Mediaboss Marketing

It was for a good cause, Coulter, almost 45, explained when Associated Press Extraterrestrial caught up with her, fully loathed, at her undisclosed location.

Q: Why now?

Ann Coulter: My decision to do Playboy is literally one week in the making. I've always chided others for taking their clothes off and posed as the girl next door. I'm the number one right-wing talking head, and for years I've been known as "The Queen of Slime", all while keeping my clothes on, and that's taken some real discipline. Every couple of years when Hef would call I would graciously decline, because it would kill that whole androgynous legend that I've got going for me, and I thought that I could maintain the mystery by keeping my clothes on.

But this year, when I got the call from Hef, it was almost my 45th birthday. The Republican party had just received a humpin', so I thought, "Wow... at 45, America doesn't want us anymore?" And I thought it's almost an epiphany... like a "F--- 'em all!" moment. I feel empowered that you can criticize other people's morals and yet still be single, with no children, sexy and confident, and then bare all for the world.

Q: So what's the story on the androgynous deal?

Coulter: I feel proud of myself. I work out really hard, and people will just have to decide for themselves. The reason that I wanted to do it the most is because I am posing for a purpose: a portion of the proceeds from each issue sold is going to my charity.

Q: That would be...?

Coulter: I am the celebrity spokesperson for WILT, the national anti-erectile function association. It stands for Whitebread Ideology Less Tumescence. If you think about it, this last midterm election in which the Republican Party received such a humpin' was all because of this vast priapism of the party over the last six years that resulted in all the scandals. My charity is devoted to wresting control of erections from the parties and putting them back in the hands of voters. Celibacy is not just for Paris Hilton anymore.

View post:
December Playboy Cover featuring Nude Ann Coulter - Daily Kos

Republicans, can you stop screaming like hyenas at every little indignity suffered by our former president? Donald Trump wouldn't lift a finger to help you.

Yes, it was asinine for the FBI to stage a raid on Mar-a-Lago when we all know the only documents Trump wanted were his letters and photos with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. (North Korea has nukes. See? "Nuclear documents.") Trump needs those for his scrapbook, to accompany the photos of him with Kim Kardashian, Mark Zuckerberg and Sean Hannity.

Still, the raid isn't going to affect your life. It barely affected Trump's. He was golfing in New Jersey at the time.

You want to be mad at the FBI? This is why you should be angry. Rather than fight crime, the agency has turned itself into the wingman for "Defund the Police." That could get you and your family killed.

Consider how they treated the cops in Louisville, Kentucky, who risked their lives trying to serve a search warrant on a major fentanyl dealer's moll, Breonna Taylor, on March 13, 2020.

The true story was discussed in last week's column, as well as my Dec. 16, 2020, column.

Here's the rest of the story, as told by Sgt. John Mattingly in his book, "12 Seconds in the Dark."

In the spring of 2020, as the defenseless officers were being smeared -- by Oprah, LeBron James, Cardi B., Beyonce, Common, Kim Kardashian, Alicia Keys, Demi Lovato, Ellen DeGeneres, Amy Schumer, Ice Cube, Diddy, Kamala Harris, the entire MSNBC on-air talent, and on and on a confidential informant revealed that a hit had been put on the officers by two black motorcycle clubs, No Haterz and STR8 RYDERZ.

And here's something random: Breonna's mother was dating the president of one of the clubs.

A few weeks later, the ATF received information that the club's Chicago chapter would be driving to Louisville that weekend to kill the officers. The targeted cops were given security and a description of the cars and motorcycles coming for them.

What happened next would force the officers to flee and live in hiding for the rest of their lives, thanks to the inaction of the FBI.

Here's how Sgt. Mattingly describes it: "On May 31, 2020, I was told the FBI corroborated two separate threats from different sources. We received a call at 10 p.m. asking us to pack our bags and leave our house. We had to sell our house that we lived in for six weeks and have been in 'hiding' ever since."

It seems a $50,000 bounty had been put on the heads of the officers. Breonna's birthday would have been that Friday.

As part of the balloon release celebrating the occasion, the organizers wanted to "have something to celebrate." To wit: Dead cops.

At least the FBI had the officers' backs! No, I'm sorry, the FBI -- Trump's FBI -- sided with the guys who'd put a bounty on the cops' heads. The agency dropped the case after a remarkably short 2 1/2 weeks, announcing implausibly that the informant was "unreliable."

Well, he'd proven reliable in the past. The informant was, even then, being used in another active case. And of course, no one at FBI headquarters had bothered talking to him. But so desperate was the FBI to close the case that it was willing to blow up one of its own informants: Once ruled "unreliable," a source can never be used in another federal case.

Mattingly says the FBI refused to investigate credible threats on the officers' lives because of the "optics" of "going after a mother in a nationally sensitive case."

Shouldn't it be the reverse: The FBI must investigate because Breonna's mother was affiliated with a club planning to murder the cops whom she blamed for her daughter's death? (In fact, Breonna died because her good pal Kenneth Walker shot at the police. Ironically, a no-knock warrant the officers knocked and yelled, "POLICE!" would have saved her life.)

Local FBI agents in Louisville were enraged. Asked what the targeted cops were supposed to do, the FBI bosses said: "Tell them to relocate." Two weeks later, Mattingly had to watch as the FBI sent 15 agents to investigate a racist rope in Bubba Wallace's stall at NASCAR.

Right-wingers, save your breath defending the most disloyal man alive. Do something useful and get a job at the FBI. Just be sure to put "BLM" on your resume! The next Republican president (Ron DeSantis) is going to need a lot of help.

View post:
Ann Coulter: The FBI wing of BLM | Opinion | havasunews.com - Today's News-Herald

When most people think of Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, they likely think of his fist, outstretched above his head in enthusiastic support of the seditionist mob near the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, that just hours later sent him scampering for safety like a scared rodent of some kind. A vole, maybe? But now, with his latest venture into the wacky world of literature, Hawley seems to hope youll focus less on his fist, and more on his, uh, manhood.

Scheduled for a May 16, 2023, release, Hawleys forthcoming Manhood: The Masculine Virtues America Needs describes itself as a clarion call for American men to stand up and embrace their God-given responsibility as husbands, fathers, and citizens.

Per the books Amazon.com description:

The book seems to be a continuation of the pro-dude, pro-bro, pro-fella ethos Hawley first introduced in his Future of the American Man speech at the 2021 National Conservatism Conference, where he declared that the deconstruction of America begins with and depends on the deconstruction of American men and that the attack on men has been the tip of the spear of the lefts broader attack on America (which, according to that same speech, includes stuff like video games and idleness). At the time, his speech garnered some choice reviews, including this gem in his local newspaper: People can agree or disagree with his opinions, but this pseudo-intellectual attempt to interpret todays socio-political friction is filled with the kind of misperception and illogic we might expect from a terminally malcontent pensioner at a bar somewhere. And they say arts criticism is dead?

Hawleys Manhood is the latest collaboration between the first-term Missouri senator and the right-wing Regnery publishing house, which puts out works from a whos who of conservative thought and action, including Ann Coulter, David Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, Dinesh DSouza, Newt Gingrich, Mark Steyn, Mark Levin, Ed Klein, David Horowitz, Laura Ingraham, Donald Trump, and many more. So, yeah, Hawleys clearly part of a real classy brain trust here. His previous screed with Regnery, The Tyranny of Big Tech, was made possible only after major publishers Simon & Schuster dropped it like a burlap sack full of warm milk and manure following the senators enthusiastic seditionist fist-pumping. But again, were not talking about his fist, were talking about his Manhood.

Incidentally, the book is scheduled be released just after Hawleys featured speech at next years Stronger Mens Conference, where he will almost certainly encourage the strong attendees to strongly get their strong hands on his ... well, you get it.

Stories that Fuel Conversations

Read this article:
Josh Hawley can't wait for you to get your hands on his 'Manhood' - Mic

On the day that Cassidy Hutchinson offered damning testimony about President Trumps scurrilous behavior on Jan. 6, Cathy McMorris Rodgers went on Fox to talk about President Bidens anti-American energy policies.

Do you think she knows what anti-American means?

The best way for her to find out would have been to pay attention to the hearings of the committee, which have masterfully built the case exposing the campaign of a former president to overturn an election he lost.

She hasnt done that, obviously. As with all things in the Trump era, McMorris Rodgers has adopted the three-monkeys strategy: Neither seeing, nor hearing, nor speaking any uncomfortable truths.

She is not alone, of course, in turning a blind eye toward the mountain of evidence, even as it grows more damning and revealing.

As the hearings played out debunking the fraud narratives and illustrating the devastating effect these lies had election integrity groups in Washington have been slinging innuendo about supposed chicanery in our elections, engaging in vigilante canvassing efforts to investigate, seeking ever more audits from county officials, and keeping aloft the idea, without evidence, that the system is corrupt and they are here to fix it.

The day after the Hutchinson testimony, a CD copy of 2000 Mules the much-derided and debunked documentary about the 2020 election showed up in my mailbox, courtesy of Spokane Citizens for Election Integrity.

Im not sure if this was a special gift for me (and others in the media whom I know received one), or more of a blanket community mailing.

But the idea that people who are supposedly interested in the security of our elections would offer up 2000 Mules as undeniable proof of election fraud in 2020 at the moment that the election-fraud lie is being eviscerated in the House committee hearings tells you all you need to know about the factual integrity of the movement.

The film, made by conservative conspiracy-monger Dinesh DSouza, has been mercilessly and repeatedly fact-checked. The Associated Press concluded it was based on faulty assumptions, anonymous accounts and improper assumptions about cell-phone location data.

A point-by-point analysis by FactCheck.org concluded the supposed evidence is speculative and does not provide the definitive proof that Trump and the filmmakers claim.

Reuters said it examined the main claims presented in the film and did not find any concrete evidence definitively showing proof of fraud.

The Washington Posts Phillip Bump, in evaluating the irredeemable flaws of the films argument, said DSouza is elevating shaky, misrepresented, incomplete claims to bolster his rhetoric an apt summary of the movie overall.

And its not just media types scoffing. Bill Barr laughed at the films argument in his Jan. 6 testimony. Ann Coulter savaged the film in an essay titled Dineshs Stupid Movie.

Too crazy for Ann Coulter should be too crazy for anyone.

In the election-integrity game, though, it isnt.

Which brings me back, in a roundabout way, to the question of what our congresswoman has seen of the Jan. 6 hearings and what she thinks of them. Because election-fraud lies are what led to that awful day and because the case being laid out in those hearings is everything the mule mockumentary is not: rigorous, factual, on-the-record, sober, persuasive.

All signs indicate that McMorris Rodgers isnt bothering to notice.

And yet she assures us that Joe Biden is anti-American.

I asked her press office three times this week whether shes been watching the hearings, and once particularly about Hutchinsons testimony. I was referred to an interview she gave to the S-Rs Kip Hill two weeks ago.

Heres what she said at the time, after claiming shed watched parts of the hearings: Unfortunately, this commission was not set up for success. Its politically driven. And I dont believe that the way that it was structured, the members that were appointed to the Commission will be successful at really exploring the facts of what happened on Jan. 6, and what the truth is.

We would all like to get the answers. But unfortunately, this commission was not set up to accomplish that goal.

Would she really like to get the answers? Forgive me if I doubt it. She wants the answers like O.J. wants to find the true killer.

On the day McMorris Rodgers was calling Biden anti-American for the hundredth time, a real Republican patriot was talking about actual anti-Americanism.

Hutchinson said that when she saw Trump tweeting insults about Mike Pence even as he knew the crowd was calling for Pences hanging, As an American, I was disgusted. It was unpatriotic. It was un-American.

The congresswoman could have learned a thing or two, had she tuned in.

View post:
Shawn Vestal: A case of truth and courage about January 6, for those with the eyes to see - The Spokesman Review

Bill Barr, two-time attorney general and one of approximately 2.5 members of the Trump administration to leave with his reputation intact, has also written one of only two books about that administration worth reading, One Damn Thing After Another. Ive read em all. At least partially. Most did not merit more than a quick skim.

[For those interested, the other book about the Trump administration worth reading is Michael Wolfes Fire and Fury, but judging by its sales, you probably already have this book.]

Ive been a fan of Barrs since long before he worked for Trump, and was thrilled when he became Trumps A.G. But when I got to Barrs description of Trumps appeal -- which went on for pages and pages! -- I wanted to throw the book out the window.

You can probably guess where Im headed.

By Barrs lights, none of Trumps positives involved ... immigration.

They will not learn. No matter what we do, no matter how many times Americans tell pollsters they want less immigration, no matter how loudly we beg Washington to halt the endless flow of the third world into our country, the ruling class refuses to listen.

If electing a cretinous flimflam artist to the presidency solely on the strength of his promise to be a hard-ass on immigration didnt wake them up, nothing ever will.

The first clue about the absolute thickheadedness of anyone living within 100 miles of our nations capital was this deeply concerning line from Barrs book:

I had long planned on supporting Jeb Bush for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

Next, Barr turns to the political landscape that allowed such a preposterous creature as Trump to sail to victory. The source of the problem, as I saw it, he writes, was the growing strength in the Democratic Party of a Far Left progressive ideology that aimed to tear down and remake American society. Trump, Barr writes, was merely the result of our embittered politics, a bitterness engendered not by Trump but by the increasing militance of the Democratic Partys progressive wing.

Yeah, OK, fine. He gets two points for accurately describing how loathsome Democrats have become. How about the elected Republicans we send to Washington to represent us? Its you guys we really hate. If it were only progressive Democrats voters detested, why NOT Jeb-exclamation point? Why not John My Father Was a Postman Kasich?

No one imagines that Democrats give a crap about the country. Its Republicans who run for office, pretending to agree with the voters on immigration -- then get into office and sell out to the Chamber of Commerce.

Oh, you wanted a wall? Yes, absolutely, but first we have to pass these tax cuts, lavish billions of dollars on some foreign country and push through another Wall Street bailout.

For 50 years, in poll after poll, a majority of Americans have said they want LESS immigration.

Even the Cheap Labor Lobby at the Cato Institute produced a poll last year showing that 81% of Americans want less immigration than we have today. Sixty-one percent of respondents want to cut immigration by at least half. Nearly 10% of Americans want zero immigration.

Unfortunately, everything Trump was ever going to accomplish was accomplished at 2:50 a.m. on election night 2016, when he announced his victory over Hillary Clinton. (Everything other than turning judicial selection over to the Federalist Society.) At that moment, the densest Republican had to realize that restricting immigration is so popular that even a lout like Trump could win the presidency on it.

After 2016, how could any sentient mammal begin a sentence, as Barr does, But the main reason Trump won the nomination -- and later the general election -- was ..., and not end it with: IMMIGRATION!? (Ill accept a range of substitutes -- the wall, illegals, Dreamers, Press 1 for English, wages lost to cheap labor immigrants, Kate Steinle, the 9/11 attack -- did the media forget to tell you that was done by immigrants? -- the drug epidemic, etc., etc.)

Not Barr. He reels off the standard RNC suicide pact, prattling about the economy, military power, pro-life and school choice.

Yes, Trump won in 2016 because of school choice.

You could Ctrl + F: immigration through Barrs entire book and get nary a hit, other than general references to the Immigration and Naturalization Service -- and this:

Before one of the 2016 presidential debates, Barr is careful to note that he contacted a friend on the candidates team to suggest that Trump say, we welcome legal immigrants, and ... Latin Americans who come here legally -- people with a strong work ethic and family values -- contribute enormously to the country.

And thats how Jeb-exclamation point won the nomination and the general election!

Just this week, Republican Sen. John Cornyn was spotted on the Senate floor, seeming to propose amnesty, collegially telling a Democrat, First guns, now its immigration.

In Cornyns defense, he is massively stupid.

But Barr? Hes a smart man. And yet he picked up nothing from the Shock-the-World 2016 election of Donald Trump -- except tax cuts and a strong military?

Referring to the monumental arrogance of the Bourbon kings, blithely assuming they could revert to the very behavior that had led to the explosion of the French Revolution in the first place, Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand is supposed to have said, They have learned nothing, and forgotten nothing.

The French nobilitys got nothing on the Republican Party.

Visit link:
Ann Coulter: They've learned nothing and forgotten nothing - Today's News-Herald