CNN Anti-Trump Panel Goes Bad When the Wrong Panelists Show Up

It’s no secret that CNN is no friend of President Donald Trump… but even the left-leaning news network couldn’t skew the facts against the president when a panel of “everyday” Americans showed up.

A group of voters were recently assembled in Ohio following the testimony of James Comey. The nine citizens were asked by CNN National Correspondent Gary Tuchman to respond to several questions, and the result was definitely not what the cable network had planned.

“First thing I want to ask you: It is a crime when you testify before Congress to lie,” Tuchman stated in a clear attempt to “prep” the panel. “That is perjury. You can go to prison for it.”

Then, Tuchman asked what the citizens thought. “Raise your hand if you believe James Comey lied at all.” To CNN’s undoubted chagrin, four of the nine panelists put their hands in the air.

“He [Comey] said that Donald Trump, quote, ‘Lies plain and simple,'” continued Tuchman. “Raise your hand if you believe Donald Trump has lied at all about the situation.”

Not a single voter on the panel raised their hand — but then things got even worse for CNN.

The shocked correspondent asked for an explanation of why some panelists didn’t raise their hand at either question. A woman in the front row gave an answer that the liberal network was absolutely not expecting.

“Well, first of all, things can be distorted and appear like lies,” the plainspoken woman responded.

She then gave the CNN journalist a scolding look. “And I think maybe the media might have distorted some things and now we’re not getting both sides.”

The big names in media have tried for months to destroy President Trump, citing “anonymous sources” and reporting things that turned out to be the complete opposite of the truth.

Americans are no longer taking the bait, and the media shell game no longer works. Citizens trust the mainstream media about as much as they believe James Comey — and that’s not saying a lot.

If you agree with this panel of voters, please share this article on Facebook and Twitter!

What do you think of this panel's response? 

http://conservativetribune.com/cnn-anti-trump-panelists/?utm_source...

Related image

Views: 85

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Thank God that people ARE paying attention.

What was he thinking?   hmmmmm....interesting....I wasn't aware he had that skill

a guess... cnn's intent was to demonstrate how Trump's voters are uniformly delusional. He stressed '9 Trump voters' in the intro, and that was sure to trigger cnn's normal audience into the prescribed frame of mind for the desired perception.

we just don't see it from the frame of mind their normal fully indoctrinated audience does.

How can we possibly see things through their lens of the only right is wrong and the huge wrong is right?

;' /   this is a dilemma I had my last few years of living in the progressive demon's den Austin. My take is you don't want to, other than just enough to recognize the dire danger to common sense and sound logic their delusional frame of mind is. Take it as the real and imminent threat that it is.

sure wish a whole lot more woulda recognized that coming 18 years ago as I did, when it woulda been much easier to shove them all back into the closet where the progressives belong, before they normalized their bizzaro world. 

The metastasis is beyond stage 4 imho.

yeah, normalization is hindsight now - I agree.

AWWWWWWWWWWWWW.....do I detect WHINING?


No audio or cameras in White House press briefing drives CNN’s Jim Acosta to meltdown


In other words, reporters were forced to do their work ‘old school,’ and their hands are hurting from all that typing.

CNN senior White House correspondent Jim Acosta didn’t take kindly to the extra hard labor. In fact, he’s quite horrified at the “bizzare” nature of it all.

Appearing on CNN Newsroom with host Brooke Baldwin, Acosta was quick to express his frustration:

“That’s the White House behind me….It’s bizarre,” Acosta said. “I don’t know what world we’re living in right now, Brooke, where we’re standing at the White House, and they bring us into the briefing room here at the White House and they won’t answer these questions on camera, or let us record the audio. I don’t know why everybody is going along with this.”

Oh, the humanity!


Call me old fashioned but I think the White House of the United States of America should have the backbone to answer questions on camera.


Acosta continued: “The White House is refusing to answer those questions on camera or in any kind of fashion where we can record the audio. My guess is because they want their evasive answers not saved for posterity. That is the only conclusion one could draw. That when they give us answers, that it somehow reads better in print than it could be seen on television or heard over the radio.”

Acosta even predicted how Trump supporters would react to his little temper tantrum:

“And I guess people can say, well, there goes the media again. They’re acting like cry babies because they can’t cover things in the way that they want. But, you know, maybe I’m old-fashioned, Brooke but I believe the White House for the United States should have the questions answered on camera to see what they’re saying and when they don’t do this, they’re doing a disservice to the people to the country.”

“When, you know, Sean Spicer…just comes in and says you can’t record the video or audio from these briefings, that wouldn’t be tolerated at city council meetings or a governor’s press conference….I just don’t know what we’re doing….It’s like we’re just covering bad reality television, is what it feels like now.”

Well, Jim, if we have audio and video, why on earth would we need the likes of YOU?

Watch the exchange below:

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2017/06/20/no-audio-cameras-white-house...

LMAO, wonder if they can spell or did that go out the window along with truth?

To Jim [crybaby] Acosta; Call me old fashioned, but I think the White House of the United States of America should absolutely ignore and disallow any/all anti-American, FAKE NEWS, hack journalists from entering the walls of the press room.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

ALERT ALERT

Newt Says What The Rest Of Us Are Thinking:
It’s Time To Throw Peter Strzok In Jail

Disgraced FBI special agent Peter Strzok, a senior member of the bureau who gained notoriety in recent months over his anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, was grilled for nearly 10 hours during a joint congressional committee hearing on Thursday.

At issue was Strzok’s anti-Trump texts to former FBI lawyer and lover Lisa Page that coincided with his leading of the investigations into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal and the alleged Trump/Russia 2016 election collusion, as well as his involvement in the subsequent Robert Mueller special counsel probe.

The hearing proved to be a heated battle, as Strzok displayed an arrogant smugness in defiance of pointed questions from Republicans that he largely danced around, while Democrats sought to upend and undermine the entire hearing with a plethora of interruptions, parliamentary maneuvers and outright praise for the man who helped let Clinton off the hook while ferociously targeting Trump.

Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was less than impressed with Strzok’s performance and cooperation in the hearing and suggested during an appearance on Fox Business that the FBI agent should be held in contempt of Congress.

“I think they have to move to hold him in contempt and throw him in jail,” Gingrich said of Congress and Strzok.

“This is a person who is willfully standing up and refusing to appear as a congressional witness and he was a government employee at the time,” he continued.

“He has every obligation to inform the legislative branch, and I don’t think they have any choice except to move a motion of contempt because he is fundamentally — and so is his girlfriend (Page) — they’re both fundamentally in violation of the entire constitutional process,” he added.

Page had been subpoenaed to appear before Congress on Wednesday but refused to appear, saying she’d been unable to review relevant documents prior to the scheduled hearing, a closed-door hearing that has since been rescheduled for Friday.

Gingrich was not the only one who thought Strzok deserved to be held in contempt of Congress, as House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte informed Strzok that he remained at risk of such during the hearing, according to The Daily Caller.

That warning from Goodlatte came after Strzok had refused to answer a straightforward question posed by House Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, regarding how many people Strzok had personally interviewed between a specific set of dates in relation to the Clinton email investigation.

“Mr. Strzok, please be advised that you can either comply with the committee’s direction to answer the question or refuse to do so,” Goodlatte stated. “The latter of which will place you in risk of a contempt citation and potential criminal liability. Do you understand that? The question is directed to the witness.”

Strzok still refused to answer, citing instructions received from his counsel and the FBI to not answer certain questions on certain topics.

Goodlatte replied, “Mr. Strzok, in a moment we will continue with the hearing, but based on your refusal to answer the question, at the conclusion of the day we will be recessing the hearing and you will be subject to recall to allow the committee to consider proceeding with a contempt citation.”

It is unclear if Goodlatte and the committee ultimately did consider a contempt citation for Strzok following the contentious hearing, nor is it clear if Page will be held in contempt for blowing off her subpoenaed appearance on Wednesday.

Hopefully Congress will follow through on the threats of contempt followed by actual jail time against Strzok and Page in response to their uncooperative behavior and failure to appear when subpoenaed, if only to ensure that future witnesses called before Congress for sensitive or contentious hearings don’t think they can get away with the same sort of behavior.

TEA PARTY TARGET

Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” says Leonard Cottrell, after successfully staving off law enforcement and the courts from confiscating his firearms. Cottrell, an Iraq War veteran, was at work when he received a phone call from his wife. The cops were there, busting in to take his guns away. It all started after a casual conversation his son had at school.

Ammoland reports:

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

After several hours, Cottrell said police agreed not to take the guns but to allow him to move them to another location while the investigation continued.

“They had admitted several times that my son made no threat to himself or other students or the school or anything like that,” he said.

Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was “not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing.”

The troopers searched his son’s room and found nothing, Cottrell said.

“To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” he said. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

“In the Garden State, the usual approach is to confiscate first and ask questions later, and victims of this approach often don’t know their rights. ‎In this case, the victim pushed back and confiscation was avoided — but the circumstances surrounding the incident are outrageous. A student expressing concern over lack of security is not a reason to send police to the student’s home — but it might be a reason to send police to the school to keep students and teachers safe” said Scott L. Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA board of directors.

NJ.com adds:

Cottrell, a disabled U.S. Army veteran who served three tours during “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” owns a shotgun and a pistol. He has all the correct permits to own the firearms, he said, and predominately uses the shotgun to hunt.

He said his wife allowed the officers to enter the home, and with her permission, they searched his son’s room — but they did not find any weapons, he said. The officers, he said, didn’t have a warrant but still wanted to take his guns. Cottrell wouldn’t let them.

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” he said Thursday.

He said the attempted seizure resulted because of a new law Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law that makes it easier for police to confiscate guns when someone in the state poses a threat to themselves or others. The law is part of a broader statewide effort to make New Jersey’s gun laws even tougher amid the national outcry for more gun control in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Cottrell said the officers “danced around the issue” when he confronted them about the new law.

A New Jersey State Police spokesman declined to answer questions about whether this incident had anything to do with the new gun laws.

In an email, Sgt. First Class Jeff Flynn said, “Troopers responded to Mr. Cottrell’s residence in reference to the report of a possible school threat. Based on their investigation, it was determined that Mr. Cottrell’s weapons did not need to be seized.”

David Codrea, writing for Ammoland, further added:

To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” New Jersey gun owner and Army veteran Leonard Cottrell Jr. told New Jersey 101.5 after a June 14 visit from State Police,. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

Cottrell was recalling state troopers showing up at his door to confiscate firearms after his 13-year-old son was overheard discussing lax school safety with a friend.

Indoctrinated by a pervasive snitch culture — one that never seems to deter the blatantly obvious demonic nutjobs — the eavesdropping student told his parents, who told school administrators, who in turn called the cops. (Note “If you see something, say something” carries risks of its own – if you report the wrong person, you could end up smeared as a “hater.”)

“Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was ‘not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing,’” the report continued. Despite that, his home is now a “gun free zone” and that has been publicized by the media. He has, in fact, willingly ceded those rights, and by his own words in order to make authorities “happy.”

Before judging him for that, consider the environment that is New Jersey. Then consider the overwhelming force the state can bring to bear, and its predisposition to using it, especially if it’s to enforce citizen disarmament. It’s easy to anonymously declare “Molon Labe” on the internet. In meatspace, resistance is more effective when the aggressor doesn’t get to dictate the time and place, especially if that place is your home and you have family inside.

Appeasing gun-grabbers, generally couched as “compromise,” is impossible. It’s like throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting them to be sated and leave you alone — instead of sensing opportunity and fear, and moving in closer.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service