Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Melania Just Named Possible ‘Greatest First Lady Ever’ After She Makes Legendary Announcement

Published

on

This is unbelievable. It’s like the world might be coming to an end! No… Not really!

In an op-ed piece titled “Melania Trump, Could Be Our Greatest First Lady,” which was written by a known Trump-hater like the majority of so-called journalists from the New York Time is bound to raise eyebrows.

Here is the article via The New York Times:

“Maybe someday, when the history of Donald Trump’s presidency is written, we’ll pinpoint the start of this week as his pivot into complete derangement and come up with a pithy name for it. Maybe we’ll call it Melania Monday.

Trending: Federal Judge Releases Benghazi Evidence – Hillary Goes Into Complete Panic

Trending: Libs Furious At What Trump Dared To Say Instead Of Paying Tribute To Dying John McCain

We’ll note that on Aug. 20, 2018, the first lady, again with a pussy bow, publicly chided cyberbullies at the same time that her husband ranted and raged on Twitter, likening Robert Mueller to Joseph McCarthy and demonstrating a grasp of history commensurate with his grip on civility.

We’ll admire the wickedness of her announcement, just hours later, that she’d be making a solo trip — her farthest and flashiest yet as an official ambassador — to Africa, whose nations the president can’t pronounce, let alone respect. She didn’t choose that destination randomly, throwing a dart at a map. She chose it defiantly, throwing shade at her husband.

Surely Melania Trump is getting under his skin. Certainly she’s making the effort. If she would just turn these fitful baby steps into full-length strides, she might finally undo him and set us free. Melania the Savior. A pussy-bow coup. Stranger things have happened. Less exhilarating fantasies have been born.

And is it really so far-fetched? To judge by his tweets, tantrums and apparent belief that Rudy Giuliani is an appropriate advocate, Donald Trump teeters at the precipice of incoherence and self-destruction, needing only a shove. Who best to administer it but a spouse with her own, separate bedroom in the White House and her own, separate hotel suite when they travel?

She inches ever closer to open contempt for him. She finds increasingly clever ways to show it. And it’s a perfect wedding of patriotism and payback for all the humiliations that he has heaped on her.

This first-lady thing clearly flummoxed her at first. It’s a ludicrous job. You’re supposed to make a difference without making waves, find a passion while veiling your convictions and smile blithely through a ceaseless forensic examination of your every accessory.

It’s infantilizing. It’s objectifying. If a presidential administration were a sedan, the first lady would be its hood ornament. If it were a manse, she’d be the topiary bracketing the front stoop.

Usually Melania Trump was absent topiary. America had a denuded front stoop. And we made hasty assumptions. When she initially announced her anti-cyberbullying campaign in a speech in November 2016, we thought that she was out to lunch. Did she not see the contradiction?

For the president’s first State of the Union address, she wore a white pantsuit that served as a sartorial reminder of suffragists and of Hillary Clinton. This month, after he questioned LeBron James’s intelligence in a tweet, her spokeswoman released a statement that asserted the first lady’s admiration for James’s work with at-risk children in his hometown, Akron, Ohio. Melania was possibly interested in visiting the school there that James had helped to start, the statement said.

And my colleagues Katie Rogers and Maggie Haberman recently reported that during a trip overseas last month, the president had a fit because the first lady’s television on Air Force One was tuned to CNN, not his beloved Fox News. Was CNN an accident or a provocation? Well, in a public response to the incident, Melania’s spokeswoman made clear that the first lady watches “any channel she wants.”

I’m not sure what to make of that “I REALLY DON’T CARE, DO U?” jacket that she wore on her way to a detention center for migrant children in Texas. It’s the “rosebud” of our time. But what if the message was that she didn’t mind if we interpreted her behavior as a rebuke of her husband’s?

Marriage as psyops — it’s not virgin territory, but the stage and stakes here are epic. On Monday, as The Washington Post’s James Hohmann noted, she used the phrase “global society” in both her spoken remarks about cyberbullying and her written remarks about the trip to Africa, which she praised for its “rich culture.” Her husband, of course, treats “globalists” and “globalism” as dirty words, and some of his “shithole countries” are on that richly cultured continent. She’ll be going there without him.

Other first ladies beautified highways, promoted reading, planted squash. This one could abbreviate a nightmare. She’s in a situation that her predecessors weren’t, on the arm of an overlord who needs undermining, and it’s her invitation to greatness, or at least her prompt for an itinerary tailored to taunt.

I urge that visit to James’s school. Bring Don Lemon along. I suggest lunch dates with Maxine Waters, Aperol spritzes with Angela Merkel and pajama parties with Nancy Pelosi. And pussy bows and pantsuits for days on end. They’re the threads of a revolution.”

Don’t be fooled, if you took the time the time to stomach reading the whole article above you will see it’s not an actual praise of anything. It’s just one more mere try to take down our President. The man the majority of us voted for in the 2016 election. But what perhaps makes this article special is that he comes at him by forwarding a conspiracy theory which actually claims First Lady Melania Trump is trying to get under her husband’s skin. That she has contempt for him and if only she would turn it up a notch “she might finally undo him and set us free.”

Free us from what? A world without ISIS? Peace in the Korean Peninsula? An unemployment rate not seen in decades? An economy which the CEO of Target calls “the best I’ve seen in my career?” A GDP which former President Barack Hussein Obama said was unattainable in today’s world? A consumer confidence not seen since the 90’s? Is this the evil they want to rid us from?

I think we can all rest assured that if Hillary Clinton didn’t have contempt for Bill, and Jackie Kennedy didn’t have contempt for John, President Trump has nothing to worry about since he has done nothing compared to what those two characters put their wives through.

The author of this piece, Frank Bruni has been with The Times since 1995 and has actually held a variety of jobs in the field of journalism, which in today’s world seems to have open contempt for people like you and I. He was White House reporter, Rome bureau chief, and chief restaurant critic before becoming a columnist in 2011 for the NYT. Maybe he should just stick to being a restaurant critic, which I am sure he didn’t excel at either outside of his own elitist circles.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Trending Now on Right Wing News


Air Force Witness Of Extortion 17 Attack On SEALs Says We Were Lied To – Obama Has Hell To Pay

Published

on

...

* By

The families of some of the 17 SEAL Team 6 commandos who were killed in an ambush in Afghanistan during a helicopter flight to help Army Rangers pinned down by Taliban gunmen accused the Obama administration of deliberately endangering their loved ones for political ends.

Now a highly decorated, retired Air Force officer is coming forward, breaking her silence to speak out on what she witnessed in one of the deadliest attacks on Navy SEALs in U.S. history. Her testimony details how the government covered up evidence in the 2011 downing of a Chinook helicopter gunship that killed a total of 38 military personnel in Afghanistan and how the attack that took so many lives could have been prevented if it were not for the restrictions to the military’s rules of engagement instituted under the Obama administration.

On August 6, 2011, Air Force Capt. Joni Marquez was working along with her crew in the early morning hours before sunrise while aboard an AC-130 gunship when they were summoned to a mission in what she describes as “almost like a 9-1-1 type of a situation.”

The gunship received orders to fly close-in air support above Afghanistan’s dangerous Tangi Valley, in Wardak Province. They were to assist troops with the Army’s 75th Ranger Regiment who were under heavy fire by eight heavily armed Taliban insurgents. The Rangers had put in a call for assault helicopters to engage the enemy to draw them out of their hiding place in the rocky valley. They believed the insurgents were all killed after the air weapons team fired on the Taliban fighters. They were wrong.

Marquez states of the events that unfolded afterward – “I had the sensor operators immediately shift to the eight insurgents the helicopters had taken out. Two were still alive. We had seen two of them (insurgents) moving, crawling away from the area, as to not really make a whole lot of scene.”

She was the fire control officer aboard the AC-130 gunship and her job was to make sure the sensors and weapons aligned allowing the crew to hone in on targets for accuracy in firing. However, that night it did not matter because the gunship had not received permission to fire.

As she monitored the scene from above she detailed the scene to the ground force commander – “You have two enemy forces that are still alive. Permission to engage,” she asked. They were denied.

Marquez details in excruciating and painful detail how the ground commander’s refusal to grant her crew permission to engage the two enemy fighters sealed their fate. As a result, 38 people died in Extortion 17. She and her team could do little more than track the two enemy insurgents with the surveillance equipment. She and her team watched on helplessly as the two moved through an open field and made their way to a village for reinforcements.

Meanwhile, a CH-47 Chinook helicopter, with the call sign Extortion 17, was called into lengthy firefight.  Marquez explained – “If we would’ve been allowed to engage that night, we would’ve taken out those two men immediately. They continued to essentially gain more and more force behind them because they just kept knocking on doors and the two personnel that initially fled ended up becoming a group of 12 people.”

Instead, a Taliban fighter shot a grenade from a rocket launcher hitting the Chinook. It sent the helicopter in a downward spin where it eventually crashed and killed everyone on board. 38 people died including thirty Americans and eight Afghans. Of those 38 dead, 17 were Navy SEALs. The tragedy took some of the glow off SEAL Team 6’s grand achievement just three months earlier: A team penetrated Pakistan airspace, infiltrated a compound in Abbottabad and killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden – long considered to be the mastermind behind the September 11, 2011 attack on the Twin Towers in New York City.

Marquez believes that had her team been allowed to engage and return fire, those 38 deaths could have been prevented. Pleas and warnings from her crew to turn the Chinook back or cancel their mission went unheeded. She explained that by the time Extortion 17 came in confusion ruled the day, stating – “Whenever we reached out to the Joint Operations Center, they would essentially just push back with, ‘Find a, a good infill location. Find a good helicopter landing zone.’”

She explained that one of the hardest things she had to do in her entire military career was to be forced to simply watch from her infrared monitor as one of the SEALs was ejected from the burning Chinook helicopter and his heat signature faded from red to blue. She stated – “We had to sit and watch that, and I think that was one of the hardest things that I had to do. That man was, you know, dying on the ground.”

Marquez describes the pain of the aftermath of living with what happened and the toll it has taken. She is in active therapy as a result and has been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or PTSD. She tearfully explains – “If we would’ve been allowed to engage that night, we would’ve taken out those two men immediately. I mean, it’s just one of those things where you know that it could’ve all been prevented.”

Her retelling of the events as they unfolded that night is corroborated by a previously top-secret report compiled by the Defense Department inspector general.  The report includes interviews with many of Marquez’s colleagues on the gunship, including the commander.

Retired Army Lt. Gen. William Boykin, who served as deputy undersecretary of defense for Intelligence and was a commander in the Army’s super-secret “Delta Force,” denounced politicized rules of engagement as a “deliberate plot” within the American armed forces that he says puts political correctness above the safety of the troops. He stated – “We’ve allowed politics to become more important than the lives and safety of those men and women.”

The rules of engagement on the battlefield were tightened by Gen. Stanley McCrystal under former President Obama’s leadership in 2009. The official reason cited was an “overreliance on firepower and force protection” with the idea that this would reduce civilian casualties and win the cooperation of locals. Except according to Marquez it didn’t. The rules regarding when to engage the enemy were continuously changing depending on who was in charge and those rules prevented her crew from effectively doing what was necessary.

Marquez stated – “Ridiculous rules of engagement that basically state that you can’t shoot until being shot upon.  A weapon has to be pointed, and essentially fired at you, in order for you to shoot and you have the proper clearance so that you don’t, you know, go to jail, that you’re charged with a war crime.”

Senior legal advocate for U.S. Special Forces Jeffery Addicott is considered an expert in rules of engagement with 20 years of experience describes Marquez’s story as one of the most tragic regarding U.S. troops under enemy fire. He explains that all these unrealistic rules do is tie the hands of military personnel and endanger lives.

Addicott states – “In Afghanistan, we had rules of engagement that became more restrictive the longer we stayed. Right now, the rules of engagement are absolutely bizarre. Law of war, if you do or you suspected that someone was an enemy combatant, they had a weapon, they were carrying it openly, you could kill them before they shot at you.”

He is now pushing for congressional oversight of the Department of Defense’s rules of engagement so as to prevent a repeat of this level of tragedy. He believes placating foreign governments at the expense of American lives became a death sentence some military personnel. Overly restrictive rules of engagement do nothing to help those fighting the war win. They are simply the work of bureaucrats enforced against military personnel under political pressure from host nations.

Examples of some of the unclassified rules of engagement for Afghanistan are as follows –

  • No night or surprise searches
  • Villagers warned prior to searches
  • U.S. units on searches
  • U.S. soldiers may not fire at the enemy unless the enemy is preparing to fire first
  • Afghan National Army or Afghan National Police must accompany
  • U.S. forces cannot engage the enemy if civilians are present
  • Troops can fire at an insurgent if they catch them placing an IED, but not if they’re walking away from placing an IED.
  • Only engage an enemy fighter if you see a weapon, and they’ve fired first

Addicott states – “Under our current rules of engagement, you cannot shoot them until they shoot at you first. Now many people — of course people on the ground, the military soldiers — they know that this is a recipe for disaster and so, we basically have these rules that are made by the president.”

Marquez agrees with Addicott’s assessment and hopes her revelations of what actually occurred on the night Extortion 17 crashed will bring change that saves lives. She states – “I won’t rest until some kind of justice is served, in a manner of either, you know, the people that were responsible for that night, for making those calls, come forward and are honest about it. I know that’s kind of a lofty goal but, if that’s something that doesn’t happen, then obviously the ROE’s to change, for them to be realistic.”

Many family members of the fallen believe SEAL Team 6 had a target on its back and that persons inside the Afghan National Security Forces may have tipped off the Taliban about that fateful night in Tangi Valley. They wonder why a fighter just happened to be stationed in a turret within 150 yards of a landing zone that had never been used before. Yet the Defense Department special operations official continues to maintain there is no indication the mission was compromised by the Afghans.

Family members enlisted legal watchdog group, Freedom Watch led by attorney Larry Klayman in an effort to force new disclosures using the power of the FOIA process. Klayman speaks of how he has repeatedly been “stonewalled” by the Justice Department, the Defense Department, the CIA and the National Security Agency.

U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon signed an order requiring documents be released on a continual basis through the spring and summer. The Justice Department said at least 50 documents in the Pentagon have been identified as relevant, but only one has been turned over. The DOJ unilaterally set a new deadline for the release and then ignored their own deadline. Klayman also stated DOJ attorneys will not take his phone calls. He states – “They don’t even produce under their own self-imposed deadline. We’re pleading with the judge to do something, and he’s just sitting on it.”

As has become abundantly clear during the last several years the U.S. government is spending a significant amount of time and resources covering up the truth on many things from the American people. Things like the current FISA abuses, spying, Benghazi, the NSA, and a vast number of other incidents. It seems that a FOIA request no longer accomplishes what it was set up to accomplish – there is no “freedom of information” any longer. The government purposely delays or conceals documents in an effort to give time to redact and to delete things they do not want the American public to become aware of.

One wonders if the end result will be the same with current fictional witchhunt into so-called Russian collusion. As Rep. Trey Gowdy said recently when questioning FBI Director Christopher Wray and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein – “Whatever you got, finish it the hell up because this country is being torn apart”

Continue Reading

Florida’s INTENSE Governor’s Race JUST CALLED – MAJOR Upset Underway Now

Published

on

...

* By

As the most reliable and balanced news aggregation service in the world, RWN offers the following information published by USA Today:

Andrew Gillum will have to rely on the courts if he has any chance to become Florida’s first black governor.

A recount of more than 8 million ballots that ended Thursday afternoon confirmed that Republican Ron DeSantis beat the Democratic Tallahassee mayor in the nationally watched race that galvanized progressives across the country.

The final tally, headed to certification next week, was 4,075,445 for DeSantis and 4,041,762 for Gillum.

The margin of victory was enough for DeSantis, a former congressman representing Jacksonville, to avoid a hand recount of questionable ballots set aside for further review. He had already assembled a transition team to prepare for his ascendance as Florida’s 46th governor.

But Gillum is not conceding. He and his supporters believe there is still a path to victory: lawsuits that could add more votes in support of him.

“A vote denied is justice denied — the State of Florida must count every legally cast vote,” Gillum said in a statement after the recount totals were released. “As today’s unofficial reports and recent court proceedings make clear, there are tens of thousands of votes that have yet to be counted. We plan to do all we can to ensure that every voice is heard in this process. Voters need to know that their decision to participate in this election, and every election, matters. It is not over until every legally casted vote is counted.”

The deadline for the recount was 3 p.m. Eastern Standard Time Thursday but Palm Beach County, a Democratic stronghold, did not complete its recount. It was the only one of Florida’s 67 counties that failed to do so. A lawsuit filed by Democrats could find more votes for Gillum there, for example.

After Election Day, DeSantis, led Gillum by fewer than 34,000 votes or a margin of .409 percent. At the time, the race was one of three under a statewide mandated recount. Margins in the Senate and state’s agriculture commissioner were also under the half-percent margin needed to automatically trigger a machine recount.

After the recount, the margin barely changed.

Gillum, 39, had attracted a national following as he sought to make history.

Potential 2020 presidential candidates Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., campaigned for him and he was often featured on national news shows after he scored an unexpected win in the Democratic gubernatorial primary in August.

But he was continually dogged by ethical issues, including his acceptance of tickets to the hit Broadway show “Hamilton,” a lavish trip to Costa Rica with lobbyist pals, and a fundraiser underwritten by an undercover FBI agent.

The victory by DeSantis, 40, who is an ardent supporter of President Donald Trump, keeps the governor’s mansion in GOP hands, where it has been since 1999.

Continue Reading




Latest Articles

Become an insider!

Thank you for your interest in receiving the Right Wing News newsletter. To subscribe, please submit your email address below.

Send this to a friend