This week, Pepsi managed to pull off the impossible. Left and right have temporarily put aside their differences and are now united by outrage over this commercial:
Pepsi pulled the ad when the internet wouldn’t stop mocking its inane premise,
— Be A King (@BerniceKing) April 5, 2017
— maya (@mayaelysee) April 4, 2017
— Wife With A Purpose (@apurposefulwife) April 5, 2017
— The Independent (@Independent) April 5, 2017
and remixing it.
— Vito Gesualdi (@VitoGesualdi) April 7, 2017
— VzA (@ValerieComplex) April 5, 2017
— Cassey Shapiro (@casseyshapiro) April 5, 2017
How much did Pepsi spend on this disasterpiece of an ad? According to experts (read: persons who can convincingly deliver budget figures they’ve pulled out of their asses to a writer at People)
“At least $2 million, but probably more like $5 million, including Kendall’s fee,” the official says, adding the the media buy would be “roughly $100 million for a campaign like this.” A longtime production coordinator notes: “Kendall was likely paid a one-time fee for the ad. I’d guess anywhere from $400,000-$1 million.”
Ooops. That’ll leave a mark.
Mike Cernovich, who just two weeks ago was the subject of a 60 Minutes segment on “fake news” that was nothing more than a naked attempt by CBS’s Scott Pelley to try to undermine Cernovich’s credibility by lumping him in with people who traffic in clickbait stories that have zero basis in reality. The segment backfired in spectacular fashion on Pelley who ended up looking like an easy mark for anyone looking to push a pro-Democrat narrative.
This week, Cernovich has once again triumphed over the lying media hoaxsters once again by publishing a bombshell report about Susan Rice. On Sunday night Cernovich broke the news that Rice is behind the unmasking of names of Trump transition team members. In a post on Medium Cernovich wrote:
Susan Rice, who served as the National Security Adviser under President Obama, has been identified as the official who requested unmasking of incoming Trump officials, Cernovich Media can exclusively report.
The White House Counsel’s office identified Rice as the person responsible for the unmasking after examining Rice’s document log requests. The reports Rice requested to see are kept under tightly-controlled conditions. Each person must log her name before being granted access to them.
Cernovich’s reporting was backed up (but not credited of course) the following day by Eli Lake at Bloomberg:
White House lawyers last month learned that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
The pattern of Rice’s requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government’s policy on “unmasking” the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like “U.S. Person One.”
Come Tuesday, Susan Rice was back on television, doing what she does best lying and dissembling with a healthy assist from MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell. Here’s the full interview:
The most interesting part of the discussion takes place beginning at the 3:15 mark. Transcript via Real Clear Politics (my supposition about Andrea’s inner monologue throughout in italics):
MITCHELL: Within that process, and within the context of the Trump campaign, the Trump transition, did you seek the names of people involved in — to unmask the names of people involved in the Trump transition, the Trump campaign, people surrounding the president-elect —
Excellent question Andrea, Susan will have no problem shutting this line of questioning down.
RICE: Let me begin —
Oops that was too open ended, must interrupt her with a question that will solicit a definitive NO!
MITCHELL: — in order to spy on them, in order to expose them.
That’s a nice big softball for you Susan, I’ll step back now and let you hit it out of the park.
RICE: Absolutely not for any political purposes, to spy, expose, anything. But let me —
Ugh, why didn’t she just say NO! absolutely not. Let’s try this one more time…
MITCHELL: Did you leak the name of Mike Flynn?
RICE: I leaked nothing to nobody and never have and never would.
Excellent work Susan! That grammatically incorrect mess of a sentence will be the only soundbite from this interview that anyone remembers. Success!
And so it was. Susan Rice didn’t leak nothing to nobody, which is not an answer to the question: are you responsible for the unmasking of the names of Trump transition team members? became the soundbite of the week. Spin like this works perfectly in a cable news interview with a friendly anchor, but I have my doubts about its effectiveness when the venue is a Congressional hearing where the questioners are former prosecutors. Best of luck with that Susan, can’t wait to see how you fare!
Carol Roth joined us to talk about the current state of the economy and her work with Microsoft Office Small Business Academy helping entrepreneurs with tips and best practices to help them realize their goals. Carol also returns in our bonus segment to drop a few f-bombs and talk sports with Fingers.
Finally we come to the latest news out of Syria. According to Western news reports, President al-Assad used chemical weapons against his own people in a bombing raid on the town of Khan Sheikhoun. These claims are being disputed by Assad and the Russians who have been providing military support to the Assad regime.
Syrian military forces have been making slow but steady progress in their fight against the rebels, and President Trump and other administration officials including Secretary of State Tillerson and UN Ambassador Nikki Haley have been signalling that the US isn’t interested in regime change in Syria. So, from a common sense standpoint, the Assad regime has nothing to gain and everything to lose by using chemical weapons at juncture in time.
Carol Roth stuck around to swear and discuss the Oakland Raiders moving to Las Vegas, and the HBO series Big, Little, Lies.
That segment is almost as important as our brief discussion about the US missile strikes that hit a Syrian airbase on Thursday evening. The base that was hit by 59 Tomahawk missiles is the supposed origination point of the chemical weapons laced bombs that were dropped by Syrian military forces earlier in the week.
What happened to this Trump?
What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 29, 2013
Has he already become a swamp creature who blindly believes intelligence reports about WMDs? I have to wonder if he’s ever seen this reporting from Seymour Hersh about the 2013 sarin attack that almost resulted in the US going to war. It contradicts the accepted narrative that Assad was behind those attacks and instead points the finger at the Turks.
There is no time to wait for an investigation to be done, because there are dead children! Have you no heart?!
And what’s this from the Pentagon?
PENTAGON: At direction of POTUS, U.S. forces conducted cruise missile strike against a Syrian Air Force airfield today at about 8:40 pm EDT pic.twitter.com/TEac56cQee
— Dan Linden (@DanLinden) April 7, 2017
Note the part about giving the Russians a heads up. If the Russians were forewarned, surely they let Assad know what was about to go down. What the hell is going on? Was this strike just a minor show of force, to show that Trump won’t bother drawing red lines, that he’ll take military action on his own without Congressional approval? Surely, there are better ways of making a point.
I’ll let Alex Jones play us out…