Weinergate



Visit Weiner Facts.com

STU: I don't know, Glenn, perhaps we can auction off something to do with Weinerfacts.com because the site is exploded across the Internet right now. Have you been to Weinerfacts.com today?

GLENN: Not today.

STU: I was driving in today I saw someone with a bumper sticker that said have you been to Weinerfacts.com today. It's all over the place. And right now the lead story at Weinerfacts.com.

GLENN: Wait. Let me Google. In fact, if you're at the office now, why would I suggest that if you're at the office?

STU: That you Google Weinerfacts?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: Well, I mean, some would say I guess if people continually Google Weinerfacts, eventually when people search for the name Anthony Weiner the Congressman Weinerfacts will actually be the top search result, and that might be a reason. I'm not saying that's why you're saying it.

GLENN: Would you do me a favor, because I didn't even know that. Would you just make sure that.

PAT: You didn't know that?

GLENN: No, I didn't. Could you just Google Weinerfacts all day long.

STU: Anthony Weiner, Weinerfacts. Any combination of Weinerfacts, Anthony Weiner always positive.

PAT: Any combination?

STU: Just do it however you would like to do it. Just do it a lot of different ways.

GLENN: So far all I have are facts and Weiner check. I have YouTube weinerfacts and Glenn Beck. And fun facts about Weiner. PAT: All of Weinerfacts.com is filled with fun facts about Weiner.

GLENN: Like what?

STU: Like, for example, the lead post right now at Weinerfacts.com is even message board used as source by Weiner disagrees with Weiner. Goes into the fact that in the unbelievably devastating Weiner Report which he discusses Glenn Beck and Goldline, one of the main sources he uses in there is a message board that there's apparently there was apparently complaints about Goldline on a message board. That was in a report released by the Congressman. That's the level of sourcing he did. Unfortunately, he didn't exactly read the site, because there was an investigation done by the founder of the site into the claims.

GLENN: Oh, you've got to be kidding me?

STU: Here is a quote from what he came up with, the actual investigation result. "Consumers can feel confident and secure when doing business with Goldline International."

GLENN: Oh my gosh. Oh my gosh.

PAT: Holy cow.

GLENN: Those are really good Weiner facts.

STU: One of the best Weiner facts I've seen on Weinerfacts.

GLENN: I'm still looking for Weinerfacts. I can't find it. I Google it. It's not coming up.

PAT: You searched for Weinerfacts and you're not getting Weinerfacts.

GLENN: Seriously.

PAT: I'm getting news results and that kind stuff. Glenn Beck retaliates.

GLENN: I have Web. Weiner facts.

STU: I do see Weinerfacts.com/weiner coming up. Look for Weiner. It's the sixth one down there. But the important thing is eventually you search for Anthony Weiner on Google, we want Weinerfacts to be the first thing. Now, currently right now the first thing is, of course, his congressional website followed by Wikipedia. But the fourth one down now is when Anthony Weiner attacks, which is a Fox News transcript of your deal with Weiner. And then there's some other reports on Weiner. But Weinerfacts so far has not shown up on the first page.

GLENN: Can I tell you something, Weinerfacts is not

PAT: It won't come up.

GLENN: It's not coming up on Google.

PAT: Is the site down. Because I can't get to the site either. I've typed in Weinerfacts.

STU: You typed in Weinerfacts and you're having a problem getting to Weinerfacts.

PAT: Yes, I typed in the address line. Have we crashed the website?

GLENN: Is that Web or news? You have Weinerfacts.com.

PAT: Are you getting it, Stu?

STU: Yes I'm getting on weinerfacts.com. When there's a lot of traffic to Weinerfacts.com, it does crash the servers occasionally. I'm getting a crash right now.

GLENN: I've been searching Weinerfacts and that's not coming up on Google. Weinerfacts.com is.

STU: If you search Weinerfacts, you'll get the redstate.com entry where it talks about Weinerfacts.com.

GLENN: How much will you give me if I can make Bill O'Reilly say on national television I like Weiner.

STU: Period. No facts after it? Is this a different discussion? What were you involved in here?

PAT: I mean where did that come from? We're having a perfectly good discussion.

GLENN: Last night last night I cut because Bill and I are on stage, where, Norfolk, and so we cut the thing for tonight. And I came in with a hot dog and I just started, I just started on the Weinerfacts thing. And we did they're probably going to have to edit it. I did ten minutes with him on Weinerfacts, and it is hysterical. It is hysterical. And at some point he said, look, I don't mean to bash the guy. I like Weiner.

(Laughter) I just about lost it. I about lost it. (Laughter) It's so great.

STU: This is airing tonight.

GLENN: It's airing tonight. He said to me, afterwards, because we laughed so hard. It was such a funny one. We laughed so hard. I wish we could run it in its entirety. He just let it go at the tape. Which usually he sticks right to it. But he just let it go. So I don't know what parts they're going to be able to run. But it is hysterical.

STU: If you're doing ten minutes on Weinerfacts on Bill O'Reilly's show we may have to add capacity to the Weinerfacts servers because

GLENN: I think you will. I think you will. Weinerfacts.

PAT: It's crashing already. And you're going to mention it on O'Reilly tonight. I think we better add capacity.

GLENN: It's so funny. I'm eating the hot dog, and he's like are you eating him? Is that what this is representing? Are you eating him? And I know he was thinking, he didn't want to say: Are you eating wiener.

STU: No you don't want to say that.

GLENN: What a joke this guy is. Anthony Weiner, what a joke.

PAT: Such a pawn too for the administration.

GLENN: Bill has booked him for next week.

STU: To talk about Weinerfacts?

GLENN: Yes, to talk about Weinerfacts. I'm going to have him on. If there's no truth to this and we've looked into it, there's nothing here. He said if there's no truth to this, and indeed this is about you and I said what else is it about, Bill? I said this is about Goldline doing commercials with me.

PAT: What was his response? Because Bill

GLENN: He said if that's true and he knows it is he said if that is true this is a huge story, and then I'm involved. And I said thank you. Thank you, Bill.

PAT: That would be good.

GLENN: I told him

PAT: It takes a lot to convince O'Reilly.

GLENN: It does. You know, he is known as a right wing blah, blah, blah, no, he's not. He's not. Bill O'Reilly pisses me off about half the time. And that's a sign of somebody who is, I think, fair, balanced. Now, I would like to see that come a little bit closer, because things are they're not even close calls anymore. It's like we have this big argument now: Well you just think everybody in the White House is a Marxist. Well, not everybody but an awful lot. Socialists.

PAT: Based on their own words.

GLENN: Based on their own words, associations, everything. Everything. But he's going to be talking about Weinerfacts tonight.

PAT: I can't wait to see that.

Stop trying to be right and think of the children

Mario Tama/Getty Images

All the outrage this week has mainly focused on one thing: the evil Trump administration and its minions who delight in taking children from their illegal immigrant parents and throwing them all in dungeons. Separate dungeons, mind you.

That makes for a nice, easy storyline, but the reality is less convenient. Most Americans seem to agree that separating children from their parents — even if their parents entered the US illegally — is a bad thing. But what if that mom and dad you're trying to keep the kids with aren't really the kids' parents? Believe it or not, fraud happens.

RELATED: Where were Rachel Maddow's tears for immigrant children in 2014?

While there are plenty of heartbreaking stories of parents simply seeking a chance for a better life for their children in the US, there are also corrupt, abusive human traffickers who profit from the illegal immigration trade. And sorting all of this out is no easy task.

This week, the Department of Homeland Security said that since October 2017, more than 300 children have arrived at the border with adults claiming to be their parents who turned out not to be relatives. 90 of these fraud cases came from the Rio Grande Valley sector alone.

In 2017, DHS reported 46 causes of fraudulent family claims. But there have already been 191 fraud cases in 2018.

Shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

When Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen pointed out this 315 percent increase, the New York Times was quick to give these family fraud cases "context" by noting they make up less than one percent of the total number of illegal immigrant families apprehended at the southern border. Their implication was that Nielsen was exaggerating the numbers. Even if the number of fraud cases at the border was only 0.001 percent, shouldn't we be concerned about any child that is smuggled by a human trafficker?

This is the most infuriating part of this whole conversation this week (if you can call it a "conversation") — that both sides have an angle to defend. And while everyone's busy yelling and making their case, children are being abused.

What if we just tried, for two seconds, to love having mercy more than we love having to be right all the time?

Remember when cartoons were happy things? Each panel took you on a tiny journey, carrying you to an unexplored place. In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud writes:

The comics creator asks us to join in a silent dance of the seen and the unseen. The visible and the invisible. This dance is unique to comics. No other artform gives so much to its audience while asking so much from them as well. This is why I think it's a mistake to see comics as a mere hybrid of the graphic arts and prose fiction. What happens between . . . panels is a kind of magic only comics can create.

When that magic is manipulated or politicized, it often devolves the artform into a baseless thing. Yesterday, Occupy Wall Street published the perfect example of low-brow deviation of the artform: A six-panel approach at satire, which imitates the instructions-panel found in the netted cubbyhole behind seats on airplanes. The cartoon is a critique of the recent news about immigrant children being separated from their parents after crossing the border. It is a step-by-step guide to murdering US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents.

RELATED: Cultural appropriation has jumped the shark, and everyone is noticing

The first panel shows a man shoving an infant into a cage meant for Pomeranians. The following five panels feature instructions, and include pictures of a cartoonish murder.

The panels read as follows:

  1. If an ICE agent tries to take your child at the border, don't panic.
  2. Pull your child away as quickly as possibly by force.
  3. Gently tell your child to close his/her eyes and ears so they won't witness what you are about to do.
  4. Grab the ICE agent from behind and push your knife into his chest with an upward thrust, causing the agent's sternum to break.
  5. Reach into his chest and pull out his still beating heart.
  6. Hold his bloody heart out for all other agents to see, and tell them that the same fate awaits them if they f--- with your child again.

Violent comics are nothing new. But most of the time, they remain in the realms of invented worlds — in other words, not in our own, with reference to actual people, let alone federal agents.

The mainstream media made a game of crying racism with every cartoon depiction of Obama during his presidency, as well as during his tenure as Senator, when the New Yorker, of all things, faced scrutiny for depicting him in "Muslim clothing." Life was a minefield for political cartoonists during the Obama era.

Chris Hondros/Getty Images

This year, we saw the leftist outrage regarding The Simpsons character Apu — a cartoon representation of a highly-respected, though cartoonishly-depicted, character on a cartoon show composed of cartoonishly-depicted characters.

We all remember Charlie Hebdo, which, like many outlets that have used cartoon satire to criticize Islam, faced the wrath and ire of people unable to see even the tamest representation of the prophet, Muhammad.

Interesting, isn't it? Occupy Wall Street publishes a cartoon that advocates murdering federal agents, and critics are told to lighten up. Meanwhile, the merest depiction of Muhammad has resulted in riots throughout the world, murder and terror on an unprecedented scale.

The intersection of Islam and comics is complex enough to have its own three-hour show, so we'll leave it at that, for now. Although, it is worth mentioning the commentary by satirical website The Onion, which featured a highly offensive cartoon of all the major religious figures except Muhammad. It noted:

Following the publication of the image above, in which the most cherished figures from multiple religious faiths were depicted engaging in a lascivious sex act of considerable depravity, no one was murdered, beaten, or had their lives threatened.

Of course, Occupy Wall Street is free to publish any cartoon they like. Freedom of speech, and so on—although there have been several instances in which violent cartoons were ruled to have violated the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" limitation of the First Amendment.

Posting it to Twitter is another issue — this is surely in violation of Twitter's violent content policy, but something tells me nothing will come of it. It's a funny world, isn't it? A screenshot of a receipt from Chick-fil-A causes outrage but a cartoon advocating murder gets crickets.

RELATED: Twitter mob goes ballistic over Father's Day photo of Caitlyn Jenner. Who cares?

In Understanding Comics, Scott McCloud concludes that, "Today the possibilities for comics are — as they've always been — endless. Comics offers . . . range and versatility, with all the potential imagery of film and painting plus the intimacy of the written word. And all that's needed is the desire to be heard, the will to learn, and the ability to see."

Smile, and keep moving forward.

Crude and awful as the Occupy Wall Street comic is, the best thing we can do is nod and look elsewhere for the art that will open our eyes. Let the lunatics draw what they want, let them stew in their own flawed double standards. Otherwise, we're as shallow and empty as they are, and nothing good comes of that. Smile, and keep moving forward.

Things are getting better. Show the world how to hear, how to learn, how to see.

People should start listening to Nikki Haley

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty Images

Okay. Let's take a vote. You know, an objective, quantifiable count. How many resolutions has the UN Human Rights Council adopted condemning dictatorships? Easy. Well. How do you define "dictatorship"?

Well, one metric is the UN Human Rights Council Condemnation. How many have the United Nations issued to China, with a body count higher than a professional Call of Duty player?

Zero.

How about Venezuela, where socialism is devouring its own in the cruelest, most unsettling ways imaginable?

Zero.

And Russia, home of unsettling cruelty and rampant censorship, murder and (actual) homophobia?

Zero.

Iraq? Zero. Turkey? Iraq? Zero. Cuba? Zero. Pakistan? Zero.

RELATED: Nikki Haley just dropped some serious verbal bombs on Russia at the UN

According to UN Human Rights Council Condemnations, 2006-2016, none of these nations is as dangerous as we'd imagined. Or, rather, none of them faced a single condemnation. Meanwhile, one country in particular has faced unbelievable scrutiny and fury — you'll never guess which country.

No, it's not Somalia. It's Israel. With 68 UN Human Rights Council Condemnations! In fact, the number of total United Nations condemnations against Israel outnumbers the total of condemnations against all other countries combined. The only country that comes close is Syria, with 15.

The Trump administration withdrew from the United Nations Human Rights Council on Tuesday in protest of what it perceives as an entrenched bias against Israel and a willingness to allow notorious human rights abusers as members.

In an address to the UN Security Council on Tuesday, Nikki Haley said:

Let's remember that the Hamas terrorist organization has been inciting violence for years, long before the United States decided to move our embassy. This is what is endangering the people of Gaza. Make no mistake, Hamas is pleased with the results from yesterday... No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has.

Maybe people should start listening to Haley. Hopefully, they will. Not likely, but there's no crime in remaining hopeful.

Here's a question unique to our times: "Should I tell my father 'Happy Father's Day,' even though he (she?) is now one of my mothers?"

Father's Day was four days ago, yes, but this story is just weird enough to report on. One enjoyable line to read was this gem from Hollywood Gossip: "Cait is a woman and a transgender icon, but she is also and will always be the father of her six children."

RELATED: If Bruce was never a he and always a she, who won the men's Olympic gold in 1976?

Imagine reading that to someone ten — even five — years ago. And, honestly, there's something nice about it. But the strangeness of its having ever been written overpowers any emotional impact it might bring.

"So lucky to have you," wrote Kylie Jenner, in the Instagram caption under pre-transition pictures of Bruce Jenner.

Look. I risk sounding like a tabloid by mere dint of having even mentioned this story, but the important element is the cultural sway that's occurring. The original story was that a band of disgruntled Twitter users got outraged about the supposed "transphobic" remarks by Jenner's daughter.

But, what we should be saying is, "who the hell cares?" Who cares what one Jenner says to another — and more importantly and on a far deeper level — who cares what some anonymous Twitter user has to say?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob?

When are we going to stop playing into the hands of the Twitter mob? Because, at the moment, they've got it pretty good. They have a nifty relationship with the mainstream media: One or two Twitter users get outraged by any given thing — in this case Jenner and supposed transphobia. In return, the mainstream media use the Twitter comment as a source.

Then, a larger Twitter audience points to the article itself as proof that there's some kind of systemic justice at play. It's a closed-market currency, where the negative feedback loop of proof and evidence is composed of faulty accusations. Isn't it a hell of a time to be alive?