Mediaboss Marketing

As soon as any conservative responds to Trumps belittling names for his rivals by erupting in a murderous rage, that will be a fantastically good point. But until then, its idiotic. Unlike liberals, conservatives arent easily incited to violence by words.

What were seeing is the following: Prominent liberals repeatedly tell us, with deadly seriousness, that Trump and his supporters are: Hitler, fascists, bigots, haters, racists, terrorists, criminals, and white supremacists, which is then followed by liberals physically attacking conservatives.

To talk about both sides being guilty of provocative rhetoric is like talking about both genders being guilty of rape.

Nearly every op-ed writer at The New York Times has compared Trump to Hitler. (The conservative on the op-ed page merely called him a proto-fascist.) If Trump is Hitler and his supporters Nazis, then the rational course of action for any civilized person is to kill them.

Thats not just a theory, its the result.

A few months ago, 38-year-old Justin Barkley shot and killed a UPS driver in a Walmart parking lot in Ithaca, New York, then ran over his body, because he thought he was killing Donald Trump. During his arraignment, Barkley told the judge: I shot and killed Donald Trump purposely, intentionally, and very proudly.

In the past year, there have been at least a hundred physical attacks on Trump supporters or presumed Trump supporters. The mainstream media have ignored them all.

Schoolchildren across the country are being hospitalized from beatings for the crime of liking Trump. In Pasco, Oregon, a 29-year-old Trump supporter was stabbed in the throat by a Hispanic man, Alvaro Campos-Hernandez, after a political argument.

Last month, the anti-jihad scholar Robert Spencer was poisoned in Iceland by a Social Justice Warrior pretending to be a fan, sending Spencer to the hospital.

Its become so normal for leftist thugs to assault anyone who likes Trump that, in Meriden, Connecticut, Wilson Echevarria and Anthony Hobdy leapt out of their car and started punching and hitting a man holding a Trump sign, rolling him into trafficright in front of a policeman.

If any one of these bloody attacks had been committed by a Trump supporter against a Muslim, a gay, a Mexican, a woman, or a Democrat, the media would have had to drop its Russia conspiracy theory to give us 24-7 coverage of the epidemic of right-wing violence.

The liberal response to this ceaseless mayhem toward conservatives is to produce a single nut, who fired a gun in the Comet Ping Pong pizzeria in Washington, D.C., last December (hurting no one) to rescue children, after reading on obscure right-wing blogs that the restaurant hid a Democratic pedophilia ring. (Theyve also hyped a long list of hate crimes that were utter hoaxes.)

Congratulations, liberals! You got one. And some tiny number of girls raped men last year. QED: Both sexes have a rape problem.

Liberal aggression has ratcheted up dramatically since the dawn of Trump, as has the dehumanizing rhetoric, but epic violence from the left is nothing new.

We dont have to go back more than century to note that every presidential assassin and attempted presidential assassin who had a political motive was a leftist, a socialist, a communist, or a member of a hippie commune. (Charles J. Guiteau, Leon Czolgosz, Giuseppe Zangara, Lee Harvey Oswald, Lynette Squeaky Fromme, and Sara Jane Moore.)

Instead, well start in the 1990s. Al Sharptons speeches helped inspire people to murder two people in Crown Heights in 1991 and seven people at Freddies Fashion Mart in 1995. As scary as David Duke and Richard Spencer are, Ive never heard of anyone committing murder after listening to one of their speeches.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, among other acts of violence, Obama supporters Maced elderly volunteers in a McCain campaign office in Galax, Virginia. They threw Molotov cocktails at, stomped, and shredded McCain signs on a half-dozen families front yards around Portland. Another Obama supporter broke the McCain sign of a small middle-aged woman in midtown Manhattan, then hit her in the face with the stick.

(All this forJohn McCain!)

At the Republicans convention that year, hundreds of liberals were arrested for smashing police cars, slashing tires, and breaking store windows. Police seized Molotov cocktails, napalm bombs, and assorted firearms from the protesters. Elderly convention-goers were Maced and sent to the hospital after protesters threw bricks through the windows of convention buses. On the first day alone, the cops made 284 arrests, 130 for felonies.

That same year, California voters approved Proposition 8, banning gay marriage. In response, left-wing opponents of the measure ferociously attacked Mormon and Catholic churches, smashing glass doors, spray-painting the churches, and burning holy books on their front steps. The mayor of Fresno and his pastor received death threats serious enough to require around-the-clock police protection.

(Although the measure would not have passed without the support of black voters, liberals held black people blameless for their opposition to gay marriage. Mormons and Catholics were a much funner target.)

In 2009, one conservative had his finger bitten off at a Tea Party rally in Thousand Oaks, California, by a man at a MoveOn.org counter-protest. At a St. Louis Tea Party rally, an African-American selling anti-Obama bumper stickers was beaten up by two Service Employees International Union thugs, resulting in charges.

For the past few years, the media have enthusiastically promoted Black Lives Matter, hoping to galvanize the black vote. The mother of Michael Brown was even invited to appear on stage at the Democrats convention. But, as the British discovered with their Indian auxiliaries during the Revolutionary War, having ginned them up, they couldnt calm them down.

As a result of the medias tall tales about homicidal, racist cops, Black Lives Matter enthusiasts staged sneak attacks, executing two policemen in Brooklyn, five in Dallas, and three in Baton Rouge.

Liberals know damn well that their audience includes a not-insignificant portion of foaming-at-the-mouth lunatics, prepared, at the slightest provocation, to smash windows, burn down neighborhoods, physically attack, and even murder conservatives. But instead of toning down the rhetoric, the respectable left keeps throwing matches on the bone-dry tinder, and then indignantly asks, Are you saying conservatives dont do it, too?

No, actually. We dont.

More:
Ann Coulter: The Left Has One More Argument: Kill Them! - Breitbart - Breitbart News

In this Feb. 12, 2011 file photo, Ann Coulter waves to the audience after speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. (AP Photo/Cliff Owen)

Conservative pundit Ann Coulter, a staunch supporter of Donald Trump during the presidential campaign, is calling him out for stalling on key immigration promises, including the deportation of hundreds of thousands of young immigrants.

Trump campaigned on a hardline stance against immigrants who violated immigration laws, promising to deport them and to "immediately terminate" programs created during the Obama administration. One of those programs, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), gives deportation reprieves to immigrants who came to the United States as children and have no legal authorization to live here, so-called "Dreamers."

As of June 8, DACA was still in effect, and the Trump administration continued to take applications, prompting Coulter to tweet: "HOW TRUMP LOSES THE NEXT ELECTION. Nearly 100,000 Dreamers Granted Amnesty In Trumps Opening Months."

Her tweet linked to an article from conservative news outlet The Daily Caller, headlined "Nearly 100,000 Dreamers Granted Amnesty In Trumps Opening Months" part of the text in Coulters tweet.

We wondered if her tweet was accurate. We found that the numbers are in line with data from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, but whether the program grants "amnesty" is a matter of debate among experts.

DACA by the numbers

About a month into Trumps administration, Department of Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly rescinded all previous enforcement priorities memos. But he kept in place a June 2012 memo that created DACA and a November 2014 memo for a separate deferred action program that would have benefitted immigrants in the country illegally who are parents of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents.

On June 15, the Trump administration revoked the memo that benefitted the parents, but said DACA would remain in place. White House press secretary Sean Spicer on June 19 said DACA is under review but did not provide a timeline for a final determination.

Close to 800,000 immigrants have been approved for DACA, according to USCIS data released June 8. The latest numbers show approvals from 2012 up to March 31, 2017.

From January 2017 to March 2017, immigration officials approved more than 124,000 applications: 107,524 renewal cases plus 17,275 initial cases.

How many have been approved since Trump took office Jan.20?

The Daily Caller, citing USCIS numbers, reported that the Trump administration through DACA had "given amnesty to an estimated 98,000 illegal immigrants."

We reached out to The Daily Callers reporter, Alex Pfeiffer, who told us he reached the estimated 98,000 by dividing the total number of cases approved from January through March by the number of business days in that period, and removing days in January that Trump was not in office.

Pfeiffer said he only used business days in the calculation, because those are the only days that USCIS accepts DACA applications. USCIS told us DACA applications are not accepted online, only by mail, and that the lockbox where requests are sent typically accepts mail from Monday through Friday.

We did our own calculation using Pfeiffers parameters and also got about 98,000.

We asked USCIS for a month-by-month breakdown of approved applications, but did not receive the information by deadline.

Coulter did not respond to our inquiries sent via social media or her booking company.

DACA recipients granted amnesty?

Whether DACA beneficiaries are getting amnesty is a not a settled matter among experts.

Weve noted before that a legal definition of amnesty is "a blanket abolition of an offense by the government, with the legal result that those charged or convicted have the charge or conviction wiped out Amnesty is not a pardon as some believe, since a pardon implies forgiveness, and amnesty indicates a reason to overlook or forget the offenses."

The common reference for amnesty in modern American politics is the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, signed by President Ronald Reagan. The law paved the way for immigrants who were in the country illegally to become lawful permanent residents if they met certain requirements, including being in the country by Jan. 1, 1982.

Individuals granted DACA are protected from deportation for two years and are eligible for work permits. Recipients can apply to renew their DACA protection, but are not granted a lawful status.

DACA is a temporary and limited kind of relief that can be revoked by the president, said Kevin R. Johnson, an immigration law expert and dean of the University of California, Davis School of Law.

"DACA does not create a lasting amnesty and lawful permanent residence" as did the 1986 law, Johnson said.

Others see it differently.

Based on the benefits it offers, DACA is amnesty, said Steven Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors low-immigration levels.

"I would define an amnesty as such whenever the law is set aside and the normal penalty is waived as a matter of policy," Camarota said. "The normal penalty for being in the U.S. illegally is removal."

Our ruling

In a tweet, Coulter said the Trump administration granted amnesty to "Nearly 100,000 'Dreamers.' "

Trump assumed office Jan.20. Data from USCIS shows more than 124,000 people have been approved for DACA from January to March.

Calculations of the total applications approved January through March that only include days Trump has been inoffice show that, at least, about 98,000 were approved.

Whether the program is amnesty is subject to interpretation. For that reason, we rate Coulters claim Mostly True.

Share the Facts

2017-06-21 19:42:30 UTC

5

1

7

Mostly True

The Trump administration has granted amnesty to "nearly 100,000 'Dreamers' "

Ann Coulter

Conservative pundit

in a tweet

Thursday, June 8, 2017

2017-06-08

Link:
Ann Coulter says Trump granted amnesty to nearly 100000 'Dreamers.' Is that true? - PolitiFact

Required reading lists are the bane of any high-schooler's summer. Now, they're also a new frontier for politicizing teens in favor of right-wing politics.

An alleged list of required summer reading at an Alabama public school surfaced online Wednesday, compelling students to read at least one book from a list of works by conservative pundits like Ann Coulter, Michael Savage and Mark Levin, as well as a book about abortion by Ronald Reagan. The list was allegedly assigned by Gene Ponder, who teaches government, economics and AP-level political science courses at Spanish Fort High School in Alabama.

Among the assigned books are titles like Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder: Savage Solutions; It's OK to Leave the Plantation; Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and their Assault on America; The Enemy Within: Saving America from the Liberal Assault on Our Churches, Schools and Military; and Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto.

The list appeared online via journalist Eoin Higgins, who obtained it from out-of-state students who were passing it around.

Of the 31 books listed, only a small handful Lies My Teacher Told Me and The Everything American Government Book, for example were not explicitly written by right-wing media pundits.

Gene Ponder isn't just a public school teacher, but a former candidate for lieutenant governor of Alabama who lost the Republican primary. During his campaign, he cited the power of the federal government to enforce its laws on noncomplying states the very means by which battles like school segregation and marriage equality were won as his reason for running.

Ponder told AL.com that this kind of law enforcement is tantamount to "coercion, intimidation and blackmail."

In an email statement to Mic, Baldwin County Alabama Public Schools communications director Terry Wilhite wrote, "Mr. Ponders reading list thats going around on social media has not been endorsed by the school or the school system."

"The list has been removed by the teacher," he added. "Baldwin County Public Schools has a process to vet and approve reading lists so that a variety of sources are used. I expect all employees to follow our processes, procedures and policies."

June 21, 2017, 7:45 p.m. Eastern: This story has been updated.

Continue reading here:
Alabama public school assigns Ann Coulter and other right-wing ... - Mic

Fights over culinary traditions are common in Europe, where countries are fiercely protective of their gastronomical heritage, and the rule books are full of regional food and drink that are protected.

The European Union also has a role in deciding which products may use more generic names like milk and cream.

The rules cover thousands of foods and drinks from arnaki Elassonas (Greek lamb) to Zzrivsk vojky (Slovak cheese). To qualify for a protected name, products are usually required to be made in a specific place. As a result, cheese producers in northern England market a feta alternative as fettle.

Here are some of the more politically charged food disputes.

The dessert was meant to add a touch of distinction to Christmas dinners.

But the product, Champagne sorbet produced by a Belgian company and sold in Germany at Aldi, a discount supermarket chain was sacrilege for an august French industry.

The Comit Champagne, a trade association, sued Aldi for selling the frozen confection.

The dessert has nothing left of what makes Champagne, Richard Nieder, a lawyer for the association, told a Munich court three years ago.

Since then, the case has made its way to the European Unions highest court, the Court of Justice. A verdict is expected July 20.

Aldi said it had stopped selling the product but declined to comment further. Galana, the Belgian company that makes the product, did not respond to a request for comment.

Plant-based meat and dairy substitutes often use the names of the animal-based products they purport to replace.

But in Germany, this has caused consternation.

Christian Schmidt, the German agriculture minister, has called for a ban on terms like vegan currywurst, a plant-based version of a popular and piquant pork sausage snack, arguing that they confuse consumers.

The Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb, a German advocacy group that promotes fair competition, is not fond of the practice either.

It sued TofuTown, a major German producer of dairy alternatives, for violating European rules by marketing Soyatoo tofu butter and veggie cheese.

This month, the European Court of Justice agreed with the German association.

Makers of coconut milk, peanut butter and cream soda, however, can rest easy: They are among the exceptions already listed in the blocs Official Journal.

Europes rules do not just affect producers in the region, but those in countries that want to trade with the bloc. China agreed this month to respect rules protecting the names of 100 European Union foods and drinks, including feta cheese from Greece.

No such agreement is on the horizon with the United States. Much of the opposition comes from American producers in states like Wisconsin, who insist that their cheeses are just as good as those made by their European counterparts, and just as deserving of the name.

Cheese politics have at times even soured trade talks between the United States and the European Union. During those talks, Paul D. Ryan, the Republican House speaker and a Wisconsinite, insisted that producers in his state should be allowed to make feta and other cheeses for generations to come.

Manolis Kefalogiannis, a Greek lawmaker at the European Parliament, later said that the United States stance created the risk of mass imports of counterfeit feta into the E.U.

Gus, the mascot for the annual British Asparagus Festival, paints his face green and wears a giant asparagus crown headdress.

In a triumph for Gus, locally grown Vale of Evesham asparagus from the west of England was awarded protected status in December.

But with Britain negotiating its exit from the European Union, Gus is emerging as a symbol of efforts by British food producers to maintain the European system of recognizing local produce.

In April, Gus traveled to Brussels to present a huge bundle of Vale of Evesham asparagus to the head chef of the European Parliaments dining room, so lawmakers from other countries could taste its particular qualities.

Sales of British goods with protected names amounted to more than 5 billion (about $5.6 billion) annually, according to the most recent figures available from the European Commission.

Now, some British producers are trying to preserve the boost that Europes protected food names system gives their business.

Even cynics agree this is at least one good thing that has come out of the E.U., Anthea McIntyre, a British member of the European Parliament, said when Gus visited Brussels in April. In my opinion the system is too good to be lost.

Fights over the names of foods and drinks are not the only issue: Their ingredients and appearance can cause controversy too.

The European authorities faced an outcry over regulations that apparently banned bendy bananas (They didnt. Well, not really).

More serious is a case involving Parma and San Daniele ham, and the process of making those well-known products.

Italian investigators were examining whether breeders had used pig sperm from unauthorized sources. The practice may violate European Union rules that require that Parma ham be made from pigs from specified Italian regions.

Follow James Kanter on Twitter @jameskanter.

A version of this list appears in print on June 22, 2017, on Page B2 of the New York edition with the headline: An Olio of E.U. Rules, Leading to Food Fights.

See the rest here:
Take Feta. Add Frites. Stir in European Food Rules. Fight. - New York Times

File photo of a person receiving a flu shot.

LIONEL BONAVENTURE/AFP/Getty Images

LONDON -- The highest court of the European Union ruled Wednesday that courts can consider whether a vaccination led to someone developing an illness even when there is no scientific proof.

The decision was issued on Wednesday in relation to the case of a Frenchman known as Mr. J.W., who was immunized against hepatitis B in late 1998-99. About a year later, Mr. J.W. was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. In 2006, he and his family sued vaccine-maker Sanofi Pasteur in an attempt to be compensated for the damage they claim he suffered due to the vaccine. Mr. J.W. died in 2011.

France's Court of Appeal ruled there was no causal link between the hepatitis B vaccine and multiple sclerosis, and dismissed the case. Numerous studies have found no relationship between the hepatitis B shot and multiple sclerosis.

After the case went to France's Court of Cassation, it was brought to the European Union.

Play Video

The measles outbreak stands at 166 cases in 18 states and the District of Columbia. Despite overwhelming evidence the vaccine is safe, some paren...

On Wednesday, the EU's top court said that despite the lack of scientific consensus on the issue, a vaccine could be considered defective if there is "specific and consistent evidence," including the time between a vaccine's administration, the individual's previous state of health, the lack of any family history of the disease and a significant number of reported cases of the disease occurring following vaccination.

In a statement, the court said that such factors could lead a national court to conclude that "the administering of the vaccine is the most plausible explanation" for the disease and that "the vaccine therefore does not offer the safety that one is entitled to expect." It did not rule on the specific French case.

Sanofi Pasteur did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Some vaccine experts slammed the ruling, saying the court's threshold for linking a vaccine to side effects is too low.

Dr. Paul Offit, a pediatrician and vaccines expert at the University of Pennsylvania, said the criteria used by the court made no sense and are similar to those used by vaccine injury compensation programs in the United States.

"Using those criteria, you could reasonably make the case that someone should be compensated for developing leukemia after eating a peanut butter sandwich," he said. Offit said the courts shouldn't be trusted to make rulings about scientific evidence. "It's very frustrating that they have such a ridiculously low bar for causality," he said, adding that anti-vaccination supporters have long relied on such court judgments to bolster their campaign against vaccines.

Offit said the court's decision was concerning and hoped it wouldn't spur more people to reject vaccines.

"Vaccines save lives and people who choose not to vaccinate their children are putting those children at risk," he said. "To prove whether one thing causes another has to happen in a scientific venue, and the courts are not a scientific venue."

2017 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Read more here:
EU court: Vaccines can be blamed for illnesses without proof - CBS News