Liberal media biases ignoring Trump wins at their own peril

Many of the latest drops that came Sunday point to a media bias facing the Trump administration from general journalistic coverage to a specific reporter at the New York Times.

In the general sense the posts point out that the President cannot get coverage of his many successes such as: Demilitarizing North Korea, the economic agenda, which had stock market at all-time highs and lowest unemployment levels in more than 30 years and Trump’s ability to grow an economy that was languishing for eight years by in some quarters doubling output of “The New Normal” of 2% Gross Domestic Product.

On the specific side, the Sunday drops point to a reporter named Maggie Haberman.

Their father, Clyde Haberman, worked at The Post and then was a long-time columnist for the NY Times picking up a Pulitzer Prize for Breaking News with a team investigating then-NY Governor Elliot Spitzer’s prostitution scandal, which led to his resignation.

The drop brings up Maggie’s infamous mention in the Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Campaign Director John Podesta email that was published by Wikileaks. These drops come after ex-Editor of the NY Times Jill Abramson last week cited Maggie’s reporting as being biased against the Trump White House in her new book.

This from Podesta to top campaign staff and Hillary, and was prior to Maggie joining the Times:

“We have has a very good relationship with Maggie Haberman of Politico over the last year. We have had her tee up stories for us before and have never been disappointed. While we should have a larger conversation in the near future about a broader strategy for reengaging the beat press that covers HRC, for this we think we can achieve our objective and do the most shaping by going to Maggie.”

Sunday’s drop infers that Maggie has had plenty of recent Tweets citing trains and that she may be dropping coded messages for the liberal Democrats since the language is sometimes odd.

Let’s just say none of these revelations surprise me in the least, since Maggie’s liberal leanings have been well-known for years. My hope is that she is not in over her head as the drops suggest and that there is time for her to get out of any trouble she may be in.


Placid markets show comfortability with Trump candidacy

Global markets appear to be sanguine over the possibility of a Donald Trump presidency as they react to the late Friday news that the FBI is reopening its probe into Hillary Clinton’s emailing sensitive material over a private server.

US stock futures are up slightly Monday morning pre-market as Asian and European market moved very little. Crude oil and precious metals are sliding as the dollar strengthens. Treasuries are being bought as yields come in slightly.

Certainly — as this election season has shown time and time again — this can’t be anything near the last shoe to drop as there is still eight days left in the campaigns.

However the fact that the markets see a Trump victory without setting off a selloff across all securities speaks volumes of Clinton’s prospects of victory.

It’s my belief that the FBI director James Comey made the announcement on Friday to get in front of what Wikileaks will come out this week.

This week will be highly volatile in the election, but how the markets react will be more of a tell-tale sign for possible election results.


Un-American activities election

Donald Trump wins debate, loses the election. That appears to be the sentiment of the news media.

I’m a bit lost over the brouhaha over the comment that Trump said he would let us know if he accepted the election results.

It’s un-American, appears to be the sentiment on Trump’s comment.

Yet neither side accepted the 2000 election until January 2001 and no one labeled that as un-American.

Given the information we have of how the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s campaign conspired to defame and defeat Bernie Sanders, how could you not think there could be something amiss going into this general election.

The thought of being un-American seems to be the unifying meme of this election.

Clinton and and her campaign’s thoughts being published by Wikileaks tells us how the campaign will usurp and rule of law to get to the White House. Trump’s treatment of woman — whether the Clinton campaign brought them to light or not — has been labeled as brutish.

I believe the comment of the night was Trump saying the election is rigged because this woman is allowed to run for president, despite all the charges she faced including lying to the FBI.

As I wrote yesterday, well before the Trump comment, I do not believe this election will be decided or conceded in early November.

I was disappointed with the economic answers. We will grow ourselves out of the problems, is not an answer to our debt levels and oppressive obligations to Social Security and Medicare.

I do not believe our growing employment numbers of waiters and waitresses, bartenders and home health-care workers are not the jobs to bring 3% GDP growth.

Minimum wage workers do not have the ability to spur the growth needed.

Well let’s see what the polls say in the next few days to see which un-American ideas Americans hold dear.


Debating the last debate

Wednesday night marks the last presidential debate.

The fireworks should be on full display as both sides look to land a knock out punch.

The idea of either candidate swaying the others’ backers to their side is a bit of folly as this election is so divisive.

The premise of bringing in the undecided voters to your side is sort of muted this year since we get daily missives on each candidates past criminal or civil allegations, which is pushing people away from the process.

So the undecideds, which I believe are fewer than most polls acknowledge, have much to weigh through in order to come to a decision.

Unfortunately the decisions of which candidate to choose is not based on a solid economic plan or a better solution to wars overseas, since these topics are not proffered because the candidates are slinging mud and allegations, not policy thoughts.

Some of these daily charges have been curtailed by the stifling of Julian Assange and Wikileaks internet connection out of the Ecuadorean Embassy in London.

Let me put this down now. If you believe we will have an answer to who won this election on Nov.8th or Nov. 9th or Jan. 12th, you would be wrong.

Whomever “wins” the general election, the other side will make the 2000 election look like a local school board election.

I just cannot see any geniality coming from either side in a concession speech early Wed. morning after the tally.


What's the next shoe to drop in Wikileaks blackout?

So this is what I am hearing from a source on the shutting down of Julian Assange’s internet connection.

Wikileaks uploaded some files one of which was a video, which showed Hillary Clinton behaving badly.

The leaked video and two to three other files were then blocked by a “state party” from being uploaded through the web blockage.

According to my source the “state party” was an US secret agency. Since Assange is holed up the Ecuadorean Embassy in London is this not an act of war? Since the embassy is considered  to have a special status.

This from the State Department website:

Embassies and consulates abroad, as well as foreign embassies and consulates in the United States, have a special status. While diplomatic spaces remain the territory of the host state, an embassy or consulate represents a sovereign state. International rules do not allow representatives of the host country to enter an embassy without permission –even to put out a fire — and designate an attack on an embassy as an attack on the country it represents.

So now we will see how Wikileaks handles this going forward. The issued statement that the Ecuadorian embassy turned off the internet connection may be factual, but at whose behest?