Connect with us


Everyone else knew the U.N. would laugh at Trump’s claims. Why didn’t he?



When a President brags about himself at a campaign rally, he will usually get wild cheers, chants, and applause. Speaking before the United Nations General Assembly is very different from a campaign rally which is why nobody would expect the same reaction. Nobody but Donald Trump.

In one of the most glaring, albeit inconsequential moments of embarrassment on the international stage, President Trump said this to the gathered dignitaries and world leaders:

“In less than two years my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country.”

Let’s set aside any debate about whether or not this is true. Valid arguments can be made in both directions. Let’s instead look at the insane disconnect the President has with the reality of situations. We’ll start with the obvious.

A United States President does not make historical claims about himself anywhere outside of campaign rallies. Period. Anywhere else, whether during interviews or press conferences or when addressing the the United Nations General Assembly, such bragging comes across as inappropriate at best, comical at worst. Today, Trump’s words were comical and the audience let him know that by laughing at him.

“So true,” he said as the laughter started to rise. After a brief pause, he said, “Didn’t expect that reaction but that’s okay.”

In the whole scheme of things, this is a meaningless faux pas. However, it demonstrates what many are starting to realize. This President really isn’t aware of anything outside of his own protective bubble. He sincerely believes that his accomplishments are so bright and glorious that he can make such haughty claims and receive the same type of applause he gets from his supporters at campaign rallies.

The left will try to label this a huge embarrassment. It’s not. One thing the world already knows is that President Trump’s self-image is inflated, so such words only act to reaffirm their assessment. In other words, they expect to hear such things. No damage was done.

The real question is how a speechwriter or any of his handlers allowed him to say it at all. Aren’t there people around him to say, “Umm, no Mr. President. You shouldn’t say that to the UN General Assembly.”

Science and Tech

6 years after Rupert Sheldrake’s censored TEDx talk, ‘The Science Delusion’ continues drawing eyeballs



6 years after Rupert Sheldrakes censored TEDx talk The Science Delusion continues drawing eyeballs

I remember the first time I watched Rupert Sheldrake’s TEDx presentation. In an example of the Streisand Effect, TED’s attempt to bury and warn people from watching it ended up magnifying the spread of the video.

Yesterday, I referred to it with a friend, assuming everyone has surely seen it by now. Of course, I was very wrong and was disappointed to find it was hard to find in the usual places. I turned to YouTube and found it listed as a “banned” talk, but even this bootleg version had over 2 million views.

I don’t want to spoil anyone’s viewing of it, but I’ll say this: in a world where scientific dogmas dominate not only the politics of the scientific community but also the motivations, this particular talk is one that must be shared.

Continue Reading


What classical liberalism is, briefly



What classical liberalism is briefly

The progressive left and the Democratic Party have undergone many transformations over the last century. They’ve masterfully spun American understanding of language and labels to the point that history has been in a constant state of being rewritten to conform to their machinations. One of the most perverse examples of this is how they now claim the mantle of “liberalism.”

Sadly, those who embrace Natural Rights, limited government, and individualism have been forced to amend our label as liberals to become “classical liberals” for the sake of escaping confusion. Most Americans today would assume if we call ourselves “liberals” that we must be big fans of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

This video by classical liberal Dave Rubin at The Rubin Report breaks it down in less than two minutes.

Liberty-loving proponents of personal responsibility and self-governance have had our label taken from us. Today, a liberal is a progressive. It’s like saying a hamburger is a vegetable, but that’s the state of American understanding today.

This is, of course, part of the political war. Words have meaning, as leftists love to say, so they’ve done everything they can to change the meaning of many words. “Liberal” is one of them. They started with a lie and repeated it over and over again until it became… politics.


Over the next few weeks I’ll be going into much more detail about the ideology of classical liberalism, its history, and how it should play a role in modern politics. We’ll be asking (and answering) important questions surrounding the resurging movement, including:

  • Should classical liberals attempt to retake the “liberal” moniker from leftists?
  • Why true liberals should embrace limited government
  • Is classical liberalism really making a comeback or has it been here all along?
  • Why the progressive “liberal” left is neither liberal nor champions of progress
  • How did liberalism, born to defend individualism, become synonymous with collectivism?

Is it possible to wrest the “liberal” label away from leftists? Is it necessary? Would it simply add more confusion to the polarized political atmosphere in America? Would that be a bad thing?

Continue Reading


George Papadapolous opens up to OAN following release from prison



George Papadapolous opens up to OAN following release from prison

George Papadapolous is freshly out of prison following a 12-day sentence for lying to federal investigators. He spoke to OAN’s Jack Posobiec for an extremely interesting five minutes.

Two big takeaways came from this. First, Papadapolous rightly points out that Michael Cohen was always President Trump’s “fixer” well before the presidential campaign was announced. The notion that he couldn’t have handled the Stormy Daniels and/or Karen McDougal situations without informing then-candidate Trump is ridiculous. His role was specifically to handle situations like that. As Trump’s lawyer, he was empowered to do such things.

That’s not to say President Trump wasn’t informed, but considering the current nature of their relationship and Cohen’s history of lying, it’s feasible to believe he’s lying now to get back at the President and attempt to cover his own asset. Our EIC noted as much last night.

President Trump’s best defense against Michael Cohen is… Michael Cohen someone needed to be paid off, Cohen would work out the details. If someone needed to be threatened, Cohen would make the call. Listening to recorded conversations of him making such threats reveals that he’s a scumbag. But he was Trump’s scumbag, and part of being a rich man’s scumbag is doing the dirty work without getting the boss involved.

Unless there are better recordings than the ones Cohen has already produced that show then-candidate Trump ordering the hush money, it’s very unlikely the Mueller investigation will yield an indictment. It’s the President’s word against his scumbag fixer’s. Indicting anyone solely on the self-serving word of Michael Cohen would be ludicrous.

The other takeaway is Papadapolous’ calls to declassify the FISA documents. He was on them, so it may not behoove him to have them released unless the government was wrong in filing them in the first place.

I’ve learned to turn to OAN more and more for honest perspectives on real topics. They aren’t Fox News or any of the other mainstream media puppets. Kudos to them, Jack Prosobiec, and the whole team for revitalizing conservative journalism.

Continue Reading




Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report