August 6, 2016 Radio Derb Transcript Up: Trump Against The Media Headwind, Etc.
Print Friendly and PDF
The August 6 Radio Derb transcript is up—go here to read items like this:
Trump against the media headwind. Before the anti-Trump media were hyperventilating about Trump’s disrespect to immigration racketeer Khizr Khan and his missus, they were gasping and sputtering over comments he made about the Democratic nominee’s missing emails.

“Russia, if you are listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” said The Donald, referring to the material somebody’s wife failed to turn over to the State Department when she left. “I think you would probably be rewarded mightily by our press,” he added.

Here Trump was just recycling a joke that’s been going around on the blogs ever since the scandal of the missing emails came into the open. If investigators want those emails, people were saying, the easiest way to get them would be to ask Vladimir Putin, who probably has them all archived somewhere, courtesy of his hackers.

Whether our press would thank Mr Putin for releasing the emails is, though, open to serious question. Our journalists want somebody’s wife to win this coming presidential election, and wouldn’t be happy to see her thus embarrassed.

You can see the bias from how they reported Trump’s joke. Sample, this one from Vanity Fair, July 27th, quote: “Trump calls on a foreign power to commit an act of cyber-espionage,” end quote.

In fact Trump, along with everyone else who’s paying attention, assumed the act of espionage had already taken place, an assumption fortified by the leak four days earlier, almost certainly via the Russians, of internal emails from the Democratic National Committee. He was just saying that since they’ve got the emails, why don’t they share them?

That’s the media headwind the GOP campaign is leaning into, though. It’s like this every election cycle; but I think it’s worse this time around because of the intensity with which the media folk dislike Trump.

Same thing with the previous mini-scandal over Melania, in her speech to the Cleveland convention, having plagiarized from Michelle Obama’s 2008 speech to that convention.

What seems to have happened was that a writer on the Trump staff, name of Meredith McIver, cobbled up Melania’s speech from bits and pieces of prose Melania told her she liked, including Michelle Obama’s 2008 address, and failed to rephrase and polish them as she should have. Ms McIver fessed up and offered to resign, but Trump, to his credit, wouldn’t let her.

My reaction to this little flap was the same as Dorothy Parker’s when she heard that Calvin Coolidge was dead, quote: “How could they tell?” Testimonials to a candidate’s character offered by a spouse at a party convention are only slightly less formulaic than multiplication tables. They all say the same thing, basically. There could just be one stock speech, given by every candidate’s spouse at every convention, like a liturgy. After a few election cycles we’d all get to know the words. We could chant along with the spouse. Hey, it’d be fun!

Again, though, the press hissed and frothed. Sample, this from the Des Moines Register, July 19th, quote:

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, still desperately angling for a job with Donald Trump, argued that “93 percent” of the two speeches [that is, Michelle Obama’s and Melania Trump’s] are completely different. That’s a bit like defending a bank robber for leaving 93 percent of the money in the safe.
End quote. Hoo-kay: plagiarism, bank robbery — got it.

This is what Trump — both Trumps — this is what they’re up against. The Democrats and their media shills want two more progressive judges on the Supreme Court — one for the late Justice Scalia’s empty seat, one for Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s upcoming retirement.

They also want to open wider the floodgates of mass immigration, to change completely and for ever the ethnic balance of our nation, to their advantage.

To these ends, everything is fair.

Print Friendly and PDF