Tag Archives: Sean Hannity

Coulter’s Berkeley Bluff

Ann Coulter has been undeservedly hailed a valiant heroine for the Battle at Berkeley, yet her perceived defiance of leftist mobs and censoring administrators was not really at all courageous.

In fact, Coulter never expected or intended to give a speech at Berkeley! It was all a clever ruse and publicity stunt. Bravado, not bravery, marked Coulter’s Berkeley bluff.

After successfully portraying herself as a courageous free speech warrior – having gotten exactly what she wanted: publicity and a new image – Coulter did not give what would have been a truly “free” (no honorarium) speech in what she herself insisted was the “safest place on earth” for her.

Before getting into details, let’s recall that Berkeley has justifiably been almost universally condemned (except by some on the far left) for not allowing Coulter to speak. Nevertheless, Coulter is not the courageous heroine she would have you believe her to be.

Coulter’s Last Stand

I gave Ann an Alamo Award in 1997 for her unquestioned courage – at that time – in speaking truth to power, at the risk of losing her livelihood. At Berkeley, Coulter risked nothing whatsoever. Indeed, regardless of the outcome, Coulter expected to gain that which she sought: publicity and an image of being a heroic-martyr.

This epic battle of wills pitting liberty lovers against academic censors saturated national news coverage. Coulter’s gambit was actually just a PR stunt from the very beginning. And it worked.

Her #BerkeleyBound mission perfectly suited her purposes. Whether or not she spoke, she won. If she spoke, she was heroic; if not, she was a courageous martyr. Win-win.

The Washington Post reported: “In a classic case of ‘heads I win, tails you lose,’ conservative provocateur Ann Coulter emerged from last week’s events at the University of California at Berkeley as a free-speech martyr.”

Coulter couldn’t lose. That was the plan from the start. It was all braggadocio and bravado, a marketing ploy explicitly designed to reinvigorate her reputation and career.

Lauded as the courageous conservative facing down Berkley rioters and university censors, the truth is otherwise: Coulter never intended to speak at Berkeley.

“Pranav Jandhyala, who founded [YAF’s] UC Berkeley chapter,” “acknowledged that it was now clear that Coulter’s intention wasn’t to engage in any real dialogue, but to prove her own point.”

Of course, YAF also wanted to use the entire scenario to promote itself and highlight the rampant trampling of the First Amendment on college campuses (and elsewhere).

Coulter’s Glory

Everything Coulter says or does accrues to Coulter’s benefit. That which she seeks most of all is glory. She became addicted to fame and power in late 1997 and she has never recovered from that pathology.

Coulter generated a tremendous amount of positive media coverage with her Berkeley kerfuffle, far more than during her last book tour. She gloried in her glory on The View.

Milking the situation for all it was worth, Coulter told KTVU that she was better than Milo Yiannopoulos: “I’m not even Milo. I mean, for Pete’s sake, I’m a twelve-time New York Times’ bestselling author.” (Actually, she’s only a ten-time bestselling author, as even McInnes admitted at Berkeley.)

Coulter also likened herself to heroic figures in the past: Martin Luther King, Jr. and Winston Churchill!

She boasted to Tucker Carlson: “By the way, I am giving the speech. What are they going to do, arrest me? They can put me in the Birmingham jail.” (King would have rejected both Coulter’s racial paradigm and anti-Christian behavior.)

The host on KTVU asked Coulter the most pertinent question imaginable: “Some people would say, ‘Ann Coulter is all about Ann Coulter. Ann Coulter wants to promote Ann Coulter. Ann Coulter wants to come here – and she’s gonna come here on Thursday – and she’s gonna be a rabble-rouser and she’s gonna try to incite people.’”

Usually in situations like this, Coulter reverts to using Jesus as her model of civil disobedience (upturning tables in temple, brood of vipers speech) to justify her own vitriol. On this occasion, she argued, “Winston Churchill was promoting himself with that ‘We shall fight on the beaches’ speech.”

Then she stridently claimed, “The idea that I’m trying to get publicity off of this event could not be further from the truth on the facts.”

Timeline

Here’s the actual timeline of events according to Coulter and her speech sponsors:

BridgeUSA and YAF sponsored Coulter’s speech. She knew – given riots at Milo Yiannopoulos’ event in February – that she wouldn’t be giving her speech. The university and/or rioters would surely shut it down.

Berkeley placed ever-demanding restrictions on Coulter’s speech. She insisted that YAF concede to every single demand. Coulter could not quit. She had to wait – and wait patiently she did (because she knew it was inevitable) – for Berkeley to cancel, making her a martyr. She told Tucker Carlson, “Well, they changed the rules every ten minutes. I kept agreeing to all of their conditions – they were hoping I would cancel.”

In this high-stakes game of chicken, Berkeley flinched. Berkeley caved and cancelled her speech, enabling Coulter to play the heroic victim of institutional censorship and mob rule.

Under intense media and political pressure, Berkeley offered an alternative date, which Coulter refused, keeping the pressure on Berkeley. Her sponsors filed lawsuits.

Coulter demanded her original speaking slot, insisted she would speak, and suggested she would speak in Sproul Plaza, if need be.

Berkeley announced that it could not ensure the safety of the speaker and attendees. Then YAF folded. Coulter wrote, “We were on [the] cusp of victory and YAF backed down, refused to seek a court order or allow the College Republicans to request a court order.  It’s a sad day for free speech.”

Coulter’s sponsors caved. Coulter was incensed. Why? She wanted Berkeley to cave and herself be vindicated as a heroine. Instead, she would have to speak outdoors, something she did not want to do.

In the end, Gavin McInnes, her good friend and latest knight in shining armor, gave Coulter’s extremely-short speech on her behalf in Sproul Plaza. Coulter was there, in Berkeley, but not at that peaceful event. Afterward, she joined McInnes and supporters for drinks at George and Walt’s.

Broken Vow

To KTVU, Coulter vowed: “I was invited to give a speech. I have a contract to give a speech. I’m giving a speech.” To the Hollywood Reporter, Coulter swore, “Yes, it was officially banned, but they can’t stop me. I’m an American. I have constitutional rights.”

Just the night before, Coulter told Sean Hannity: “I do think it is possible that the Berkeley campus will be the safest place on the face of the earth because so many people are flying in to defend me.”

At the airport, Coulter said, “Safest place on earth for me, but these cowards! Who has a better idea of what the campus is gonna be like than the person who’s going there as opposed to the moron sitting in Washington?”

So – both the day before and the afternoon of “the speech” – Coulter declared Berkeley “the safest place on earth for me,” yet she assigned her speech to McInnes! She gave him that assignment the day before the speech, which she emailed to him.

Coulter is there, but does not speak herself?

Gavin McInnes tweeted the day before the speech: “The @AnnCoulter event in Berkeley is NOT canceled. I will be speaking tomorrow with @Lauren_Southern @FaithGoldy @BrittPettibone #POYB.”

Two days earlier, Coulter tweeted: “Nice day for an outdoor speech at Berkeley,” implying she would give her speech in the plaza, if necessary. Coulter told AP, “I have my flights, so I thought I might stroll around the graveyard of the First Amendment.”

Five days later, Coulter told Lou Dobbs, “I would have preferred to have spoken.”

Coulter regularly advertises upcoming speeches on her website as soon as she has them booked. She never advertised her Berkeley speech on her own website – even though YAF did on theirs – complete with date, time, and location. Why?

She never intended to speak. It was all a charade. She wanted credit for courage without being courageous. She knew Berkeley would give in.

Nothing changed between Milo and Ann and the results were wholly predictable – and expected.

Coulter’s Speech

If Coulter really planned on speaking, then she must have prepared an astonishing speech. Indeed, Coulter boasted to Carlson that it would be “a searingly brilliant speech on immigration.”

McInnes said, “Ann sent me her speech,” and then he read it, breaking in with his own running commentary. Coulter’s actual speech was less than four minutes and contained nothing new, except for her comparison of immigrants to rat feces (contained in the lead paragraph). It contained zero references to Berkeley.

Hardly “searingly brilliant.”

Coulter told Carlson that her speech was about enforcement of existing immigration laws. Her speech – given by McInnes – never addressed that issue.

Earlier that week, Coulter said she would be updating her speech. Pretty good gig, $20,000 for a four-minute speech.

McInnes introduced her speech, saying, “Ann was betrayed. She was censored. They put all the legal onus upon her so that if someone gets hurt tonight, it would have been on her head. Now it’s on my head.”

If it was so dangerous that Coulter couldn’t give her speech, why did she have McInnes risk his life – and the lives of those in the audience – to do so on her behalf?

But what did she say shortly before McInnes gave her speech? “Safest place on earth for me, but these cowards!”

Yet, Coulter wasn’t about to nail her 95 Theses on Berkeley’s wall. She let her friend do it for her, while she took all the credit.

Speech Sponsors

The non-partisan BridgeUSA and conservative Young America’s Foundation co-sponsored Coulter’s speech. [Both YAF and BridgeUSA were non-responsive to my interview requests.]

The founder of BridgeUSA explained why his organization co-sponsored Coulter’s speech – “to facilitate dialogue between political opposites.” Ironically, he wrote: “Free speech isn’t about provocation, violence, publicity stunts, selling books or testing limits” – precisely what Coulter does on a regular basis.

Further, BridgeUSA “refuse[s] to invoke the right to free speech to inflame, attack and generate publicity” – exactly the modus operandi Coulter has embraced for the past two decades.

He added, “instigating controversy for publicity does not fix a broken system,” yet BridgeUSA sponsored a self-proclaimed provocateur and polemicist to do just that. How well would David Duke be received by the Black Panthers?

At CPAC 2002, Coulter posited the notion that she should keep going further and further right to draw the culture and the left toward her. Shortly thereafter, Coulter coined a series of “rules” for talking to a liberal: being as outrageous as you can be to inflame them. No reconciliation there.

Alheli Picazo writes, “People like Coulter and Yiannopoulos aren’t brought to campus to contribute substance – hearing either speak for a few minutes quickly puts lie to claims of their brilliance. They are skilled antagonists who can reliably incite backlash from a perceived enemy.”

It is unclear why Coulter is the best spokesman for YAF on anything, even immigration (the purported topic of the series of speeches spearheaded by BridgeUSA).

YAF has 100 speakers on its roster. Only five speakers are listed for immigration; Coulter is not among them. Were none of the actual “experts” on immigration available?

Moreover, only eight YAF speakers require an honorarium of $20K or more. Surely YAF could have selected a better representative of conservatism for less money.

YAF previously sponsored Milo Yiannopoulos, who isn’t even listed on its roster. Coulter claimed she is not like Yiannopoulos, yet they are both leaders of the Alt-Right and share an Alt-Right worldview. Is YAF in agreement with those views?

Unanswered Questions

One YAF tweet was particularly confusing: “At no time was there ever a space or lecture time confirmed for Ann Coulter to speak.” Yet YAF’s event page listed the location, date, and time as 110 Sprout Hall from 7:00 to 8:30 pm on 4/27/17. What really happened?

Would it be fair to say that YAF chose both Yiannopoulos and Coulter to generate controversy, anticipating a backlash which would then highlight the thuggish behavior on the Left and their threats to the First Amendment?

Coulter’s Courage

Conservative heroine Ann Coulter has proven herself a cowardly fraud. The free speech battle at Berkeley was merely a publicity stunt for this polemicist and provocateur.

As noted above, Coulter exhibited genuine courage in 1996-97. Hence her Alamo Award.

Since then, Coulter has gotten edgier and edgier while simultaneously abandoning her principles and ideals. In doing so, Coulter has actually embraced her fears. Now she is desperately grasping for the glory she once had and which increasingly eludes her.

What she fears most is facing the truth about the person she has become. Moreover, Coulter fears that she is beyond redemption, so why not continue on her downward path. (Ann, My Redeemer Lives, and so does yours!)

Ann Coulter isn’t a voice for freedom or free speech. Ann Coulter is a voice for Ann Coulter.

[#NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia examines the origins, worldview, and impact of the Alt-Right movement. It is now available on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.]

Advertisements

Coulter Doesn’t Trust Trump

Ann Coulter, the author of In Trump We Trust, doesn’t trust Trump.

coulter-doesnt-trust-trump

She never really did.

Coulter has always cared about power and always cared about credit. So much so that she has sought power most of her adult life and claimed credit where it is not due. Coulter is an elite’s elite who loves wielding power.

Her decades-long pattern of behavior continued with her promotion of Donald Trump (and herself).

Coulter, the Bully

First, Coulter browbeat the electorate to vote for Trump, insisting he was the only person who could save America. Now, Coulter bullies, cajoles, and threatens Trump to do what she wants done.

Let’s remember the context. For years, Coulter did the very same thing with Romney. Remember, Coulter was careful to tell Romney that he owed her (personally). Coulter rammed Romney down our throats, promising us that he was the best and would get the job done, all the while warning Romney that he better do that very thing (see Case Study #6, Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter).

But did Coulter ever trust Trump?

Hardly. Coulter repeatedly told Trump that he’d better do what he promised her he would do because of all the sacrifices she had made for him.

According to The Times, Coulter told Trump, “I’m the only one losing money trying to get you in the White House, you’re going to listen to me.” After Trump’s immigration flip-flop, a piqued Coulter joked, “He just said something stupid, which he’s done before, and he will do again … he does need a little slap now and then.”

Coulter’s face-slaps frequently include Twitter tirades and jeremiads against the only person in the world who can save America (according to her).

Coulter even threatened impeachment against her beloved Savior:  “The wall and deporting illegals … renegotiating trade deals and not starting pointless wars – those are the big ones. If he betrays us on those, they’ll impeach him and there’ll be nobody to defend him.”

Coulter, the Terrified

Coulter is absolutely terrified that she backed the wrong horse, that Trump will prove as unscrupulous as she is, thus jeopardizing what’s left of her own career. Coulter’s fate is inextricably linked to Trump’s.

In her last column in November, Coulter ominously described “How Trump Could Ruin His Presidency.” How? But not doing what Coulter tells him. Coulter succinctly wrote:

“He’d better!”

Also, “But if he breaks a major campaign promise, his supporters will turn on him with a blind ferocity, dwarfing their rage toward Jeb! because Trump’s is the more exquisite con. He will have duped them. And he will never, ever, ever get them back.”

Also, “If Trump betrays voters on immigration, he can have as many rallies as he wants, but Americans will say, Been there, done that — you screwed us. He will never escape the stink of broken campaign promises.”

Finally, “Whether he’s listening or not, his supporters are screaming: TRUMP! NOW! TAKE THE SHOT!!!”

Can you hear Coulter screaming?

Free Republic on Coulter

In the 1990s, members of Free Republic loved Coulter, called her the “goddess of the conservative movement,” and cherished everything she said and did. That has no longer been true for many years.

Here are a few highlights from just one Free Republic thread:

Ann can be NUTS, at times ( look how much she LOVED and pushed for that POS Romney!) and is ALWAYS looking for something to rant about. She does poorly when things are going well.”

“Hannity wanted to know WHY since she has Trump’s ear, she didn’t just call him up and since she knows his closest adviser/team why she just didn’t call them. She sputtered and fumed and then claimed that she had and went back to attacking. Perhaps ‘dear’ Ann isn’t as ‘CONNECTED’ as she claims to be. ;^)”

“I don’t dispute that she’s smart, but I’ll be honest with you and say she has a really grating way about her. If Hillary Clinton is ‘America’s Ex-Wife,’ I’d say Ann Coulter is ‘America’s Ex-Girlfriend.’

She’s being a stupid snowflake….demanding that SHE be allowed to pick Trump’s team; not him. And she just proved, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that she holds NO sway and worse…is NOT ‘in’ with Trump. She’s a damned DRAMA QUEEN and a poser.”

“She is just as world class a troll at generating attention and self-promotion as Trump is. Ann Coulter, first and foremost, is going to do what is in Ann Coulter’s financial interests, she lives by talking head appearances, book sales, social media, web sites, all of which demand promotion and the setting of narratives. Coulter’s tweet means nothing, other than she needs attention. Stop worrying.”

She thinks she is on the inside, but she is on the outside lookin in.”

“Ann, go get your head meds and eat the entire damn bottle.”

“She’s a brilliant writer but…this woman is just scitzo. I don’t know how else to put it.”

[A new book, #NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia, sheds some light on the #OnlyTrump movement and its Alt-Right constituency. It is now available on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.]

Coulter to Impeach Trump

Hell hate no fury like an Alt-Righter scorned!

coulter-to-impeach-trump

(And Trump isn’t even in office yet!)

On the Sean Hannity Show (11/15/16), Coulter summarized her (that is, Trump’s) policy agenda and what would befall President Trump should he fail to implement his (that is, her) agenda:

“The wall and deporting illegals … renegotiating trade deals and not starting pointless wars – those are the big ones. If he betrays us on those, they’ll impeach him and there’ll be nobody to defend him.”

In other words, if Trump doesn’t pursue and achieve her policy goals, he should and will be impeached.

High Crimes and Misdemeanors

But, in her 1998 bestseller, High Crimes and Misdemeanors, Coulter declared that impeachment is designed to target “moral misbehavior” and criminal activity, but not policy disputes.

Again, Coulter contradicts herself.

In 1998, Coulter was regarded as an expert on impeachment. In her book, Coulter wrote (emphasis added):

“Personal misconduct took a larger role in impeachments, for example, and policy disputes became irrelevant to impeachable conduct.” (pg. 10).

“One additional distinction the Constitution requires is this: policy disputes are not to be resolved by resort to impeachment.” (pp. 11-12).

“That policy disagreements cannot form the basis for an impeachable offense in this country is more than a logical deduction from the structure and purposes of the Constitution.” (pg. 12)

“Other comments from the framers further demonstrate that the purposes of impeachment did not include policy disputes – but did include personal misconduct.” (pg. 12)

Apparently, the Alt-Right will do whatever it takes – including threaten its standard-bearer – to achieve its goals.

[A new book, #NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia, sheds some light on the #OnlyTrump movement and its Alt-Right constituency. It is now available on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.]

Coulter Banned For Trump? Ridiculous!

Playing the victim yet again,[1] Coulter recently claimed, “Try to find me on TV. I’m what’s known as a Trump supporter. Banned.”

Banned For Trump

Coulter banned for supporting Trump? Is Coulter’s claim true? Will you believe your own eyes or believe Coulter’s lies?

Another LOL Moment

Trump supporters are all over the airwaves. Trump is all over the airwaves. In fact, Trump has already received over $2 billion of free publicity this election cycle.

What about Fox News, Coulter’s former home base (she has appeared on that network at least 450 times)?

Fox News has given Trump tons of favorable coverage and bent-over-backwards to defend him. In fact, Fox just aired a one-hour, prime-time special for Trump last night (On the Record) and will air another one-hour, prime-time special with Trump on Hannity tonight, immediately preceding the crucial Wisconsin primary to be held tomorrow.

So, why hasn’t Coulter appeared on Fox News since September 17, 2015? Is it, as she claims, because she is a Trump supporter? Obviously not.

Asked in January if she had been banned by Fox News, Coulter insisted, “No, I’m boycotting them! I’ve joined the Trump boycott!”[2]

What Trump boycott? As of January 26, 2016, Donald Trump had already appeared on Fox News and Fox Business News 132 times[3] – far more than any other candidate. That number has undoubtedly skyrocketed since then. (See also Steve Deace’s analysis at “Trump’s Cancer Spreads to Fox News.”)

The Real Reason for Coulter’s “Ban”

If Coulter has been banned from Fox News (the only network she really cares about), it is not because she is Trump’s biggest supporter and consigliere.[4] Rather, Coulter’s own behavior and obnoxious views have precipitated a sharp decline in the attention which would normally be lavished upon her.

The tipping point occurred in mid-September when she first attacked Jews, then Catholics.

Coulter’s infamous rant against Jews[5] cost her both speaking engagements and television appearances.[6] She had been slated as a presenter for both Media Research Center’s Dishonors Awards and David Horowitz’s Restoration Weekend. She was discretely disinvited from both of those prestigious events.

Coulter’s phony excuses[7] failed to convince critics and fans alike. On the heels of her anti-Semitic tirade, Coulter went on an anti-Catholic rant, the first of several to come. Coulter repeatedly attacks Catholics[8] for being Catholic. She just won’t stop.

Playing the victim, Coulter is nevertheless the victimizer.[9] Vanity hinders her repentance,[10] something she has always been loath to do. Until she does, she should be shunned. In the meantime, she is desperately in need of your prayers.[11]

Update: “A new report confirms that five television networks cut a deal with Donald Trump that has effectively turned their coverage over to the Republican frontrunner and turned the networks into Trump propaganda arms.”

As of this writing (4/13/16), “Trump has appeared on Hannity an astonishing 41 times since he announced his campaign last June, often for the entire hour.”

Endnotes:

[1]               See “I Am Victim, Hear Me Whine,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, is available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[2]               Ann Coulter, Eric Metaxas Show, Salem Media Group, 1/12/16.

[3]               Sean Hannity, Hannity, FNC, 1/26/16.

[4]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[5]               See “Ann Coulter’s Jewish Roots” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-a1.

[6]               See “Effing Jews and Ann Coulter’s Waterloo (or Damascus Road?)” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-a9.

[7]               See “Jews: Quality, not Quantity” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-al.

[8]               See “First, Jews; Now, Catholics?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-ah.

[9]               See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2013, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

[10]             See Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[11]             See “An Open Letter to Ann Coulter” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cK.

Ann Coulter’s Flights of Fantasy

Given her frequent flights of fantasy, one wonders why anyone listens to Ann Coulter.

Recently, Coulter insisted that she could arrange a détente which would yield her Dream Ticket: Trump-Romney.[1] Simply delusional. Since then, Coulter has been spiraling downward.[2]

Fantasy

Coulter has redefined terms, such as “real American,” traitor,” and “patriot,” spoken of vast conspiracies, and displayed paranoia.

Employing a variety of Orwellian techniques, Coulter has become a propagandist who is no longer able to discern fact from fantasy.

Real Americans!

 Yesterday, Stephen Nemo made some absurd claims. His introductory paragraph asserted: “Ann Coulter is hated by Democrats, but she’s also a pariah among Republicans. Why? She still believes in conservatism and the rule of law.”

Nemo has drunk the Coulter-aid.

In truth, Coulter abandoned Conservatism[3] and Christianity[4] many years ago. As for the rule of law, why is she constantly lying about it? Coulter continues to lie about Supreme Court[5] cases[6] in order to influence national politics.

The person Coulter said she blindly worships as her Savior,[7] The Donald, is not a conservative![8] Moreover, Trump cares about what is best for Trump,[9] not for America.

As evidence for his claim of Coulter’s fidelity to conservatism and the rule of law, Nemo quoted a recent Coulter column: “Conservative pundits keep assuring clueless [television] viewers that Trump is not a ‘real Republican.’”

Nemo omitted these words from her essay: “I certainly hope he’s not a ‘real Republican.’” Nemo did, however, continue with her next words: “I know he’s a real American. Those used to be the same thing.”

In other words, “real Republicans” are no longer “real Americans.”

For decades, Coulter has defined who “real Americans” are per her own malleable standards. As I noted last September,[10] Coulter was wrong then and she is wrong now!

Coulter defines not only who Americans are but she also pinpoints where the traitors can be found.

Treason Without Reason

Displaying both hyperbole and paranoia on steroids, Coulter tweeted (emphasis added): “Fox News & Cruz are American traitors, in league with the liberal establishment. Silent majority must face fire from a unified oligarchy.”[11]

American Thinker provided the Cruz quote which prompted “Coulter foaming at the mouth.” After condemning the violence at Trump’s rally in Chicago, Cruz said, “when you have a campaign that disrespects the voters, when you have a campaign that affirmatively encourages violence, when you have a campaign that is facing allegations of physical violence against members of the press, you create an environment that only encourages this sort of nasty discourse.”

American Thinker correctly observed: “Never mind that the ‘unified oligarchy’ Coulter decries is a unified oligarchy elected by the American people; the main point is that every word, every syllable, every letter of the above quote is absolutely and verifiably true.” (He then provided a surfeit of details.)

Upon hearing of Rubio’s epic defeat in his home state of Florida, Coulter again furthered her treason motif, tweeting (emphasis added), “Media’s favorite line tonight: Rubio lost because he was too optimistic. Yeah, the whole treason thing had nothing to do with it.”[12]

In 2003, Coulter declared as traitors everyone who disagreed with even just one item of the GOP platform. To her, all Democrats and liberals were guilty of treason. Now, Coulter calls Republicans, conservatives, and Christians[13] “traitors” for disagreeing with her on one single issue: immigration.

Back then, the entirety of the Left were treasonous in Coulter’s eyes. Now, a huge swath on the Right have joined their ranks. Oh, and, by the way, Coulter’s definition of “treason” is not a legal one, but an elastic one dependent upon her own personal whim. Moreover, Coulter misuses the term for its effect as emotional vernacular to bypass reason and facts.

Propaganda With Paranoia

A gifted linguist, Coulter is, indeed, adept at propaganda. She knows how to manipulate language to manipulate people. Orwell’s Newspeak and doublethink could have been designed just for her.[14]

Since the release of her latest book, Coulter’s commentary has been replete with errors[15] and outright fabrications. Who knew that the Great Depression “was the most prosperous period in American history?”[16]

One particular tweet required a great deal of chutzpah to publish (as well as a certain disdain for her readership). Gloating over Trump’s Florida victory, Coulter tweeted (emphasis added), “To beat Rubio, Trump had to beat: Fox, entire MSM, National Review, Salem Radio, every major GOP donor…MAYBE VOTERS WANT LESS IMMIGRATION!”[17]

The entire tweet in all of its particulars is incorrect. Coulter consistently claims a conspiracy among political and media elites to foil Trump’s candidacy. According to Coulter, Fox News is part of that grand conspiracy.

Fox News? Matt Walsh recently exposed her lies on this, writing, “All the other dull, blathering Trump sycophants on Fox News, like Andrea Tantaros and Eric Bolling and Kimberly Guilfoyle and other various Trump shills who’ve now taken to declaring that ‘principles don’t matter.’ The Fox morning show team hands airtime to Trump whenever he demands it, and they sit in admiration listening to him blabber on like infatuated school boys pretending to be interested in what the pretty girl in class is saying. But they’re of course not as bad as Joe Scarborough over on MSNBC, who was recently caught on camera taking instructions from Trump about what questions he can ask.”

Walsh continued: “Trump and his groupies complain that Fox is ‘unfair’ to him, but those of us who haven’t had our brains cooked by Trump fever recognize that, with the exceptions of Megyn Kelly, Bret Baier, Greg Gutfeld and a few others, the entire network slobbers over him like a cheerleader fainting when the varsity quarterback asks her to the prom.”

As of January 26, 2016, Donald Trump had already appeared on Fox News and Fox Business News 132 times[18] – far more than any other candidate. That number has undoubtedly skyrocketed since then.

Entire MSM? The mainstream media is hardly a monolith and it has provided more coverage of Trump than any other candidate in any other election in history. It covers Trump rallies and speeches, often without commentary, while overlooking other candidates. Trump gets air time whenever he wants it. Also, Trump has bullied many media outlets into acquiescence.

The Media Research Center frequently notes the disparate coverage afforded Trump at the expense of his opponents, even in GOP debates. Most recently, Breitbart, known as Trump’s personal Pravda, has come under fire for covering up Trump scandals and betraying its reporters and readers.

The Sun Times reported that the media “gave Trump $400 million worth of free coverage in just one month’s time.” In total, Trump has received about $2 billion in free air time.

Back in 1999, Coulter was incensed at any publicity that Sen. John McCain received during his 2000 election campaign. Coulter asked of McCain, “Courageous, independent, or bought?” and accused him of “shilling [for] the newspaper industry in return for favors worth millions of dollars in campaign donations.”[19]

Is Trump shilling now?

National Review? National Review is one of the few media outlets actually opposed to Trump, not out of treasonous hatred for America but, rather, with fervor for journalistic integrity, the Constitution, liberty, conservatism, and the rule of law. (Yes, conservatism and the rule of law, Mr. Nemo.)

While the “entire MSM” has failed to focus on Trump’s moral and business failings, National Review put together “a comprehensive roundup of the man’s disastrous [business] record.”

Salem Radio? Salem Radio is hardly part of a Vast Left and Right Wing Conspiracy. Sadly, many Christian leaders have actually jumped aboard the Trump bandwagon, seemingly willing to abandon both biblical and conservative principles for the elevation of someone they regard as a protector of their rights and freedoms. However, Trump is merely a bloviating bully[20] with disdain for the Constitution and he would govern with his own version of Obama’s pen and a phone.[21]

Every Major GOP Donor? GOP donors were hardly united against Trump. Many funded attacks against Cruz, Trump’s biggest rival.

Immigration? Immigration – Trump’s (and Coulter’s) signature issue – regularly places around fourth in exit polling, demonstrating that Coulter is wrong about the reason for Trump’s success thus far. Voters are outraged, want change, and are looking for a strongman to forcefully reverse the course our government is presently on.

Ironically, Coulter’s zealous devotion to Trump is itself predicated on a lie. Coulter insists that Trump is the best candidate on her core issue – immigration – yet, Trump has proven himself a fraud on immigration.[22] Trump admits he is flexible on immigration and he actually promotes amnesty (“touchback deportation”). To ensure a Trump victory, Coulter has repeatedly[23] lied[24] about Ted Cruz,[25] the one candidate who has a proven record of defending the border and preserving our national sovereignty.

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Coulter’s Dream Ticket: Trump-Romney” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cB.

[2]               See “Ann Coulter’s Upside Down World” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cP.

[3]               See “Coulter Hates All GOP Candidates But Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bj.

[4]               See “Coulter Attacks Christians for Being Godly” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-az.

[5]               See “Coulter Lies About Supreme Court Case” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bE.

[6]               See “Birther Coulter Births More Lies” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bI.

[7]               See “Meet Ann Coulter’s Savior” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bM.

[8]               See “Coulter Admits Trump is a Fraud” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cf.

[9]               See “Coulter’s Latest RINO Would Give Democrats Victory” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-8t.

[10]             See “Ann Coulter’s ‘Real’ Americans Fallacy” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9Y.

[11]             Ann Coulter, 3/12/16, 12:16 a.m.

[12]             Ann Coulter, 3/15/16, 7:55 p.m.

[13]             See “Ann Coulter’s Xenophobic Anti-Gospel of Hate” at http://t.co/aQGhLuWwtD.

[14]             See “Propaganda: George Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-4j.

[15]             See “Are Coulter’s ‘Facts’ Right?” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-9E.

[16]             See “Ignorant Ideologue” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-br.

[17]             Ann Coulter, 3/15/16, 5:50 p.m.

[18]             Sean Hannity, Hannity, FNC, 1/26/16.

[19]             Ann Coulter, “When ‘reform’ means tilting the balance of influence,” 10/20/99.

[20]             See “How to Talk to a Bully (if you must)” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bY.

[21]             See “Bully Boy Trump” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cv.

[22]             See “Trump’s Phony Wall” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-cn.

[23]             See “Birther Coulter Births More Lies” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-bI.

[24]             See “Coulter’s Desperate Lies About Cruz” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-c8.

[25]             See “BrotherWatch Endorses Ted Cruz” at http://wp.me/p4scHf-dw.

Ann Coulter, Bimbo

Ann Coulter loves the words “bimbo,” “retarded,” “idiot,” “moron,” and similar words!

Is Coulter, by her own definition, a bimbo?

Bimbo

Simply put, Coulter loves to offend people[1] and, more importantly, she thinks she is smarter than[2] and superior to[3] everyone else. Everyone opposed to Coulter is, in her mind, a “useless idiot.”[4]

In Slander, Coulter asserted, “If liberal propaganda didn’t work, it would be impossible to comprehend bimbo starlets and uneducated slobs attacking the intelligence of the man who won the Cold War.”

(Ironically, Coulter now attacks those “idol-worshipping Ronald Reagan”[5] and laments, “These johnny-come-latelies to Reagan worship [who] seem to think that he was Jesus Christ and could do no wrong.”[6] Would that make Coulter a bimbo talking head?)

Coulter’s own propagandistic version[7] is to simply assert that everyone who disagrees with her is stupid, retarded, or a bimbo. Of course, Coulter’s ad hominem attacks actually work by shifting debates over substantive arguments to issues of free speech.

Coulter Proudly Calls Nikki Haley a Bimbo

A fascinating dialogue on the John Gibson Show[8] is instructive of Coulter’s temperament and Trumpian sense of self-importance. Asked if she was joking about deporting Gov. Nikki Haley, Coulter replied:

“Um, no. No, no, no, no. Yeah, [I think she should be deported]. Yeah, she won’t be governor anymore, I suspect.”

Then Coulter stepped on a linguistic landmine, as is her wont:

“I think she’s a bimbo and, um, you know, having a black Indian do such a fantastic job in a response to the State of the Union, yeah, they picked her to be, to be …”

At this point, Coulter was interrupted by the host, her decades-long friend from her MSNBC days in 1996-97. Gibson asked if her characterization was “kosher.”

Coulter erupted, “What do you mean, ‘kosher?’ Is it true or isn’t it? You’re policing my language? I’m saying something I think is true. I think she is a bimbo!”

Naturally, Coulter never explained how it is true – and the host never asked. (They rarely do.)

Irate at being, in her mind, censored by political correctness, Coulter petulantly queried, “What is that? Do we have to add that to the list of words that can’t be used now, because the list is getting bigger than the dictionary?” (Proper grace and decorum never seem to register with Ann.)

Going with the flow, Coulter then defined what a bimbo is rather than use the term: “Yeah, a not very bright female. Actually, they’re not always females but they often have those qualities, the feminine qualities.”

Notice, Coulter, as she is prone to do, includes liberal men in her definition and regards those qualities as distinctly feminine in nature.

Contemptuous of being asked not to engage in name-calling, Coulter again erupted, “You’re joking!” Continuing, Coulter immediately asked, “Can you email me a list of what words can’t be used?” Then she defiantly said, “Bimbo!”

Still not done, Coulter addressed the GOP’s decision to choose Haley to give a rebuttal to Obama’s State of the Union address. Coulter pondered, “It’s going to be hard to describe how she was chosen. She’s a, a, a, a woman who was accidentally elected, um, because she’s pretty and isn’t very bright. Can we say that?”

In other words, a bimbo. However, Coulter never explained why being a bimbo would be a qualification for that choice – or for anything, for that matter.

Continuing her rant, and incorporating her unisex definition of the word in dispute, Coulter lambasted South Carolinian Republicans, saying, “they have the worst representatives. … Lindsey Graham is South Carolina. … Lindsey Graham and Nikki Haley? Lindsey Graham – also a bimbo!”

(Whenever exchanges like this take place, Coulter is implacably impenitent.[9])

Is Ann Coulter a Bimbo?

As noted above, Coulter offered her preferred definition of “bimbo” – someone who is “pretty and isn’t very bright.” We can work with that.[10]

Remember, it’s been over a decade since Coulter so eloquently said, “I’m so pleased with my gender. We’re not that bright.”[11] Proof of Coulter’s contention regarding herself abounds![12]

Just a few weeks ago, Coulter claimed that the Great Depression[13] was “the most prosperous period in American history.”[14] Need I say more?

Consider, too, Coulter’s own self-revelation. In 2003, she admitted, “Ann Coulter engages in ad hominem attacks. Ann Coulter is insane.”[15] 13 years later, her long-time friend, Sean Hannity, finally reached the same conclusion, saying, “You crack me up, but you’re insane.”[16]

Endnotes:

[1]               See “Coulter, Simply Offensive” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-5i.

[2]               See “Ann Coulter – Smartest Person in the World” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-59.

[3]               See “Coulter – An Elite’s Elite” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-aW.

[4]               See “Coulter’s ‘Useless Idiots’ and Other Foolishness” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-ar.

[5]               Ann Coulter, quoted by Lloyd Grove, “Coulter Hates ‘the Browning of America,’” Daily Beast, 5/26/15.

[6]               Ann Coulter, Ricochet, 6/4/15.

[7]               See Propaganda: Orwell in the Age of Ann Coulter, 2014, available as a free download t www.coulterwatch.com/propaganda.pdf.

[8]               Ann Coulter, John Gibson Show, Fox News, 1/14/16.

[9]               See “Chapter 9: Conscience & Innocence,” Vanity: Ann Coulter’s Quest for Glory, 2012, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/vanity.pdf.

[10]             See Never Trust Ann Coulter – at ANY Age, 2014, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/never.pdf.

[11]             Ann Coulter, Hannity & Colmes, FNC, 9/23/04.

[12]             See “Chapter 4: … Brains …,” The Beauty of Conservatism, 2011, available as a free download at www.coulterwatch.com/beauty.pdf.

[13]             See “Ignorant Ideologue” at http://wp.me/p4jHFp-br.

[14]             Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 12/18/15.

[15]             Ann Coulter, Scarborough Country, MSNBC, 7/7/03.

[16]             Sean Hannity, Sean Hannity Show, Premiere Radio Networks, 1/19/16.

Coulter Bashes Cruz – Again!

In a remarkable interview on the eve of Thanksgiving, Ann Coulter again bashed Ted Cruz, calling him a “midget” “compared to Trump!”

Extolling a Trump-Romney ticket, Coulter rejected Cruz for even the V.P. spot. The reason is astonishing!

CruzMidget

Coulter explained her logic, claiming that Trump is being self-sacrificing in running for President while Cruz and the remainder of the candidates have “got nothing else to do.” The other candidates have “nothing else to do?”

Coulter declared (emphasis added):

“I would put Reagan, Romney, Trump in the same category in this way and that is all three of them – unlike everyone else running for President – their lives are made worse by running for and becoming President. They have fantastic lives. They’re wealthy. They have beautiful families. The fact that they run for President at all suggests to me that these three genuinely love America and would like to save it.”

That’s right, Trump is a good candidate because he’s got a “fantastic” life. In what way is his life fantastic? Well, he’s “wealthy” and has a “beautiful family.” (Don’t the other candidates have beautiful families, too?)

Coulter claimed that Trump “genuinely love(s) America and would like to save it.” Does Coulter mean that Cruz hates America and wants to destroy it?

As for the self-sacrificing nature of Trump’s presidential aspirations, doesn’t he want to be President for the sake of being President?

Coulter further asserted (emphasis added), “These guys who are running because they’re got nothing else to do, they really are such midgets compared to Trump.”

Coulter, ever the elite, knows no better!