CNN appeared to think Trump’s Diet Coke habit was more serious than NYC terrorist attack

It’s not uncommon to see MSM in the spotlight over its controversial reports, but news outlets really outdid themselves when they chose to jump on the bandwagon of a sourceless New York Times article which claimed Donald Trump drinks 12 Diet Cokes a day.

To understand exactly what occurred in the world of MSM on Monday, you first have to go back to a New York Times (NYT) reportfrom Saturday, titled ‘Inside Trump’s Hour-by-Hour Battle for Self-Preservation.’ It’s a dramatic headline to say the least, which the outlet backs up by claiming to have interviewed “60 advisers, associates, friends, and members of Congress.”

In the report, the outlet – a well-known foe of President Trump – allegedly details the leader’s day-to-day life in the White House. Citing estimates from “people close to him,” the newspaper stated that Trump “spends at least four hours a day, and sometimes as much as twice that, in front of a television… marinating in the no-holds-barred wars of cable news and eager to fire back.”

That claim was enough to get the attention of Trump, who tweeted that it was a “false story” and “bad reporting.” But mainstream media seemed to care less about the TV claim and more about a singular sentence which stated – without naming a source – that Trump drinks a dozen Diet Cokes a day.


“Watching cable, he shares thoughts with anyone in the room, even the household staff he summons via a button for lunch or for one of the dozen Diet Cokes he consumes each day,” the NYT article states. That was all mainstream media outlets needed to make a story.

Quick! Call the experts! 

The mainstream media landscape – both in the US and abroad – was dominated with Diet Coke headlines on Monday, two days after the New York Times published its article. A Washington Post opinion piece didn’t stop at Diet Cokes. It went on to shame the president for reportedly… wait for it… eating McDonald’s on the campaign trail. Granted, the claims are that he often ate two Big Macs, two Filet-O-Fish sandwiches, and a chocolate shake in one sitting – but should that really matter, amid North Korean nuclear threats and turmoil in the Middle East?

In an effort to justify the hysteria, many outlets called in experts to provide comment about the ill effects that 12 daily Diet Cokes can have on a person. “That amount of anything is potentially harmful for anybody,” dietician Aisling Pigott, a spokesperson for the British Dietetic Association, told International Business Times UK. “Twelve cans is equal to 500mg of caffeine a day, a large amount of artificial sweeteners and lots of gas.”

Nutritionist Dr. Joanna McMillan went so far as to tell that the Diet Cokes could be affecting the president’s brain. “If [Trump’s] eating a rubbish diet with these drinks, considering he is slightly overweight, looking at his diet overall then his brain function is affected,” she said.

‘What happens to your body if you drink 12 cans of Diet Coke a day, like Donald Trump?’ reads a Monday headline from British newspaper Metro. It of course provided the answer by way of David Katz, a nutrition expert at the Yale School of Medicine. “Twelve cans a day, diet or regular, it’s potentially going to do damage to your skeleton, and eventually that can be a serious problem,” he said.

CNN called in numerous experts, one of whom explained the dangers of 12 Diet Cokes using a physical display of, well, 12 Diet Cokes. Another expert told the outlet that Diet Coke can fill a person with bubbles, cause bloating, and damage tooth enamel.

Diet Coke v terrorist attack

CNN really excelled itself when it came to devoting on-air time to the Diet Coke saga, deciding to give it significant attention on Monday. Some would say its dedication to the story was a bit over-the-top, but what happened next was even more shocking.

When news broke of a suspected terrorist attack near Times Square in New York, CNN made the decision to continue shaming Trump about his beverage choice, rather than interrupt its segment for the breaking news.

The timeline of events is easily understood when you watch this video of the Diet Coke segment, which begins at 8:39am EST. Twenty seconds into the broadcast, the anchor tells her guest – CNN contributor and Trump biographer Michael D’Antonio – that the network has breaking news so she may have to cut away from him. However, the clip continues until 8:47am, with no mention of the terrorist attack taking place at all during that time. At 8:45am, a blurb can be seen on the ticker at the bottom of the screen.


Bigot: ‘one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred and intolerance,’ according to Webster

 | – DECEMBER 4, 2017

The New York Times printed three op-eds by three different writers describing President Trump as a bigot.

In a naked display of hypocrisy, all three attack pieces, published on Sunday, accused Trump of being a racist bigot.

Liberal writer Charles Blow wrote about Breitbart News Chief Steve Bannon’s influence on Trump’s worldview.

“It is always worth remembering that Bannon, who departed the White House in mid-August and returned to his right-wing website Breitbart the same day, last year proudly told Mother Jones: ‘We’re the platform for the alt-right.’ Alt-right is just a new name for Nazis and racists.”

Blow added, with no evidence, that Trump’s hostility to the fake news media is an attempt “to grease the skids toward more oligarchy, more authoritarianism, more fascism.”

Another liberal writer at the Times, Roger Cohen, called Trump’s efforts on international politics as “the last stand of the white man, whose century this will not be.

Nothing bigoted about that statement.

“In every Western democracy, Trump has helped unleash that which is most foul in human nature,” Cohen wrote, adding that Trump’s politics “do little or nothing for his white blue-collar constituency.”

The third op-ed, written by freelance writer Kashana Cauley and titled ‘Trump’s Racist Tweets. My Growing Patriotism’, says that Trump’s feud with the NFL and kneeling players “make it clear what he thinks about black Americans: Our role is to sit down and shut up, to remain deferential and grateful to him…”

The actual bigoted tendencies of the mainstream media have been incessant since Trump’s 2016 election victory, suggesting – in the most bigoted way – Trump is inherently racist.

In October for example, during the national controversy over Confederate statues, CNN reporter April Ryan absurdly asked White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders if “slavery was wrong.”

Sanders called the question “digusting and absurd,” adding that she’s “not going to re-litigate the Civil War.”

Ryan gloated on Twitter that she did ask the question but only got back “crickets,” as if that question was hard-hitting journalism.


And last month, the Times ran an overtly racist op-ed called ‘Can My Children Be Friends With White People?’ written by Ekow Yankah, who concluded that, no, his children in fact cannot be friends with white people.


What would happen if the shoe was on the other foot?



DOJ & FBI must explain why they refused to reveal reason Mueller kicked anti-Trump agent off Russia investigation after being subpoenaed, he says

PJ Media – DECEMBER 3, 2017

In what appears to be an orchestrated leak, both the Washington Post  and New York Times reported on Saturday that Special Counsel Robert Mueller removed an FBI agent from the Russia collusion investigation in July over anti-Trump text messages. And the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is ready to slap contempt of Congress citations on Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray because they have been keeping that information from his committee since August.

Peter Strzok is considered one of the agency’s “most experienced and trusted counterintelligence investigators,” according to the Times. Interestingly enough, he also played a critical role in the FBI’s Hillary Clinton email investigation. He exchanged the anti-Trump text messages with Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer with whom Strzok was having an extramarital affair.

Is this starting to sound like a soap opera? It gets better.

The Post reported that Strzok and Page exchanged text messages that “expressed anti-Trump sentiments and other comments that appeared to favor Clinton.”

Strzok’s transfer to the FBI’s human resources department in July was an obvious, eyebrow-raising demotion that attracted the attention of the House Intel chair.

Rep. Devin Nunes told the Washington Examiner that his committee has been trying to get that very information for months — only to be stonewalled by the FBI.

Enraged, Nunes is now demanding that the FBI and Department of Justice explain why they refused to reveal the reason Mueller kicked a key supervising FBI agent off the Trump-Russia investigation, after being subpoenaed and repeatedly asked about it.

According to the Examiner’s Byron York, “the committee had issued a subpoena that covered information about Strzok’s demotion more than three months ago.”

Word of the messages and the affair were news to Nunes, even though the committee had issued a subpoena that covered information about Strzok’s demotion more than three months ago. The committee’s broadly worded subpoena for information related to the so-called Trump dossier went to the FBI and DOJ on Aug. 24. In follow-up conversations on the scope of the subpoena, committee staff told the FBI and DOJ that it included information on the circumstances of Strzok’s reassignment.

On Oct. 11, Nunes met with deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein. In that meeting, Nunes specifically discussed the committee’s request for information about Strzok.

In an Oct. 31 committee staff meeting with the FBI, bureau officials refused a request for information about Strzok.

On Nov. 20, the committee again requested an interview with Strzok. (Three days earlier, on November 17, Strzok met with the Senate Intelligence Committee.)

On Nov. 29, Nunes again spoke to Rosenstein, and again discussed Strzok.

On Dec. 1, the committee again requested to speak with Strzok.

The FBI and blew Nunes off only to leak about the demotion to the Post andTimes on Dec. 2. In both papers, unnamed federal law enforcement officials explained why the feds were reluctant to share the information.  The Post reported that “there is great concern that exposure of the texts they exchanged may be used by the president and his defenders to attack the credibility of the Mueller probe and the FBI more broadly,” and the Times reported that “the existence of the text messages is likely to fuel claims by Mr. Trump that he is the target of a witch hunt.”

If the shoe fits.

Some might say that the attempt to hide the text messages looks like an indication of consciousness of guilt on the part of Mueller and his team.

At any rate, Nunes is seeing red.

“By hiding from Congress, and from the American people, documented political bias by a key FBI head investigator for both the Russia collusion probe and the Clinton email investigation, the FBI and DOJ engaged in a willful attempt to thwart Congress’ constitutional oversight responsibility,” he said in a statement Saturday afternoon. “This is part of a months-long pattern by the DOJ and FBI of stonewalling and obstructing this committee’s oversight work, particularly oversight of their use of the Steele dossier. At this point, these agencies should be investigating themselves.”

Now Nunes says the DOJ — after stonewalling for months — is suddenly willing to meet some of the committee’s demands for information.

“The DOJ has now expressed — on a Saturday, just hours after the press reports on Strzok’s dismissal appeared — a sudden willingness to comply with some of the committee’s long-standing demands,” Nunes said in the statement. “This attempted 11th-hour accommodation is neither credible nor believable, and in fact is yet another example of the DOJ’s disingenuousness and obstruction.”

According to the Examiner, Nunes has “instructed committee staff to draw up a contempt of Congress citation for Rosenstein and for FBI Director Christopher Wray.” The chairman has given the FBI and DOJ until the end of December to meet all the committee’s outstanding demands — or else he will take action on the citations.



Screen Shot 2017-11-29 at 7.18.13 PM

During a statement at a Congressional Black Caucus press conference, Rep. Jim Clyburn of South Carolina revealed advice that he gave his 21-year-old grandson about what to do if police pull him over for a traffic violation. Clyburn said he told his grandson, “You’ve got to deny your manhood if you want to ensure that you come home alive.” C-SPAN

By Noah Feit

Sexual harassment standard different for Congress, SC’s Clyburn suggests

U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn could find himself in hot water.

A flippant response the Columbia Democrat made to reporters while walking in the Capitol is drawing the ire of many.

When asked about sexual harassment allegations against colleague Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), Clyburn seemed to suggest elected officials should be held to a different standard than other public figures.

In a video posted on Twitter, the 77-year-old Clyburn is walking to an elevator with Congressional Black Caucus chairman Cedric Richmond (D-La.), when asked “Other men in other industries have faced similar accusations … and gotten out of the way, resign, stepped down, far faster than he has, right … Harvey Weinstein, Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer?”

That was followed by another question, “So it’s different because he’s elected,” but the elevator doors closed before Clyburn might have responded.

Many comments critical of Clyburn have been posted on social media. Among them, people are questioning his logic, asking him to resign – in delicate and powerful terms – and calling him a poor representative of South Carolina.

A writer for The New York Times Magazine and National Geographic tweeted that Clyburn invoked the name of Susan Smith, South Carolina’s infamous child murderer, in his defense of Conyers.

“James Clyburn compared Conyers’ accusers to the child murderer Susan Smith, who initially claimed a black man had abducted her kids. Clyburn said, these are all white women who’ve made these charges against Conyers,” Robert Draper tweeted.

When asked if that comment was true, Draper said he verified it through two sources, adding “Clyburn has used the Susan Smith parallel more than once, to members & staffers.”

Screen Shot 2017-11-29 at 7.26.40 PM

This isn’t the first time Clyburn has opened himself up to criticism on the issue of Conyers.

On Nov. 21, the assistant Democratic leader, the third-ranking Democrat in the U.S. House told The New York Times he was unsure whether the claims against Conyers “have any real substance.”

“You can’t jump to conclusions with these type of things,” Clyburn told The New York Times. “For all I know, all of this could be made up.”

The following day, Nov. 22, Clyburn had a somewhat different on Twitter.

Clyburn tweeted that any claims of sexual harassment are very serious and can’t be tolerated.

“The allegations against Congressman John Conyers are very disturbing, and I am aware he has emphatically denied them,” Clyburn wrote. “The House Ethics Committee should conduct a prompt, deliberate and thorough investigation.”

Should Clyburn’s followers on social media expect another response, differing from his curt comment at the elevator, on Thursday?

Screen Shot 2017-11-29 at 7.29.32 PM

Clyburn might not be in the minority among his peers on this issue.

The Democratic caucus held a meeting Wednesday morning, and according to a post on Twitter, Rep. Linda Sanchez complained that elected members of Congress shouldn’t “be held to a higher standard” than others when it comes to sexual harassment.

Conyers, the longest serving member of the U.S. House, is currently being investigated by the U.S. House Ethics Committee after BuzzFeed News first reported the 88-year-oldrepresentative settled a wrongful termination complaint in 2015 by a staffer who accused him of sexual harassment.

Conyers has denied the allegations and resisted calls for his resignation, but stepped down from his role as the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.

On Monday, Clyburn asserted he isn’t planning on retiring after 25 years on the job. He said he will seek re-election next year as the incumbent in the South Carolina’s 6th District congressional seat.

“My health is good. I feel fine,” Clyburn said, adding, “I don’t think I’ve detected any angst with the voting public about my service.”

Screen Shot 2017-11-29 at 7.31.51 PM


NYT reporter who demanded respect for women left women “scared” & “violated” after unwanted groping, kissing.

 | – NOVEMBER 20, 2017

Yet another ‘male feminist’ has turned out to be an alleged sexual abuser of women after New York Times White House correspondent Glenn Thrush was accused by multiple women of sexually harassing them.

According to a report by Vox’s Laura McGann, numerous female journalists, including McGann herself, were subjected to Thrush’s unwanted kissing and groping that left them “scared, violated, ashamed, weirded out”.

“He slid into my side of the booth, blocking me in. I was wearing a skirt, and he put his hand on my thigh. He started kissing me. I pulled myself together and got out of there, shoving him on my way out,” wrote McGann of one encounter.

She describes how Thrush would abuse his power and influence to lure women into uncomfortably intimidate positions before sexually assaulting them. His behavior became so notorious that women just starting out in Washington were warned not to attend an event with him that involved alcohol.

According to one of Thrush’s alleged victims, “He kept saying he’s an advocate for women and women journalists. That’s how he presented himself to me. He tried to make himself seem like an ally and a mentor.”

As McGann points out, the recent sex abuse scandal prompted Thrush to post, “an impassioned note on his Facebook page in October, calling on his fellow journalists to stand by women entering the field.”

“Young people who come into a newsroom deserve to be taught our trade, given our support and enlisted in our calling — not betrayed by little men who believe they are bigger than the mission,” wrote Thrush.

Thrush’s Twitter history is an almost endless stream of how much he respects women, particularly female reporters & journalists, emphasizing once again how the most vehement virtue signalers when it comes to feminism and women’s rights are often actual perverts who abuse women.

Responding to an article asking if Siri, Apple’s voice assistant was “feminist,” Thrush responded, “It involves men asking a woman a question then listening to what they say? Yep.”


This tweet is particularly ironic given that Thrush’s specialty appeared to be pretending to be interested in what young women had to say in order to sexually harass them.

During one of the presidential debates, Thrush celebrated Hillary ‘smoking’ Trump when she said, “Donald thinks belittling women makes him seem bigger.”


Thrush’s alleged assault victims probably felt very belittled too.

Recall that Thrush was so in the tank for Hillary that the Wikileaks emails revealed how he would send his stories directly to the Clinton campaign for approval before having them published.

In perhaps the most darkly ironic tweet, Thrush said, “Trump goes after women reporters,” while Thrush himself was physically doing that exact thing.


Thrush also accused Donald Trump of using rape victim Kathy Shelton as a political tool.


Thrush repeatedly virtue signaled about how much he supported female reporters and journalists, and how “women have been treated as 2nd class citizens,” while sexually harassing them behind the scenes.


In another tweet, Thrush criticized political strategist Mark Penn by accusing him of setting back feminism 50 years.


In another instance, Thrush chided Fox News for having a history of systematic sexual harassment,” while himself creating what was described as a “toxic environment” within Politico’s office as a result of his systematic sexual harassment of women.


Oh, the irony.