Is Breitbart Anti-Trump in Reality?

Is it just me or does anyone get a strong sense that Breitbart, formerly helmed by Bannon, really does reflect his Trump-undermining agenda.

At this point I look at Breitbart and really detest how they operate. They really don't say much good about the successes of Trump. They do say a little, but it takes a backseat to the explosive rhetoric of the Left that they so obligingly amplify day in, day out. Every single day they upload articles of even the most minor celebrity saying negative things about Trump.

If you really look at their site, they are a megaphone for screaming lefties that would otherwise go pretty much unnoticed.

By pounding in these 'ironic' articles, people will eventually get a bad gut feel. The ywill start thinking, wow, if this many say this, there must be something going on.

Breitbart never outweighs the negative Trump stuff with all the positive our President has done. They virtually ignored the support he got at Davos. To me, that was the blatant tell-tale.

Make no mistake, I want to see a wall and illegals kicked out, E-verify, all that, but I think Breitbart no longer really supports Trump, just their own very, very, very strong anti-immigrant agenda.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=l2Cf-6vKVWg
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

No, I think it's always been like that. They're all about pointing out the absolute state of the left. I'm glad they're around.
I actually think they're keeping themselves on an even keel as a credible, conservative news organisation by doing this.
I can't say I read them much, being a busy Australian, but their headlines (the stories they cover) always seem to be on point.

Steve Bannon was the biggest enemy of illegal alien amnesty. They took him out first. Tucker Carlson and Ann Coulter are next.

I mean, you're implying that they were a voice explicitly FOR Trump, which is debatable perhaps, but I'm sure Breitbart would stress their impartiality.

>By pounding in these 'ironic' articles, people will eventually get a bad gut feel. The ywill start thinking, wow, if this many say this, there must be something going on.
I don't see the danger there. They already have 90% of the MSM for that, including all of comedy and hollywood.

This microphone has seconds to live.

this

I read Breitbart, Huffpost, CNN, and Fox.

Out of the four, Breitbart is the least bias, and I believe it's because they have no dogs in the fight. They may have an agenda like the others, but they don't push it like them.

Huffpost says "Hey, you're all racist and sexist!"
CNN says "Hey, the system is racist and sexist!"
Fox says "Hey, we have some bad apples in the system!"
Breitbart says "Hey, look at these retards going full-retard."

Who took out Bannon? How? Genuinely curious to know what you mean.
Tuck and Ann are in totally different categories though obviously.

We must grow and expand the culture that gave us Trump. Illiberalism in all of its forms are the antidote desperately needed to fixing this kiked nightmare. Social policing of (((unaccepted))) views must be rendered ineffectual and exposed as the culture of faggot manginas and shrill harpy traitorous biocunts that it is.

>we must remove and replace the ((((system))))) and (((((culture))))) that gave us Trump

Agreeing with liberals... FOR THE WRONG REASONS!

Well put, friendo.
And it's actually a shame about CNN. They used to be perfectly decent when they were covering actual current events. Now they are laughable.

I don't understand, the article clearly depicts the celebrities engaging in that event in a negative light, the highlighted quote implying that they are even threatening our current democracy. How do you read this as anti-Trump? Because they're reporting on it?

>is Kikebart anti-Trump?
We may never know

I do not read breitbart. Only read it during the election. As far as I'm concerned it's just for boomers and gen xers

It’s basically an edgy boomer outlet

My personal favorite is the daily stormer. Anglin’s writing cracks me up

yeah, but they hand them the megaphone.
I sense Breitbart sticks to truth,
but amplifying what some Lefty celebrity is still being truthful, but the repetition wears on the Trump base, me, I jus think it does. It certainly doesn't strengthen it.

I see Breitbart now as reporting what other people's opinions are as newsworthy fact.

I simply do not care what Enimen says. Why isn't my voice amplified? Breitbart caters to celebrities.

I think their agenda is so well thought out, so well placed and executed, their intentions, not wholly anti-Trump, but somewhat undermining, stay below the radar.

If Bannon has some idea of running for President in 2020, he's in for a surprise. I get that notion.

what i'm saying is they give it the megaphone and the publicity. True, you read the article, but many don't read the articles, they just skim the headlines, that's where the undermining takes seed, -the relentless mention of negativity.

I see perfectly what you're saying, but there's something that may also be playing out on a more psychological, repetitive level.

>we must remove and replace the system and culture that gave us Trump

Awesome! Does that mean Hollywood and msm are going to off themselves!?

ha,
but they don't see it that way I guess...

Breitbart has had a constant theme of reporting on the leftists media's activity as news itself. I see what you're saying but that would be like saying Breitbart is working against Trump because they report on every outraged statement CNN or some other MSM outlet makes. In the meta-context of Breitbart its not really agreement so much as a report on what the opposition thinks of their base.

yeah, i agree with that.
maybe I just wonder why they areen't more like Gateway Pundit or Daily Caller
They're just like that, -that's their deal.

Who's that in the middle? Is that Shia labeouf?

maybe, did they ignore his Davos welcome?
selection and editorial play much of a role in tone as tone does

>celebrities
>representatives of "the people"

youtube.com/watch?v=l2Cf-6vKVWg

No, showing us these self righteous champagne socialist wannabe communist elite class retards pedal their bullshit from their ivory towers is exactly what Trump needs to keep support.

These idiots want communism because they want to be the ruling classes, they want a security that celebrity doesn't bring, as their 15minutes could be up as soon as they get a little fat or the wrong audio tape gets leaked. Only by exposing people to this will they continue their hatred of the champagne socialist celebrity society in America and only through that hatred can we destroy the reds under our beds.

In short I'm saying events like this do more harm than good in the long run, so shining a light on it is actually better than letting it go unnoticed.

I once tried to explain to American maga-boomers in the Breitbart comment section that Cultural Marxism, while invented in Europe, after the 30's have been developed, perfected and weaponized in the U.S. "Gender studies", "queer studies", "critical race theory", "white privilege", "safe spaces", "trigger warnings" etc all this shit has been mostly innovated in the US and been pushed to the rest of the world by the US.

But no matter how much evidence I provided, the most pig-headed one still kept insisting that all marxism is either Russian or Chinese in origin.

Fucking kikebart