New Hampshire conservative Republican leader Andy Martin says Fox News tried to politically assassinate Donald Trump at the Cleveland debate
Conservative New Hampshire Republican Party leader and corruption fighter Andy Martin says that Donald Trump is correct: the questions posed by Fox News hosts in Thursday’s debate were mean-spirited and biased. “Fox News was not conducting a ‘debate’ involving Trump,” Andy says. “Megyn Kelly, Bret Baier and Chris Wallace had an agenda to destroy Donald Trump. The subsequent brouhaha about what Trump said on CNN is complete nonsense. Jeb Bush, the little toady, who refused to confront Trump in person, was back stabbing Trump in
Atlanta on Saturday. Erick
Erickson’ efforts to replace Trump’s appearance with an invitation to Kelly
shows that Erickson and Fox have a ‘wolf pack’ mentality trying to destroy
Trump’s candidacy. Stay tuned.”
analyzes the impact of Donald Trump on the Republican Party
“The Internet Powerhouse”
Andy Martin, J. D.
adjunct professor of law
“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”
you can call Andy:
National (866) 706-2639
Cell (917) 664-9329
you can email Andy:
you can write Andy by
faxing (866) 214-3210
Blogs/web sites (partial):
To become a regular subscriber to our emails please send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org and place “SUBSCRIBE” in the subject line.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Andy Martin provides his conservative insight and experience on the Trump/Fox News/RedState controversy
Andy analyzes the disputed questions at the Fox News debate and says Fox hosts clearly had an agenda to attack Donald Trump personally
“The only good that has come of this kerfuffle,” Andy says, “is that Jeb Bush has been exposed, once again, as a cowardly, back-stabbing toady for the Republican establishment.”
( Chicago, IL August 9, 2015)
I am not supporting Donald Trump as a candidate and have no connection with Trump’s campaign. I am an independent media and conservative analyst and activist. Because of my unalterable opposition to Jeb Bush, I am not supporting or endorsing any presidential candidate. I will support any Republican candidate for president except Jeb Bush.
The Fox news/Trump/RedState.com/Erick Erickson/Bush kerfuffle is metastasizing faster than I can even keep up with written remarks. I saw the debate Thursday, and I was listening when Trump was interviewed by CNN Friday when he made comments that have since been taken out of context by Trump’s adversaries. Following is my point-by-point analysis:
1. The general Fox News bias against Donald Trump
Let me be blunt. The Fox “News” debate was rigged against Donald Trump from start to finish. Fox News even rigged the audience in the debate auditorium against Trump, packing the stadium with party hacks, not a representative audience.
Questioners at a presidential debate have every right to ask “tough” questions. I have no problem with that. But Trump’s opponents were asked “tough questions” about issues. Trump was the only one who was peppered with nasty and misleading personal questions. And, as I point out below, if anyone has a checkered corporate past, Jeb Bush is much worse than Trump. But Fox News did not ask Jeb Bush about his financial failures, or how he collected government welfare when his own business ventures collapsed.
The “debate” was 100% anti-Trump. Bush was given a complete pass on his business failures. Who controlled the questions? Not the journalistic prostitutes that were asking them.
2. Contested Question #1 “Will you support the nominee?”
This question was a legitimate question but it is a phony question at the same time. Here, Trump fell into a trap because he ignored his prior answers which were perfectly acceptable.
In the past, Trump has said he is keeping his options open because of bias against him within the Republican Party leadership. The
auditorium was not packed with ordinary citizens in the audience. It was packed
with Republican Party hacks and Fox News hacks, which is why Trump was booed.
Fox News had even biased the audience against Trump.
Trump should have given a clearer, crisper answer. He should have said, if the process is fair, I will support the winner. If the process is rigged, I will keep my options open. Bret Baier’s question was intended to lure Trump into a trap and to undermine Trump’s participation in the debate. If Trump had given one of his prior clear, crisp responses, he could have turned the issue on its head. Instead, Trump’s answer was a little muddled and it colored his opening at the debate.
There is nothing wrong with not supporting the winner of a rigged primary. In 2014 the Republican Party ran a rigged primary for U. S. Senate in
New Hampshire. Like Trump, I was
treated badly. I worked to see that the winner of the crooked primary was
defeated to teach dishonest Republican leaders a lesson. There is nothing wrong
with Trump keeping his options open to fight back against a corrupt Republican
Party primary process or national convention. (Next month I will start a new
round of attacks against the corrupt leadership of the New Hampshire Republican
Party. I am still a loyal Republican, but I am not required to worship or
endorse dishonest leaders.)
As for myself, as I stated in my disclaimer above, I will support any Republican candidate (of the seventeen) except Jeb Bush, because Jeb Bush is a disgrace and his family has been toxic for
both financially and in foreign policy. No more Bushes. I am still a loyal
Republican and will vote 100% Republican at the state ad local level.
The attempt by Bush supporters and their mandarins at Fox News to use the “will you support…” trope to undermine Trump has the same sort of sleaziness as the “Were you ever..(a communist)..?” of the 1940’s and 50’s. Trump has every right to stand up against Fox News and Bush Family McCarthyism.
3. Are you (Trump) anti-woman because of your remarks?
Megyn Kelly started her questioning by asking Trump if trash-talking on television and in the
tabloid newspapers disqualifies him from serving as President. Kelly dredged up
several intemperate TV remarks Trump may have made. Trump has not made any such
remarks as a candidate.
I have a long history of support for women’s issues, for equal pay and equal opportunity, and for women’s equality. I am the product of a single-parent household managed by a working mom whom I revere. If Trump was anti-woman or anti-female I would not hesitate to say so. (And, boys and girls, stay tuned. Jeb Bush is the real anti-woman candidate. I’ll be writing about that later on.)
Kelly was using the “anti-woman” meme to smear Trump and to divert attention from the “tough” questions on the issues she was directing at the other candidates. Trying to suggest Trump is anti-woman because of his TV talk would be akin to suggesting Jerry Springer supports domestic violence because of the antics on his TV show.
Instead of asking Trump serious questions, Kelly was prostituting herself to her overlords at Fox News that want to destroy Trump and were using the debate format to achieve their goal. (Am I “anti-woman” because I just said Kelly was prostituting herself to her bosses at Fox News? Not at all. I am using a figure of speech.) Kelly had an agenda. She was not acting as the legitimate journalist she pretends to be, and she was out to smear Donald Trump. In her own way, Kelly is just as much of a trash talker on TV as Donald Trump.
4. Do several corporate reorganizations disqualify you for president?
I am not an expert on all of Trump’s corporate reorganizations. The term “corporate reorganization” is probably more accurate than “bankruptcy,” because Trump admits he did have reverses in
Jersey and some of his business interests went
through reorganization. Once again, the tone of Chris Wallace’s question showed
that Wallace was not trying to understand complicated corporate finance. Wallace
was trying to falsely suggest Trump had “gone bankrupt.”
Given that Jeb Bush collected millions of dollars from a firm that was liquidated during the financial collapse (Lehman Brothers) and that Bush has never had a real job in his life, constantly being placed in lucrative positions by his family contacts, it took a lot of nerve for Wallace to try and single out Trump for corporate conniptions.
Jeb Bush has lived his whole life protected by and financed by “honest graft” engineered by Bush family Wall Street contacts and similar connections. What experience did Bush have to pump millions of dollars out of Lehman Brothers before the firm collapsed? None. Bush is just part of a parasitic family that has financed its children with wall Street handouts.
Before the Internet became widespread, twenty-one (21) years ago I exposed Jeb Bush as a financial fraud and corporate huckster. I know Bush. In all probability, you don’t know anything about his shenanigans. Fox News didn’t probe. Why not? Chris Wallace did not ask Jeb Bush what Bush did to earn millions before Lehman Brothers collapsed. Wallace was only focused on denigrating Trump. Wallace is another Fox News corporate prostitute.
Mark your calendars for how long it takes Fox or CNN or anyone else to ask Jeb Bush about the millions has scammed since leaving the governor’s office. Or whether Bush can enforce the tax laws when his wife is a jewelry smuggler? The negative questions were all anti-Trump, not evenly directed at Bush, Trump and the others.
5. Did Trump refer to Megyn Kelly’s “menstruation?”
I was watching Trump’s phone interview with Don Lemon on CNN Friday night. It was vintage Trump. I heard the remarks about “blood” in Kelly’s eyes and “wherever.” I didn’t remotely think that Trump was referring to female hormones or menstruation. I agree with Trump that Erick Erickson, who has personally created the menstruation kerfuffle, is a sick puppy for even thinking that way.
If I thought Trump was denigrating Kelly as a woman, instead of blasting her as a TV host, I would tell you. As I stated above, I see no evidence that Donald Trump is anti-woman. The “anti-woman” smear is just another slander by the Fox News/Bush/Erickson combine.
6. Is Jeb Bush a coward and a skunk and a two-faced liar?
Jeb Bush was in
Saturday at the
event trying to whip up opposition to Donald Trump and slamming him, again. When
Bush was offered an opportunity to confront Trump in person at the debate, Bush
wimped out and lied and said he had never attacked Trump. He denied attacking
Trump verbally. But the moment Trump was out of sight, and Trump was out of
town, Bush started with his attacks again in Red State Atlanta.
Bush is a two-faced coward who will never be president. He is part of a family
of failed “presidents” who devastated this nation with two unnecessary Middle
East wars. Bush is a Wall Street swindler who made millions while
Lehman Brothers collapsed. Bush lacked the character and bravery to confront
Trump in person in Cleveland, but Bush
resumed his back-stabbing routine in Atlanta.
Maybe that tells you something about the crowd Erick Erickson assembled in Atlanta.
Mr. Erickson used to be on the payroll of CNN; maybe he still is. Erickson says he doesn’t want his daughter in the same room with Trump. What a cowardly and despicable remark. Erickson and Bush deserve each other.
7. Where do we go from here?
The liberal New York Times says “conservatives” are taking a “second look” at Jeb Bush, see link below. They better keep looking. I pointed out above that Bush’s behavior at the
meeting was predictable but
despicable. But ask yourself, why is the New York Times so eager to promote Jeb
Bush to conservatives? Need I say more? Red
LINKS TO THIS STORY (cut and paste the entire link below and not just the underlined portion):
New citations after emailing:
WHAT OTHERS SAY ABOUT ANDY MARTIN:
One author has called Andy Martin the “big kahuna” of the anti-[Barack] Obama movement. Another said “Andy Martin is revolutionizing journalism… [Andy] brings to online journalism what Rush Limbaugh [brings] to radio or Michael Moore to film: sleek little stories that fit into larger political narratives…” Another says, “The only American journalists that are ‘standing UP’ [to Obama] are, Andy Martin…”
ANDY MARTIN - A BRIEF
Andy Martin is a legendary
, New Hampshire and Chicago-based muckraker, author,
Internet columnist, talk television pioneer, radio talk show host, broadcaster
and media critic. With forty-seven years of background in radio and television
and with five decades of investigative and analytical experience in New York , the Washington and around the world, Andy provides
insight on politics, foreign policy, intelligence and military matters. For a
full bio, go to: www.AndyMartin.com;
also see http://www.boycottabc.com/executive_director.htm USA
Andy has also been a leading corruption fighter in American politics and courts for over forty-five years and is executive director of the National Anti-Corruption Policy Institute. See also www.FirstRespondersOnline.us; www.AmericaisReadyforReform.com.
He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC).
He is the author of “Obama: The Man Behind The Mask” [www.OrangeStatePress.com] and produced the Internet film “Obama: The Hawaii’ Years” [www.BoycottHawaii.com]. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of the “Internet Powerhouse,” blogging at www.contrariancommentary.wordpress.com and www.ContrarianCommentary.com.
Andy’s family immigrated to
100 years ago; today his home overlooks the Manchester, New
Hampshire Merrimack River and he lives around the corner from where
he played as a small boy. He is ’s leading corruption fighter and
Republican Party reformer. New Hampshire
Andy’s columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com
[NOTE: We try to correct any typographical errors in our stories; find the latest version on our blogs.]
© Copyright by Andy Martin 2015 – All Rights Reserved