More on Jeffrey Toobin's "exposure"--a chicken may have paid the ultimate price

Toobin in the Now

It was initially reported that the Comedy News Network's legal Anal ist, Jeffrey Toobin was suspended from the New Yorker after he unwittingly exposed himself on a Zoom call to the magazine and WNYC radio staff. 

The report has now been updated.

It turns out to be false. Toobin was not exposing himself, according to those who saw what he was doing on camera--he was apparently "choking the chicken," or "charming the cobra," as it were. Yes, this overpaid pea-brain law school graduate was masturbating and did not know he left his computer camera on.

Even some on the left would say that "beating the bishop" during a Zoom call, whether or not one was sending it out over the internet, was unprofessional and somewhat gross. Everyone on the right would agree.

The matter is being "investigated" said a spokesperson for the New Yorker, and one can only imagine the difficulty one would have trying to maintain a professional demeanor, [keeping a straight face] while looking at the video in this so-called investigation.

"Jeffrey Toobin has been suspended while we investigate the matter,” a spokesperson for the New Yorker solemnly confirmed to Fox News.

Vice later reported a very salacious update.

The call, which was described as an "election simulation," featured Toobin's New Yorker colleagues including Jane Mayer, Masha Gessen, Andrew Marantz, Jelani Cobb, Evan Osnos, Sue Halpern, and Dexter Filkins playing various roles in potential 2020 outcomes including President Trump, Joe Biden, "establishment Republicans," 'establishment Democrats," and "the military." Toobin was playing "the courts." while playing something else.

According to two sources, Toobin was seen "flicking the bean" in what was supposed to be a 10-minute "strategy session" along party lines, but that it "seemed like Toobin was on a second video call."

"The sources said that when the groups returned from their breakout rooms, Toobin lowered the camera. The people on the call said they could see Toobin touching his homeboy. Toobin then left the call. Moments later, he called back in, seemingly unaware of what his colleagues had been able to see, and the simulation continued," Vice reported. 

Vice updated their original report: "This piece has been updated with more detail about the call and the headline has been updated to reflect that Toobin was masturbating."

Prior to the reported "double clicking," Toobin, one of CNN's biggest leftists, offered a feeble apology for his "embarrassingly stupid mistake" and attempted to explain what led to the incident.

“I made an embarrassingly stupid mistake, believing I was off-camera. I apologize to my wife, family, friends and co-workers," Toobin said in a statement to Motherboard. “I believed I was not visible on Zoom. I thought no one on the Zoom call could see me. I thought I had muted the Zoom video."

So the mistake was that he was visible to Motherboard, not that he was "celebrating Palm Sunday." Interesting. 

According to a CNN statement obtained by The Washington Post, "Jeff Toobin has asked for some time off while he deals with a personal issue, which we have granted.”

Yeah, he wants to spend more time with his family, yadda yadda.

C'mon, man. You know you want to follow Brain Flushings--it's free and worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a liberal sheds a tear.

Tweet

Scaramucci's vulgar language makes Trump look bad

Photo: Reuters/Carlos Barria

If I used even a smidgeon of the vulgarity the White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci used regarding Reince Priebus Google would shut down this blog. Even if they didn't shut me down you probably would go elsewhere to get your White House information and I wouldn't blame you.

Mooch, as he likes to be called, even made fun of Senior Adviser Steve Bannon in the same interview with Ryan Lizza, writing for the New Yorker magazine. 

In the story published on Thursday, Mooch asks Lizza to tell him who leaked the details of a dinner Trump attended and he goes on to accuse Priebus of being the leaker.

"Reince is a f***ing paranoid schizophrenic, a paranoiac," Mooch told Lizza in a Wednesday evening phone call.

"I fired one guy the other day. I have three or four people I'll fire tomorrow," Mooch said. "I'll get to the person who leaked that to you. Reince Priebus--if you want to leak something--he'll be asked to resign very shortly."

He went on, doing an impersonation of Priebus: "Let me leak the f***ing thihng and see if I can c**k block these people the way I c**k blocked Scaramucci for six months."

Mooch said that unlike Bannon, he's not interested in inflating his profile to the media.

"I'm not Steve Bannon; I'm not trying to suck my own c**k," he said. "I'm not trying to build my own brand off the f***ing strength of the president. I'm here to serve the country."

At least he didn't say he was here to serve the 'f***ing country'.

He accused Priebus of leaking his financial disclosure to the media calling it a 'felony,' but the information was public record, so he was wrong.

"I've called the FBI and the Department of Justice," he said.

"What I want to do is I want to f***ing kill all the leakers and I want to get the president's agenda on track so we can succeed for the American people," he said, and told Lizza that he believed Priebus would resign soon.

Mooch ended the call with Lizza, telling him he needed to "start tweeting some s**t to make this guy crazy."

Interestingly, Scaramucci didn't deny any of the comments he made. "I sometimes use colorful language," he said. "I will refrain in this arena but not give up the passionate fight for @realDonaldTrump's agenda."

Then later on Thursday, Mooch made it sound like it was all Lizza's fault stating that he "made a mistake in trusting in a reporter. It won't happen again."

But whether the reporter was told that it was "off the record" or not, Scaramucci still displayed the unprofessional vulgarity and even homophobia the LBGTQ would say, that should render him wrong for this job.

We all remember what Trump said a few years ago about grabbing women by their genitalia. This echoes the same negativity and likely problems Trump will have in the future. 

Lizza spoke on the Crappy News Network (CNN) saying, "It's not a matter of trust, it's a matter of we as journalists trying to explain who these people are to the American people and when you do an on the record interview with someone, its standard operating procedure that the interview gets reported."

And you really can't disagree with that. Imagine if you, as a journalist, was privy to Sacarmucci's private rants, with all of its anger and vulgarity. If you didn't report it, you'd be guilty of journalistic malpractice.

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders defended Scaramucci saying that he gets passionate about his job. 

"This is a guy who sometimes uses colorful--and in many circles, probably not appropriate--language. And he's very passionate about the president, the president's agenda and I think he may have let that get the best of him in that conversation," she said.

That wasn't 'colorful' language, it was highly vulgar and totally inappropriate and cannot be justified, in spite of Sanders' intelligent handling of it.

One White House official leaked concern to Fox News saying, "This is getting out of hand. I am honestly getting concerned for my safety in the office tomorrow. This type of behavior is unbelievable. Working in the White House and something like that is said, it is a disgrace."

Sadly, I agree with the leaker.



Tweet

Hillary, if you can't take the heat, back out

Reading through the FoxNews website an article by Howard Kurtz caught my attention: "Hillary backer: Calling Clinton 'calculating' or 'ambitious' is 'coded sexism'"

It begins with an email that a New York Times reporter, Amy Chozick, received from what Kurtz describes as a "hyperactive Hillary Clinton supporter." The email to Ms. Chozick is titled: "Your Obsessive and Loathsome Coverage."

We knew this was going to happen in Clinton's campaign, but her campaign hasn't even been officially announced and already the morons are pulling out the "Sexist Card."

John West, the moron in question, is the director of "HRC Super Volunteers." West apparently sees everything that is critical of Hillary Clinton as sexist, just like everything critical of Barack Obama is racist.

Liberals have nothing in their defensive arsenal to thwart factual criticism so they must rely on the liberal tactics of ad hominem attacks.

This Hillary pantywaist emailed 120 journalists telling them that he and his group (a gaggle of liberals who came together as one on Facebook) "will not tolerate any form of sexist news coverage of any woman who chooses to break through the glass ceilings: whether as a CEO or running for president of these United States. Already we have seen the coded language of sexism and innuendo used by major news outlets and we are not happy."

The 120 journalists are so scared of these vaginally-focused idiots that they were quaking in their jeans (or was it quacking at their computers).

West cites examples of what he determines is "coded innuendo": the New Yorker referring to Clinton as "petulant"; USA Today, the Washington Post and Time Magazine writing about her preference for "secrecy"; and the New York Times having the utter gall to say that she could "be seen as unduly secretive or imperious." Imagine, even Politico called her "devious" and "defensive."

How dare they write what John West finds offensive and sexist?

West threatened the journalists by saying:

"You are on notice that we will be watching, reading, listening and protesting coded sexism this time around in words and phrases like polarizing, calculating, disingenuous, insincere, ambitious, will do anything to win, represents the past, out of touch, inevitable, entitled, over cofident, defiant, inserting snide comments on her looks like tired, haggard, worn out . . . the list goes on but I trust you get my point."

Kurtz points out what a few male politicians, mostly from the GOP side, have gone through with the slings and arrows from the liberals. For example, John McCain being called old and possibly missing a couple of screws from his time in a POW camp (liberals really suck to use the POW ploy in a negative way for McCain); Ted Cruz being called a "wacko bird" and worst this week; Boehner being too weepy.

Originally a McCain joke about his shorts

What Hillary Clinton did by keeping her government emails on a private server and deleting those she decided to get rid of, has nothing to do with her being a woman. 

And along with her sordid past with White Water, her politically-motivated tolerance of Bill's indiscretions with women, her being fired from the Watergate Committee, and on and on, what does her being a woman have to do with the fact that we cannot accurately describe her as: insincere, ambitious, driven, defiant, polarizing, calculating, disingenuous, and will do anything to win?

To be told that one must censor what one writes about Hillary Rodham Clinton merely shows how weak she really is, and how her "super duper pooper volunteers" recognize this. 

Like Barack Obama, Hillary's ego is unable to tolerate genuine criticism, especially when it rings true. Sadly, her super followers have the need to protect this weak woman, a throwback from the past.






Tweet