By Jeff Childers
Good morning, C&C, it’s Monday! And we have a great roundup to match this morning’s terrific weather: the Associated Press tries to backpedal on its definitional choices; thoughts on the worldwide trans agenda; Indiana councilperson Ryan Webb identifies as Native American woman of color and the Left doesn’t like it; Russia hypersonically eliminates Ukrainian counter-offensive ammo overnight; Wall Street Journal breaks explosive Epstein story fingering (even more) dems; corporate media starts shift in Trump/DeSantis narrative; Biden mumbles something true, in historic first; and Bill Maher interview Elon in a prime-time video to help kick off your week right.
🗞💬 *WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY* 💬🗞
🔥 Human Events ran a fun opinion piece over the weekend mocking the Associated Press with the headline, “Associated Press—who used capitol riot to redefine ‘insurrection’—now OUTRAGED by GOP calling state capitol riots ‘insurrections’.”
Conservative writer and playwright Libby Emmons has a problem with how the Associated Press can’t make up its mind about what the word “insurrection” means. The news giant waffles back and forth, like a man visiting China for the first time desperately trying to figure out which one is the men’s bathroom.
What has brought things to a confusing head are all the violent trans protests in the Tennessee and Montana Houses of Representatives, where oversized activists wearing size-10 spike heels and plus-sized cocktail wear rushed the galleries and had to be physically removed by outnumbered riot police.
The latest problem arises because, back on January 14, 2021, the Associated Press “updated” its long-standing definition of “insurrection” in order to better match the event of January 6th. Before J6, the AP defined “insurrection” using the long-standing 18th century definition: “a violent uprising that targets government authority.” But that didn’t seem quite right, since it sort of ruled out calling J6 an insurrection, so diligent AP editors — always striving for truth and justice — tweaked the word’s meaning. Just a smidge or skosh.
So in early 2021, the AP’s editors somberly announced, in order to fit in better with 21st-century ideals, an “insurrection” was now — officially (according to the AP) — an “an act or instance of revolting against civil authorities or an established government.”
No uprising needed!
See how it works? Those devilish J6 MAGA Trumpites weren’t just ordinary protestors, no, they were INSURRECTORS! We just updated the meaning! And so, for the last 2+ years we’ve gotten an earache listening to deadpan news anchors ignorantly describing the events of January 6th as “an insurrection,” over and over and over.
But now the AP is shocked, shocked and appalled, that conservatives would dare compare the violent clashes between clown-wigged, BLM-masked trans protestors fighting riot police IN THE MONTANA HOUSE GALLERY to the much more serious and civilization-shattering events that unfurled when some conservative rally-goers quietly strolled through the Capitol rotunda.
It’s an outrage. Here’s how the AP expressed their concern and dismay over the misuse of their own newly-redefined word:
The AP’s hilarious headline is a wonderful example of the reflection defense, where you pre-emptively accuse your enemy of doing what you, yourself, have done. The GOP is not — as the headline claims — “redefining” the word. The GOP is just using the AP’s own updated definition.
The Associated Press used the capitol riots to redefine “insurrection.”
Sadly, this is what passes for journalism these days. Words are even more fluid than genders over at the Associated Press’s marbled halls. My old J-school professors are probably spinning pirouettes in their graves, unless they’re still alive, in which case they’re probably going right along with it, because you’ve never seen a bigger pack of libs than the professors who ran journalism school.
But when I was there, even those liberal stalwarts would have failed a story where some journalism student tried to tweak a word’s meaning to make their article better.
It’s too bad, really. The AP’s word tweakers could actually be helpful if they’d tackle re-defining a word like “woman”? What IS a woman anyway, AP? It’s weird, they know EXACTLY what an insurrection is (something conservatives do), and isn’t (whatever leftists do), but are baffled about what a “woman” is.
Most of us boys figured out what a woman was in our early to mid teens. It wasn’t hard, it just happened naturally. But the AP’s emotional/biological development has been retarded somehow.
Must be the puberty blockers.
🔥 Isn’t it interesting how this trans mind-virus infected the entire West at the same time?
Yesterday, the Upper Lip (UK) ran a lovely story headlined, “NEU Passes Historic Motion to Appoint a Drag Queen as Head Teacher in Every British School.”
In other words, they prefer a man in charge of every school! Take that, feminism! Checkmate. But I digress.
The point is, the trans wars are also raging in Great Britain.
On the other side of the world, ON AN ISLAND, an island continent that has been largely quarantined for the last few years, Australia also battles the woke transformers, who seem exactly like our own violent, masked trans activists:
You know where they DO NOT have a trans problem? Russia and China. Does Drag Queen Story Hour make us stronger? Maybe, and I’m just brainstorming here, maybe during wartime we can’t afford to let boys pretend to be girls, even if it hurts their widdle feewings.
🔥 Stunning and Brave! Local WISH Channel 8 ran a story last week headlined, “Indiana county councilman comes out as woman of color.” They were referring to white councilman Ryan Webb.
Here he, er she, is, the Muncie, Indiana councilperson:
But the left thinks Ryan’s faking it, and they don’t like it, not one bit:
Outraged leftists filled Twitter with hysterical anti-Webb screeds and demanded Ryan’s resignation:
But Webb responded hotly, demanding respect and affirmance for his newly-acquired gender identity:
This is the way. Checkmate, transformers!
🚀 In yesterday’s bonus edition, I reported about how Biden is herding Ukraine toward immediately starting their poorly-organized and under-resourced gala Spring Counter-Offensive:
In a similar vein, on Saturday, CNN reported that Ukraine’s counter-offensive could literally start “any moment.”
Maybe the Russians took all that seriously. Throughout last night, multiple independent sources reported “massive” land and sea missile attacks by Russia against Ukraine using both conventional and hypersonic missiles, launched at 5am local time.
As far as I can tell, the Russians apparently targeted ammunition and supply depots Ukraine had staged for its counter-offensive. If the Russians just blew up Ukraine’s force buildup for the offensive, this is going to put the Counter-Offensive back in the Ukrainian mud.
Corporate media is pretty quiet. The Wall Street Journal has not reported the strikes. The New York Times ran a hopeful story early this morning headlined, “Explosions Echo in Kyiv as Ukraine Prepares for Broad Russian Attack.” The first sentence indicated the Russians were striking targets in Kiev:
Explosions echoed across the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv, on Monday as Ukrainian officials warned of a large-scale Russian missile attack.
The Times said 15 of 18 incoming Russian missiles headed to Kiev were “shot down.” Online sources claimed those figures counted missiles that hit their targets as being “shot down.” Sounds about right.
But don’t complain. There’s nothing wrong with that. Ukraine has just re-defined the phrase “shot down.” Everybody’s doing it these days.
If Ukraine’s over-hyped counter-offensive blows up on the launch pad, that will probably be the end of the Proxy War in Ukraine. The U.S. military has other problems developing around the world and it can’t spend ALL its time and tanks frolicking around Ukraine.
🔥 The Wall Street Journal ran an explosive story this weekend headlined, “Epstein’s Private Calendar Reveals Prominent Names, Including CIA Chief, Goldman’s Top Lawyer.”
Apparently the Wall Street Journal received a “trove” of new Epstein documents. It did not disclose where it got them. Here’s how the Journal described the new evidence:
The documents, which include thousands of pages of emails and schedules from 2013 to 2017, haven’t been previously reported.
The Journal’s article focused on Epstein’s personal calendar, which included names (without agendas) of meetings with various industrial, academic, and government leaders. Among many named, the top ones included CIA Director William Burns (before he was CIA director), Obama White House counsel Kathryn Ruemmler, and MIT Professor Noam Chomsky, who seems to have met with Epstein a LOT.
The Journal asked all those people to explain why they kept meeting with the notorious pedophile and child trafficker. Chomsky said it was none of your business:
When asked about his relationship with Epstein, Mr. Chomsky replied in an email: “First response is that it is none of your business. Or anyone’s. Second is that I knew him and we met occasionally.”…
But to his credit, Chomsky admitted that he DID know about Epstein’s sordid status:
Mr. Chomsky told the Journal that at the time of his meetings “what was known about Jeffrey Epstein was that he had been convicted of a crime and had served his sentence. According to U.S. laws and norms, that yields a clean slate.”
CIA director Burns met with Epstein at least three times in 2014, while Burns was Obama’s deputy secretary of state. They first met in Washington and then Mr. Burns twice visited Epstein’s personal townhouse in Manhattan for evening appointments. A CIA spokeswoman waved it off: “The director did not know anything about him, other than that he was introduced as an expert in the financial services sector and offered general advice on [Burns’} transition to the private sector. They had no relationship.”
Makes sense. Seek professional advice from a notorious convicted pedophile. Multiple times. At night.
Kathryn Ruemmler, Obama’s deputy White House counsel, met with Epstein “dozens of times” in the years after her White House service and before she became a top lawyer at Goldman Sachs. The schedules also show Ruemmler visited Epstein’s private Caribbean sex island in 2017.
Probably just to discuss Middle East peace or something.
None of these folks’ names appeared in Epstein’s now-public “black book” of contacts or in his private jet’s public flight logs. Coincidentally, all of the individuals identified in the Journal’s article are hardcore leftists.
🔥 Also in yesterday’s bonus edition, I argued the case that the Biden Administration has decided it wants to run against Trump, and I speculated that we’ll be seeing corporate media pivot against DeSantis to make sure Trump becomes the Republican nominee.
Biden’s big problem is democrat voters are dispirited and unenthusiastic, as this next recent montage of interviews from ABC illustrates. But note the nice gal who struggled mightily to come up with one single thing she likes about Joe Biden, and ultimately could only offer: “he isn’t Trump.”
That’s Biden’s entire campaign. He isn’t Trump. So they need Trump to be the foil.
As exhibit A for the new narrative, Forbes ran a story late last week — after Biden’s quiet re-election announcement — headlined, “Billionaire GOP Donor Says He Won’t Support DeSantis Because Florida Gov. ‘Doesn’t Even Return Phone Calls’.”
Didn’t return a phone call? Disqualified! He’d be a terrible president!
The corporate media appears to have pivoted away from consistently describing DeSantis as “the leader of the emerging conservative movement.” The new narrative is that DeSantis’s personality is too boring, or something:
New York billionaire John Catsimatidis won’t support Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in his widely expected presidential run, he told the Washington Examiner, citing DeSantis’ poor relationship-building skills—marking the latest Republican mega donor to shy away from DeSantis, while adding to an emerging, unflattering narrative about his personability.
Got it. All billionaire conservatives care about is how much the candidate will kiss their butt. (For the record, I don’t believe that for a second.)
If it weren’t for the Biden campaign’s evident goals to run against “MAGA, Inc.,” you might think corporate media is being a trifle schizophrenic. First they complained that Trump was too loud and boorish. Now they complain that DeSantis is too quiet and dull, and doesn’t pal around with billionaires — the exact opposite of their complaints about President Trump.
I’m not exaggerating. Forbes continued describing its complaint in more detail, and giving voice to pro-Trump Republicans:
Republican lawmakers endorsing Trump have painted an unflattering picture of interactions, or lack thereof, with DeSantis in recent weeks—bringing to the forefront concerns within the party that DeSantis’ sometimes-stiff personality could hurt him on a national stage.
The giveaway that this is the latest psyop is that the article didn’t quote a single counter-opinion. There are TONS of Republicans who love DeSantis, but Forbes’ reporters apparently couldn’t find any of them to interview for the article. Uh huh.
It’s true that, in person, DeSantis has often struck me as stiff, not particularly warm, and he doesn’t hand out affectionate pet nicknames like election stickers, like Trump does. What this has to do with DeSantis’ qualifications for any office escapes me. It seems like a track record would be more important, but I’m just a lawyer, not a dog-faced Forbes reporter.
Last week also saw corporate media begin running polls of Republican voters showing Trump has a gigantic, insurmountable lead over DeSantis. For example, this poll from Emerson College’s polling division:
Before last week, all the public polls showed a much closer race. Funny how one week — the week including Biden’s stealth campaign announcement — can change everything, isn’t it?
🔥 At last week’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Biden hilariously mumbled, “In a lot of ways, this dinner sums up my first two years in office. I’ll talk for ten minutes, take zero questions, and cheerfully walk away.”
In vino veritas.
🔥 Finally, for your viewing pleasure, over the weekend Bill Maher interviewed Elon Musk (21 minutes):
Among many other things, the two discussed free speech and the “woke mind virus.” It’s a terrific interview, and no matter what you think of Elon Musk, Bill Maher just published in prime-time twenty-one minutes of anti-woke truth.
Even more encouraging, Maher’s young audience appeared to enthusiastically agree. Progress.
Have a marvelous Monday! I’ll see you back here tomorrow for another installment of caffeine-fueled C&C.
Join C&C in moving the needle and changing minds. I could use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope, if you can: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/-learn-how-to-get-involved-
Truth Social: jchilders98.
C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com
Emailed Daily Newsletter: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com
© 2022, Jeff Childers, all rights reserved
The views expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Citizens Journal Florida.