Trump Plays Compilation of Violent Video Games During Meeting With Entertainment Executives

A rising number of scholars question evidence of a link between gaming and aggression

President Trump reportedly showed a compilation of graphic scenes from modern video games to entertainment industry executives during a meeting about the effects of violent media on teenagers.

The Washington Examiner reports that during a closed-door meeting with a number of executives from video game studios, President Trump began the meeting by playing a compilation of “horrendously violent” scenes from video games to the group. Present at the meeting was Melissa Henson of the Parents Television Council, Dave Grossman, a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who has long argued that video games cause violence in teens, Mike Gallagher, the CEO of the video game trade association Entertainment Software Association (ESA), video game developer ZeniMax Media CEO Robert Altman, Take-Two Interactive CEO Strauss Zelnick, Pat Vance, the President of the Entertainment Software Rating Board, Brent Bozell of the conservative Media Research Center, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Mo., and Rep. Martha Roby, R-Ala.

The video that Trump played for the group has been posted to the official White House YouTube page. The Verge listed all of the scenes featured in the clip, they include,

  • The death of Call of Duty: Black Ops character Joseph Bowman (2010)
  • A collection of scenes from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (2009)
  • Clips of kills in horror multiplayer game Dead by Daylight (2016)
  • More scenes from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, this time the infamous “No Russian” mission
  • Killing Nazis in Wolfenstein: The New Order (2014)
  • Shootouts in Fallout 4 (2015)
  • The “X-ray kill cam” system in Sniper Elite 4 (2017)
  • A death animation from horror game The Evil Within (2014)

The video can be seen above.

Grossman gave details on the meeting to the Washington Examiner: “President Trump said, ‘Did everyone see that clearly?’” Grossman said. “He played a video of a bunch of horrendously violent slashing games and then he turned to the industry representatives and said, ‘What are you going to say about this?’” The video game executives produced research showing that there was no link between violent video games and violent teens, which Grossman called “bogus.” When he’s not writing about the dangers of fictional video games, Grossman is a self-described “Killologist” who teaches military tactics to police officers and was most recently quoted telling officers “It’s your job to put a piece of steel in your fist and kill those sons of bitches when they come to kill our kids.”

Breitbart Tech has previously debunked the claim that video games cause violence. Recent studies have not shown any link between violent video games and violence in teens. Some studies have claimed that on-screen violence can create a desensitization effect, but so far have failed to show a corresponding drop in personal empathy towards others. A study in Frontiers in Psychology found no link, nor did a similar study in Brain Imaging and Behavior. According to a team of researchers at Oxford, online team-based video games can actually help to improve the sociability of children while in some cases actually reducing aggression.

President Trump reportedly asked each executive, “What do you think needs to be done?” Trump was apparently quite open-minded throughout the interview, “I don’t think he came in with his mind made up…. I think he was gathering information,” said Henson of the Parents Television Council. “He didn’t come in with an opening statement or a closing statement.”

The ESA released a statement on the meeting which states: “We welcomed the opportunity today to meet with the President and other elected officials at the White House. We discussed the numerous scientific studies establishing that there is no connection between video games and violence, First Amendment protection of video games, and how our industry’s rating system effectively helps parents make informed entertainment choices. We appreciate the President’s receptive and comprehensive approach to this discussion.”

Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center told the Verge, “I don’t think there should be any government control over it. But there is some programming that contains just absolute mind-boggling violence. We’ve all seen it. Is it appropriate in a civilized world to have that? Or could the industry listen to the better angels of their nature and say, we just don’t want to do it, on a voluntary basis?”

The White House also issued a statement which reads:  “The President acknowledged some studies have indicated there is a correlation between video game violence and real violence. The conversation centered on whether violent video games, including games that graphically simulate killing, desensitize our community to violence.”

Breitbart News reporters Allum Bokhari and Charlie Nash wrote in their recent piece that there is no direct correlation between violent media and real-life violence:

Across society, there is no correlation between the rise of on-screen violence. There is considerably more violent media available today than there was in the mid-20th century when movies were tightly censored by the Hays Code, which prohibited gratuitous displays of bloodshed. Video games – violent and otherwise – are a new medium, only gaining traction in the late 70s and 1980s. Yet real-world violence in the developed world has declined across the same period.

The American Psychological Association (APA) categorizes violent video games as a risk factor in causing aggression but found no evidence linking them to acts of real-world criminality or delinquency. Aggression, which is also caused by competitive sports, is not sufficient to lead to real-world violence. In 2017, the Media Psychology and Technology division of the APA has advised public officials and journalists against attempts to link violent media to acts of real-world violence.


President Trump Asks Dianne Feinstein to Add ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban to School Safety Bill

Trump and Feinstein (Alex Wong / Getty)

President Trump asked Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to add her “assault weapons” ban to the overarching school safety bill during a bipartisan meeting with lawmakers on Wednesday.

Feinstein’s bill, which is an enhanced reintroduction of a bill she has put forward again and again, bans over 200 different firearms.

During Wednesday’s White House meeting, Trump showed support for the gun control pushed by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA). The Manchin/Toomey bill is a gun control bill that the Democrat-controlled Senate rejected on April 17, 2013. But Trump chalked that failure up to Barack Obama’s lack of leadership, and talked of using the Manchin/Toomey bill as a base to which other bills could be added.

The goal was to create a body of gun legislation, ubiquitously for the purposes of school safety.

Sen. Feinstein talked about her bill and described the AR-15 as one of “the latest and newest weapons” to hit our streets. However, Eugene Stoner designed the AR-15 in the 1950s and Armalite began producing the gun during the 1960s. Are weapons from 60 years ago now considered “latest and newest”?

Nonetheless, Trump listened to Feinstein, heard from a few more gun control proponents—including Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL)—then looked back at Feinstein and told her she should add her bill to the Manchin/Toomey bill for consideration.


Report: Trump Jumped Out of Limo to Stop Mugging in 1991

US President Donald Trump looks on from the presidential limo, nicknamed The Beast, following his arrival at Hanoi's Noi Bai airport on November 11, 2017. Trump arrived in the Vietnamese capital after attending the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit leaders meetings earlier in the day in Danang. / AFP PHOTO / HOANG DINH NAM (Photo credit should read HOANG DINH NAM/AFP/Getty Images)

According to a New York Daily News report dated November 20, 1991, when he spotted a “big guy with a big bat” beating on another guy, Donald Trump told his limousine driver to pull over. Witnesses told the paper,  that “with [then-girlfriend] Marla Maples tugging at his arm to try to stop him, [Trump] leaped from his black stretch limousine Monday evening during the Manhattan assault.”

The Manhattan billionaire, who was 45 at the time, told the story from there. “The guy with the bat looked at me, and I said, “Look, you’ve gotta stop this. Put down the bat. I guess he recognized me because he said, ‘Mr. Trump, I didn’t do anything wrong.’ I said, ‘How could you not do anything wrong when you’re whacking a guy with a bat?’ Then he ran away.”

Trump added that he saw the mugger deliver “five or six good whacks” before he put a stop to it.

Witness accounts varied. One young woman says Trump only got out of his limo only to see what was going on after it had already happened and the mugger was long gone.

Another witness, though, backed The Donald’s account. “All of a sudden, a big long limousine pulls up on an angle, and Donald Trump pops out with the blond, too,” the unnamed witness said. “There was a guy with a bat, hitting a guy over the head, and Trump yelled, ‘Put that bat down. What are you doing?’ The guy dropped the bat, came over and started talking to him.”

Trump, who was on his way to a Paula Abdul concert, said that he only left the scene when he knew an ambulance was on the way and saw that the victim was being treated by a witness who appeared to be a doctor.

At the time, there was no police report filed about the attack.

The reporter, James Rosen, does not disclose how he learned of the incident. Trump said he was surprised anyone heard about it. “I’m not looking to play this thing up,” Trump told Rosen. “I’m surprised you found out about it.”

Rosen also reports that “Trump was at first reluctant to discuss his daredevil deed, but then he warmed to the task.”

Trump’s famous ability to manipulate the New York press should always be kept in mind.

New York in the pre-Giuliani days of 1991 was not the New York of today, the New York that looks like a Hollywood backlot dressed for a romcom. No, in 1991, New York looked like this and the statistics looked like this. Just a few weeks earlier, in fact, Trump’s own mother had been mugged before a bystander named Lawrence Herbert chased the thug away.

A full 27 years later, this story surfaced online after the media roundly mocked President Trump over his claim that, unlike the local deputies at the scene, he would not have stood outside as innocent children were being massacred at a school in Parkland, Florida.

CNN’s anti-Trump pundit, Jake Tapper, who is himself using traumatized children as human shields to hide from the widespread criticism of his mishandling of last week’s anti-gun town hall, angrily lashed out at Trump over the school shooting comments. Tapper has yet to comment on this 1991 report.

In its own snarky attack on Trump, the far-left Washington Post also failed to inform its readers about this report of Trump stopping a mugging.


White House on ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban: ‘We Haven’t Closed Doors on Any Front’

Sarah Sanders, Assault Weapons

During Tuesday’s press briefing, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders was asked about a proposed “assault weapons” ban and said, “We haven’t closed the door on any front.”

NPR’s Mara Liasson asked, “In 2000 [President Trump] did support an ‘assault weapons’ ban. What is his position now?” She followed her own question by asking if President Trump supports “reinstating” the 1994-2004 federal “assault weapons” ban.

CNN reported that Sanders responded by saying, “I don’t have any specific announcements, but we haven’t closed the door on any front.”

Sanders went on to say “the next several days and weeks” will witness conversations on where changes in current laws might be made.

She said Trump is specifically supportive of making background checks “more efficient.”

On February 20, Breitbart News reported that Trump directed Attorney General Jeff Sessions to finalize plans to ban bump stocks. The details of the ban–whether it might include a grandfather clause–are not yet known.


Trump Directs DOJ to Ban Bump Stocks in Response to Gun Control Outcry

A bump stock device that fits on a semi-automatic rifle to increase the firing speed, making it similar to a fully automatic rifle, is shown here at a gun store on October 5, 2017 in Salt Lake City, Utah. Congress is talking about banning this device after it was reported to of been used in the Las Vegas shootings on October 1, 2017. (Photo by George Frey/Getty Images)

President Donald Trump directed Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Tuesday to finalize plans to ban bump stocks.

The Hill reports that Trump mentioned that the “process” of banning bump stocks began in December.

It was December 28, 2017, when Breitbart News reported that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) was accepting public comment on proposed regulatory gun control that would alter the definition of “machinegun” to cover machineguns and non-machineguns, too. This shift allows the ATF to use the National Firearms Act (1934) to control firearm accessories like bump stocks in the same way it controls actual machine guns and devices that convert semiautomatic firearms into machine guns.

Gun control outlet The Trace reported that the public comment period ended with roughly 36,000 comments, of which more than eight out of ten voiced opposition to bump stock gun control.

Yet Trump is supporting regulatory action against the firearm accessories.

CNN’s Kaitlan Collins tweeted:

Trump also said he expects regulations banning bump stocks to “be finalized … very soon.”

Bump stocks were not used in the February 14 attack in Florida. Nor were they used in the Texas church attack (November 5, 2017), the Alexandria attack (June 14, 2017), the Orlando attack (June 12, 2016), the San Bernardino attack (December 2, 2015), the Umpqua Community College attack (October 1, 2015), the Lafayette movie theater attack (July 23, 2015), the Chattanooga attack (July 16, 2015), the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal attack (Jun 17, 2015), the Santa Barbara attack (May 23, 2014), the Fort Hood attack (April 2, 2014), the D.C. Navy Yard attack (September 16, 2013), the Aurora movie theater attack (July 20, 2012), the Gabby Giffords (January 8, 2011) attack, or the Virginia Tech attack (April 16, 2007), among others.

In fact, the October 1, 2017, Las Vegas attack is the only high profile public attack in which a bump stock was used criminally.


After Trump’s Speech, Border Wall Poll Takes A Tremendous Swing

It’s amazing how fake news can split this country. For over a year, we’ve been told President Trump is the one dividing us. But when the people are allowed to see the facts, we discover the opposite is true.

The only people dividing us are the liberals. They lie in media. They lie in Washington. They push false narratives in order to keep many Americans in the dark.

But when they were allowed to hear from Trump himself, it makes all the difference. Since Trump’s State of the Union address, many people are singing a new tune. Turns out, most of us support Trump’s plan for America.

From Breitbart:

The majority of Americans want a wall along the southern border to protect the United States and American workers from illegal aliens pouring into the country.

Following President Trump’s “State of the Union” (SOTU) address wherein he demanded at least $25 billion from the Republican-controlled Congress to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, nearly 60 percent of Americans said they supported the plan.

The post-SOTU CBS News poll revealed that 59 percent of Americans said they supported “building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.”

Only 41 percent of Americans said they opposed the border wall, but were not given other options in the poll for what they would like to see done about securing the country’s southern border.

The support for Trump’s border wall is just the latest development in Americans’ vast support for the president’s plan to transform the current legal immigration — whereby more than 70 percent of legal immigrants arrive in the U.S. for no other reason than to reunify with foreign relatives — into one based on merit, skills, and English proficiency.

It seems like the only people who want to protect illegal immigration are radical leftists. And, of course, the brain-dead celebrities who endorse them. Neither group has to deal with the fallout of increased illegal immigration. The rest of us do.

Most Americans are against illegal immigration. They don’t want millions of undocumented strangers flooding the country. We understand the danger that poses.

Most Americans also want improvements to the immigration system. And now we know, most want a border wall.

So, who’s standing in the way? Radical liberals who need illegals for their support. They aren’t interested in protecting the economy or national security. Democrats only want to exploit illegals for political power. Pathetic.

But more and more Americans are getting behind the President. Democrats will be forced to either support his vision or get voted out of office. Let’s see which happens first!

Source: Breitbart,

CNN’s Tapper: Trump’s ‘Americans Are DREAMers, Too’ Statement ‘Offensive’ to Dems

Following President Donald Trump’s delivery of the State of the Union address on Tuesday, CNN host Jake Tapper said Trump did not “understand” how offensive it was to Democrats for him to state that “Americans are DREAMers, too.”

According to Tapper, Trump did not understand that Democrats were going to be offended by the phrase “Americans are DREAMers, too” and other language used by Trump on immigration.

“[B]y the same token, I think President Trump doesn’t actually necessarily understand just how offensive many Democrats in that chamber are going to find some of the things he proposed and some of the things he said in terms of, there are Americans who are DREAMers, too, etc., some of the things he said about immigration that are going to turn off a lot of people in that chamber,” Tapper said.

Network political analyst Gloria Borger followed by saying that she agreed with Tapper’s assessment of Trump’s language.

“I want to echo something Jake said,” Borger said. “Because on the one hand, the speech could be kind of sunny and moving when you talked about some of the anecdotes and the people who were in that gallery. And then he would turn quite quickly to America first, to saying that Americans are DREAMers too, to policies that are quite divisive. And I think he’s gotten a little more adept at doing this. And we see that in this speech.”

Trump Drains Swampiest Liberal Agency In D.C., 75% Gone Overnight

The high priests of the official state religion of the US, ‘Climate Change,’ are unhappy with President Trump and his leadership team.

Apparently, they do not believe they are getting the respect they deserve.

Anyone who does not buy into the theory of climate change is immediately written off by the left as a kook, an ignoramus, or a “flat-earther.”

If man-made global warming turns out to be a flawed theory, you don’t need big government to fix it. And that’s the real tragedy the left is worried about.

Nine members of a twelve-member advisory panel on national parks threw a pity party because wouldn’t sign off on their liberal policies.

So Trump took it as a great excuse to drain the swamp.

From HuffPost:

See the source image

Most of the members of the National Park Service Advisory Board have tendered their resignation over frustrations with Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, The Washington Post reports.

Nine of the 12 board members quit Monday night, citing Zinke’s refusal to convene the citizen advisory panel or discuss matters with it since he came into office last March.

Zinke has drawn criticism for a number of his actions in the Interior Department, including silencing scientists about climate change.

Where does the HuffPost get its news? Far from being “silenced,” there are plenty of scientists talking about climate change. Nonstop.

Zinke has rejected numerous requests to meet with the advisory panel, which is required to meet twice a year, despite his efforts to review restructuring national parks.

Departing board Chairman Tony Knowles told the Post that the panel has waited to work with Zinke but has been ‘frozen out.’

Great. Now we’re getting somewhere. Mr. Knowles should be thanked for sharing this good news with us. One more worthless part of an unnecessary bureaucracy has just bitten the dust.

Joel Clement, a former employee who claims the Interior Department retaliated against him for his work on climate change, told HuffPost in October that the morale under Zinke was ‘in the toilet.’

Clement also criticized Zinke’s comments that questioned the department staff’s ‘loyalty’ to him and President Donald Trump.

This actually gets amusing as you realize what’s going on. Of course, a department full of liberals is going to go berserk when they can no longer dictate the agenda. Maybe the whole department will quit and go to work for Greenpeace. We could be so fortunate.

National Park System Advisory Board Logo Dark Green

And a left-wing article would not be complete without attacking one of the left’s most hated industries. Watch for it. Here it comes:

“It’s profoundly offensive because it portrays a lack of understanding about the civil service and the mission of the agency,’ Clement told HuffPost.

“It made it clear that what he’s trying to do is not work with the career staff and advance the mission ― he’s trying to undercut the agency and its mission. And it became very clear that his interests were aligned with special interests, like the oil and gas industry.”

Now it’s complete. President Trump has been vilified. His interior secretary has been vilified. The oil and gas industry has been vilified. And the purveyors of the climate change theory have been exalted.

All in all, a predictable, normal news story from a leftist news outlet.

Source: HuffPost,

Leaked: Democrat Plan Creates 8 Million New Voters Overnight

Liberals are willing to do anything for a vote, and they just proved that in spades with their latest move.

It doesn’t matter how much danger they put Americans in, their thirst for power puts the safety of our neighborhoods and cities in danger.

Liberals drag down the economy with their socialist policies and their open doors immigration.

And they’re playing the long game. A couple decades will go by in the blink of an eye. It is worth the wait for liberals to control every branch of government for life.

They have already made every change they need to control America unless Trump rolls it back.

From Breitbart:

“Every year, the U.S. admits more than 1.5 million foreign nationals to the country, with the vast majority deriving from family-based chain migration, where naturalized citizens are allowed to bring their extended family members to the country.

In 2016, the legal and illegal immigrant population reached a record high of 44 million. By 2023, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) estimates that the legal and illegal immigrant population of the U.S. will make up nearly 15 percent of the entire U.S. population.”

James Gimpel is a political scientist at the University of Maryland, College Park. He has studied the impact of immigration on voting patterns, and has released the following findings:

Immigrants, particularly Hispanics and Asians, have policy preferences when it comes to the size and scope of government that are more closely aligned with progressives than with conservatives.

As a result, survey data show a two-to-one party identification with Democrats over Republicans.

By increasing income inequality and adding to the low-income population (e.g. immigrants and their minor children account for one-fourth of those in poverty and one-third of the uninsured) immigration likely makes all voters more supportive of redistributive policies championed by Democrats to support disadvantaged populations.

There is evidence that immigration may cause more Republican-oriented voters to move away from areas of high immigrant settlement leaving behind a more lopsided Democrat majority.

Here’s an additional perspective on this:

President Trump wants the program ended. Of course, the Democrats see potential liberal voters and want the program to continue. Some confused Republicans want the program to continue as well.

What do the American people want?

Chain migration is increasingly unpopular with the American people. As Breitbart News reported, a recent poll by Pulse Opinion Research found that nearly 60 percent of likely voters said they wanted chain migration to end.

The majority of Americans also said in the poll that they wanted to see reductions to current legal immigration levels, where the U.S. admits a little more than 1 million new legal immigrants a year.

A majority of 60 percent of likely voters said they wanted to see legal immigration cut down to 500,000 new immigrants or even less.

Only 27 percent of voters said they wanted current legal immigration levels to remain the same or be increased beyond 1 million new admissions a year.

Once again, the president’s views closely align with those of a majority of Americans. And the left still cannot figure out how he won the election.

The Democrats will have to resort to tactics such as hurling charges of racism at those who oppose chain migration. That is if their plan to use immigrants to increase their representation in elected offices is to succeed.

It’s a pitiful way to gain voters. Why? Because it implies that you cannot convince the current electorate that your party’s ideas and policies have merit. So you bring in others to swing the vote your way.

It’s a tactic Democrats are employing that involves using people for political ends. They must be called out for this.

Source: Breitbart,

Major California Democrat Goes Rogue, Openly Supports Trump’s Top Priority Live On T.V.

It’s taken them a year to figure it out. But some Democrats have discovered that President Trump really does know how to get his agenda implemented.

In other words, all that talk about “winning” was not just bluster. He outlined what he wanted to get done, and has largely accomplished that agenda in his first term.

What remains to be finalized are immigration issues and the replacement for Obamacare. And even some of those goals have been accomplished via executive orders.

Obamacare has been largely gutted, and now exists mostly in name only. And the border wall is coming regardless of what Nancy Pelosi and her pals want.

Image result for democrat leaders

More and more cracks are appearing in the Democratic opposition to the border wall. Now, Democratic congresswoman from California Jackie Speier has announced that she is ready to work with the president.

And it’s safe to assume that if one Democratic member of Congress is ready to cooperate on the wall, there are many more of the same persuasion who have simply not made their positions public yet.

Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., broke ranks with Democratic leaders on Thursday and said she is willing to work with President Trump and congressional Republicans on legalizing the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program in return for border wall funding.

“I’m willing to go, you know, midway with the president and the Republicans to fund higher-tech walls along our border, more border security, enhanced measures, but I really feel very strongly that our DACA kids need to be protected,” Speier told MSNBC host Craig Melvin, who seemed stunned by the statement.

This is probably all the heresy a Democrat can utter without getting excommunicated from the party. And it mirrors the position recently published by the Washington Post.

So what we might have here is a coordinated effort to at least take part of the credit for accomplishing something. After all, they certainly don’t want to be seen as just sitting around irrelevant as the Democrats did during the president’s tax bill success.

“‘To be clear, I want to clarify. You are okay with giving the president his wall in exchange for DACA?’ Melvin asked.

“‘I would be willing to give the president a high-tech wall, willing to give him some amount of money to build his wall to a certain degree,’ Speier said.”

We have all the makings of successfully passing legislation addressing these issues. It’s just a matter of working out the details along with plenty of political theater to satisfy supporters in both parties.

Proving they are yesterday’s leaders, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer have both previously insisted the Democratic Party would not compromise on that request.

Those two offer nothing of value to the American people and are actually a drag on their own party. However, in the finest of political traditions, they remain either unaware of, or indifferent to, their own uselessness.

At least Pelosi and Schumer do one thing well. They demonstrate the sort of leaders who should be forced into retirement.

Meanwhile, they can watch a true leader, President Trump, work with selected members of the Democratic Party to move forward his agenda. It’s something to behold.

Source: Washington Examiner,