Trump, Porn, Stormy Daniels, and the Fake Liberal Outrage

Liberals are morally “outraged,”, “offended,” and ” perturbed” by a billionaire businessman having a one-time fling with a pornographic actress, Stephanie Clifford (AKA Stormy Daniels).  In October, 2016, Trump’s lawyer, Michael Cohen, paid Daniels $130k as part of a non-disclosure agreement so that she wouldn’t spill the beans on the alleged affair.  Now, Daniels wants to tell all, claiming the agreement is void because Trump never signed it.

But before 2016, Daniels had already discussed her affair with Trump:

“[The sex] was textbook generic, she said in an interview with US magazine InTouch magazine in 2011. He wasn’t like Fabio or anything. He wasn’t trying to have, like, porn sex.

“It was nothing crazy. It was one position, what you would expect someone his age to do.”

And now there is buzz of the possibility of the existence of “confidential information” (texts, images, etc.) pertaining to the affair, since the agreement required her to turnover any such information.  Being that ten years has transpired since the affair, and nothing has been leaked, the likelihood that there are crude images or texts, is slim.  But if Daniels really does have something more on Trump, and she wins her suit to have the NDA declared void, she’ll have a chance to release any salacious texts or images.  (Basically, after this rodeo, she would have to “put up or shut up,” otherwise it’s just confirmation of a publicity stunt).

Now that we’ve established  that the affair likely happened, it’s intriguing that liberals are so intent in manufacturing a scandal, when their own actually engaged in far worse scandals that violated the public trust.

  • Bill Clinton would routinely summon Monica Lewinsky to the Oval Office for oral sex;  he was President, she was an intern, and the outcome resulted in him being disbarred after he had the audacity to lie under oath about it.  (He was never convicted by the Senate, and refused to resign).
  • Anthony Weiner (AKA Carlos Danger), was sexting women, some of whom were teens, sending lewd pictures of his genitalia to them via social media sites such as twitter, and snapchat.  He did this during his term in Congress, and when running for NYC Mayor.
  •  Eliot Spitzer paid up to $80,000 for prostitutes over a period of several years – first while he was attorney general, and later as governor.  Yes, he was linked to a prostitution ring as “Client 9” scheduled to meet with a prostitute who’s part of the ring, Emperors Club VIP.  Ironically, while he was meeting with prostitutes, he was prosecuting these prostitution rings as the Attorney General.  (He later got his own show on CNN).


Trump likely had a sexual encounter with a pornographic actress, which later turned platonic.  It was a one-time fling:  the alleged sexual encounter occurred in 2006, and didn’t happen again. It didn’t involve an intern in the oval office;  it didn’t involve underage children;  and he wasn’t linked to a prostitution ring while simultaneously prosecuting those rings.  In other words, he didn’t abuse the public trust, or engage in criminal behavior.  He wasn’t even a politician at the time.

We’ve heard from Daniels how the encounter went, and yet some are eager to get “texts” and “calls” stemming from the affair for the sole purpose of embarrassing a sitting U.S. President.  Maybe those people, for our sake, should suggest serious policy proposals, instead of indulge in their fascination with Trump’s past sex life.  Their hatred and desire to embarrass a sitting President is packaged as “moral outrage,” when their own did far worse, and were treated with kid gloves, and afforded second chances.













About Tyrant Watch

Other than a column I had with the Washington Times a few years ago while in law school, I have no background in journalism. But a little common sense, education, research, and intuition can go a long way in scratching beneath the surface. My passion is the news, and as a consumer of such (just like yourself), there’s nothing more infuriating and insulting than some of these performers masquerading as journalists. (News coverage during the last election cycle is proof positive of this.)

We’re in a new era.  It’s one where “journalists,” and bloggers will do anything for ratings.  It’s one where talk show hosts spout off stuff without knowledge to appease their handlers.  Lies.  Half-truths.  Spins.  Embellishments.   The magic show has begun, and they’re on stage pulling a rabbit out of a hat.  Who are these performers?  They originate from mainstream media and alternative media outlets alike;  they feed you things you want to hear, slowly seducing you into their dark web.

And that’s why I started this blog.  These “media magicians” can no longer work their “magic,” and will be held accountable so long as this blog is publishing.  We fact check and analyze their segments;  scrutinizing everything they say, and do.  We investigate their political ties, and history;  we call out their asinine jokes (so they know we aren’t laughing “with” them);  and we take the spin and straighten it out.  When all is said and done, they’re left naked on stage:  no hat, rabbit, or clothes.  Totally exposed.

Let me make one thing clear:  this blog is more than just a fact checker.  We look to the underlying motivation behind the reasons for the spin, and lies.  Sometimes it’s not enough to address the lies, so you scratch beneath the surface.  (It’s like taking a pill to feel better, without addressing the underlying issue.)  Only  then can we really expose the tyrants for who they are, and what they want.






YouTube Censors Video Claiming David Hogg is a Crisis Actor

For three hours, a video claiming that student survivors of the Florida shooting were crisis actors, was the #1 “Trending” video on YouTube.  The video, posted by a user named Mike M., and viewed more than 216,000 times, was hastily removed by YouTube.  If you click on the link to the video now, you’ll see a black screen and the following message:

“This video has been removed for violating YouTube’s policy on harassment and bullying.”

The video, uploaded with the caption “DAVID HOGG THE ACTOR,” describes a confrontation between the lifeguard and Hogg’s friend, who put his boogey board on a trash can in Redondo beach.  After his friend told the lifeguard to go away, the lifeguard was provoked and told him  not to give him lip. During the confrontation, his friend is seated on the beach, and the lifeguard is standing and leaning down very close to him.  Meanwhile, Hogg secretly records the incident, and later claims in a news segment that his friend felt “threatened” and “worried” by the lifeguard.  In speaking on behalf of his friend, his comments are made in a monotone and robotic manner.

The censored video can be found here:

Hogg and his friend get exactly the reaction they want from the lifeguard:  anger and frustration.  It was calculated to get news coverage, and viewership on YouTube; Hogg had the camera rolling, and recording before the confrontation even started.

Why is YouTube censoring the video for the sole purpose that the caption reads, “DAVID HOGG THE ACTOR”?  The link above is a news clip of the incident; the full, unedited version of the incident is here: And Hogg makes clear he owns the copyright to that video with a copyright disclaimer written across the clip.  The comments section for both videos have people accusing Hogg of being a crisis actor.

But a clip suggesting that Hogg is a crisis actor (in its caption) isn’t all too crazy considering that apart from the sketchy recording of the lifeguard incident, we know that:

  • He only recently moved from California to Parkland, Florida to attend Douglas High School.
  •  His instagram profile claims he’s a Sun Sentinel Teenlink reporter, and Student film maker.
  • As a high-school sophomore, he reportedly created broadcast packages and said that television news was his passion.
  • David’s father (Kevin Hogg) was a retired FBI agent assigned to the L.A. International Airport until 2014.


Hogg’s journalistic ambitions, along with the timing of his move to attend Douglas High, as well as his father’s career at the FBI, are raising eyebrows.  Further, during the shooting incident, while hiding in the closet with classmates, he decides to start recording himself interviewing his classmates.  He and the other students seem surprisingly composed given the possibility that they could be killed at any moment.  Nobody is pleading for help, or sending shout-outs to loved ones. Here are some of what the students had to say:

  • “At this point, I don’t even want to be behind a gun.”
  •  “We need more gun control in our country.”
  • “No amount of money should make it more easily accessible to get a gun.”
  • “I personally have rallied for gun control.”

Gun control, gun control, gun control.  If you heard that clip, you would think it’s a PSA for gun control, rather than a live recording of students interviewed  during a shooting.

The other strange thing about this incident is that Hogg changes his story about whether he knew the incident was a drill when he was hiding in the closet.  In his recording, he talks to the camera, saying that he initially thought it was a drill, but after hearing more gunshots, knew it wasn’t.  (Therefore, he knew that it wasn’t a drill before he hid in the closet.)  However, in an interview with MSNBC anchor, Stephanie Ruhle, Hogg says it wasn’t until he was in the classroom closet hiding, and checked his phone and saw news reports of the shooting, that he decided to record footage of the incident.  “Once we were all in the room and started seeing the headlines, we realized this was anything but a drill,”  said Hogg.  Oddly, in that same interview, he mentioned that the janitor had warned them that the shooter was in the direction they were evacuating, and that they shouldn’t proceed that way.  (And that’s why they hid in that classroom closet instead of evacuating.)

Did he learn that it wasn’t a drill after hearing multiple gunshots, or after checking the news in the classroom closet?  Did he think the janitor was a part of the drill?  (That would be surprising.)  So exactly when did he know it wasn’t a drill?  This is important because he says he only started recording after he knew it wasn’t a drill, so their voices would be heard in case they were killed.   Maybe if MSNBC anchor, Stephanie Ruhle, had spent less time showering Hogg with praise, and more time asking about the details of the incident, we would’ve gotten a straight answer.

Then you have Hogg doing an interview with Anderson Cooper of CNN.  Hogg responds to a question by Anderson Cooper, in which he’s asked how he feels about Trump Jr. liking a tweet claiming that the incident was a conspiracy perpetrated by Hogg and his father. Hogg sounds like a politician off the bat, not replying to the question, but instead saying how he’s “so sorry that people have lost their faith in America.”  Eventually, he claims that he’s  “not an actor in any sense, way, shape, or form.”  He appears stoic throughout the interview, and periodically looks to his right (as if he’s referring to notes).  At the end, he insists he isn’t anti-second amendment, and only wants people with major convictions and mental illnesses barred from buying guns.

But that’s bogus.  In another interview with CNN, he refers to the NRA as “child murderers” and agrees with another student that they should “dismantle” and not make another organization under another name.  (Nevermind that after the Vegas shooting, the NRA agreed to background checks and a ban on bump stocks on guns (which effectively turn semi-automatic weapons into machine guns)).

YouTube banned a video solely because its caption claims Hogg is an actor.  Hogg likes the limelight, and this can be seen with his previous recording where he set up a lifeguard in a terse exchange with his friend, and later speaks on behalf of his friend to reporters about the incident.  We know that he contradicts himself about when he first learns that the shooting wasn’t a drill (and this is important because his rationale for recording was so that their voices could be heard in case they died).  Further, he and his classmates in the recording seem unusually composed, and coherent in their support of gun control, given that at any moment they could be found and shot.  Finally, he appears stoic and scripted in his interview with Anderson Cooper and others.

An actor?  Possibly.   Since the same video is on YouTube, people can go check that out, look at his background, and look at his interviews with Anderson Cooper and others, and make up their own minds.