Connect with us


Liberal media, it’s time for you to take down Bill Clinton



Bill Cosby, Roger Ailes, Harvey Weinstein, Bill O’Reilly, Kevin Spacey, Roy Moore, Louis C.K., George Takei, John Travolta. This is a hefty list of very powerful men in Hollywood, the media, and politics who have been accused of or taken down by the new wave against sexual assault. I’m certain there is much more to come, and I have no problem with it. Let’s clean out all the rat’s nests. But wait… aren’t we missing someone? Isn’t it curious that absent from this list is one very major public figure?

Before you go making excuses about statutes of limitation or letting elders live out their remaining years, let me remind you that Cosby’s assaults happened in the mid 60’s. Juanita Broaddrick’s story happened in 1978. Let me also remind you that Broaddrick’s rape allegation sounds a lot like a Harvey Weinstein tale: He asked her to come up to his hotel room, multiple witnesses corroborated her story, and he used power and intimidation to keep her from talking to authorities. Why then, hasn’t President Clinton been publicly shamed like all the others? Who is protecting him?

To the media on the Left

The motivation to bring down one of your biggest champions should be to prove that nobody is above the law in a civilized society, especially when it comes to sexual conduct. But because he is so revered, let me offer you this carrot instead: If you take down Bill, you can take down Donald.

How we got here

Here, where giants like Cosby, Weinstein, and O’Reilly can be brought down but sitting presidents cannot, was established in 1997. The precedent was set by the liberal media when they gave the most powerful man in the country a free pass when Kathleen Willey first alleged sexual assault while Clinton held office in 1997. Now that we are dealing with similar circumstances from the Republican Party, they want to renege on that free pass. I do too. But it starts with righting the first wrong. It starts with their side taking down Clinton before the public will take them seriously.

Going forward

Think of it this way, news media… You established the strike zone back in 1997. Bill Clinton was at bat. He already had two strikes against him from Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones. But when Monica Lewinsky threw a fastball that caught the inside corner, you called it a ball and let him walk. Now that Donald Trump is at bat, you want to call strikes on the inside corner again. While we agree those are strikes and should have always been called as strikes, you can’t start calling them strikes again until you call them on Clinton first. It was you who established this strike zone. It’s up to you to make it right.


Continue Reading
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Don McCullen

    November 14, 2017 at 7:30 pm

    I agree, but I am not holding my breath either.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Jim Acosta is building his own celebrity, not seeking the truth



Jim Acosta is building his own celebrity not seeking the truth

The press shouldn’t be part of the news. It happens from time to time based upon proximity; because they have to be close to situations, they occasionally get drawn in. What a good journalist should never do is intentionally insert himself into the news, but that seems to be exactly what CNN’s Jim Acosta is doing.

He doesn’t care about reporting. It’s as if he now enjoys being the news. That’s the only logical conclusion one can come up with when viewing his actions over the past several months. Once an obscure media figure during the Obama era, Acosta has found true celebrity status by going after the President and his staff.

He tasted blood and he liked it. Now, it seems he’s addicted to it.

The latest “outburst” against him came from the President himself. It happened during an event with the President of Kazakhstan in which Acosta asked an unrelated question:

‘OUT!’ Trump orders CNN star Jim Acosta to leave Oval Office after reporter’s newest outburst“Did you say that you want more people to come in from Norway? Did you say that you wanted more people from Norway? Is that true Mr. President?” Acosta frantically shouted.

“I want them to come in from everywhere… everywhere. Thank you very much everybody,” Trump responded as Acosta continued to bark questions.

That’s all acceptable, albeit slightly inappropriate considering the reason for the event. Acosta took it up several notches with his followup question:

“Just Caucasian or white countries, sir? Or do you want people to come in from other parts of the world… people of color.”

This was intended to insert himself into the news once again. It’s a ridiculous question to ask and embarrassed the President and the nation on an international stage. “Journalists” like Acosta are willing to harm the country and its people as long as they can harm the President at the same time.

I’ve treated the President fairly since he was elected. When he pushes a big-government agenda, I voice my concerns. When he does well, I give praise. I would never attempt to shame him (and the nation as a result) with petulant outbursts of absurd questions. Jim Acosta apparently doesn’t hold such standards.

Continue Reading


Rich Lowry on Dick Durbin’s desire to make a DACA deal work



Rich Lowry on Dick Durbins desire to make a DACA deal work

Based upon Senator Dick Durbin’s actions the last few days regarding President Trump’s “s***hole” comments, one would think his intention was to derail talks and have a valid reason to blame Republicans in general and Trump in particular. If he really wanted a DACA deal, wouldn’t he have handled it differently?

JD Rucker had some thoughts on this:

Trump was wrong to say what he said. Durbin was wrong to reveal it. crossed that line. He took comments that paint the entire country through the President himself in a way that harms our ability to work with other nations. He wasn’t championing the nations Trump spoke out about. He had a single intention: harm.

Will this help with negotiations? Possibly, but at what cost?

National Review’s Rich Lowry wasn’t quite as accusatory, but he did question Durbin’s motives and whether or not he really wanted to make a DACA deal happen. Perhaps he was just greatly offended. Then again, perhaps he was just being a politician. Here’s Lowry’s quote:

“Everyone seems to think that Durbin really wants a deal, which makes it weird that he has gone out of his way to blow up the s***hole meeting.”

Read all of his comments:

Trump’s “Shithole” Comments, DACA & Political Fallout benefit of a merit-based system is that it would move us away from special ethnic pleading in immigration policy. The visa lottery began as affirmative action for Irish immigrants. My understanding is that Dick Durbin said in the meeting that he wanted to preserve the visa lottery in a slightly changed form because the Congressional Black Caucus wanted it. This is not how we should be making decisions about who comes here and who doesn’t.

Continue Reading


Rand Paul defends President Trump’s sentiment



Rand Paul defends President Trumps sentiment

On an interview today with Chuck Todd, Senator Rand Paul defended the President’s sentiment in his infamous “s***hole” comment. While not defending the language, he noted that if the language itself had been more politically correct, the sentiment of what the President said was true.

He also turned blame on the media and Democrats for derailing immigration talks by focusing on the President’s comments.

“I do want to see an immigration compromise and you can’t have an immigration compromise if everybody’s out there calling the President a racist,” Paul said.

My Take

For the most part, the Senator is correct. This has become a distraction and a roadblock to important talks. The incessant desire to discredit the President has the rabid media keeping us focused on how the President talks rather than his actions.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily






Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.