Gregory: Is there any point to which you would wish to draw my attention?
Sherlock Holmes: To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.
Gregory: The dog did nothing in the night-time.
Sherlock Holmes: That was the curious incident
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Sliverblaze
I have a bit of a soft spot) for Mika Brzezinski I saw that she was willing to make arguments, hear the other side, be content to be a handsome woman putting on a pound or two rather than trying to outbombshell younger rivals, liked the way she and co-host (now husband) Joe Scarborough treated their fans at personal appearance and unlike many of her contemporaries was always unabashed about admitting her biases.
She has however since the rise of Trump, retreated into the bubble of Trump Deranged left, emerging only briefly for her Biden interview, and because of this TDS she has made an elementary mistake, one that she didn’t make when the show quietly passed over the Jeffrey Epstein business during the last campaign, loudly insisting that Twitter take action against Trump after he alluded to an event concerning a female intern who was found dead in her now husband’s office two decades ago.
Brzezinski went on to call on Twitter to censor Trump, and said the Silicon Valley company would be “hearing” from her.
“But the germs you’re spreading on Twitter — first of all, Twitter? You shouldn’t be allowing this. And you should be taking these tweets down. And you should be ashamed of yourself – you’ll be hearing from me on this, because this is BS.”
“But Donald, you’re a sick person,” said Brzezinski, continuing her rant. “You’re really a cruel, sick, disgusting person. And you can keep tweeting about Joe, but you’re just hurting other people. And of course, you’re hurting yourself.”
Brzezinski continued her pressure campaign on Twitter, calling on the CEO, Jack Dorsey, to take down President Trump’s tweets, saying it would make the world “safer.”
Now while it’s never good when the President tweets out a story that one prefers remains forgotten if such a thing is going to happen, the best time for it is during a national crisis where there are plenty of other things to distract people from it. Thus even though the story might be painful and damaging it was likely to fade away pretty quick.
Alas when you live in bubble world such considerations don’t enter into one’s reasoning and Mika decided to make a very public counter which is likely to have a bad effect as explained in this excellent twitter thread.
You're obviously unfamiliar with the Streisand Effect.
Now everybody is going to look into What Trump is talking about.
You see a lot of folks on your side of the fence likely was not aware of Joe Situation and likely may not have even seen the Trump tweet on the subject, but your decision to bring it up means that folks will ask questions and given the cynicism of the age such people are more, rather than less likely, to draw a conclusion you and Joe don’t want made.
Now frankly if you lived outside of the bubble you would have realized that silence was the 2nd best defense here and would have employed it, but because you’ve chosen that quarantine within the NeverTrump world that obvious choice is lost on you and because of this you risk the reputation of your husband not with Trump fans ( who don’t like him anyways) but with your own crowd.
Kinda sad really.
Closing thought: Readers might have noticed I called silence the 2nd best defense. There is an obvious better defense based on DaTechGuy’s 4th law of media outrage which states:
The degree of media exposure of the corruption or illegality committed by any individual or organization under investigation is directly proportional to its distance from the media’s ideology.
On July 20, 2001 the day intern Lori Klausutis was found dead in congressmen Joe Scarborough’s office the left was still reeling from George W. Bush’s victory and deep into the Bush Derangement Syndrome that would not dissipate until 53 days later when Al Qaeda would change the subject. This leads to the obvious question:
Does anyone think for one moment that the mainstream media, still angry over the Bush victory and the Clinton Impeachment (that Scarborough voted for) would not have jumped all over this story and made it national news (particularly given Scarborough’s Sept 5th resignation) and a talking point to hit Republicans over? After all here you have a GOP congressman representing one of the most republican districts in his state, A republican who voted for Slick Billy’s impeachment with a dead female intern in his office. It would be a Godsend for the left Would this have not lead on CNN or MSNBC? Would not the New York Times and Washington Post used this as a club asking every GOP member of congress or the cabinet with devastating effect? Would they not when that congressman resigned seven weeks later suggest it was proof that something was up? Would this not be made a campaign issue in the special congressional election with demands that GOP candidate call for a fuller and deeper investigation?
You bet your ass they would!
And remember this was BEFORE he transformed himself into the type of Republican that Democrats like the most, the type willing to attack the GOP.
That more than anything else tells me there is no “there” there.
This would be the obvious 1st defense to make however to make this defense one has to concede the media as Democrat operatives with bylines and while I’m sure Mike loves her husband even she doesn’t dare use this defense aloud.
Unless you are consumer of conservative media, or news sources from Detroit–I’m both of those things—you probably missed a piece of awful offal from US Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), a member of “the Squad.”
If you live in the Chicago area, as I do, you probably heard about the “racially insensitive” comments made by longtime Chicago Blackhawks announcer Pat Foley during a preseason game against a German team.
In a tour last Tuesday of the center with Detroit’s police chief, James Craig, one that the Detroit News described as “tense,” the freshman congresswoman told Craig that only blacks should be employed as facial recognition analysists at the center. Yep. She said that. Her actual comments were, “Analysts need to be African Americans, not people that are not. I think non-African Americans think African Americans all look the same.”
Craig, who is black, took the high ground by replying, “I trust people who are trained, regardless of race; regardless of gender. It’s about the training.”
Of course it is.
Craig later condemned Tlaib’s remarks. “If I had made a similar comment people would be outraged,” he told Detroit’s ABC affiliate, “they would be calling for my resignation.”
In short, Tlaib got a pass because she is woke. She’s also a Democratic Socialist.
Not so Pat Foley, the television voice of the Chicago Blackhawks. I don’t know Foley’s politics. Perhaps he’s apolitical. But Foley, who is white, is not woke. He has not spoken of the glories of Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. He does not make large contributions to left-wing organizations. He has not apologized for his “white privilege.”
Oh, what did Foley say that got the left so upset? During that ‘Hawks preseason game against Eisbären Berlin, while opposing forward Austin Ortega handled the puck, Foley said, “Ortega, who sounds like he ought to be a shortstop.”
The Blackhawks in that statement noted that Foley, a recipient of the Foster Hewitt Memorial Award by the Hockey Hall of Fame, apologized to the Berlin team.
What appears to have ignited the controversy was a Tweet from an Hispanic hockey fan, Ghostchant, who distorted Foley’s words. “‘Ortega, sounds like he should be a shortstop’ instead of hockey.” Yep, “instead of hockey.”
But there is something else. Foley didn’t say “instead of hockey.” The Tweeter, who, if he has a sense of honor would place himself into his personal penalty box for a spell, added those words.
Here’s the entire Tweet along that “insensitive” comment from Foley.
“Ortega, sounds like he should be a shortstop” instead of hockey
In this split-second-glance-at-my-smartphone world, it’s easy to see why Ghostchant’s dishonest Tweet went viral. Many people look, get outraged, then re-Tweet or post on Facebook, without digging into the veracity of information on that puny screen, or, as I suspect in this instance, bothering to play the accompanying video clip.
Foley’s reputation has taken an undeserved dirty hit.
Tlaib, on the other hand, just keeps going.
What happened to Foley reminds me of a comment made by Nixon White House thug, Charles Colson, who later redeemed himself post-prison. “Anyone who opposes us, we’ll destroy,” he said, “as a matter of fact, anyone who doesn’t support us, we’ll destroy.”
That’s today’s left. Destroy first. Ask questions later. If at all.
There’s a lesson here. If you are a prominent person, unless you are deemed woke, you cannot comment on race or ethnicity, according to the rules of the high priests of the left.