News de Grace-Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap

Come writers and critics

Who prophesize with your pen

And keep your eyes wide

The chance won’t come again

And don’t speak to soon

For the wheel’s still in spin

And there’s no tellin’ who that it’s namin’

For the loser now will be later to win

For the times they are a-changin’



So Bannon worked for Goldman Sachs  in the early  1990’s.  So with all the libel and slander the presstitutes used against this otherwise American success story of epic proportions it’s funny to me that his GS resume has barely been touched (remember Ted Cruz’s wife, it might be the only thing we learned from all the primary challengers wives) As irresponsible and alarmist  as the networks are, the attack on Bannon was an all time low in lost art of journalism. We can take comfort, despite the false reproach, smear attempts gain little for them since they accomplish one of two things. They either solidify the wellspring of public distrust of news media and pundits and/or the American public will more often or not root for the underdog, especially one that has been hit below the belt.  Think Rocky.

The one argument that could actually be bent to fit their objective of hamstringing the transition team by removing the luster of an otherwise golden effort of the Trump’s advisers, would be the logical fallacy of guilt by association.  Its not as if they are opposed to fallacious reasoning to drive home their fake news.  So I wonder,  did they overlook the GS connection innocently or intently?  The GS canard would have gone better for them and the Bernie fans (presumably the ones who actually subscribe to the print media).

With guns blazing, they came for Bannon. The  blatant lies and ad hominem invective they assaulted Bannon with daily, backfired.  By shooting off all their ammunition at a target that should never had been targeted,  their clips were emptied and they had no ammo left for the rest of the cabinet picks.  They essentially vaccinated DJT from   legitimate criticism.   Sleazy attacks, while an effective  rule for radicals and for people trying to get the upper hand,  can quickly be tuned out by a population that seeks entertainment and not libel and slander. Two things Americans will never go for.

Now I am  no industry advertising marketing statistician but if I was I would have advised against such a straw dog move.  There was no net gain for the networks, only loss,  and it gave Trump another major victory in two areas of public perception:

1: He is the outsider bent to fix a legislative system broken by corrupt liars who are incapable of doing anything right.

2: They lost any power to go after the other picks with credibility.  Choices that should have been questioned, like David Freedman, (who was obviously a gift to Sheldon Addleson), Davos for her past support of Common core, Mnchin for his role at GS, Bolton a dyed in the wool neocon etc.

Although the picks at the time were not known, the people running the show in the papers and networks are not virgins in presidential transitions.  It would be obvious to even the most apolitical creature that DJT’s picks were going to be controversial.  So why lead off with an unsubstantiated smear of a most distasteful kind, one which any reader of BB would know in a millisecond that the smear was laughable. And a pick that was entirely up to the President’s discretion. It would be like shooting a yearling knowing there were 20 bucks walking your way.

Did the editors and chiefs of NYTWAPOABCNBCCBSCNN  just not see the consequences?  What about their million dollar hired guns? Surely they would not advise such a course.  Even a 1st year seminary student would know not to bear false witness and a novice campaign manager would know if you are going to attack dirty make sure you can back it up with irrefutable facts.

So why did they do it?

Was the fake news  smear on Bannon intentionally  written and reported on this stupid and easy to unmask by design?  Honestly I am at a loss as to why,  except for this:

Maybe  Someone is either trying to sabotage an already threatened industry and inadvertently aiding Trump or both?


Could it be that the Main Stream Mediots are actually this stupid and crooked?  and if that’s the case what the Hell are they doing running these billion dollar tabloids like  ships of fools.  Don’t they have to do some sort of simple IQ test when they apply for these jobs? We know their integrity is for sale. But if this is true, that they simply were too careless and stupid to process the potential blowback as an existential threat to their already dipping  ad buys and viewers, or at least listen to the people they pay to protect themselves from themselves, why should we trust them to report on weddings, deaths and births truthfully and with mental acuity and acumen let alone events that shape our world. The penguins from Madagascar would run the news industry better.


maybe there is no money left for counsel and the news media paid someone to program an algorithm to filter the news in a prejudicial and distorted manner,  saving a lot of  money by not having a real editor. This would explain the monocrop of lackluster and tasteless word games shoveled by the mediots.

Regardless of the reasons, Trump will be remembered for being  the asteroid to the dinosaur mediots

Those who naturally distrust anything the Mediots say are not really bothered by this one small chapter in the balkanization of the press, but are really impressed with Bannon’s reaction.   Laughter.  And for the rest of us, dirty deeds are not always done dirt cheap.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s