Let’s discuss the alternate universe that liberals reside in.
The left somehow believes Fox News is ultra-right propaganda, but CNN and MSNBC doesn’t favor Democrats. They believe everything they read in The Daily Beast, The New York Times, Huffington Post, and The Washington Post and they think Anderson Cooper and Don Lemon are Woodward and Bernstein. Not sure if Bob and Carl ever got drunk in a hot tub on New Year’s Eve and ogled Kathy Griffin’s boobies while she ran around Times Square in her undies, but I digress.
Let me give you an example of what I mean. The Daily Beast has a writer who is a liberal hack. He won’t admit he’s a liberal hack, of course. He also won’t admit that The Daily Beast is nothing more than a shill site for Democrats and Hillary Clinton. Nobody at The Daily Beast will admit this bias, whether it’s Olivia Nuzzi or this particular hack. His name is Asawin Suebsaeng.
Asawin recently wrote an article entitled: Who Does Sean Hannity Even Work for Now: Fox News or Donald Trump? with the subtitle: Although he receives a cushy salary from the cable-news giant, Hannity openly flouts its editorial standards seemingly on behalf of his friend Donald Trump.
So how is Fox News any different than CNN or MSNBC, Asawin? Remember, if it’s not reported on CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN or MSNBC, then it didn’t happen, because over 65% of the American people still get their information from television. Last week, Andrea Mitchell was having a conversation with Colin Powell, where she described Donald Trump as “awful.” I thought Andrea Mitchell was a unbiased journalist who worked for a network with high editorial standards. Why would she call a presidential candidate awful? Who does Andrea Mitchell work for Asawin Suebsaeng, Hillary Clinton or MSNBC?
Chelsea Clinton had a gig over at MSNBC where she got a half million bucks for barely appearing on the network. Univision’s legendary anti-Trump attack dog Jorge Ramos has a daughter who works for Hillary Clinton. So for Asawin to take issue with Donald Trump using his friend Sean Hannity to help get out his message seems a little absurd.
But that’s the liberal alternate universe. George Stephanopoulos worked in the Bill Clinton administration. He was an integral part of getting the man elected. Stephanopoulos donated thousands to the Clinton Foundation that he tried to hide until forced to disclose it. Yet somehow the left thinks that anything he says on ABC is gospel when it comes to Trump and the GOP, and there are actually some Republicans who think George will give them a fair shake when they appear on his show. This truly baffles me.
Here is an excerpt from Asawin’s liberal hackery:
Fox News host Sean Hannity’s pro bono work for the Donald Trump campaign now includes smearing a former beauty queen as a porn star, and defying Fox News’s in-house orders regarding on-air standards.
Quick note here. The Daily Beast is owned by a company called IAC. Chelsea Clinton sits on the board on directors. In fact, she’s the president! Chelsea beat mom to the glass ceiling shattering! Here’s Asawin Suebsaeng, a man who gets a paycheck from the daughter of Donald Trump’s opponent, and he says Sean Hannity is violating Fox News’ on-air standards by telling everybody about a fat beauty queen and Hillary surrogate’s sex tape, which by the way, does exist. I’ve seen it. Not that great. Lighting, people. Night vision is not a good setting for smut. Could’ve used a couple of close-ups also.
So when you read a story written by a guy who works for a Chelsea Clinton “news” site, don’t be so appalled or surprised when the article says Sean Hannity might be in the bag for Trump. You might want to take the info with a few thousand grains of salt.
Just like when Bill Maher sarcastically tweeted that Fox News had already called Trump the winner of the debate before it ended. What parallel universe is Maher living in where CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, Daily Beast, etc., etc., etc., doesn’t have an article or news segment with a Donald Trump/Hitler comparison nearly every day? Calling him a racist, sexist, xenophobic, transphobic, homophobic, Islamophobic fat shamer? People like Bill Maher pretend none of this exists.
Last month, Hannity faced strong criticism for entertaining Trump’s assertion that the election could be “rigged” in favor of Clinton, and thus stolen from him.
In May, when Trump and Ted Cruz were still locked in a bitter primary fight, Hannity egged on, and did not push back on, Trump when the real-estate mogul repeated the (completely unsubstantiated and fringe) conspiracy theory that Cruz’s father, Rafael Cruz, was with Lee Harvey Oswald shortly before the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
The National Enquirer—a supermarket tabloid with close ties to Trump, openly supporting his White House run—had just published a report and a photo suggesting the elder Cruz was in New Orleans passing out pro-Castro pamphlets with JFK’s assassin.
When Trump went on Hannity’s radio show, the host meekly allowed Trump to give yet more oxygen to the Enquirer’s supposed scoop.
Again, why is someone who gets paid by Chelsea Clinton criticizing someone for appearing to offer support to Donald Trump? Hubris, thy name is Asawin Suebsaeng.
Hannity’s unwavering loyalty to Trump has made him an enemy of large chunks of the Republican Party.
Large chunks? Oh, I get it. They must have taken one of their “scientific” polls.
In his support for the campaign, he has escalated his on-air assaults on Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, John McCain, Kelly Ayotte, and other GOP establishment figures who Hannity has deemed insufficiently enthusiastic for a Trump candidacy and presidency.
“Time to name names…If you call yourself a conservative and a Republican, it’s actually immoral not to vote for Donald Trump,” the host said on Fox News in August in a rant that bashed #NeverTrump conservatives as “disgusting,” and as effectively pro-Hillary “crybabies.”
However, one thing is abundantly clear: Hannity doesn’t really answer to Fox News anymore, though he may receive annual salary from the network. He doesn’t even answer to the GOP anymore, the party to which he has for decades sworn allegiance. Sean Hannity seemingly works on behalf of Donald J. Trump—as a spokesman, as a relentless advocate, as an informal strategist, as a close and trusted “friend.”
Count on that trend to continue, in one form or another, whether or not Trump moves into the White House this coming January.
This is the best part though:
Earlier this month, Hannity got into hot water at Fox after his superiors discovered that he had participated in an official Trump campaign ad that also starred Ted Nugent and other, minor conservative celebs.
“I’m supporting Donald Trump this year,” he said, wearing jeans and a sport shirt in the cell-phone footage that he shot for the ad. “He’s gonna put originalists on the Supreme Court who believe in fidelity to the Constitution, separation of powers, co-equal branches of government. He’s a guy who vet refugees to keep Americans safe.”
Apparently, Hannity didn’t obtain permission for appearing in the Trump video—an act that would be considered a breach of ethics at most news outlets.
Hey, Asawin. Isn’t it sorta a “breach of ethics” to criticize the opponent of the mother whose daughter you work for? It’s not a breach of ethics when George Stephanopoulos is critical of any Republican when he has worked for the Clintons and donates money to them? A breach of ethics isn’t when Andrea Mitchell calls Donald Trump awful or when Jorge Ramos demands an immediate answer to an inaccurate claim made by the liberal media from Trump when his daughter works for Hillary Clinton?
But you won’t see Asawin Suebsaeng pointing out these breaches of ethics. His boss Chelsea Clinton wouldn’t like it. You won’t see it from the ubiquitously gay duo of Don Lemon or Anderson Cooper, either. All they’ve done since the debate ended is talk about poor fat shamed Alicia Machado, while leaving out everything in her past, from her being an accomplice in an attempted murder to appearing in the aforementioned crappy porn tape.
Instead, they paint a picture of just a poor woman working in boiler room that mean old Donald Trump decided to be mean to. She worked in a beauty pageant. She won that beauty pageant. Her reign as Miss Universe didn’t end when she put on the crown and strolled down the runway with an arm full of roses. Her reign ended when she passed on that crown to the next contestant a year later. During the course of that year, Alicia Machado put on 60 freaking pounds. Because Donald Trump tried to help her out and keep her from losing her crown, he gets blamed for fat shaming poor Alicia Machado aka Miss Venezuela aka Miss Universe aka attempted murder accomplice and bad porn star.
Another segment I found astoundingly ironic is when they tried to compare Donald Trump’s history with women to Bill Clinton’s affairs with numerous women while in office. CNN actually put together a video montage of all of Trump’s well-publicized dalliances with various women, while completely ignoring the fact that Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas and President of the United States when he did his dirty deeds.
Before he decided to run for president, Donald Trump was an entrepreneur/entertainer. All of the indiscretions that were brought up and things he said on the Howard Stern show were what was done while he was a private citizen. Bill Clinton did what he did while holding public office. Big difference there. YUGE difference. When you compare what a billionaire playboy does to get publicity for his businesses or television shows to what a governor or a president does while in office, you actually diminish the office of that governorship or presidency.
When Paula Jones went to meet with Bill Clinton, she wasn’t going to a hotel room to hook up with some horny business guy. She thought she was meeting with the governor of Arkansas, not some celebrity. When Monica Lewinsky got googly-eyes for Bill Clinton, he was the President of the United States. When Hillary Clinton’s campaign does an ad where they basically say, “How can little girls look up to Donald Trump when he calls women names?” I ask Hillary Clinton, “How can little girls look up to you, when you stood by a man who seduced a naive 22-year-old intern with his awesome presidential power and made her a public spectacle and then lied about it with you standing right beside him?”
But this is the liberal alternate universe. When you control the message, this is how you get misinformed people to fall for the BS. Anderson Cooper and Don Lemon just play right along with it, pretending there’s no distinction between a billionaire playboy publicity hound and a president.
How is Donald Trump’s treatment of women more egregious than Bill Clinton’s treatment of women? Because Bill Clinton’s not running for president? But he was president when these things happened. His wife is running for president now. Hillary says Bill will advise her on economic matters because the economy was so good under his presidency. So in essence, Bill Clinton IS running for president. Hillary herself essentially said he will be part of her economic advisory team. Bill will be back in the White House under another Clinton administration.
So when you see Don Lemon and Anderson Cooper spend three hours describing Donald Trump’s treatment of women as horrible, as deplorable, remember who will be back running things behind the scenes if Hillary Rodham Clinton is elected. William Jefferson Clinton. Someone all little girls can look up to, while they’re on their knees.
Not a pretty picture, is it?
From 9-29-16 episode of The Rob Zicari Show LIVE 7-10pm M-F