WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 2026
Act like a human for once: People who watched last evening's Gutfeld! show got their jollies right from the jump.
At 10 o'clock sharp--hat's 7 o'clock out on the coast)--Suzanne Scott pried the lid off the garbage can and one of the mutts crawled out. He always starts with two or three minutes of "jokes"--with jokes which are message carriers.
Last evening was no exception. His first joke pushed one of his standard themes--Hillary Clinton murders her rivals.
Then it came time for his second joke. His second joke, in all its unmistakable brilliance, started out like this:
GUTFELD (3/19/26): Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said the Iran incursion will soon, quote, bring the enemy to its knees...
Everyone who has ever watched this "cable news" show knew where this was going! Continuing directly, the little guy now said this:
Well, guess who just enlisted?
[PHOTO of Don Lemon]
At this site, we aren't big fans of Don Lemon's work. But the little guy restricts himself to this repetitive gay bashing when speaking of Lemon (as he constantly does).
He just keeps selling a tired old theme about the endless pursuit of indiscriminate sex.
The lord of the mutts told seven more jokes. (One was about how no one cares about women's sports. One was about how unattractive Yoko Ono was.
Finally, the punishment came to an end. It was still 10:03 when his final joke went like this:
GUTFELD: And finally, thanks to a new real estate deal, President Trump's name will be on the tallest skyscraper in Australia. Meanwhile, former president Joe Biden's name will be featured on a structure that's much closer to the ground.
[PHOTO of a gravestone]
AUDIENCE: [Muffled groans]
The little guy frequently offers jokes built around the enduring desire to see Joe Biden dead. He just can't seem to quit his demons. But this is who, and this is what, the Fox News Channel is.
("He'll put a smile on your face," Sean Hannity always says.)
Last night, this program's extremely peculiar host was surrounded by one of his typical panels. As you may have heard, his primetime corporate messaging show is watched by one of the nation's largest "cable news" audiences.
Last night, he staged several of the stupidest discussions we've ever seen, assisted by this modern, hall of mirrors version of the Village People:
Gutfeld!: Tuesday, March 10, 2026
Tyrus: former "wrestler"
Kat Timpf: comedian
Greg Gutfeld: host
Brianna Lyman: "Frequently seen on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business, Fox Radio and Fox Nation"
Andrew Gruel: executive chef, Calico Fish House
Assisted by a chef named Gruel and a former "wrestler," Gutfeld staged two of the stupidest "news discussions" we think we've ever seen.
(We stopped watching halfway through. You can only take so much.)
At any rate, Hillary Clinton murders her rivals, and Joe Biden will soon be dead! So it goes on this program, night after night, though someone apparently told the little guy that he had to drop the fusillade of comments and jokes in which he persistently compared the women of The View to horses, cattle, pigs and dogs--and of course, to whales and "livestock."
Someone apparently told him to stop! Also, a newer version of Dana Perino has seemed to emerge on The Five.
Hillary Clinton murders her rivals! When he pimps this favorite theme, the little guy takes us back to the mid-1990s, when a pious fellow named Reverend Falwell was touring the countryside selling a piece of murder porn known as The Clinton Chronicles.
The internet barely existed then. He had to peddle his video about the Clintons' many murders the old-fashioned way—the way the purveyors of elixir remedies used to sell their wares.
This nation's dangerous state of tribal division was picking up steam right there—right there, but also with the list of "contrasting words" Newt Gingrich had managed to come up with.
How should Republicans talk about Democrats? As we noted yesterday, he recommended such words as "destructive, shallow, sick, shame, cynicism, lie, disgrace, taxes, devour, anti-child, anti-flag and traitor"—and on and on from there.
Here we are, some thirty years later, and those of us in Blue America are never told about the way this dangerous garbage lives on. We're never told in the New York Times, or in the lordly Atlantic.
This week, we want to show you what happened last Tuesday on two Fox News Channel shows—first on The Five, at 5 p.m., then on the Gutfeld! program.
The Five attracts the largest audience in all of "cable news." The size of its audience dwarfs the size of every Blue American program—and it's as we showed you yesterday:
Last Tuesday, the program was staffed by the former cheerleader for the Raiders, but also by the former "wrestler" and by the peculiar man/boy who earned his stripes conducting dim-witted pseudo-interviews as Bill O'Reilly's "man in the street."
(No disrespect to O'Reilly, on whose show we appeared six times.)
At one point, the former cheerleader joined the former man in the street to enjoy a delicious exchange.
Sad! They were talking about something that didn't happen—something that didn't happen during President Clinton's deposition concerning his (rather limited) association with Jeffrey Epstein, which ended in 2003.
They were discussing something that didn't occur! Here's part of what these profoundly irresponsible resident flyweights said as a bit of tape from the deposition played on the screen:
WATTERS (3/3/26): Check out the look on Bill Clinton's face as Bubba reminisced a little too fondly about the good old times with Epstein, flipping through photos like it's a school yearbook. That is, until his lawyer swoops in, snatch the papers and reminds him this isn't story hour:
[Mimicking Clinton's lawyer]"Back to business, Mr. President!"
[...]
COMPAGNO: I mean, he was like—I felt uncomfortable seeing his glee at the pictures. Like, I felt like he was reminiscing clearly. I was like—I felt like I was seeing too much.
WATTERS: [Giggles]
COMPAGNO: I know! He loved it!
(Laughs delightedly)
WATTERS (imitating President Clinton): "Give me that back!"
Sad, but also disgraceful. Also, a bit of behavior which undermines the very possibility of maintaining the American project.
Again, this pair of corporate messaging agents were laughing delightedly over something that didn't occur! As you can plainly see if you choose to watch the tape, they were pretending that Clinton had been looking at photos of a bunch of young women—young women you were supposed to think he had assaulted during his handful of trips on Jeffrey Epstein's massive plane back in 2002 and 2003.
As a bit of videotape from the deposition aired, you were supposed to think that Clinton was looking at photos of young women and "reminiscing" about the ones he had assaulted.
The former cheerleader said she "felt like he was reminiscing clearly." Indeed, she felt like she "was seeing too much." She and Watters giggled and laughed delightedly as they enjoyed all the fun.
In fact, President Clinton was looking at something completely different during that brief bit of tape from the deposition—but management had instructed these tools that this was the way they should play it.
Watters and Compagno giggled and played. Other lunacies were acted out on The Five—and five hours later, things got a good deal worse when the baton was passed to the irresponsible, braindead panel on that evening's Gutfeld! program.
(Tomorrow—Fair warning!—we're going to show you the way Greg Gutfeld conned his program's millions of viewers about that bit of tape.)
Sorry, flyweights! During the lengthy deposition, there were no photos of young women who were present on the Epstein plane. At no point did Clinton survey some such collection of photos.
At one point, he did discuss what he has come to know about one of Epstein's victims. She was 22 years old when she met the former president on one of those flights.
Before the week is done, we're going to show you what she said about that interaction.
We'll go there by the end of the week. It was the misery handed to her by Epstein that Compagno and Watters and Tyrus and the rest of the mutts were delightedly laughing about.
Last Tuesday, Compagno and Watters were earning their pay, mugging about a hilarious event that didn't actually happen. What they did is precisely the way The Five works—unless you read the New York Times, or unless you read The Atlantic.
As these braindead Fox News Channel shows attack the very possibility of continuing the American project, Jeffrey Goldberg holds court each Friday night on the weekly PBS show, Washington Week with The Atlantic.
Thoughtful discussions are offered to a misled PBS audience. Never a word will ever be said about what happens on the Fox News Channel. More strikingly, never a word about that channel will ever appear in the very important magazine Goldberg serves as editor-in-chief.
Motherfrumper, it's time you stood up like an actual human. It's time you got up off your asp!
"Again, this pair of corporate messaging agents were laughing delightedly over something that didn't occur! As you can plainly see if you choose to watch the tape, they were pretending that Clinton had been looking at photos of a bunch of young women—young women you were supposed to think he had assaulted during his handful of trips on Jeffrey Epstein's massive plane back in 2002 and 2003.
ReplyDeleteAs a bit of videotape from the deposition aired, you were supposed to think that Clinton was looking at photos of young women and "reminiscing" about the ones he had assaulted. "
Why does Somerby feel the need to say this twice? Without saying what Clinton was actually looking at! Repetition provides emphasis. Every time Somerby repeats a Gutfeld joke, he advances it, promotes it, circulates it. If those jokes are so horrible, why does Somerby repeat them, instead of just saying that Gutfeld told a series of tasteless jokes?
Twenty-five percent of today's Somerby essay consists of promoting the content of Gutfeld's show. There is no excuse for that. It makes Somerby an accomplice in whatever political purpose is served by continuing to disparage Bill and Hillary Clinton, retirees now doing good works via their charitable foundation.
There wasn't anything to discover about Bill Clinton's relationship with Epstein, but that doesn't prevent Somerby from focusing on invented fantasies made up by Gutfeld's writers, but advanced by Somerby today. This is ugly stuff, but it is Somerby participating along with Gutfeld, not calling him out -- because calling Gutfeld out would take an entirely different form than repeating his jokes the way Somerby does almost daily.
So, Somerby supposedly advances Gutfeld’s fantasies. Let’s pick one at random: Hillary Clinton is a serial murderer. Is there anybody out there who was misled by Somerby’s post into believing this fantasy to be true?
DeleteTrump sets world on fire, see full report here on how Gutfield mocks Clinton. Whippee we are all doomed.
Delete12:29 - I suspect there are other sites out there reporting on Trump's actions. This site, however, is dedicated to American media discourse. If it were a site dedicated to sports, would you still be bawling about how it fails to highlight Trump's transgressions?
DeleteThanks for the update Dogface, I did not realize the media was totally ignoring the most consequential action the President has ever taken so there is no media discourse for Somerby's analysis. And your analogy is stupid.
DeleteSomerby knows nothing about media or analysis.
DeleteThe one about Bill leering was repeated twice by Somerby. Why? You tell me, DG.
DeleteTune in later for more Bobslapping.
DeleteI guess we can tally up the results: Exactly zero number of people were misled by Somerby into believing that Hillary Cllinton is a serial killer. I guess that means Somerby is not very effective in his campaign to convince gullible liberals to believe right-wing talking points. Maybe Putin should seek a refund.
Delete"Bobslapping"
DeleteQuaker, you can really turn a phrase.
Good luck finding something Somerby actually believes, that you could agree or disagree with.
DeleteOther than the name-calling, of course.
Hey Dogface, when you next speak to Bob could you let him know enough already with the idiot Gutfield and his minions. For Christ sakes it has been about his only media crank for years now.
DeleteSadly Bob is now the angry old man glued to Fox yelling at the clouds.
DeleteMany people believe Bill Clinton is a womanizer because of relentless politically motivated attacks on his character, like this one that Somerby repeats instead of debunking, Quaker. That is how they swiftboated Bill.
DeleteAh, perhaps some people believe that Bill Clinton is a womanizer because he lost his license to practice law because he committed perjury by denying an extra-marital affair.
DeleteOr shall we debate the meaning of "is"?
DeleteIf you read this, it is clear that Clinton agreed to surrender his law license and pay a $25K fine in order to end any further attempts to prosecute him on the Lewinsky matter, the Paula Jones trial or Whitewater after he left office at the end of his two-term presidency.
DeleteIt is majorly hypocritical for Trump to complain about politically motivated prosecutions when Clinton's entire political career consisted of these ginned up prosecutions over bogus charges.
When I hear supposed Democrats repeat these fake charges, I realize that the person repeating them is not serious but is trolling using right wing talking points. Most Democrats respect Clinton's success as president and admire Hillary Clinton's work. Just as most Democrats admire Biden's presidency and respect what he accomplished.
Quaker, I don't know where you are coming from but you sound like an asshole 50% of the time these days. DG claims to be a Democrat and yet he repeats the bogus smears against Clinton just as if he were never around in the 1980s to see how the right used every weapon at hand to try to bring him down. The right is still smearing. That supposed lefties join in their attacks is unacceptable. Educate yourselves and stop helping MAGA do its dirty work.
Oops, forgot to include the link:
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/02/duncancampbell
I am a Democrat and I was around in the 80's for all the Republican smears.These claims are true. It's also true that Clinton engaged in extra-marital relations with other women; it's true that he lied about these extra-marital relations; and it's true that he got his license suspended.
DeleteWhat is false is your claim that I repeat "bogus smears."
Maybe except for this: It was in the 90's, not the 80's, that we saw all these Clinton sex scandals.
DeleteBTW. I highly admire Clinton's and Biden's success as presidents. They produced the two best economies the world has ever seen. Hell, Clinton even got rid of the deficit.
DeleteCan you imagine where we'd be now if W. Bush hadn't pissed away all of Clinton's hard work to get the budget under control? Tax Cuts and Senseless War! That's the Republican formula for devastating the country's financial stability.
DeleteDogface, they started accusing Bill Clinton of sex scandals when he was Gov of Arkansas, via the Trooper-gate and Gennifer Flowers scandals. Those were in the 80s. Whitewater was about their actions while he was Governor, in the 80s. There was never a time when he wasn't being hounded by right wing enemies in his home state.
DeleteDG, wasn't this you?
Delete"Dogface GeorgeMarch 11, 2026 at 3:43 PM
Ah, perhaps some people believe that Bill Clinton is a womanizer because he lost his license to practice law because he committed perjury by denying an extra-marital affair.
Dogface GeorgeMarch 11, 2026 at 3:45 PM
Or shall we debate the meaning of "is"?"
Read Moncia Lewinsky's deposition. It is her statement of what happened, in her own words. Then tell me he was a womanizer who had sex with women. SHE engineered their meeting and stalked him (her words, not mine).
When you thoughtlessly accept the framing of the Lewinsky scandal, you are unfair to Bill Clinton and set back the prospects of Democrats. Just as you do when you accept current framing by the right of Clinton's non-relationship with Epstein. Clinton was not scum like Epstein and I doubt he would have enjoyed his company, the way Trump and his cronies obviously did. Clinton was pursuing funding for his foundation. End of story. No womanizing and no locker-room talk (the way Trump and his sleazy bros talk about women). Hillary would never marry a man who behaved like that toward any woman, much less continue to live with him during their long lives together.
4:57 - For Lent I'm giving up arguments with dead-enders. Believe that Bill is a paragon of virtue if you want.
DeleteSometing is off when a Democrat expresses a widely held opinion yet DG calls them a dead-ender that he won’t talk to. Maybe it is harder to be a pretend-Democrat than DG thought.
DeleteIf believing I'm not a Dem provides you with psychological balm, then believe away. After all, you wouldn't want have to have to deal with the mental turmoil of recognizing that another Dem thought your partisanship might be blinding you.
DeleteYou are clearly not a Democrat. You believe right wing propaganda about Clinton and see nothing wrong with Somerby's repetition of sleazy accusations today expressed as innuendo about Clinton. If you don't defend Democratic candidates, past and present, from Republican dirty tricks, you are not a Democrat. You are an asshole.
DeleteSome guys think it is cool to be cynical but they don't seem to understand that they come across as lacking in character because ideals and firmly held values are part of being an adult.
DeleteI wouldn’t say you’re an asshole, exactly, but I would say you’re uninteresting.
DeleteIt is embarassing when Somerby uses cutesy substitutes for profanity that is now so widely used it is no longer profane:
ReplyDelete"Motherfrumper, it's time you stood up like an actual human. It's time you got up off your asp!"
Somerby is himself a grown man. Why does he never say what he means? Why does he hide behind this kind of silliness that makes him sound like the world's biggest fool?
Yesterday someone called Iran a quagmire> Here's my response. "Quagmire" is the word of the day, but Geez. It's been less than 2 weeks. Wars typically last YEARS. Trump had guessed that this one would be over in only 4 weeks more or less. He says he's ahead of schedule. I see no evidence that we won't achieve this.
ReplyDeleteThe other day some dumbass troll stated that the war was essentially over. Oh yeah. That was you.
DeleteYes, you’re correct, dickhead. Everyone needs to relax and allow the Orange King to blow up the world at his leisure
DeleteThe thing being blown up is just Iran, not the world. The purpose is to prevent Iran from literally having the ability to blow up much of the world.
DeleteSome people see only what's right in front of them. Trump sees the threat in the future, and has the courage to deal with that threat.
What is it about Republican presidents that causes them to wage war on other countries for no legitimate reason?
Delete"The thing being blown up is just Iran..." lobbing drones at twelve countries impacting the oil production infrastructure and shipping lanes you stupid idiot.
DeleteDG - Can you explain why you believe the Iran attack had no purpose? Do you think Iran wasn't developing nuclear weapons? Do you fully trust the Iranian Ayatollahs to use nuclear weapons responsibly? Do you think we could persuaded Iran to stop developing nukes by negotiation only? Do you have some other reason?
DeleteGood questions, dickhead. We need to check with Bebe
DeleteAnyone catch the Orange King throwing Jared and Witkoff under the bus yesterday? Bwahahaha!!
DeleteBesides the fact that Iran posed no threat the US, attcking Iran constituted an aggressive war barred by international law that is binding on the US. Yes, I think "no legitimate reason" fits quite well as a description, thank you.
DeleteHey Dickwad, totally obliterated. Fuck you, you fucking flipflopping liar.
DeleteDG - You have a good argument that the US attack violates the Geneva Convention. An attack not in self-defense and not authorized by the UN. although there are some counterarguments. Of course, past Presidents repeatedly ignored this provision. They attacked other nations in situations that were not self-defense. E.g., Obama and Clinton. BTW neither these past attacks nor Trump's were authorized by Congress.
DeleteDickface, shouldn’t we just drop a couple dozen nukes on Iran and wipe them out for good? How else to ensure they will never develop a nuclear weapon? Praise Jesus!
DeleteI mean, fergodsakes, Orange King tried everything to avoid this quagmire. He even sent his slumlord grifting son-in-law to do the negotiations! Nobody can say he didn’t try
DeleteThe purpose is to prevent Iran from literally having the ability to blow up much of the world.
DeleteYou do understand that the above statement is nonsense, right?
Not only nonsense, Ilya, but the reason that Iran is even motivated to get a nuclear bomb in the first place is to deter countries such as Israel and the US from bombing the holy hell out of it. So, the more we bomb, the more Iran is incented to get a nuclear weapon.
DeleteDavid the bald faced liar: "BTW neither these past attacks nor Trump's were authorized by Congress." What, you think we are as stupid as you and the rest of your flip flopping lying cult?
DeletePrecisely, DG. We've got a tiger by the tail now.
Delete'Of course, past Presidents repeatedly ignored this provision."
DeleteWho could forget Trump's 2024 Presidential campaign, where he noted he's exactly like past Presidents, like Barack Hussein Obama?
Getting roped into a war by an apartheid genocidal nation run by a crook? What could go wrong? They are such a good ally, they haven’t sunk a ship of ours in years.
Delete"Who could forget Trump's 2024 Presidential campaign, where he noted he's exactly like past Presidents, like Barack Hussein Obama?"
DeleteIt's all they would talk about on Fox News.
"We've got a tiger by the tail now"
DeleteI agree. If this operation succeeds, we won't have to worry about the tiger in the future.
For once ignorant idiot David in Cal is correct, per (smart pretending to be an) idiot (for idiots like David in Cal) Senator Tom Cotton; Iran attacking us has been "imminent" for 47 fucking years!!! Who coulda known? Now I see. These wars started with these Ahab motherfuckers forming OPEC and stealing our big oil corporate profits. And that means WAR!!!
DeleteFLASHBACK:
DeleteDavid in CalJune 25, 2025 at 11:08 AM
Israel Atomic Energy Commission assessment:
“The devastating US strike on Fordo destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure and rendered the enrichment facility inoperable,” the IAEC statement reads.
Iran’s nuclear weapons program has now been set back “by many years” following U.S. and Israeli strikes, the statement added.
“We assess that the American strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, combined with Israeli strikes on other elements of Iran’s military nuclear program, has set back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years,” IAEC said. “The achievement can continue indefinitely if Iran does not get access to nuclear material”
Funny how the Nazibigotroll never responds to these displays of his own cult stupidity.
DeleteSo David in Cal, you now agree we have a war in which we cannot extricate ourselves from. Or you are just a fucking idiot. Which is it?
Delete"The phrase to have a tiger by the tail, and its variants, mean: to find oneself in a situation that has turned out to be difficult to control but cannot be got out of. The image is that someone holding a tiger by the tail can neither keep hold of it nor let go of it with safety" What a dunce.
Iran’s nuclear weapons program has now been set back “by many years”
DeleteIs it possible that they meant dog years, which is only about 8 human months?
Um, yeah David, you would have to be a tremendous dumbass to grab a tiger by the tail, and get yourself into that predicament.
DeleteThat's funny, Ilya. And 3:22, you're right. It's hilarious that DiC is BRAGGING that Trump has a tiger by the tail!
DeleteIlya - what's your point? The earlier bombing was not a decisive as Trump claimed. Three reasons
Delete-- We later learned from the UN that a lot of the refined uranium was stored under another city Isfahan.
-- After that attack Iran continued to work on nuclear weapons
-- Trump exaggerated the effectiveness of the attack.
So, what's your point?
You and Trump are full of shit, that’s the point, dickhead
Delete“He says he's ahead of schedule. ”
DeleteDiC, you are on record at this blog saying that you shouldn’t listen to what Trump says, but pay attention to what he does. In other words, you yourself acknowledge he is full of shit. Why do you post his words here as if they mean anything?
"Do you fully trust the Iranian Ayatollahs to use nuclear weapons responsibly?"
DeleteThe only person I would trust less is Trump.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHector, you didn't answer the question. We can't get Trump to give up all nuclear weapons, but we can (probably) prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Should we do that?
DeleteWhat is my point, David? Really? Other than the most obvious: everything that this administration spews out is 100% pure bullshit.
DeleteWe were told after the illegal attack back in June that Iran's nuclear capabilities were thoroughly destroyed. Some people in-the-know were skeptical, but they were told to shut up. Now, Trump has unilaterally decided to go to war against Iran, which clearly illegal. The reason? Who the fuck knows.
But let me assure you, any sane person is less concerned with the Ayatollah having nuclear weapons than Trump. Personally, I would not be at all concerned, other than the general preference for non-proliferation.
Trump is truly unhinged and dangerous. Whether it's because of his frontotemporal dementia or whatever, but Trump is a fucking menace. And his DUI hire, Hegseth, is weird and scary as well. Madmen are in charge of the world's most powerful military.
Sure Trump lies like all politicians, but so do his voters who said they voted for him "because he tells it like it is."
DeleteOh my God idiot David in Cal was right! Iran surrenders to Trumps masculinity. We won!!!
Delete"Iran believes there can be no end to the conflict until it believes Trump has been shown the economic, political and military cost is so high that it is not worth repeating. It is instead insisting on a permanent deal that includes a US commitment not to attack Iran again.
“If a ceasefire is to be established or the war stopped there must be a guarantee that aggressive actions against Iran will not be repeated. Otherwise if another attack occurs after a few months such a ceasefire would be meaningless,” said Kazem Gharibabadi, the deputy foreign minister."
Sorry, thought - Trump TACO's out again - meant we won.
Iran oil exports to China thru the straight of Hegseth is Stupid are up, while everyone else is shut down. So much fucking winning I can't take anymore.
Delete"Trump had guessed that this one would be over in only 4 weeks more or less. He says he's ahead of schedule. I see no evidence that we won't achieve this."
DeleteIt won't be over in 4 weeks.
You may turn out to be right, @11:33. What are your reasons for your prediction?
Delete2 reasons:
Delete1) Trump said it would be over in 4 weeks, more or less.
2) The Iranians know that the longer it gets dragged out, the more unpopular the Trump regime will be rendered. They know that their efforts at shutting down ship traffic will pay large dividends in crippling the US economy. The shipping companies will decide whether it is safe to transit waters at risk of Iranian attack, not Trump nor his minions.
Let's start a game. Count how many different euphemisms the media and the Drump administration can use to avoid calling it a war.. What do you say, dickhead?
ReplyDeletePutin calls the Ukraine War a "special military operation." Wouldn't that work?
DeleteAfter Trump blamed Iran for murdering their own children it is now a known fact versus a known unknown that we murdered ~ 170 school girls with maximum lethality. Asked about it today the asshole says he knows nothing about it. Strength in leadership during war is essential. But we have these mentally ill lying putzes.
ReplyDeletePro-life my ass!
Delete