More on the spread of the “bloodbath” hoax
I bring you Hillary Clinton:
“A bloodbath.” What would you say if you saw this in another country? https://t.co/aUnNAoAWfE
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) March 18, 2024
Such a useful truncated quote to spread around.
I was listening to a podcast made yesterday by the Ayn Rand Center, and the people speaking – who are definitely not on the left, but who also do not like Donald Trump – were repeating the “bloodbath” meme as though it were true. Even though they are people who are usually quite alert to propaganda and quite good at rejecting and even debunking it, it was shocking that they had bought into the propaganda. But the truth about that particular quote from Trump hadn’t reached them even by yesterday. That brought home to me (once more, with feeling) the power and reach of a lie, and how entrenched it can become despite evidence that ought to invalidate it in everyone’s minds.
I wonder how many people who think they hate Trump are basing their opinions almost solely on lies told about him over the years?
And speaking of bloodbaths:
Look, the journos at @politico like to incite violence in all of these headlines with “bloodbath.”
I’m not going to give you the context though, because that would be actual journalism. pic.twitter.com/xEUombHyIM
— Thomas Stevenson (@RealTStevenson) March 17, 2024
It’s such a common expression that it’s included in the dictionary pic.twitter.com/YQDkjtIrQ5
— Justine (@BruinJustine) March 18, 2024
Hillary Clinton knows all about bloodbaths, c.f., Libya and the American consulate.
“I wonder how many people who think they hate Trump are basing their opinions almost solely on lies told about him over the years?”
Upon what basis might we assume that they want to know the truth?
Obeisance to the narrative requires unthinking loyalty and a knee jerk rejection of anything that contradicts it.
Most of all, it’s the safe thing to do…
I think it just reinforces the stupid quotient, I think the crew who will believe any notion,
I’ve seen screenshots of both ChatGPT and Grok being asked why Trump would say bloodbath, and both responded that it seemed a metaphorical usage.
So even left-leaning LLM’s figured it out immediately.
Apparently, the Zito Maxim is still in operation.
“When he makes claims like this, the press takes him literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.”
And of course the Democrat and their state-run Media don’t really take him literally, they just have no interest in providing any exculpatory context.
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/4302014-she-saw-trump-coming-in-2016-better-than-anyone-what-does-salena-zito-see-for-2024/
We did see it in another country….BENGHAZI LIBYA.
The common thread between this current—Bloodbath—hoax AND the Russia Hoax AND the Border Hoax AND the Inflation Hoax, AND the Supply Chain Hoax, AND the Covid Hoax AND the Gaza Health Authority (or whatever they want to call themselves) Hoax AND the Immigration Hoax AND the January 6 Hoax AND the November 2020 Hoax AND the Global Warming Hoax AND the Racism Hoax AND ALL OTHER Democratic Party-cum-Corrupt Media-inspired hoaxes is SIMPLY this: that the Truth NO LONGER MATTERS for a huge swath of the American People and those in the West, generally.
At least that is what our elites are banking on.
Yes, one of the early response tweets to Clinton was “We did” with photos of the four men killed at Benghazi.
I wonder why Clinton feels the need to go on tweeting when other defeated or retired politicians are so much quieter. Some think she still hopes to be president, but maybe it’s more that she’s bitter — bitter about losing, bitter about her husband, and bitter by nature.
AesopFan,
Salena Zito has been the best journalist on Trump for nearly a decade, yet few people pay attention to her. The Cassandra of the Monongahela.
Trump should have been smart enough (spoiler note – he is not very smart) to avoid using the term “bloodbath”.
they made a deal out of ‘binders full of women’ so my care quotient is at 2.5
The Ayn Rand Center seems to be for open borders and that is one basis for their opposition to Trump. They claim Ayn Rand supported open borders by quoting her being against a truly closed border such as the Soviet Union’s Iron Curtain. Yet they seem to ignore that not only did Galt’s Gulch have physical barriers to deter trespassing, but that John Galt required every person adhere to an oath in order to stay. Dagney Taggert was forced to leave when she initially refused to abide by the oath. I’d be happy if the US had the same style of border that John Galt employed.
ok then
https://notthebee.com/article/this-dude-snuck-inside-the-roosevelt-hotel-so-you-didnt-have-to-and-tell-me-if-you-see-any-women-or-children-in-this-video-cuz-i-sure-dont?
they can’t recognize ‘dog eat dog’ law when it stares them in the face,
“I wonder how many people who think they hate Trump are basing their opinions almost solely on lies told about him over the years?”
Harry Reid: We won, didn’t we!
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/03/19/aussie-security-committee-madness-spy-agency-chiefs-kicked-out-replaced-by-climate-head/
I’m pretty sure I said this just the here the other day but most of the Dem voters I know believe most of the media fomented Trump hoaxes anyway. This fits in perfectly with the legacy media narrative regarding Trump. Confirmation bias baby!
And why do they lie? Because it works and there is no penalty to be paid.
meanwhile
https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1770475635028234259
Tony Bobulinski has an effective idea if only it can be seen . . . and there’s the rub: https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1770462772398088298?t=sAWPmYN5eFfAcuTTg5W7iQ&s=19
https://aaronkheriaty.substack.com/p/a-close-look-at-the-amici-briefs
Floor wax or desert topping
Fair enough, but, um, what Bobulinski doesn’t seem to understand is that Goldman and Raskin and Schiff and Pelosi and Garland and Biden and Biden’s remarkable family—and “Biden”—the whole kit ‘n kaboodle of ’em LIE for the good of the American people.
For the sake of the American people.
What Bobulinsky does NOT understand is that they lie unceasingly and selflessly, shamelessly and unstintingly, unabashedly and effortlessly FOR THE SAKE of the country they so cherish; to protect it, to defend it, to strengthen it, to help improve it, its people and its institutions; and its laws, and its morals—to make it a light unto the nations and a beacon of liberty and hope.
What Bobulinsky does NOT understand is that their love of country, their patriotism, their devotion and their dedication is so strong, so stalwart, so adamantine, so unbreakable that they are prepared to DESTROY their country—to sacrifice their country for their beliefs—just like Abraham/Ibrahim was prepared to sacrifice his son to fulfill the command of his God, such is the depth of their depravity—um, sorry, DEVOTION.
Not sure why this is so hard to understand….
I hope for Trump to win and that there be bloodbath of government workers.
Tho because such mass firing would likely be illegal, a possibly more realistic idea would be to send most of them to be life coaches of the druggies in the blue cities, as well as checking up on the work of other social workers.
Tom Grey on March 20, 2024 at 5:30 pm
“… such mass firing would likely be illegal…”
Except given the ins and outs of the personnel hiring and firing rules, it just might be easier legally to fire (RIF) people en mass as a whole department or bureau than as individuals, who might then have the right to trapse through the maze before leaving.