit late to the breaking of the story.

            Liked by 2 people

          • Karmaisabitch says:

            Sorry I disagree with you on that one. During the election, after the chaff fell off, I was for Romney too, as i can easy guess; most of the people here as well, he was the best we had at the time. To attack drudge over the size of the lettering, even though it is distinguished in red, is petty. Before you throw everyone away on your march to purity, make sure where you point your gun. Wild accusations can be a dangerous enemy.

            Liked by 2 people

        • sammyhains says:

          Drudge was pro-Paul prior to Trump taking over.
          Drudge would pump up stories on Rand and kept him in the news.

          Drudge knows what’s juicy, and Trump was and remains very juicy, and will remain so as president. I think all of the media has been secretly rooting for Trump, and helping him, because they are all in the business of selling news.

          Only Fox News hasn’t been, because they are in the business of corporate mind control.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Derigitable says:

            Well, Drudge did post that absolute garbage agenda push poll that Sundance spoke about at length, and I wondered at that time how much Drudge had been paid for that.

            Liked by 1 person

            • sammyhains says:

              The media was pimping that poll hardcore.

              Drudge posted the polls, but also posted an opposing poll. To me, it looked like he was making a counter-argument to the narrative the media was trying to craft.

              Like

      • sundance says:

        @Riddick is 100%. Without any doubt Matt Drudge was “all in” for Mitt Romney in 2012 during the primaries. Drudge was relentless in ’11, and early ’12 against any Republican except Romney. (The favoritism was so over the top it even spawned some brand new aggregates because of it).

        However, that said, he’s been VERY favorable toward Donald Trump in ’15 and ’16; and Matt Drudge has appeared favorably on Alex Jones too. He’s also a big proponent of Ann Coulter on the immigration issues. So I don’t really know how to interpret Matt Drudge in 2016.

        Liked by 22 people

        • Riddick says:

          Sorry, Sundance, was typing my response above yours at the same time you did.

          As much as I appreciate that Drudge this time is on our side I simply cannot forget what he did to us ALL last time. And like Trump, I do not forgive nor forget. Him burying this link, albeit with a red color to it, is same crap he used to pull in years past. I would not trust him much at this point, have no idea what game he”s playing, but he did change course of history for us and last 4 years of ALL of our lives. To a great extent.

          So, what happens if Romney comes back to life with GOPe push? Is Drudge once again on his side? And speaking of Coulter, she was a “I hate Romney so much” and then “Romney is the only choice, I love the guy”, any reason we all should forget that as well? They all lie and all make money lying.

          Am I the only one with memory intact? I am a bit confused here, or what I am posting has never happened and its only a dream of mine?

          Liked by 3 people

        • SD, this doesn’t surprise me. I’ve been telling my husband since the beginning of this election that rush and Hannity and bill O not to be trusted! There is sooo much money involved! That’s yet to come out! That’s why no one ever questions Rubio on amnesty or gang of 8. I hope trump reads this! He probably knows already!
          Thanks for the enlightenment!

          Liked by 4 people

        • wheatietoo says:

          Maybe he’s trying to atone now?
          One thing is certain…he really, really doesn’t like Hillary.

          Like

        • flyingtigercomics says:

          Drudge read the future better and got in ahead. Doesn’t make him reliable or not a traitor just means he buried in place early to preserve gatekeeper status.

          Traitors betray, it’s their function.

          Same with fellow gatekeeper and agitprop agent of Stratfor… Alex Jones.

          The current “mainstream” media is toast. Gone, dead, buried. In their place the “alternative” and “new” media will take their place – and become the NEW mainstream.

          Mockingbird is old news now.

          Bear in mind the two biggest conspiracy sites of yore, Above Top Secret and Godlike Productions – have both been outed as intel agency fronts and honeypot traps for independent thinkers. Above Top Secret is MI5 / Air Force intelligence and Godlike Productions is DIA / ATF.

          They’ve been busted doing their dirty business several times.

          Drudge is no different, neither is Alex Jones.

          All they need to do to be accepted by real patriots and revolutionaries is get out there early enough and act “indie” long enough and they are perfect sleeper agents.

          To out them, just check out what they WON’T discuss. If ANYTHING is off limits then the media maven you’re listening to is controlled.

          Which yes, means virtually 100% of them are controlled.

          How could they not be?

          There’s a reason media content is called… “programming”…

          Liked by 5 people

        • Beenthere says:

          Maybe the simple reason Drudge was for Romney in ’12 and now Trump is because of Coulter was able to convince him.

          Liked by 1 person

        • American Nationalist says:

          Note that Ann Coulter was all for Romney, too, in 2012. We have to remember what it was like then. Ann probably was grasping at any straw she could find to curtain immigration and that Romney was that straw at that time tells you just what an earthquake Trump has wrought today.

          Like

      • sammyhains says:

        I remember Drudge’s Night of the Long Knives, the Friday before Florida 2012.
        The whole page was covered in blood. By far the lowest point of Drudge’s history.
        It took me a long time to start going back after that.

        Liked by 1 person

      • sammyhains says:

        The link to the NYT article is in RED.

        Red is an elevated story, stage 3. The list of importance on Drudge is:

        1 – regular link
        2 – top left link
        3 – RED link
        4- RED top left link
        5 – HEADLINE
        6 – RED HEADLINE
        7 – DRUDGE siren
        8 – DRUDGE siren with RED HEADLINE

        8 is reserved for nuclear war and contact with aliens

        Liked by 6 people

    • BigMamaTEA says:

      Drudge is linking this.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Roy Engstrom says:

    Sundance, I want to apologize for referring to talk show hosts with severe names, and will not do this again. I really care about Trump and hope he wins as he is the best hope to save our country from strong consequences that I’d rather not see.

    I’ll keep reading on here anyway as I have learned a lot.

    Best to you,

    Roy

    Liked by 4 people

  7. texasgypsy53 says:

    “Oh,Father. I cry for my country. We people cry for honor in our leaders,but find none. How long before man will stand on his feet,look the people in the eye,and speak truth,even if it gains the truth teller nothing? Why does man scream with dishonesty in his voice,so that he may keep power and greed in his hand. He deals behind closed doors,and in the open,lies and rips his brother apart. Give us strength this year,Father. Teach us,for we long for good men,but sees evil,slander, lies, and double dealing everywhere. Put your hand to the enemy of this country. We want it back to when the founding fathers molded it for us,and the men who died,so that we my live free and protected..in Your Son’s Holy Name..Amen. 😢

    Liked by 9 people

  8. wheatietoo says:

    “Gaslighting” is exactly what they did to us, too.
    Thank you, Sundance.

    I remember it well. Those of us who read the bill, were going…”Uh. That sounds like Amnesty.”
    And the Fox/Gang-of-8 people were saying…”Oh nooo. It’s not Amnesty.”

    Us: “Yes it is. It’s Amnesty!”

    Them: “No. It’s Immigration Reform!”

    Us: “It’s Amnesty, and you know it.”

    Them: “No. Our immigration system is broken. We need to reform it.”

    Us: “It’s not broken. Our laws are being broken, that’s what’s broken! And now you want to give amnesty to the ones who have broken into our house!”

    Them: “No. You’re crazy. This is just immigration reform.”

    Liked by 21 people

  9. rebel53blog says:

    FOX NEWS – Burn in HELL

    Liked by 6 people

  10. Pingback: Bombshell Expose’ – Conservative Radio: Limbaugh, Ingraham, Hannity and Levin Were All Part of Gang-of-Eight “Gaslighting”… | The Last Refuge | Flurry of Thoughts

  11. asnowrose says:

    House of cards come tumbling down! Ivory towers will be next!

    Like

    • Notmeagain says:

      Hope so. They’ve done for the knowledge base of science, both soft and hard, what the pundits have done for public political understanding. Like a hundred years down the toilet. It’s all intertwined.

      Like

  12. trump trump trump says:

    Anyone consider this could be a liberal plot to destroy talk radio? I wanna hear what Levin(ugh), Hannity(meh), Rush(smh) and Laura(idk) have to say for themselves b4 I make a judgement. I used to listen to all these guys and watch Fox religiously. I dropped fox after ME-gyn Kelly went after Trump.

    Stopped Levin because he was pushing Cruz as a natural born citizen when everyone knows he’s not. Dropped Rush after he defended what Cruz did to Carson. Hannity and Laura both fair to Trump but now I only listen to Savage.

    I wanna hear what they have to say b4 I pass judgement.

    Liked by 7 people

  13. ThePatriot says:

    I have listened to Rush Limbaugh since 1988. I just recently turned him off for good.

    I couldn’t put my finger on why I was doing that, but it felt good NOT to tune in. Now, I am vindicated and find that following my instincts was the right thing to do.

    Rush Limbaugh is a traitor to his country.

    Liked by 9 people

  14. LionsareGreat says:

    The dumbest thing we can do is divide between people that are now on our side. I hope you guys aren’t going to fall for this stupid Establishment trick — there’s a reason this article got out. Those talk-show hosts (some Trump-haters) are still now with us on the issues of being pro-american, so instead of attacking them focus your anger on those who continue pushing this self-destructive no-borders, anti-american agenda.

    Like

    • Raffaella says:

      Are you kidding? How could they be pro-America and push two Cubans who are not even NBC over Trump? They are all guilty and are all involved in pushing a globalist agenda. It has been so obvious since they went after Trump and supported both Cruz and Rubio.

      Liked by 12 people

      • IMO says:

        I tuned out Limbaugh, Beck, Levin, Hannity back in 2008 when they refuse to talk about 0bama’s sealed records. Hannity was suspose to have Lt Zullo on his show after the Cold Case Posse investigation Press coverage on 0bama’s fraudulent BC and selective service card and like a coward canceled with Lt Zullo.
        After that I knew they worked for the regime.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Howie says:

      I see you have not become jaded enough yet. Give it a little time. You will.

      Liked by 3 people

    • What is this? You are still blind? Open your eyes! Talk show hosts are against us. They’ve been fooling people like you for years. They tell you they are with you and then do back room deals.

      Like

    • Obomination says:

      focus your anger on those who continue pushing this self-destructive no-borders, anti-american agenda.

      That is exactly what we are doing.

      Liked by 1 person

  15. yakmaster2 says:

    I remember so well those couple of years when talking heads and politicians on Left and Right were constantly blathering about immigration “reform” of a “broken” system. NONE of them ever explained exactly WHAT in the “system” was so “broken” that needed “reform”. They were never called out on it because when you get right down to the core it’s the LAWS that have been broken and they want to make NEW immigration laws that NEGATE the existing laws. THAT’S the immigration “reform” they’re actually talking about, but no one has the guts to admit it. Such an admission would beg too many questions and the answers would reveal habitual WILLFULL laxity.

    The fact that Rubio and clan lobbied influential media to IGNORE the reality and use those hackneyed euphemisms to describe their efforts to legalize over 11 million (I think the number is much higher) illegals is PROOF of their own self-awareness of their duplicity. Every time BOR and the rest on Fox spout those two words (immigration reform & broken system), I’m reminded they’re intellectually dishonest sell-outs. The biggest one, of course, is Rubio who talks now about how we must secure the border first because Americans insist on it—meaning, of course, that the border has NEVER been a priority for HIM. Arrrrrggh! What a con man!!

    Liked by 10 people

  16. JT says:

    This is old news as far as Limbaugh is concerned. He has repeatedly spoken about politicians trying to lobby him to back amnesty, including the Schumer/Graham meeting mentioned in the NYT piece above. He has said repeatedly on his radio show that they tried several times to get him to endorse the Gang of Eight bill, and, according to him, his response was that he would sign off on amnesty as long as the illegals were not allowed to vote for 25 years. None of the politicians lobbying him took him up on the offer.

    His version of a poison pill, so he has said.

    Not sure why this article is so earth shattering. Of course politicians try to curry favor with media in order to get them to push a narrative. Doesn’t mean all the people being lobbied go along with it.

    It’s true that Limbaugh does like Rubio. However, he also likes Trump and Cruz. He has positive things to say about all of them, but stops short of making any kind of official endorsement for any one candidate. He has a responsibility to cover, talk about and offer opinions on all the Republican candidates as his listeners are made up of people who all have their favorites.

    I’m not sure how this makes Limbaugh “a direct participant willing to defraud his audience.” The NYT article itself even mentions Limbaugh criticizing Rubio over amnesty:

    “But on Monday, Mr. Limbaugh shed light on his interactions with the senators when he told a caller frustrated with his criticism of Mr. Rubio that the immigration position the senator had advocated “comes right out of the Gang of Eight bill.””

    Show me where Limbaugh has said he favors amnesty, then I’ll believe he’s guilty. As far as I’ve heard and read, Limbaugh most definitely is against any form of amnesty.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Howie says:

      Rush is state controlled media. Hahahaha! They “Tamped him down.” Dey been a whole lotta tampin’ goin’ on out there.

      Liked by 2 people

    • boutis says:

      The “voting” is a nice dodge but the issue is the economic downfall of the US. Tony Blair has been exposed in the UK as going in for open immigration for the reason of getting permanent voting majorities of Labour Party but the economic and social destruction of the UK came first.

      This continuous getting into the weeds, rationalizing why they they want to destroy a country, impoverish a population with migrant hordes, drive down standards of living and subject us to criminals, pestilence from third world hell holes, and destroy our ancient and successful culture is just another ruse. I’m sick of it. Limbaugh wants me, my children and grandchildren dead from starvation, disease and drug addiction. But first he wants me to pay him to lie to me. Go the devil Limbaugh, and all your disgusting pals, if you don’t already have him on your back.

      Liked by 1 person

    • churchill says:

      Nice post, JT.

      As far as I’ve heard and read, Limbaugh most definitely is against any form of amnesty.

      I would agree.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Derigitable says:

      lol. If you support and defend the politician that stands for amnesty, that, umm, makes you pro-amnesty. Your suggestion is that you can vote for a politician that is pro-abortion but still maintain your anti-abortion beliefs. Doesn’t work that way.

      Liked by 2 people

    • JT says:

      Now there’s two JT’s on this site.

      Like

    • archer52 says:

      Rush has gone full anti-establishment. The only exception is that he will go for establishment Republican over HRC. He hates progressives. Some might find that offensive or traitorous, but it is not. The reason is simple. If it is YOUR guy, you are on deck, have some control over how much he tacks one way or the other. If it is THEIR guy, you are stuck in the hold with all the other slaves, rowing under the threat of a whip.

      Folks, the hard truth is the center of the nation- how it functions, how it thinks, how people vote, what people demand is fixed. It just is.

      Where you make the change is in two places. At the margins immediately. And in the culture over generations. Rush has been fighting the fight for generations and you can argue the Tea Party was partially his doing. He is not a traitor. But will be labeled one by those who want to discredit him.

      Trump will learn this, if he already doesn’t know it to be true.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. ssupsky says:

    The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    Do not ever forget that we, the American people that love this country, are the enemy to the media and corrupt government.

    The media plays like they are in our corner, yet if they were, they would not be on the globalists teat either.

    Misinformation is a powerful tool. They will use it to their advantage to sabotage this country and weaken her to the point of removing our national identity.

    The Borg (you all remember the Borg right, from Star Trek The Next Generation) had a line that fits this scenario perfectly.

    Resistance is futile.

    Of course the Founding Fathers had a better answer.

    The Declaration of Independence.

    Liked by 8 people

  18. Finalage says:

    Trump should not do the next debate if does amazing in Super Tuesday. Why aid the opposition? Trump will win Michigan anyway and why are there so many debates on GOP side? They are now just opportunities to destroy the frontrunner. I think after Super Tuesday, Trump should quit the debates.

    Liked by 8 people

    • red6242 says:

      They made more debates after Trump started doing so good and the whole reason is to have more chances to attack him, if Bush would have been leading or Rubio than the debates would already be over with and done. They will try to ad more as well.

      Liked by 6 people

      • red6242 says:

        Also it was clear that Rubio knew all the questions they would ask Trump since he would immediately jump in when Trump was asked a question with long detailed attacks on him directly about the questions he was asked.

        Liked by 7 people

    • Howie says:

      Just use them to expose it.

      Liked by 1 person

    • As a matter of fact trump shouldn’t do anymore debates!

      Liked by 3 people

    • phil fan says:

      Yes what is the point after Super Tues? It was good Ruby and Cruz were exposed but don’t see why we need more. Who’s left? Romney? Up to Trump, whatever he wants I’m good

      Liked by 1 person

    • facebkwallflower says:

      Exactly. Why be an enabler? Really, he wins big and continues the con that the other guys are contender is enabling their false sense of reality and addiction to trying to take down the big guy and be somebody.

      Like

    • KH says:

      After March 15th, yes, before, no, he can’t without breathing new life into the also rans.
      RNC said last year they only wanted to do 8-9 debates to keep from destroying their people… well we’re at 10, and we’ll have been at 11 by March 15th; also the D candidate will 100% be decided by then and will then be focused 100% on general election campaign, Hillary will already be shifting into that mode after Tuesday. Enough is enough.

      Liked by 1 person

  19. Joe's Dad says:

    “Now Mr. Trump has become the Republican leader in national polls by picking fights with Mr. Ailes and offending the Latino voters whom Mr. Rubio had hoped to bring into the Republican fold.” – New York Times.

    Really New York Slimes? THAT’S why Mr. Trump is leading in national polls? Picking fights & offending Latinos?

    You folks just can’t seem pull your heads out of your asses can ya?

    LISTEN UP! I’LL MAKE IT NICE & SIMPLE FOR YOUR WEAK PEA-BRAINS TO UNDERSTAND:

    Defending oneself against a relentless assault from a corrupt/destructive political & media regime is called SELF-DEFENSE, not ‘picking fights.’

    And winning EVERY demographic in the first 4 Primaries/Caucus, INCLUDING ALMOST 50% OF HISPANICS IN NEVADA, doesn’t sound like ‘offending the Latino voters.’

    YALL JUST INSULTED A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH THAT ASININE STATEMENT.

    Yall’s article just exposes the kind back-handed, back-room, Beltway bullshit that American People are DONE with! PERIOD.

    Trump isn’t our leader. WE THE PEOPLE ARE OUR OWN LEADERS! WE THE PEOPLE RUN THIS COUNTRY, NOT Washington. Washington WORKS FOR US. Trump represents our collective voice. And since he’s willing to man the front of the line for us & his family, then you’d better believe we’ve got his back.

    TEXANS FOR TRUMP 2016!!!

    Liked by 15 people

    • boutis says:

      NYT is owned by Carlos Slim of Mexico City. He and Vincente Fox need open borders to keep the graft going in Mexico. Close the borders and send their own people home and Carlos and Vincente have a big problem feeding them. Like revolution time feeding them. Let the revolution be in Mexico instead of here. Treating the US as a poor house and social safety valve for their excess people must stop. This is why they are sweating and swearing on television. They know that building a wall, enforcing the border and cutting off the freebies will send them home to cause BIG problems in Mexico and Central America. Remember that Fox was in cahoots with GWB and I’m sure still is. Slim makes billions off media including Obama phones. The gravy train has to end.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Old Conservative says:

        Carlos Slim – Mexican, Murdock – Australian (I think), Soros – Brazilian (at least he lives there). Why are foreigners detecting the national dialog?

        Liked by 2 people

        • moogey says:

          OldCon: Just another fact is that Carlos Slim is 100% Lebanese. And the provisions in the Gang of 8 bill would have ceded our Sovereign power to Mexico in perpetuity and we would never be able to alter the flow of invaders into our country without approaching the world court, which would determine whether we should be allowed to close our border, halt invasions and dispute labor law.

          NYT is in complete support of open borders and destruction of the sovereignty and law of the United States of America. Fox News is in complete support of open borders and destruction of the sovereignty and law of the United States of America. Any media or voter who supports Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz is in complete support of open borders and destruction of the sovereignty and law of the United States of America.

          Carlos Slim and the NYT hold America and her citizens in contempt. Never forget that.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Notmeagain says:

        Not only does Slim make money directly off the Obamaphones, Mexicans in the US use them and make secondary money for him phoning home. Slim has appropriated telecommunications in Mexico and controls the information flow.

        Liked by 2 people

      • kallibella says:

        Boutis, Trump makes a similar argument about China, specifically that China has been rebuilt into the bustling country it has become in recent years by the pouring in of our $$$$ favored by the consistently enormous trade imbalances in the past several years.

        If it were not for that the Chinese population would still be in large measure wards of the communist State, in which case they would have serious economic problems, as in not being able to even feed their citizens. Just look at Venezuela as an illustration of State ordered market place.

        China greatly benefited from trading with USA, as it is far more feasible to have foreign money pay wages to Chinese people as opposed to getting hand outs from communist government welfare programs. In a way the USA alleviated/or has come close to solving the Chinese problem of feeding and building their country up as they have.

        Mexico knows that trading with the USA and allowing those low skilled and the poorest among them cross the border illegally enables them to remove those Mexican citizens from the rolls of their welfare programs!
        We don’t win anymore! We are a joke to them. We are to be milked dry.

        Liked by 1 person

    • phil fan says:

      Cue the faux crocodile tears for “Mr Ailes” from NYT. You know the outfit that just attacked Fox News, Hannity, BOR. They really think we are asleep this cycle

      Like

    • BigMamaTEA says:

      Now Joe’sDad, email THAT to the NYSlimes

      Like

    • Fantastic! I salute you Joe’s Dad!

      Like

    • The Only Winning Defense for Trump vs Uniparty-Globalists-Media is a HUGE OFFENSE.

      Like

  20. Howie says:

    NYT has no motive at all to help Trump. That lends credibility to this report for me. It must be a leak from a defector.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Howie says:

    When illegal cheap labor is legalized it/they become eligible for all kinds of programs for low income labor. Who benefits? The big corporations who pay them. Who loses. Working taxpayers who fund the programs. In effect if you still have a job, you pay taxes, to fund freebies, for those who take your job. So much for those wonderful “conservative principles.”

    Like

  22. Howie says:

    We may have to re-declare independence

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

    http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

    Liked by 7 people

    • Howie says:

      He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
      He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
      He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

      Liked by 4 people

  23. Howie says:

    One if by land
    Two if by sea
    Three if by government
    We are lucky. We can still vote. It is time to use that power to turn out the tyrants. The Uniparty wants to offer you a Hobsons Choice election. They ain’t got us yet but soon will unless we do. It appears to me that Donald Trump may be the last best chance. But at least it is a chance. JMO.

    Liked by 7 people

  24. Howie says:

    In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

    Liked by 5 people

  25. Howie says:

    ARBITRARY Government is where a people have men set over them, without their choice or allowance; who have power to govern them, and judge their causes without a rule.

    Liked by 2 people

  26. Howie says:

    I already voted for Trump. Voting for him is like your shot, heard around the world. A last in a lifetime opportunity.

    Liked by 13 people

  27. Reblogged this on Exposing Modern Mugwumps and commented:

    All establishment, all globalists. And saying Mr. Trump isn’t conservative is the code word for “he’s not a globalist like us.”

    Liked by 8 people

    • kallibella says:

      Agree. The globalists have redefined the meaning of the word “conservative.” They have used in ways that effectively change the original meaning.
      The majority of Trump’s issues are posited in a decidedly conservative way. I just didn’t get it when they say he is not a “conservative.” But lately I have seen that the word’s original meaning has changed and based on the newer definition/understanding of the word, Trump doesn’t qualify.
      He is an affront to them all!
      That’s why I support him, and the way he proposes to deal with the issues.

      Like

  28. ctdar says:

    not hard to deduce what subject that dinner photo of Bush, Murdoch and Jarrett was all about.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. itswoot says:

    The treachery deepens. These people are the modern day equivalents of Loyalists (also known as Tories) in the American Revolutionary War who sided with the British and fought against our Patriots.

    If Rush Limbaugh is indeed complicit in this, it would be especially ironic given the children’s books that he has written involving the Revolutionary War.

    Liked by 5 people

  30. carole says:

    Lame Cherry has been saying these things about Rush and Hannity specifically for quite a while now That blog and The Conservative Treehouse are the only ones I trust.

    Liked by 2 people

  31. goingsunny says:

    Trump RTed a tweet about this article. I wonder if he would include the info from the article in his next rally?

    Liked by 5 people

  32. archer52 says:

    Did you read the article?

    Have you listened to Rush for the past four years?

    Have you listened to Levin? He hates the establishment and has said so with a poisonous tongue. He has supported Tea Party member, (Matt Blevins from Kentucky for one) and tried to undermine the establishment crony candidate. Where is the respect for that? He hates it so much he is convinced, not without reason, that Trump will go that way before he goes the way you think he will. And that is his right to feel that way. Each person has their one sacred cow. Levin likes the Constitution. Cruz is a Constitutionalist. Thus the lovefest.

    Have you seen how many times Hannity has given Trump air time to give him a chance to overcome his latest gaffe? Yet, Hannity will say openly he is a Republican- although not happy with the establishment.

    How about O’Reilly? Who loves him some Trump. Seriously, when they get together it is like get a room guys moment! Same with Hannity.

    Rush will probably address this tomorrow, but has alluded to it before, IF you have listened to him regularly.

    This NY Times is a hit piece on Rubio. And it is correct in that Rubio was the front guy for amnesty. We’ve beaten that horse into hamburger as to why the “establishment” wants immigrant people here.

    First of all, if you follow Rush you’ll notice a sea change in his demeanor towards the Republicans. He has gone anti-establishment for years now, openly showing his disgust. And I noticed the change around 2011.

    Now compared to HRC or to Trump- who Rush knows personally- Rubio is more the mainstream Republican. Compared to HRC or Bernie, Rubio is a catch!

    Rush has spents HOURS defending Trump on his show because he too is done with the establishment types like McConnell et al.

    So why say nice things about Rubio? He is anti- democrat. And he HATES Hillary. So any Republican that wins the primary or gets put in place in a brokered convention will be his guy. That is why he is walking down the middle.

    The only thing in the article that makes sense to me now is why Rush went anti-establishment around the time of the Tea Party- which he helped promote. He kept warning the old guard they had better change or they would be swept away. For years!!!

    Hannity, Cavuto, Greta all give Trump more air time than many other stations. So where is the conspiracy again? There is probably a little internal revolt going on inside Fox. Not everyone there is a party guy.

    You have to accept that people are going to be critical of your Trump. Doesn’t make them your enemy or even wrong frankly.

    And taking this piece from the NYTimes as some kind of illumination is dangerous. Unless you’ll accept any other article from the NYTimes as gospel, even one that is critical of Trump. And boy, that is coming.

    Hopefully, you won’t censor the comment here. I’m just trying to bring some facts back into focus. I pay attention to all of these guys. Be careful, you’ll be tricked by a very manipulative media if not.

    Liked by 2 people

  33. ctdar says:

    NYT posting their own method of “conservative talk show” censorship rather than wait on the internet takeover.

    Like

    • phil fan says:

      Mistakes were made it looks like and this article “explains” some of the obvious cognitive dissonance coming out of these outlets. That is real. So what is their response? We’re all waiting to hear…

      Like

  34. BlueSky says:

    Yesterday at one of Trump’s hanger-fly-by-rallies , he mentioned something to the effect that perhaps he shouldn’t do any more debates. The crowd much to my dismay seemed not receptive. There was no roar of approval. I was flummoxed! I know I let out a rip roar ,”Don’t do them!” I feel ,Trump may have been given the impression that his people want him to continue in these efforts of pointless futility.
    I immediately twittered him to let him know I was against them for the expressed purpose that they are only being put on to degrade him and prop Rubio and Cruz as gladiators. If everyone here contacts Trump to let him know WE don’t want him to do anymore he just may NOT. He listens to his people. Why give the enemy opportunities on a national platter?

    Liked by 1 person

    • red6242 says:

      I agree everyone should try to let him know as the are pointless right now.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Howie says:

      I think he should do them and expose the tricks. Can you see the look on Cris Wallace face?

      Liked by 1 person

    • chrystalia99 says:

      NOT doing them is more damaging than doing them. If he is not there–then they plenty of time to spread all the horse dookie they want, and he can’t get their attention away.The winning general does not leave the battle field–he takes the entire field.

      And he will look “cowardly”–optics are everything so some of the fence sitters. We want Trump to not only win, but win with a mandate. That means not isolating himself. Note that they needed “time” in the last debate–the objective was to tag team and badger him until he either socked somebody, or walked off *thank goodness he did neither). If he had done either, they would have “won”. THAT is why they had no commercials in the middle.

      What he needs to do is be at every debate–but steal their time. Reference Kasich or Carson in every answer, so that they must be allowed to respond. If he does that–Cruz and Rubio will get NO TIME. And if they try and steal time, they look like horse dookie.

      If he is really smart, he has staffers searching for kasich/carson points that are in basic agreement with his so he can say “Well, I noticed that Governor Kasich has views similar to mine…” or ” Dr. Carson, whom I really respect, said in his book….”

      This accomplishes a pure win on several fronts:

      It steals TIME from Cruz and Rubio–no time, no sustained attacks.
      It makes people speculate on whether he is considering those two for cabinet/VP slots–more media coverage.
      It makes him look statesmanlike and presidential–because he noticed two fellow candidates got thrown under the bus to take him down, views it as unfair, and is willing/confident enough to extend them a chance to air their views.
      and they MIGHT also be able to steal some voters from Rubio and Cruz–the GOPers threw them under the bus because they are the most well reasoned candidates, so they must not be heard. If they are heard, the two golden canaries might lose votes.

      If I were running his debate strategy–that would be the best option. Show our Lion single-handedly turning these slug fests into real debates, naturally, without even taking credit for it. It makes him look, hands down, like the most presidential guy in the room, and as a final bonus, puts both Kasich and Carson in a position where for them to turn against him later would make them look like serious dookie.

      The GOPers are absolutely counting on Trump to do what you suggest–cede the territory to his enemies. We need to convince him to do the opposite–claim ALL the territory.

      Liked by 7 people

      • Notmeagain says:

        Agree, totally. Especially the deflection tactic of bringing up Carson and Kasich: take away the media thrust for Rubio. Trump has owned the debates in spite of spin that mostly came from Fox. But now he can go to the enemy and throw this in their face.

        Liked by 2 people

        • chrystalia99 says:

          Yep–open war has been declared, so time to make sure that Our Lion doesn’t do what they expect. They knew they could get away with throwing Kasich and Carson under the bus. And they believe Trump is such an egotist that he will also ignore them because he is always attacking those who offend him directly.

          Can you just picture the slopeyheads at the debate is Trump is calm, cool, collected–and running out their clock, making their ankle biters look like…well…ankle biters?

          Like

      • Scott says:

        If Trump can convince Cruz to drop as well(playing the fox supports Rubio card) it would end the debate. Trump can use Priebus’ own word about only wanting 8-9 debates as a defense. He can easily point out that the only reason for more is to bring him down and can cite the recent stories as proof. Maybe hint that he may not show because of it and leave them hanging.

        Liked by 1 person

        • chrystalia99 says:

          Another possibility–if we can get both of them torpedoed at once, it would be great. There are quite a few ways this could work to Trump’s advantage.

          I think the additional debates being added was a tactical error, myself, as is their current tag team strategy–gives people a check to see how petty they are.Sometimes, GOPers are poor planners.

          Like

    • KH says:

      Because the crowd has a clue and they know it would hurt him right now, he can’t blow off the upcoming fox debate, after that (ie after March 15th) maybe he could get away with it depending on the results (if he wins oh and fl).

      Like

  35. papa joe says:

    Ditto JT! I have heard Rush mention several times that the GOP elites have tried to pressure him not to call it amnesty.
    Laura Ingraham is an avid illegal immigration opponent. She is one of the few out in front of this issue and she has been for several years.
    Michael Medved is an amnesty supporter. And says it is not amnesty.

    Liked by 2 people

    • JT says:

      Then why did Limbaugh say marco-mark was a conservative?
      Has he called him out on the amnesty issue?
      rafayel also called for amnesty in 2013. Limbo calls him a conservative too.
      Never addresses the NBC issue except to say that both are.
      Never challenges the short Texan about sealing his records.
      Race horses at the track get more vetting before a race then these two have received.

      Liked by 1 person

      • mamajen says:

        Saving face. Rush Limbaugh’s constant refrain has been that conservatism works every time it’s tried. He’s always said that true conservatives will win, because that’s what the right wants. But here we have Cruz “the closest to Reagan we’ll see in our lifetimes” and he is going nowhere. If Rush were right about conservatism and about Cruz, he should be running away with the election. By saying that Rubio is also a conservative, it explains why Cruz is struggling.

        The NYT piece sheds more light on his defense of Rubio, but I think it’s more about defending his assertions about conservatism over many years. It’s not playing out the way he’s said it would.

        Like

  36. So many comments , so early OMG ! The irony / motive? killshot by NYTimes to their true enemies : Fox ( Murdoch) and Limbaugh ? Rubio destruction , just means to end? NY Times probably Thinks if Trump wins loses to Hillary ? They have their anti-Trump stories lined up for General a la McCain /Romney ? But Trump will be too strong I predict. Irony Trump now cites ” failing NYTimes ” for this bombshell. But broken clock right twice a day and they just struck 12 . Really unbelievable . Lastly who were sources ? Christie?

    Liked by 2 people

  37. james23 says:

    Narco Rubio is the ultimate CON MAN
    NO ONE has run a bigger con on conservatives than Gang of Rubio
    Ran as an anti-amnesty conservative, and upon securing victory, goes to work for amnesty.

    In the private sector, this sort of Con would generate multiple class action suits, and a DOJ investigation. But in politics, Con Men are given a Free Pass.
    Politicians exempt themselves from all of the basic rules of the game they impose on the rest of us.
    Political frauds should go to jail. Including Narco Rubio.

    Like

  38. Howie says:

    Is this report the reason Rubio is absent from any of the Sunday political TV shows?

    Liked by 5 people

    • Sanj says:

      Rubio disappears after debates, on Sunday’s, from Senate, from campaigning early in Iowa and NH. What the hell is going on with him? As a Floridian, I already loathe him, but there has to be something else hidden in the closet with this dude.

      Liked by 2 people

      • facebkwallflower says:

        Doesn’t show up for work; what is new here?

        Like

      • lastConservinIllinois? says:

        Sheesh, did not know that.
        They are doing these things right in our face, the marxists are well dug into taking control of our government.

        Dug in, and commencing with the destabilization.

        I do not expect Obama to be leaving office in January.

        Like

      • KH says:

        He’s being re-programed. Marco doesn’t like forums where he might get something thrown his way that he’s not been programed on how to respond.

        Like

    • kallibella says:

      Good point/question Howie. I haven’t watched TV today. But Rubio must be hold up deep in the confines of globalists/GOPe hiding places being drilled on talking points.

      Like

      • BigMamaTEA says:

        You can check Marco-Choko’s website, but I think he had like 6 campaign stops today. Two of them were this evening here in Oklahoma. (Highschool gyms if that matters. ha!)

        I think he kind of waited until the last minute.

        Like

  39. Howie says:

    Trump is on all three network politica shows today. I wonder if he will mention this NYT report. That would be so funny to see the reactions and the “panel” panic.

    Liked by 3 people

  40. pyromancer76 says:

    My first thought is: No more debates, too. However, there might be some important reasons to continue, that Trump knows about, that include reaching a large audience that does not come to rallies. I was quite concerned about the last debate. Like Trump said, they can punch, but they can’t take him out. However, I still did not like the tenor of that debate. It was trashy. And it was trashy the way Carson was treated.

    Nevertheless, someone whom I have been trying to reach re the issues turned from Rubio to Trump after that debate. That real surprise for me suggests there might be value in them after all.

    Maybe Trump continues to join debates on his own terms, e.g., each of the candidates submits two questions for each of the others. All get to see the questions. Then let there be a debate-discussion “moderated” by the so-called opinion makers (one or two only). Put the candidates forward, put the moderators in the background. If there are questions from the audience, let each candidate put forward his audience-person to question one of the others.

    Like

  41. pyromancer76 says:

    Forgot to say another thanks to Sundance and crew. You people are really, really on top of all issues: biff, bam, pow! Both powerful and timely. Another contribution on its way, as well as some Trump sweatshirts for friends and family — good quality. Also I am remembering those postcards.

    Liked by 6 people

  42. burnett044 says:

    propaganda ..mind control ..selling like edward bernays …it`s all radio ga ga..

    Liked by 1 person

  43. mamadogsite says:

    I agree. No more debates. A quiet enemy is a scary enemy. They are trying to get into his mind….trying to fathom what his next moves are going to be. They are trying to unravel him…the two yippers on either side are nothing but a distraction. The original plan was 10 debates. Period. Thats it folks. I think he should just focus on his campaign and forget the mud wrestling…..the debates at this point are achieving nothing. He reaches more people at his rallies anyway. IMHO

    Liked by 4 people

    • boutis says:

      The next one is on Fox with the same old crew on March 3 in Detroit. Why give them the ratings? Why give losers a chance to aim at Trump. After that is CNN on March 10 in Miami. Ugh. Forget it. Let Rubio and Cruz tear each other apart and Kasich hug people and Carson deliver one liners. On cable. Blech.

      Liked by 2 people

      • phil fan says:

        I emailed DTs campaign = NO more debates. We don’t need it. Really it is up to Donald but why bother?

        Liked by 1 person

        • chrystalia99 says:

          They gave us the perfect chance to take the whole battlefield–but if Trump does no more debates, their plan works. They are counting on him not doing them. I wrote a long reply above about it.

          If he doesn’t, he does exactly what they want. But if he does what I suggested above–we take it all. I have already emailed this strategy to his campaign, and with any luck, they listen…

          Liked by 2 people

          • phil fan says:

            Yes I saw that. Debate on Trumps terms is good, sure. Just not on Fox, F themthem

            Liked by 1 person

            • chrystalia99 says:

              But pulling it off On FOX, and getting away with it would be the biggest baddest troll of the campaign :-).

              Just as beating old Cruz hollow in Texas would be, or winning Cruz’s “home town” (which would be even better LOL).

              If we’re going to play scorched Earth, we want to go all the way. Shred their fancy plans, on their biggest ally’s debate stage, in front of the whole world.

              Liked by 1 person

      • KH says:

        Sorry you can’t duck the pre march 15th debates. Yes they are pointless at this point, but he’s got to go too these two or else risk OH and maybe even FL. 2 weeks is long time in politics. Now that said. After March 15th… then I say no more debates, and especially no more debates if he happens to with FL and OH on march 15th.

        Like

    • facebkwallflower says:

      No debate. No fanfare or announcement about not participating. No competing fundraiser. Just don’t show up to debate but follow through on whatever is on list of scheduled events for his campaign. When asked, “Shouldn’t live on assumptions. Fox ASSUMED I would be there. Just expected a command performance. No negotions, no deal.”

      Like

      • El Torito says:

        Even though he is treated unfairly, the debates are a useful tool for Trump to control a news cycle or two. He wins every online poll and that becomes the news. As much as I hate to see him have to go through it, it is a powerful benefit to the campaign. Also, even Trump has admitted that skipping the debate may have cost him the IA win. Instead of doing a no show, I would would force RNC to be more involved with the terms of the debates with the networks. These debates are like owning guns – better to have and no need than need and not have. I don’t think Trump will squander the benefit again.

        Like

    • BlueSky says:

      I concur, no more debates, unless and until some kind of order is meted out like P…76 suggested. And if nothing is in place then BYE-BYE. But, my instinct still leans strongly towards dumping the stupid squabbles that appear to be badges of courage for the Cuban Duo.

      Like

    • chrystalia99 says:

      That is what they want to happen. A good general doesn’t leave the field when he is winning the battle. They designed their attacks very specifically to get him to boycott future debates, leaving the field to them to do and say what they wish.

      I have worked quite a few campaigns in my day, and after an attack like that, not doing them would be the worst possible move. A winning candidate never cedes ground to the opposition.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Notmeagain says:

        All these people saying “no debate” are saying what they would do. I would probably not go either, but I’m not Trump. Being objective as possible about it, every battle is fraught with danger and pain–but they have to be fought to win the war.

        Liked by 1 person

      • KH says:

        100% agree with this… at least up though March 15th. Depends on how that goes though, at that point I would then join the – “no more debates we’re only helping the democrats” chorus, in addition to having already well exceeded the number of debates (8-9; 12 will be done by then) that the RNC originally said they wanted to limit the primaries too.

        Liked by 1 person

        • chrystalia99 says:

          Yep. I think it would only take one debate, though. If he adopted this strategy in the next debate, bet your bottom dollar Priebus and company would find an excuse to cancel the rest–as their strategy would be in tatters, so no point making a bad situation worse.

          These guys do have a tendency to double down on stupid, but they aren’t that stupid (sadly).

          Like

  44. geoffb5 says:

    Trump proposes changing the ruling from the 1964 New York Times Co. v. Sullivan case.

    Pundits aghast. Accuse Trump of wanting to gut the 1st amendment.

    NYT now publishes piece to get them on his side.

    Liked by 2 people

  45. tz says:

    The pot times correctly reports the color of the kettle.
    Where is/were Glenn Beck and his Blazebots?

    Like

  46. Sanj says:

    Sundance, I’ve wondered, what is your level of contact with the Trump campaign? I assume and hope that the articles you post here are made known to them, and that they use them in varying degrees, but I’d like assurance that they know what you’re posting.

    Surely Trump has been around enough political backstabbing and gamesmanship to know what is really going on right? The evidence shows, so far, that all the normal tricks and strategies by the GOPe, Media, DNC et al haven’t been working because it seems that Trump has mastered the art of Jui-Jitsu, but I get nervous because the forces and money allied against Trump are formidable.

    Thanks Sundance

    Liked by 1 person

  47. Citizen Kane says:

    The NYTs has essentially silenced Talk Radio coming into Super Tuesday….Monday will be spent with the Conservative Talkers disputing/spinning/denying what the NYTs printed.

    It will play to the benefit of Trump !

    PTL NYTs, on several levels you have helped our man Trump !

    Liked by 3 people

  48. georgiafl says:

    NYT – “So the senators supporting the legislation turned to Mr. Rubio, the Florida Republican, to reach out to Mr. Limbaugh.”

    Rush’s description, ‘full throated conservative,’ comes to mind and not in a very nice way.

    (note to my mind – get out of gutter)

    Like

  49. Plus one other thing , shows how smart / devious Schumer , Reid are , and what dope/ dupe / easy mark Rubio is . Also Schumer etc could be source , malicious psyche op?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Papoose says:

      Schumer for sure – the 3 Branches of Government – a tutorial on national news.

      Take 1 minute and find out the definition of the 3 Branches of US Government.

      2011

      Like

      • Howie says:

        The best plan is to shut down “parts” of the government. The bad parts. A president can do it at will. He controls all the agencies. He also has the power of the pardon to render moot all the regulatory and legal malarkey these turkeys have passed that arbitrarily render citizens criminals for non compliance. Yes, it is that simple. Trump is their worst nightmare.

        Liked by 2 people

        • moogey says:

          Howie, just speculating: What would happen if a President stood at the podium and enacted War Powers against the Progressive/Marxists who in any way have supported, voted, constructed, mandated or lobbied for the legislation contained within the Gang of 8 Bill and the TPP that ceded US Foreign Sovereignty with irreversible consequences?

          Could enacting war powers give a President the administrative powers required to immediately begin shutting down agencies, terminating employees, nullifying contracts and fighting the enemy within our border?

          Or can war powers only be enacted and used against a foreign enemy?

          Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s