moonbattery logo

Aug 08 2016

Meet the New Media, Same as the Old Media

A favorite tactic of the liberal media establishment is to exaggerate crowd sizes, usually through selective photography. A recent example:

Abby Phillip works for WaPo, but CNN must have applied similar spin, judging by a tweet that put both to shame:

Like left-wing Democrats, the Trumpist branch of authoritarian progressivism has its own media. It plays by similar rules, but even more crudely. Breitbart actually tried to pass off a picture of the Cleveland Cavalier’s NBA championship victory parade as the crowd for a Trump campaign rally in faraway Jacksonville.

When called on it, they pulled the picture — which is more of a concession to truth than you can usually expect among Trump’s dogged supporters.

On tips from Eddie_Valiant and Torcer.

79 Responses to “Meet the New Media, Same as the Old Media”

  1. seaoh says:


    Trump: 197,696 subscribers
    Clinton: 24,429 subscribers
    Hillary for Prison: 55,228 subscribers
    Not only does Trump have more subscribers, more than twice as many people subscribe to “Hillary for Prison” than just the Clinton page.

    5 reasons Trump is beating the media’s rigged polls

  2. KirklesWorth says:

    Another I-can’t-resist-slamming-Trump editorial in a Hillary exposé. Slam Hillary, slam Trump, enable Hillary, rinse, repeat. How’s that Darrell Castle doing anyway? When are his poll numbers going to surpass Hillary’s?

  3. KirklesWorth says:

    Gateway Pundit agrees with you (via Breitbart):

    Current polls show the race for President is much tighter than it really is. Ann Coulter warned us years ago in her best seller Slander that Democrats and the liberal media always use polls to manipulate and discourage conservatives from voting. Thanks to social media there is more and more evidence that the polls are way off and if things stay as they are, Trump will win in a landslide!

    It’s evident Hillary has a hard time filling a Union Hall while Trump regularly turns people away from his stadium and arena venues.

    Now this – Analysis from social media provides additional support that Trump is likely to win in a landslide.

  4. Silence Dogood says:

    This lame media has been complicit in every lawless act this administration has done and when, not saying “if”, the people finally make a stand for our liberty, they should be the first to hang.

  5. TrojanMan says:

    “Trump will win in a landslide!”

    Then he won’t need us.

  6. KirklesWorth says:

    So, what are you implying? That he’ll proceed with an Obama-like lawlessness? Are you afraid that our politicians and the people will give him free reign?

  7. TrojanMan says:

    I thought it was fairly obvious what i was implying. if Trump will win in a landslide then he will not need people such as myself to vote for him. We have gone over this before, no need to beat a dead horse.

  8. MAS says:

    Actually Dave slammed Breitump for lying (in picture) about Trump…like he slammed the media lying for Hillary. Can’t see it can you…reading comprehension much?

  9. KirklesWorth says:

    Pardon me for asking for clarification.

  10. MAS says:

    New Trumptroll with comprehension challenges.

  11. TrojanMan says:

    Come on now, be nice. Satan uses the jedi mind trick on the weak minded. Its not really his fault 🙂

  12. KirklesWorth says:

    Sorry, I don’t find “Like left-wing Democrats, the Trumpist branch of authoritarian progressivism has its own media.” and “When called on it, they pulled the picture — which is more of a concession to truth than you can usually expect among Trump’s dogged supporters.” to be very Trump-defending nor Trump-supporter defending. How’s that for reading comprehension?

  13. KirklesWorth says:

    You Hillary-enablers are the cleverest!

  14. MAS says:

    “This is not the site you want to troll” waves hand…

  15. KirklesWorth says:

    I support the republican candidate – just exactly how does that make me a “troll”? Do you support Hillary?

  16. MAS says:

    “How’s your reading comprehension?” Good enough to realize that you belong on Breitump Disqus. Look, if you don’t like what Dave posts there are gobs of other sites to visit. Even if you don’t like when he slams your orange messiah but do like his other opinions move on to the next article. That’s what I tend to do with my comprehension…

  17. TrojanMan says:

    I support the Constitution of the United States of America. I will defend it from all enemies foreign and domestic, which includes Trump and hitlery.

  18. TrojanMan says:

    I was thinking the same thing. I make it a point to not frequent the trumpet sites such as brietbart and gatewaypundit.

  19. MAS says:

    Straw-man ad hominem attack much? It is a favorite tactic of the Branch Trumpian troll…”if you don’t support The Great Orange Ruler you support and vote for Hillary”.

  20. KirklesWorth says:

    How can a question be an “ad hominem attack”? Calling me a “troll”, using liberal debating tactics, and helping Hillary’s chances of becoming president? Impressive integrity.

  21. KirklesWorth says:

    My, aren’t you fierce! Thanks for conceding the point on your lack of comprehension anyway. Tell you what, you name me the best candidate and I won’t point out your Hillary-enabling cowardliness.

  22. MAS says:

    You mom’s calling…

  23. KirklesWorth says:

    Yeah, better to just let things happen and condemn everybody for your negligence. Simpler that way.

  24. KirklesWorth says:

    HAHAHAHAHA…not. I knew you had nothing.

  25. MAS says:

    Wow you doubled down…not that you could even comprehend what that is.

  26. KirklesWorth says:

    “When you doubled down” is not even relevant. Where do you come up with this stuff? You just throw out “straw-man ad hominem attack” and hope that it sticks? Are you going to attempt to prove your assertion?

  27. KirklesWorth says:

    Pardon me…are you a Disqus representative? I thought only liberals tried to suppress dissenting opinions…? I guess that could be what happens to people who work on Hillary’s behalf.

  28. KHarn says:

    We are often old that we have to choose the lesser of two evils, but why must we choose evil at all?
    (Paraphrasing a writer whose name I’ve forgotten)

  29. KirklesWorth says:

    I see. So you see these “enemies”, and you have nothing to recommend, so you just lash out at those trying to support the republican candidate? Is that supposed to be “patriotic” or “noble” somehow?

  30. KirklesWorth says:

    You don’t have to choose anything…but it will be chosen – and often by those who may not be as good a person as you.

  31. MAS says:

    I do check with Breitrump but, unlike KirklesWorth et al, refrain from trolling their Disqus section. They do have some articles worth a read…once you skim past all the Trump pom pom sections.

  32. KirklesWorth says:

    I’m curious…where’s your candidate’s pom pom section?

  33. KirklesWorth says:

    Oh, copy #2 of Ferris Bueller! So clever! And trying to push me out of my own thread! And in such a way that you avoid having to admit you have nothing! But keep trying to push me out because you are unable to debate.

  34. KHarn says:

    You seem to be arguing the we should vote against Hillery because she “fucking sucks” and for Trump because he “only sucks”. I’ve seen more than half a century and know that we’ve played that game too many times. In every case, while the public was willing to compromise, the politicians did any damn thing they wanted.
    I have a better idea: let’s elect the absolute WORST people to run things and let the country go to hell. That will result in three things:
    1: It’ll prove that “choosing the lesser of two evils” will still fuck you over.
    2: NOBODY can make socialism work, not even America.
    3: We can start over and try a constitutional republic again.

  35. KirklesWorth says:

    Go for it! What happens when the November election arrives?

  36. KHarn says:

    We’ll get fucked over again, what do you expect? Do you REALLY think that Trump will be any different?

  37. KirklesWorth says:


  38. KHarn says:

    Just out of curiosity, how old are you? No, I’m not going to say something nasty when you answer.

  39. KirklesWorth says:

    Middle aged. You?

  40. KHarn says:

    Fifty eight. “Middle aged” doesn’t really tell me anything.

  41. KirklesWorth says:

    Okay. I’m a few years younger than you. Why do you ask?

  42. KHarn says:

    I just wanted to gage your experience.
    I have an appointment soon, so goodbye.

  43. TrojanMan says:

    The only possibility to save the republic as it stands IMHO is a convention of states. Otherwise either a bloody revolution or secession is necessary. Therefore it does not matter whom you vote for.

  44. Stosh says:

    Killary is the worst possible candidate but….the 50 people showing up to Hillary rally in Omaha, isn’t so bad. People in flyover country are usually at work, and in Nebraska 50 people is more that a flash mob, could be the entire population of some towns….lol

  45. KHarn says:

    I would whole heartedly support a convention of free states to law down the law and tell the feds where to get off.
    Secession? Deal me in. If it were just the Southern states, the neo-commies and most Republicans would be glad to see us go. But of course, they would insist that we find some desert island to live and surrender our wealth, land and whatever was erected on it.
    Remember 1860.

  46. 762x51 says:

    Exactly what I have said here, lo these many years.

    Unfortunately, even a Convention of States will lead to secession and civil war. Totalitarians like the ones who presently run the federal government will not allow a measly Convention of States to interfere with their gravy train. They would find a way to squash it which would directly lead to secession and the blood shed it brings with it.

    War will soon come to American soil, on the streets of your neighborhood, it is inevitable now, the Trumpanzeees and their Democrat allies have ensured it.

  47. 762x51 says:

    Wirnkledick believes it, because you can’t fix stupid.

  48. 762x51 says:

    Oh, wrinkledick frequents Breitrump AND Alex Jones.

    He’s a true believer, and an imbecile as his posts demonstrate. But at least he is smug and arrogant about it.

  49. 762x51 says:

    YOUR THREAD?!? You whiny, arrogant, elitist fucktard.

    Just because your mommy isn’t there to hang a pork chop around your neck so the dog will play with you doesn’t mean you can push others around. Useless fucking coward.

    Go fuck yourself.

  50. 762x51 says:

    You can’t reason with an imbecile or a Progressive. Wrinkledick is both.

  51. 762x51 says:

    Damn right. My oath is to the Constitution, not some two bit dictator wannabe, regardless of their plumbing.

  52. 762x51 says:

    Correct. Choosing evil is evil, regardless of the degree.

    But wrinkledick is an evil little shit who can’t back up his bullshit so he needs a a strongman like “the Donald” to do it for him, instituting his fascist dreams so he can watch and smile.

    Just another smug, arrogant Trumpanzee coward.

  53. 762x51 says:

    What a shame you lack the courage to say that to my face.

    Go fuck yourself.

  54. 762x51 says:

    So you are a Republican Establishment shill. Explains a lot, especially considering how Republican Establishment Progressives have collaborated with Democrat Progressives for the last decade or more.

    Go fuck yourself.

  55. 762x51 says:

    It has no reading comprehension. It is a Progressive and like all Progressives it has only its agenda. It will not accept facts or reason that disputes or defeats that agenda. No debate is possible with it. You can try and come to your own conclusion, I’m just trying to save you the trouble of wasting your time.

    In the final analysis. it is a target awaiting engagement in the coming civil war, nothing more.

  56. 762x51 says:

    YOU are the fucking coward here you worthless little prick.

    You stir up trouble then chicken out when someone calls you out to back it up. You are nothing but a sniveling pussy who likes to start trouble while hiding behind your anonymous screen name and keyboard. A coward like you can’t back up what he says in the real world.

    Go fuck yourself you fucking coward.

  57. MAS says:

    Fun to let the Badger out from time to time. This one is simply too dim to be entertaining for long though…

  58. FrozenPatriot says:

    He’s not going to acknowledge Trump’s shortcomings or concede that Trump has flip-flopped or walked back almost every major campaign promise. There’s essentially no benefit in arguing with Trump’s poo-flinging trumpanzees…

  59. FrozenPatriot says:

    Some of want a quiet, constitution honoring president who will leave us alone, and not a power-hungry attention-whoring narcissistic demi-god with a pompom section. There was a time not long ago when actively seeking a political office was the greatest disqualifier for it, as such ambitions exposed the inner lust for power, and principled, educated people knew (many still do) that anyone lusting for such unadulterated power should be the ones kept furthest from it — for what should be obvious reasons.

    Today’s “viable candidates” have far more in common with President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho than they do with Silent Cal. The existence of Comacho’s pompom section doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface…

  60. KirklesWorth says:

    Sure, I can concede Trump’s shortcomings, flip-flopped, and walked back…that doesn’t make Hillary any more acceptible. The only “poo-flinging” here is by the Hillary-enablers.

  61. KirklesWorth says:

    You mean because you have nothing and can’t debate – only insult. I’m used to that with the liberal-like Hillary-enablers.

  62. KirklesWorth says:

    Okay…is Trump or Hillary best suited as your “quiet, constitution honoring president who will leave us alone, and not a power-hungry attention-whoring narcissistic demi-god with a pompom section”? Those are the two viable choices, and all your complaining won’t change that.

  63. Tom says:

    I can’t for the life of me understand why the ladies aren’t just flocking to you, what with your winning personality and calm, confident demeanor.
    Kind of a Catch-22, huh? The opposite sex avoids you like the plague because you’re so nasty and angry, and because you’re shunned by any woman you meet, you become more nasty and angry.
    Oh, sorry…that’s a reference to a book that was made into a movie (Catch-22), and we know you are completely ignorant / oblivious to things such as movies or novels.

  64. FrozenPatriot says:

    “Hillary enablers” are the people who vote for Hillary, and I don’t see any around here.

    If you vote for Smith, and I vote for Jones, and Brown wins, aren’t you equally as responsible for not stopping Brown by supporting Jones? When Jones is a far better candidate, and Smith has yuuuuge character flaws, the choice — and the fault — couldn’t be more clear.

  65. KirklesWorth says:

    I didn’t say “Hillary voters” did I? “Republicans” and “conservatives” who don’t vote for Trump are Hillary-enablers – especially when they are hostile to Trump supporters. Not voting for your party’s candidate and risking the election of Hillary is “Hillary-enabling”…and that couldn’t be more clear.

  66. KirklesWorth says:

    You’d be better off to block paycho-Troll 762×51 like I did or you could end up on his/her kill list.

  67. MAS says:

    Speaking of blocked…buh buy.

  68. KirklesWorth says:

    Just as well. All you “contribute” is insults with no suggestions, no alternative, no candidate, no debating skills, and no reason for attacking Trump supporters when you have nothing.

  69. FrozenPatriot says:

    Where do you come up with this “Hillary enablers” = “Hillary voters”?

    Easy: if Hillary has no voters, she wouldn’t be enabled. Therefore, her voters are her enablers.

    Again, if you vote for Smith, and I vote for Jones, and Brown wins, you’re equally responsible for enabling (sic) Brown by not supporting Jones. Ergo, you’re a “Hillary enabler” by your own twisted logic. For the record, I disagree with this illogical conclusion. One’s enablers are their supporters. In an election, supporters = voters = enablers.

  70. KirklesWorth says:

    Hillary-voters vote for Hillary. Hillary-enablers can be Hillary-voters plus those who don’t vote for Hillary but won’t vote for Trump to defeat her either. I also go by the assumption that there are no Hillary-voters here, but I could be mistaken. Furthermore, there is a distinct resistance by people here to name another candidate, so I can only use the default of a “no-vote” because I have no better information.

    But since you went to the trouble to re-post your analogy, I will address it. You are assuming that there are more than two viable candidates in contention. As it stands now, that is not the case and your analogy doesn’t apply. If you can provide me with a viable third candidate, then we can continue along this vein. Otherwise, non-Trump candidates would be vote-splitters and Hillary enablers.

  71. FrozenPatriot says:

    The Whig party made the same “viable candidate” argument throughout the 1850s and look where they are now. As long as sufficient numbers keep loyally voting Republican — because viability! — and a tiny, determined minority* can get their guy nominated, we’re going to have really crappy candidates.

    I’m done holding my nose when I vote. As for naming names, there’s really no need. There is lots of time between now and November to decide. That people are pressured in early August to openly support someone to be their ruler speaks only to their desire to be ruled. I do not share that desire.

    * Trump received 13-14M votes during the nominating process, yet 118M general elections votes were cast in 2012 and 131M in 2008.

  72. KirklesWorth says:

    If you don’t want to sacrifice your ideology for pragmatism, you have every right to do so. The threshold of my ideology is lower to where a 66% conservative is much more palatable than a 100% progressive-liberal-socialist criminal. To each his own!

  73. 762x51 says:

    I don’t block it because I enjoy hounding it, like I do all Trumpanzee swine. He can spread all the lies he wants and block me all he wants, I’m going to make sure everyone can see him for what he really is. A progressive douche who can dish it out but can’t take it.

  74. 762x51 says:

    Your wife doesn’t think so, Brony Bitch.

    She laughs at you constantly because you can only live your life through movies, too weak and afraid of the real world. She thinks you are areal pussy, as does everyone you meet.

    Trumpanzee coward.

  75. 762x51 says:

    Run rabbit, run, LMFAO!!

  76. 762x51 says:

    Awwww, poor baby. Everyone stand back, kirklesworth has sand in his vagina, again.

    Go fuck yourself – 31.

  77. MAS says:

    You are a stronger more patient man than I .308. I get bored with the junior high antics and have decided to just block these pajama boys.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy