By the time President Trump’s presidency is over, one of the biggest pieces of fake news we will look back on is when we were told by the media that Trump was good for the media business. According to what is happening in a place called the real world, the truth is that business for the media is horrible.

We will start with the Denver Post, which announced Thursday that, between April 9 and July 1, 30 jobs will be cut from its newsroom. That is a massive 30 percent cut of its current staff of 100 journalists.  Just 10 years ago according to the far-left Washington Post, the Denver Post employed 600 journalists. That is close to a 90 percent reduction in only a decade.

Just a few hours later we learned that another wave of surprise layoffs hit the Chicago Tribune. Fourteen newsroom staffers were let go in that publication’s second round of layoffs in less than six months. Back in October more than a dozen were let go. Roger Federer reports that “Further cuts are expected as the newspaper prepares to leave Tribune Tower for smaller space at Prudential Plaza.”

Last month, the San Jose Mercury News was hit with another round of terminations, as many as 27 staffers were either laid off or bought out.

In late January, the East Bay Times wiped out a quarter of its editorial staff through layoffs and buy outs — a total of 28 staffers.

We also learned in January that a total of five publications owned by Southern California News Group will face “significant layoffs,” including the OC Register and Los Angeles Daily News.

On our cable dials, while Fox News and MSNBC are open about their respective biases and thrive, the far-left CNN is not only collapsing in the ratings but dealing with some massive layoffs of its own. Over the past few years, CNN, which continues its ludicrous pose as an objective news organization,  has been in a credibility death spiral, and that is finally starting to take a real tool on the anti-Trump cable channel.

None of this should be surprising.  Americans are losing faith in the media, and for good reason. The belligerent biases, the unrelenting fake news. As an example, just look at the past 18 hours. Both ProPublica and the New York Times have been caught spreading fake news about Gina Haspel, Trump’s pick to run the CIA, and the Washington media falsely reported that Trump had fired his national security adviser, H.R. McMaster.

Alternately, this same media missed completely the biggest political story of the last 60 days — Trump replacing his secretary of state with his CIA director and choosing a woman to lead the spy agency, a historic first.

Our media is shockingly useless, constantly playing catch up with actual news while obsessing over rumor and innuendo.

Consider the fact that the media that protected Bill Clinton — a man who as president committed perjury to cover up his sexual affair with a young intern, an affair conducted just a few rooms away from his wife and daughter in the  Oval Office — is now obsessed over a porn star’s story that she might have had a consensual affair with Trump more than a decade ago.

When women credibly accused Clinton of rape, groping, and harassment, our media joined the White House in destroying them as liars. But this same media hoping to turn a 12-year-old consensual relationship into a national scandal.

Americans are tired of the media lying to them, misleading them, lecturing them… Today, there are plenty of alternative sources of news. No one needs to put up with what is called the MSM anymore.

Which reminds me…

To protect Barack Obama’s anemic economic “recovery,” our media tried to convince us that unemployment  in the Obama era, was really “funemployment.” When the working class, those our elitist media despise, lose their jobs to illegal immigrants, unfair trade deals, and oppressive and unnecessary environmental regulations, the media have dismissively suggested that they all catch up with the times and learn computer code.

So let me be the first to wish all of these “journalists” a Happy Funemployment and wish them luck all the luck in the world with their new careers as computer coders.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was asked on Thursday during her weekly news conference about President Donald Trump’s recent trip to California to examine border wall prototypes, and her criticism of the eventual border wall reached an absolutely pathetic level.

According to the Washington Examiner, the House minority leader was asked if her party was prepared to grant approval for border wall funding, given that the deadline to save the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program — to which Democrats had attempted to tie border wall funding — had come and gone.

“What do you think?” Pelosi replied with a snarky smile. “I mean, should we give a border wall for nothing? I don’t think so.”

“First of all … Did you see it? How high it is? I mean, really? In a civilized society, we do something like that?” she asked rhetorically. “As obnoxious as it is, you know that’s a community there with a border running through it.”

“A wall that big separating people? I mean, really? This is like, a big wall,” she continued, prior to a failed attempt at making a joke about the Trump administration seeing and being inspired by the tall tin wall that used to separate Northern Ireland from Great Britain.

She then hearkened back to the recent failed efforts at bipartisan legislation put forward which would have saved DACA and allegedly made “serious concessions” on border wall funding, but stated, “For nothing would we give the wall? No. I mean, what would be our motivation?”

“Let me be clear,” she continued. “If the dreamers never existed — and thank God they do, our inspiration, our pride, thank God that they do — if they never existed, we still have a problem with what the president wants to do.”

You can watch Pelosi stutter her way through this ridiculous criticism of the border wall as “obnoxious” right here:

So there you have it: Nancy Pelosi thinks the border wall will be “obnoxious,” too high and unnecessary in our “civilized society.”

She also expressed her thanks that such a class of people as “dreamers” existed — bear in mind these are people who are in the country illegally — and made it clear that Democrats had no motivation to secure the border with a wall without a deal for dreamers — just before seemingly scuttling that argument by stating Democrats would still oppose the wall even without the dreamers in the mix.

Louder With Crowder suggested that Pelosi could very well have been projecting the public’s view of herself onto the wall — “Obnoxious, unsightly, and unnecessary in a civilized society” — and revealed how little interest her party has in securing the border no matter what.

Indeed, Democrat elitists would likely prefer the wall, if it even ever existed, consist of little more than welcome signs greeting those migrating across the border in an illegal fashion.

RELATED: Chris Cuomo’s Anti-Trump Bias Is So Bad Even Liberal Senators Are Calling Him Out

Pelosi has proven herself to be nothing more than a hypocritical joke on countless occasions, and one who objects to an important national security measure on the basis of how aesthetically pleasing it will appear once complete.

That is just absurd, but is exactly what we have come to expect from Pelosi and her fellow Democrats over the past year. Absolute absurdity and opposition to the president for the sake of opposition.

It has grown tiresome and beyond ridiculous — not to mention obnoxious.

What do you think of Nancy Pelosi lamenting how “obnoxious” and “too high” the border wall will be? Scroll down to comment below!

The Church of Scientology, a cult Hollywood celebrities frequent and former members criticize for allegedly abusive practices, announced its new television network airing Monday.

The Church of Scientology made the announcement Sunday via a new Twitter account made to promote the network, “Scientology Network,” as well as through the launching of a new website.

The new television channel was also advertised with the release of a television app for those with streaming services like Roku and programming offered by Apple, Google and Amazon, according to The Associated Press.

The church’s new television network website advertises it will air Monday at 8 p.m. EST, and while it does not explicitly state what kind of programming it will feature, the tagline “Curious?” and prominently featured sections like “What is Scientology” imply the network will likely be a platform for the cult’s proselytizing.

“It’s actually making a difference in the world. That’s what it’s all about,” the network’s Twitter account advertisement voice said.

Many former members dispute the religious group’s self-proclaimed benevolence.

The cult most recently came under fire for allegedly protecting actor Danny Masterson from sexual assault allegations.

Actress and former Scientologist Leah Remini also documented the church’s abusive practices in her Emmy Award-winning documentary series, “Leah Remini: Scientology and the Aftermath,” which stirred more public outcry against the religious organization.

Church members’ antagonistic behavior toward former members, the church’s indoctrination techniques, and the level of secrecy the leadership tries to maintain was also recently captured on film in the documentary, “My Scientology Movie.”

Chris Shelton, another former member of the Church of Scientology who held high ranking, affirmed allegations of abuse and cover-ups within the cult.

RELATED: Everybody Missed What Really Happened When Katy Perry Kissed That Teen

“The church works to protect the church first,” Shelton told Fox.

“(The Church of Scientology) considers anyone outside the church to be a ‘wog,’ which is a defamatory word describing non-members … It creates an ‘us versus them’ mentality (and tells) members that ‘wogs’ at law enforcement won’t protect them.”

A version of this article appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!

The United States Army is developing compact weapons platforms “optimized for fighting in dense urban terrain.”

Despite a long history of resistance to the idea, it appears that our military is finally considering the seeming inevitability of mechanized warfare. As they prepare to hand over many human tasks to their automated counterparts, it has become apparent that the age of putting (human) boots on the ground may be coming to an end.

By 2020, they want prototypes of both robotic and “optionally manned” units available for field testing. That means having something solid to work with by 2019. Brigadier General David A. Lesperance told reporter Sydney Freedberg of Breakingdefense.com that they expect heavy modeling, simulation, and experimentation in the next “six to 12 months.”

Army Chief of Staff Mark Milley created the “Cross Functional Teams” working on what he termed the “Big Six” military modernization priorities, to carry the American armed forces into the future. The “Next-Generation Combat Vehicle,” or NGCV, is near the top of that list.

Unfortunately, our national military is not known for their armored warfare designs. Our premier advances have been little more than a modification of the same M1 Abrams and M2 Bradley tanks that we have been using since the Cold War. Every major attempt at advancement beyond those designs has failed.

General Lesperance was unable to confirm a fielding date but is determined to see “experimental prototypes” in “shakedown testing” in 2019, followed by an operational model in 2020. That would put development of next-generation combat vehicles two years ahead of the previous timeline, in addition to adding robotics not part of the original plan.

General Lesperance further specified that the “optionally manned” and fully robotic units were not one and the same and that either one could be advanced or altogether scrapped in the process. The one thing that is certain is that the U.S. Army is finally taking a real shot at adapting to 21st-century warfare — all they need to do now is make sure Russia does not get there first.