On Anderson Cooper 360, Dana Loesch wants the country to default

On last night's Anderson Cooper 360, Dana Loesch was back on and guess what she did? Went back to her bread and butter-- which was lying, misinforming, and being childish to other guests. Her idea to cut the deficit: more tax cuts for the rich and gut Medicare. And of course, she blamed the Democrats for the debt problems, with no facts to back it up. Loesch also supports this country defaulting for the sake of defeating Obama and the Democratic Party.

From the 06.29.2011 edition of CNN's Anderson Cooper 360:

Transcript of the Loesch/Gergen/Begala segment:

Right now, though, "Raw Politics" and President Obama today throwing down the gauntlet to Republicans on cutting the budget and passing legislation so America can pay its bills. The country is facing an August 2nd deadline to do the second part, raising the debt ceiling, something no Congress, Democrat or Republican has ever failed to do.

This time, though, Republicans say it won't happen without big spending cuts and no tax increases. Today, responding to a question from chief White House correspondent Jessica Yellin, the President slammed Republican leaders for not budging on taxes and for playing chicken, he believes, with that August 2nd deadline.



And -- and if -- if by the end of this week, we have not seen substantial progress, then I think members of Congress need to understand, we are going to, you know, start having to cancel things and stay here until we get it done.

You know, they're -- they're in one week, they're out one week, and then they're -- they're saying, "Obama's got to step in." You need to be here. I have been here. I have been doing Afghanistan and bin Laden and the Greek crisis and -- you stay here. Let's get it done.


COOPER: Well, a moment before he said that, he compared lawmakers to slacker kids.


OBAMA: You know Malia and Sasha generally finish their homework a day ahead of time. Malia is 13; Sasha's 10. It is impressive. They don't wait until the night before. They're not pulling all- nighters. They're -- they're 13 and 10. You know, Congress can do the same thing. If you know you've got to do something, just do it.


COOPER: Well, that drew this response from the GOP House Speaker John Boehner -- quote -- "The President's remarks today ignore legislative and economic reality and demonstrate remarkable irony. His administration has been burying our kids and grandkids in new debt and offered no plan to rein in spending. A debt limit increase can only pass the House if it includes spending cuts larger than the debt limit increase, includes reforms to hold down spending in the future, and is free from tax hikes."

Tough talk now on both sides.

Joining us now is senior political analyst David Gergen; Tea Party organizer Dana Loesch; and Democratic strategist Paul Begala.

Paul, was it really fair for the President to claim the Republican congressional leaders aren't working as hard as he is? I mean, he has been known to enjoy a golf game or two in his time.

PAUL BEGALA, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, they're certainly not making enough progress. And I guess that's kind of where I would take it.

There's reports that the -- the Democrats, the President, is willing to accept as much as $2 trillion in cuts and that the Republicans won't even accept like $400 billion in revenue. And I thought the President was exactly right. His party, my party, is going to have to agree to cuts, painful cuts in constituencies that we care about.

The Republican Party is going to have to agree to new revenue. They're just going to have to. It should be focused on the rich. He pointed out tax breaks for corporate jets and for oil companies. I mean there's some low-hanging fruit that the Republicans, for reasons I can't understand, are defending.

So, I thought that he made a very good point about the Republican intransigence here.

COOPER: Dana, the -- the -- the private jet thing, though, I mean, as Paul said, that's kind of low-hanging fruit. If the President is really serious about cutting spending, I'm not sure that's the biggest item he should be talking about.

DANA LOESCH, EDITOR, BIGJOURNALISM.COM: Yes, I think that only saves $3 billion.

And he actually continued that tax break in 2009 with the stimulus. I think that the $2 trillion, I believe, was over a 10-year period. That's a drop in the bucket over what can be cut. We really have to look at entitlement reform. And we also have to realize that history shows when government seizes capital, revenue for the government goes down. It doesn't increase. You have to have that private sector incentive, the job creation, all of that.

And tax cuts or an extension of the current tax rate is going to be the thing to do it, coupled with massive, massive cuts.

COOPER: David, it's interesting, though, because I mean, while -- while the debt ceiling talks were under way, the White House was pretty quiet about it. Does this seem to signal that they think the whole thing has fallen apart and the President is just kind of going campaign mode?

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Anderson, it certainly suggests that the mode -- the tone the President set today is a -- is a tone set by someone who thinks that talks are near collapse or not going anywhere and he's trying to scold the Republicans into action. If he really were truly near an agreement, I imagine he would have dropped all those snide comments about Republicans. It would have been a much more constructive, sort of encouraging kind of press conference. Instead, what we had were these snide comments, which I think will -- and some of the arguments. I think Paul is right. Some of the arguments are going to play pretty well with the public that the President made.

But the snide comments are really going to alienate Republicans, I think, and make it less likely they will come to the table in a compromising mood. And I think ultimately, Anderson, we're not going to get a big mega-deal. I think we're looking at some sort of patch.

COOPER: So, Paul, what is the strategy behind him doing this, do you think?

BEGALA: Well, I think David makes a point. I think David is right. It looks like the Republicans are not going to right now agree to anything.

So, the inside game has not worked -- and they have been at this for weeks -- if the inside game has not worked, well, then maybe you try the outside game.

I hate to even use phrases like game. Most of what I do and talk about is politics and its fun and there's no real harm done. People who really know the economy -- and I don't -- but people I trust say that the potential damage to the economy if America defaults after two and a quarter centuries is really serious. People use words like "cataclysmic".

I thought the President on that was pretty muted today. He said, well, it's -- it would actually be very unpredictable and it could cause a lot of damage, it could hurt jobs.

People are telling me it could be a whole lot worse than that. Can you imagine being the President knowing that we have to cut spending, knowing that we need new revenue, especially if we have to, from the rich and from big corporations -- it's an obvious deal -- and not having partners who are willing to accept the obvious?

COOPER: Dana, I think you have said, though, you have expressed doubts that it's as cataclysmic as Paul is indicating. Is that right?

LOESCH: Well, right. I mean, as -- well, as Jessica Yellin questioned the President at the press conference today, she asked him, well, there's been four dates that have already gone by and all of this apocalyptic stuff that Democrats keep saying is going to happen never actually happened. And we have gone past these dates and we have kept -- we keep having these extensions. So how do you reconcile that?

So, I don't think it is. I think there's a little bit of fear- mongering there. I don't think it's as bad. And it's definitely not as bad as what is going to happen, as what the CBO has said is going to happen, if we don't get entitlement spending under control. And if we look at Medicare, the spending for that is going to double in 25 years. We're talking about having the possibility of Medicare spending being 11 percent of our GDP. I mean, it's astronomical. It's -- there's no way we can sustain spending like this.

COOPER: David, I see you shaking your head.

GERGEN: I'm sorry. Just let's get -- factually, the administration has never set four dates and said it's -- we're going to have real consequences if we don't hit this date. They have always -- they have said for a long time --


LOESCH: Oh, yes they have.

GERGEN: -- August 2nd is the big date. That's just been very clear right from the beginning.

And secondly, listen, we're playing with fire here. Every major economist, every major financial institution -- the International Monetary Fund today issued a report saying there's going to be a severe shock to the economy nationally and internationally if we don't -- if we go into default.

Standard & Poor's has warned that they're going to cut our credit ratings. I don't know how many different kinds of warnings you have before you realize this is going to be really a very dangerous game we're playing. And both sides need to act like adults.

The President sort of accuses the Democrats, I mean, of -- I mean the President accused the Republicans of going off and loafing. He's going off to fund-raisers. He's got another one tomorrow night. He's had a series of fund-raisers.

I mean, you know, if both sides are going to get serious, let both sides stay in town.


LOESCH: Right. Right.

And can I add one quick point onto what David said -- David said? We would not even be having these Biden debt talks; we would not even be having these discussions if Democrats had produced a budget in the past two years.

COOPER: Paul, I want to give you the final thought. And then we have got to go.

BEGALA: If -- the budget the past two years doesn't have anything to do with it. We have a debt crisis. The American economy is facing default. The American government is facing default.

It has potentially really damaging consequences. And it's not an even-steven deal. The Democrats don't like the spending cuts. They hate it, but they're agreeing to it. Republicans have got to agree to ask wealthy people and big corporations and big oil companies to pay a little bit more.

And -- and until they're ready to acknowledge the obvious, then we're -- they're going to plunge this country -- I worry that maybe they're rooting for America to fail, so that Obama can be defeated. I hate to think that.


LOESCH: No, no, no.

BEGALA: But the only -- it's the only possible explanation here. Why would they -- because they don't want -- why would they want to drive our country into default?

COOPER: We have got to go.

Dana, I appreciate it. Paul, David, thank you.

Let us know what you think. We're on Facebook. Follow me on Twitter @AndersonCooper. I'll be tweeting tonight as well.
At least Begala and Gergen have enough sense to tell the truth--especially on the Republicans rooting for the economy to fail so that they can attempt to win the Presidency come 2012, unlike a certain moron who hosts a radio show on KFTK. And why the hell does CNN let her on to spew blatant lies with very little challenge from either the host and/or other guests?


Hardcore Biblethumper Loesch defends Theocrat Todd Akin's "Liberals Hate God" Statement

On Big Hackulism, Dana Loesch accused the "Liberal Media" and "Liberal Churches" of having a hissy fit over Todd Akin (R-MO02)'s statement that "Liberals hate God." Akin is a well-known cowshit Theocrat and is running for Senate to attempt to defeat Claire McCaskill (D) in 2012 to be with the corrupt as hell Roy Blunt (R),who won convincingly in a GOP-dominated (and Outstate Missouri/JeffCo reddening rapidly) political climate in 2010.

Loesch's inane screed at BigJournalism:

Rep. Todd Akin, Missouri’s conservative Republican challenger against Democrat Claire McCaskill, said this during a recent interview over the NBC/Pledge of Allegiance controversy.

Predictably, the progressive media had a meltdown, led by Think Progress (you know, the outfit who promoted the short-lived ‘Crash the Tea Party’ stunt wherein progs dressed up as klansmen and Nazis and attended rallies so that edited video could be used to smear the movement, even lifting other videogapher’s work).

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reached out to two groups, one which is definitely far-left and another that uses left-leaning code words like “we are agents of social justice” on their “About” page. I’m unclear as to why the paper chose to have representatives of a completely different faith to comment on the faith of another when the beliefs of both faiths are quite varied, but this isn’t Big Religion – a way to drive a wedge? Diversity? But it still doesn’t answer why no other religious leaders – or expressed Christian ones, not one the describes itself as “interfaith” – were represented in this article besides two left-leaning groups. I’ve asked the article’s author, Jason Hancock, on Twitter why only these two groups were included for comment

From the 06.24.2011 edition of FRC Radio's Washington Watch Weekly:

Achy Breaky Akin initially refused to apologize, but later did somewhat apologize, thus he got criticized on the Right for doing so.

The anti-reproductive rights/anti-choice Loesch was demanding that a pro-reproductive rights /pro-choice church, called Faith Aloud, apologize for "slandering" Akin."

This has nothing to do with questioning their relationship with God; it’s about questioning their misrepresentation of God’s will by claiming that faith is OK with things such as abortion. Akin gave no such impression that his remarks were directed at an individual, but certain progressive individuals with stated beliefs antithetical to that which is taught in Scripture purposefully wanted to interpret it as such as a way to both claim Akin’s scalp and edge closer to popularly redefining tenets of Christian faith. If liberal groups like Faith Aloud find offense at the idea that progressivism seeks to eradicate God from American culture — just as they seek to do the same by fudging Christ’s approval for abortion — that’s too bad. It certainly doesn’t merit an apology.

Faith Aloud has a page devoted to overcoming the (conservative/evangelical)stigma of an abortion.

Faith Aloud believes in the power of women to make good decisions and the power of God to support women through difficult times.

Shame is not caused by abortion, but by destructive religious and societal forces that prefer to keep women oppressed.

We provide religious counseling that is kind, non-judgmental, and supportive of women in whatever choices they make.

We provide unique religious resources to abortion providers to help them support the spiritual needs of their patients.

We are interfaith and include clergy and laity from a vast number of religious faiths and denominations.

Unlike Loesch and her anti-choice ilk, Faith Aloud (like Hope Clinic in my hometown, Granite City, IL and Planned Parenthood [which abortion only accounts for 3-6% of its services) is a trusted source for abortion issues. And, no, Liberals do NOT hate God, but they sure hate the Republican Jesus (known as Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Ronald Reagan, Rush Limbaugh, Fixed News, and/or Glenn Beck).


Loesch supports McCain's irresponsible statement that "Undocumented Immigrants started the wildfires"

The lying liar from St. Louis is back up to her dirty tricks. She supported the senile 2008 Republican Presidential Nominee and Arizona Senator John McCain (R-AZ)'s patently bogus claim that "Undocumented [Latino/a] Immigrants started the wildfires in Arizona."

John McCain, who has few fans in grassroots conservatism and even fewer in the MSM, was excoriated in the media over his recent remarks that the Arizona wildfires were started by illegal immigrants.

And this is coming from the same moron (Dana Loesch) who hates alleged RINOs like Romney, Huntsman, and McCain? Just another insidious attempt at anti-Hispanic/Mexican race-baiting and blatant xenophobia by Loesch.

Here's the real facts (From CNN): Undocumented Immigrants did NOT cause the wildfires in Arizona.

"It's easier to fan the flames of intolerance, especially in Arizona," said Randy Parraz, a civil rights advocate who ran unsuccessfully against McCain as a Democratic candidate in 2010.
Parraz called McCain's remarks "careless and reckless" but not entirely surprising given the political climate in Arizona. The Latino advocate is co-founder of Citizens for a Better Arizona, a group trying the recall the legislator who authored the state's controversial anti-illegal immigration law.
McCain said that illegal immigrants set such fires either to send signals, keep warm or distract law enforcement agents. But he did not specify which fires allegedly had been started by illegal immigrants, nor did he identify his sources or provide details of the "substantial" evidence he cited.
Firefighters are currently battling five wildfires that have burned a combined 732,427 acres in Arizona, according to InciWeb, an online interagency database that tracks fires, floods and other disasters. The fires are under investigation and suspects have not been named. However, local media outlets have reported anecdotal cases of fires breaking out in areas where illegal immigrants have been known to cross the border.
"People are looking for someone to blame," he said, claiming it is too easy and convenient to target what he called one of Arizona's "most vulnerable populations."

Senator McCain ought to know better than to piss off the Latino voters in Arizona, some of whom who happened to vote for Republicans (including him).


Dana Loesch baselessly claims "NBC is being anti-Christian," NBC apologizes for omitting "Under God" and "indivisible"

Dana Loesch is back again, this time playing the "godless Liberals are taking God out of everything" canard. Guess who inserted "under God" into the Pledge? The Evangelical Christian Right and anti-Communist groups, such as the traditionalist Catholic group Knights of Columbus. George MacPherson Docherty was the main person who came up with the additions to the words in question. The Pledge has been criticized (primarily from Atheists, Anarchists, Deists, and some Libertarians) for allegedly breaking the barrier of separation of church and state, principally for the inclusion of the words "under God." The last time I checked, God is still everywhere in this country, even in ultra-Blue areas.

The video in question, from the 06.19.2011 edition of NBC's Golf Channel on NBC: 2011 US Open.

Back to Loesch, who was peddling the "God is being removed" bullshit to her readers over at Big Hackulism, as nearly all of her fanbase believe that "those godless, Liberal, Socialist, Commie heathens want to get God out of everything and everywhere" crap. Well, guess who's putting God INTO everything? You guessed it. It's the Evangelical Conservatives who want their-- and solely THEIR version-- of Christ into everything. She falsely accused NBC of "betraying Christians."

NBC apparently edited out the phrases “indivisible” and “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance in their opening sequence for the US Open this afternoon.

What those working to drive out God from America don’t realize is that man is no longer truly free once man is given domain over the basic rights of others. Do they really believe that simple man is a better arbitrator of liberty than God? Man, who has perverted, shamed, and misrepresented his faith by waging war, killing and oppressing his fellow man? Those who wish to “free” America from God want to entrust us to this sort of jurisdiction? They’ll believe in corrupt men who waste their free will over the entity who bestowed upon them free will so that they could truly be free in life and choice?

If NBC or anyone else has a problem with identifying God as the source of liberty in America, their conflict dates back further than when the new Pledge was signed into law in 1954 – it extends back to when a group of free men met in a room and created the basic framework for a free society. If you dispute the source of your rights and are willing to allow your fellow man have domain over you, realize than that the reigns of power change hands and your freedom will never be assured.

NBC apologized for omitting the words "indivisible" and "under God." But will Loesch and her ilk give NBC credit for them apologizing? Hell NO! They'll just continue to play the "Blame the Liberals/Atheists/Secularists" and the "We [Conservative/Evangelical] Christians are being silenced and persecuted" cards.

From USA Today's golf section on USAToday.com:

BETHESDA, Md. (AP) — An omission in the Pledge of Allegiance had NBC issuing an on-air apology Sunday during the U.S. Open.

The network opened its broadcast with a montage that included children reciting the pledge, but the words "under God" and "indivisible" were omitted.

The backlash on social media was quick and harsh, with some tweets calling for a boycott of NBC.

We began our coverage of this final round just about three hours ago, and when we did it was our intent to begin the coverage of this U.S. Open championship with a feature that captured the patriotism of our national championship being held in our nation's capital for the third time," announcer Dan Hicks told viewers. "Regrettably, a portion of the Pledge of Allegiance that was in that feature was edited out. It was not done to upset anyone, and we'd like to apologize to those of you who were offended by it."

Even after NBC apologized, Loesch was still crying like toddler.

*UPDATE: Readers on Twitter are telling me that one of the anchors has apologized on camera for the omission, saying that he is sorry if anyone was offended. If it was an error, it was made in production, though I’m still curious as to how one can accidentally omit parts of the very short Pledge of Allegiance twice.
Newsbusters's Mark Finkelstein also blogged about the nonsense story, accusing NBC of "not fully apologizing":

As Noel Sheppard reported earlier, in the show-opening feature of its coverage of the final round of the US Open golf championship today, NBC--twice--edited out the words "under God" from its clip of school children reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

Clearly many Americans were offended and let NBC know about it. Because later in the broadcast, host Dan Hicks issued an apology on behalf of the network. But NBC simply compounded one omission with another. The apology spoke of "a portion of the Pledge" being edited out--but never mentioned that the omitted words were "under God."

Looks like Dana Loesch (and almost all of her listeners/fans) have lots of ties to the Evangelical Conservative Christianity world. And this is more proof that she is just another Republican watercarrier disguised as an Independent Conservative.

UPDATE: This is not the first time that NBC's been under hot water by the Christian Right. Remember them accusing NBC of allegedly whitewashing religious references out of VeggieTales? NBC is offically religion-neutral, whereas VeggieTales had an Evangelical Christian take on religion for kids.


On CNN Newsroom, Dana Loesch gushes over Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich

The woefully incompetent Dana Loesch was on CNN yet again spewing out gross falsehoods to the viewers, with very little pushback. Roland Martin, who recently has been under scrutiny for having homophobic tendencies, and Pete Dominic were the other panelists hosted by Kyra Phillips on CNN Newsroom. Of course, Loesch fawned over Rick Perry (who's ruining Texas worse than Dumbya during his reign as Governor), proving time and time again that she is a GOP shill, and NOT a Conservative Independent.

From the 06.15.2011 edition of CNN's CNN Newsroom:

She has defended the loonytunes Congresswoman from Minnesota known as Michele Bachmann, while slamming Anthony Weiner.

Newt Gingrich went on The Dana Show yesterday, and guess what she did? Let Gingrich spin his head like a top unchallenged.

From the 06.15.2011 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:


Dana Loesch baselessly blames Obama for high prices at the gaspumps at the K and N Rally

Local hate yakker and serial distortionist Dana Loesch was at the K&N Patriots/Americans For Prosperity-held Rally in O'Fallon, Missouri (the home to raging liar Cynthia Davis) yesterday, entitled "Running On Empty," which was a barrage of "The Liberals/Democrats/RINOS and Barack Obama want to gouge the prices higher" and "They're taking our energy use freedom away"-type talking points from the Koch Bros and GOP Special Interests. To all the brainwashed Teahadists out there, President Obama's NOT gouging the prices of oil, but if anyone should be blamed for price gouging at the pumps, it is the Republicans (and some DINOs) who kiss the backsides of Big Oil, speculators, and the greedy CEOs and execs of Big Oil.

Who else was at the rallies? Two candidates to replace Todd Akin for MO-02 (Ann Wagner and Ed Martin) and potential challenger to Claire McCaskill for Senator Achy Breaky Akin.

Adam Shriver at the St. Louis Activist Hub calls out Martin's buddies on Gas Prices and Energy:

This Saturday (June 10), wrong wing 2nd Congressional District candidate Ed Martin (Yes, the same Ed Martin who resigned in disgrace for legal and ethical problems as Gov. Matt Blunt's Chief of Staff) is heading a rally at the intersection of K & N at 10 AM. The main purpose is to showcase Ed Martin's corporate give away programs, but that is hidden under the guise of erroneously blaming President Obama for high gas prices.

Before Martin and his crew can spew waste worse than a BP oil rig and flood this busy intersection with raw, unvetted, mind numbing sewage, voters should know the facts about today's high price of gas

UPDATE: Dana Loesch told even more lies, such as falsely claiming that Al Gore's truthful film An Inconvenient Truth was banned from British Schools.

At a rally this weekend organized by astroturf Americans for Prosperity, which just happens to be funded by the Koch brothers, who just happen to own a number of oil refineries and bankroll the leading climate change denial groups in the country, Dana Loesch declared that Al Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" was not allowed into British schools because it was "fiction."

Here's the typical fact-free nonsense of Loesch:
And the British high court, told the educational system that they're not allowed to show this film. Why? Because it's fiction. Because it's propaganda. They said there was a number of things wrong with the film...wrong with the facts used to support this theory in the film. Nine of them were super-huge...they had a bunch of other complaints...but they're not allowed to show it in school districts.

Actually, Loesch's claim that An Inconvenient Truth was banned in British schools is indeed dogpoop.
Actually, the judge wrote that the film was, "substantially founded upon scientific research and fact" and said that he had "no doubt" that, "Al Gore's presentation of the causes and likely effects of climate change in the film was broadly accurate." The judge did note 9 errors, but allowed the film to be shown in schools as long as it was accompanied by a"guidance note" that presented a contrarian point of view on those nine claims.


Dana Loesch's circle of corruption

Over the past week, Dana Loesch has been linked to several corrupt people, including the notorious child molesting sexist pervert Mike Stack (who goes by @goatsred on Twitter) and Dan Wolfe (@patriotusa76 on Twitter, but had his account deleted). Here's the members of Loesch's Circle of Corruption.

First member of the Circle of Corruption: Mike Stack

Stack, known to the Twitterverse as @goatsred, has a long rapsheet that includes, but not limited to: assaulting his girlfriend, engaged in obscene behaviors, moderated xxxporntalk.com (his username was redgoat), and allegedly engaged in underage sex.

From the Daily Kos blogpost titled: "'Weinergate' Ends when Mike Stack, et al., have been investigated"

Mike Stack is one evil man. He is the one who was contacting young girls online and trying to get them to accuse Rep Wiener. If you know Mike Stack you would never want him to be anywhere near a daughter of yours.

His sidekick PatriotUSA76 ("Dan Wolfe") now claims that he has daughter and that his access to her has been limited due to issues involving a sex offender and implied molestation. That of course explains why his BFF online is a lover of incest pornography, right?
see the psychotic ramblings of PatriotUSA67 (Dan Wolfe) here:

Well let me tell you that Mike Stack has been for a long time associated with extreme and illegal porn (non-consensual sex/rape, incest etc..). He is also a moderator on a porn web site called xxxPornTalk. There his username is RedGoat. Specifically he moderated the subterranean "The Sh*t List" sub-forum where there are articles with titles such as these:
Whores Who Think They Are "Models"
Die of AIDS Jasmine Tame!

where Mike Stack (as sinlinlin) rushes in to defend an extreme porn producer accused of Pedophilia (previously convicted for his rape themed obscene videos) and his admission that he is BFF with this producer as well as other admissions of having collected money in exchange for removing harassing videos that he had created on YouTube against a female porn actress. Charges of extortion are made on that thread. Google sinlinlin and look for the first twitter result. The cached excerpt should show that the sinlinlin account (which has now been deleted) was owned by one "Mike Stack". You can also the connection between Mike Stack, goatsred and sinlinlin by checking out his FOAF xml file on opera.com here http://my.opera.com/...
Note the matching names, username,age and email address of mscart2000[@yahoo.com]

The biggest question is why the hell did she let a known creep go on her radio show to spew his dangerous lies without rebuttal?

Now, the fact that grown men were, in the words of the girls and their parents, harassing minors is bad enough. But it turns out to be far more disturbing when you find out who Mike Stack is. The web site The Smoking Gun found out that Stack was the moderator of an X-rated porn site, xxxporntalk.com. Depending on your sensibilities, you may or may not find that to be a big deal in itself, but it certainly adds a level of creepiness to the fact that Stack was harassing minors online in connection with the Weiner story.

Chrisopher has a bizarre habit that I lack, namely taking Breitbart at his word, but whatever, let's assume at that point in the story (Friday of last week) Breitbart had not used any of Stack's leads. What I want to know, then, is why Dana Loesch decided to interview Stack for her show yesterday. Loesch is normally pretty strategic about who her guests are, but it's hard to see what value Stack adds to the right-wing narrative or to any news at all! Loesch introduces Stack only as "@goatsred on Twitter," and the interview immediately jumps in to an attack on @patriotusa76. It also included this interesting quote from Stack:
From the 06.08.2011 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:

2nd member: Dan Wolfe
Wolfe, formerly known to the Twitterverse as @patriotusa76, got the Weinergate scandal started by posting a tweet as far back as May 11th, predicting that Weiner was going to be the unlucky victim.

Photo: stef406's photobucket, via DailyKos.

Wolfe emailed Breitbart the issue of Anthony Weiner's questionable tweet.

With that as background, The Smoking Gun published emails today from Dan Wolfe, AKA "patriotusa76," at least one of which listed Breitbart as a recipient. In the first email, Wolfe tips off Breitbart to the screengrab as well as key details of the story and promises at the end that "we have more."

In the second email, Wolfe appears agitated and warns that he will be in big trouble if unspecified details about his role in the incident leak:

I have ALOT of personal problems I didn't want to go into--but as I become the focus of this I am more and more afraid this will all come out. I want to tell you why I haven't talked on the phone yet.

I have an en exwife suing me for custody of our 2 kids and for lots of other stuff right now. Her attorneys are after everything I own.

I have an ex girlfriend who has mental problems causing issues for me at work .

My business is suffering as a result.

If my exwife's attorney's got a hold of a call recorded with me on it they'd have a field day with that. I want to try to avoid.

She had recorded me twice before. She worked with my exgirlfriend and had two calls recorded.

It has gotten me in a lot of legal trouble.

I am screwed. If this comes out along with everything I'm dealing with here -- I don't know what to do.

Wolfe had harassed thesupposed recipient of the photo:

Not only was @patriotusa76 the person to discover the tweet, he's the same person who had been harassing the supposed recipient, and he knew the Congressman was going to post the photo before he actually did.

From all this, we can start drawing conclusions.

First, Dan Wolfe had foreknowledge of this event. That much is indisputable. This would lead one to be highly suspicious of the fact that he was the one to discover the photo, but those suspicions are as yet circumstantial.

Now, it's important to revisit the allegation, which is that Rep. Weiner posted the photo to yfrog and mentioned a young college student in a tweet linking to that photo. Because here is where it gets interesting.

3rd Member: Andrew Breitbart
Breitbart has a long history of deceitful activities.
Over the past several days, Breitbart has humiliated himself over this story, but does he ever NOT humiliate himself?

Why did CNN gave him a platform to falsely implicate Weiner unchecked?

CNN Spreads Latest Breitbart Smear focused on what we knew about the stalking and set up of Congressman Weiner. That this was another ACORN like ‘sting’ is readily apparent via even a cursory inspection.

CNN has disingenuously ‘covered’ the story, which is to say they smeared right wing bullshit all over Congressman Weiner, probably motivated by a combination of the beating the GOP took in New York 26 and Weiner’s unflinching handling of the crimes of Clarence Thomas.

How do we know they were complicit? Simple, they’re running Crimson Hexagon – there is no plausible way they could not have known it was a setup.

Breitfart also snuck into Weiner's press conference:

I have no idea what's about to happen here, but having Breitbart come out and chew out the press 5 minutes before Weiner appears is just...surreal...

Update: OK, this is just bizarre beyond belief; did Breitbart fool everyone into thinking that this press conference was gonna be for Weiner? He got on stage at about 3:55, talked for about 15 minutes, then took off. We're looking at an empty podium at 4:16pm.

He claimed total vindication, that everything he said is true, that Weiner made up the "hacking" claim, and now claims that he's "holding back" one more extremely explicit photo in order to "save his [Weiner's] family".

This is just...strange.

He went onto The Dana Show to bash him some more:

And finally the ringleader, Dana Loesch:
Loesch, who's the editor in chief at Big Hackulism, a CNN "Contributor", and host of KTFK's The Dana Show, was leading the charge to defend her ethics-challenged cohorts.

Media heather Dana Loesch aka @DLoesch, who has been with CNN for just over ninety days, and who appears to have been intimately involved in a computer intrusion crime in the context of manufacturing 'news' aimed at a troublesome Democrat? How in the world is she still employed by CNN?

Here's a link to her crap on CNN. If you want to complain about her on Twitter you can contact @TeamCNN and I guess they route comments internally. There is a fat, juicy CNN feedback page, too.

Loesch was telling repeated false claims on all of her media venues:

As I just pointed out, Loesch retweeted this completely false claim earlier today:

Eric Boehlert at Media Matters retweeted my blog post pointing out that it was a lie:

And here was Loesch's response:

See? So when Loesch said that Media Matters wrote 9 pages, she was actually "asking" if they wrote 9 pages!

Here we go again: Loesch plays the victim card ("Wah, wah, wah! Those Liberals are lying about me again") and demanding that Joan Walsh owes an apology to her:

Since Anthony Weiner's press conference, Andrew Breitbart and Dana Loesch have been running around whining about how unfairly they were treated, what with people pointing out their histories of dishonesty and all. Loesch has in particular been directing her ire at Salon's Joan Walsh and hilariously demanding an apology (BTW, did Loesch ever apologize to the UMKC and UMSL professors she slandered?). Loesch is upset because Walsh tweeted that the "Breitbart empire" and other conservative blogs revealed the personal information of the woman who received the text, thus leading an army of neanderthals (my words not Walsh's) to pick through every detail of the victim's personal life.

News for you, moron Dana: YOU owe Eric Boehlert, Joan Walsh, and people YOU have defamed an apology!

Why the hell does CNN allow her on their network to fib at will with no repercussions, when she once criticized them?

Considering all that, Loesch's move out in front of the camera almost seems an inevitable addition to her other gigs: hosting a talk radio program in St. Louis and editing Andrew Breitbart's Big Journalism website, where she helped break the Weinergate scandal. And yet CNN is also a bit of an odd fit: Big Journalism's mission is "to hold the mainstream media's feet to the fire." CNN is part of that mainstream by pretty much every definition, and so there were howls of sellout! from the Tea Party faithful when she inked the deal. Loesch herself has said acerbic things about the network in the past, calling it among other things "the biggest bunch of idiot blockheads" and slamming its "blatant disregard for objectivity."

It's little wonder that Loesch ended up working for Breitbart, the former Matt Drudge underling turned conservative new-media kingpin who loves nothing more than manufacturing (see ACORN) or stoking (see Weinergate) a liberal scandal. Loesch has herself used new media to spearhead a couple of high-profile, Breitbart-style takedowns, like "Dump Dede," a blog that sought to prevent New York State "RINO" Dede Scozzafava from winning a seat in the House of Representatives in the midterm elections. When Scozzafava subsequently withdrew from the race, it became a major bragging point for Loesch, who still highlights it in her Big Journalism bio. More recently, she stirred up rage against Wonkette after a blog post tastelessly mocked Trig Palin; when advertisers withdrew, the post was eventually pulled.

Loesch's ease in both worlds, and her frequent emphasis on her conversion from liberal to conservative, makes her something of a type: a Woman Who Saw the Light.

She became a Conservative, around the time of 9/11, as frequently mentioned on The Dana Show.

Like Coulter, you're never quite sure what Loesch believes and what's meant to provoke, but of the two women, she is, on the whole, the far more sincere one.

Um, Loesch makes Coultergeist and Malkin look sane in comparison.

This is more solid proof that Loesch has ties to these members of the "Circle of Corruption."
Tweets by @JGibsonDem Tweets by @JPCTumblr