Author Topic: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media/social media  (Read 1149660 times)



Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
The MSM is No Longer Mainstream
« Reply #4152 on: June 24, 2024, 03:05:08 PM »
Much of what we are witnessing in the no longer MSM is their lashing out due to their waning influence:

Should I link NYT?
JUN 24, 2024

What did the National Catholic Register, KHOU-TV and City Journal share in common Saturday? All three were cited as news sources in my weekly wrap-up of the news.

CNN, the New York Times and the Washington Post shared in common being excluded because I have more and better news sources. When I began in 2008, as a blogger, my venture into news wrap-ups with the Daily Scorecard, those three outlets were go to places for news. No more.

It is not as if I am going to the echo chambers of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy for news. I linked content by ABC, AP and the Hollywood Reporter — and readers know how much I dislike the Hamas-supporting AP. I even cited press releases from the Biden administration.

My rule is the media supplies the facts, I supply the opinion. It is a matter of trust not ideology. Let me give an example of the media’s trust problem.

On Friday, NYT splashed onto its pages an exclusive story, “Judge in Trump Documents Case Rejected Suggestions to Step Aside.

“Two federal judges in South Florida privately urged Aileen M. Cannon to decline the case when it was assigned to her last year, according to two people briefed on the matter. She chose to keep it.”

Well, that sure seems like news that I should comment on, but the paper cited no sources by name.

It claimed the chief judge in the Southern District of Florida, where Cannon works, Cecilia M. Altonaga, advised her to drop the case due to inexperience. Given that the FBI never raided a president’s home and confiscated 100,000 items before, no one has any experience handling such a case.

Still, I was tempted to include the story in my highlights, until I got to Paragraph 12:

“But ultimately, Judge Cannon is not subject to the authority of her district court elders. Like any Senate-confirmed, presidentially appointed judge, she has a life tenure and independent standing and is free to choose to ignore any such advice.”

My BS detector said punt. I did. Considering neither Cannon nor Altonaga would talk to NYT, it was a good thing I did. If someone else has a more reliable story verified by on-the-record sources, I may look at the case again.

Newspapers have become a misnomer. They don’t have news and they are mainly digital not paper.

The Washington Post is the Old Maid Card of journalism with the staff running off new management just like the staff ran off half its readers. The staff are the kids no one wants to babysit.

Ira Stoll speculates that Jeff Bezos will unload it on Bill Gates or some other status-seeking billionaire. Just remember, Stoll talked to no one about this. His piece is the same voices-in-my-head journalism that NYT used to attack Judge Cannon. I didn’t comment on his speculation any more than I would weigh in on who would win a fight between Superman and Mighty Mouse.

The question is should you link NYT? Is it ethical to grant any legitimacy to a proven and constant source of misinformation? Should I lend credibility to an organization that promoted the Russian Hoax — the idea that Putin stole the 2016 election from Hillary — and has never apologized or returned its Pulitzers?

Well, I do. Not directly. Usually a third party can be found that carries NYT’s material. I make no claim to purity or virtue. Most if not all the sources I cite are biased. The National Catholic Registry promotes Catholicism, does it not? But an ordained priest becoming a law clerk for Justice Brett Kavanaugh is news that oddly enough that the leftwing media ignored.

By the way, maybe the priest could set up a confessional booth at the court. (Father forgive me, for I have violated the Constitution.)

I no longer have to rely on facts filtered by lefties. You don’t either. We don’t have to because the Internet freed us from the chains of the news oligarchs.

Elon Musk at Twitter became my top source of news because just about anyone can use it to publicize just about anything. It also is a source of nuisance as well as news because — get this — people also use it to publicize fake news. But I can decide which is right and which is an illusion.

Musk rescued free speech by ending government censorship of Twitter.

This of course bothers the Establishment. Australia tried to fine Musk for not censoring Twitter. That failed. Brazil and EU also have tried to coerce Twitter into censoring the rabble-rousers who dare disrespect their authority. And of course, Biden is using the federal government to go after Musk and his various companies.

Meanwhile, the media tries to defame him.

The Hill ran a piece by Zachary Ellwood, “Elon Musk is making political debate more toxic — here’s how to change course.”

Yes, he called Trump supporters deplorable. (Fact check: That was Hillary.)

He imprisoned Trump supporters who trespassed at the Capitol. (Fact check: That was Nancy.)

He called Trump supporters a grave threat to democracy. (Fact check: That was Biden.)

Ellwood mentioned none of this. Instead he attacked Musk, calling him toxic.

Elon Musk often treats his political opponents with contempt. He uses the social media site he owns to call people morons and idiots, say they have a “mind virus,” and claim to know with certainty other people’s malicious intent. He treats people with contempt even outside political contexts (see the “pedo guy” thing.)

Musk’s contemptuous behavior amplifies the toxicity of our divides. Not only that, it’s self-defeating, as it strengthens and inflames his more extreme and passionate adversaries (just as his opponents’ contempt grants him more power).

Criticisms of Musk (and others like him) are often incorrectly reduced to criticisms of their beliefs. But this criticism of Musk isn’t about his beliefs, but rather about how he handles disagreement and conflict. It’s not about the polarization of his beliefs, but about his affective polarization — his disdain for the “other side.”

Why is Ellwood lying? Of course his toxic attack on Musk is about politics. If it weren’t, Ellwood would have cited specific examples of leftwing political toxins. The only lefty he mentioned by name was Keith Olbermann, who left MSNBC 12 years ago.

Musk may say things Ellwood dislikes, but guess what? Musk allows people he disagrees with politically to post. He puts up with critics but draws the line at personal attacks and attacks on his minor children.

Old mainstream media outlets are dying because their audiences and readership are falling. Oh well. Most buggy whip companies went south after the automobile became popular.

I keep reading about news deserts but I don’t see any evidence. Those news deserts are a mirage promoted by journalism schools, who are in the business of separating suckers from their money by training them for jobs that no longer exist.

The J-school at Northwestern said, “The loss of local newspapers accelerated in 2023 to an average of 2.5 per week, leaving more than 200 counties as news deserts and meaning that more than half of all U.S. counties now have limited access to reliable local news and information, researchers at the Medill School of Journalism, Media, Integrated Marketing Communications at Northwestern University have found.”

We have three TV news operations in the Greater Poca Area — which includes Huntington and the state capital of West Virginia. We don’t need a local paper.

Northwestern’s own numbers show news sites are growing thanks to the Internet. It calls the new sites phony because they promote political ideologies.

NEWS FLASH: Newspapers have editorial pages. You had better believe the news pages promote it because when was the last time a pro pro-life story ran in NYT?

Nevertheless, AFP reported:

At least 1,265 "pink slime" outlets — politically motivated websites that present themselves as independent local news outlets — have been identified, the U.S.-based research group NewsGuard said in a report.

By comparison, 1,213 websites of local newspapers were operating in the United States last year, according to Northwestern University's "local news initiative" project.

"The odds are now better than 50-50 that if you see a news website purporting to cover local news, it’s fake," the NewsGuard report said.

Calling your competition pink slime is toxic. Will someone please alert Mister Ellwood?

Who needs newspapers? When was the last time a big city paper crusaded for the election of a Republican mayor? Oh, they will rally for a First (Fill-in-the-blank) Mayor. But while the garbage piles up and homeless drug zombies take over the streets, those newspapers refuse to hold City Hall accountable and demand change.

Well, swine like to wallow in their own filth.

Given the pro-school board reporting by newspapers, there is a need for someone who challenges their decisions. In most communities, the school board is the largest employer. In most newspaper towns, the school board is covered by a future communications director for the school board.

We should welcome the pink slime guys to hold the feet of the school board members to the fire because they control a very powerful organization that spends a lot on local contractors and the book industry. Where does the money go?

They say, Lincoln made men free; Sam Colt made them equal. I say Elon Musk gave men a megaphone.

https://donsurber.substack.com/p/the-sources-of-news-expanded?r=1qo1e&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&triedRedirect=true


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile
A cheat during the debate?
« Reply #4154 on: July 02, 2024, 03:34:33 PM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media
« Reply #4155 on: July 02, 2024, 03:43:29 PM »
I think it might have been either Greg Kelly or Rob Schmitt who pointed out Biden's right hand moving up to his R ear during debate as though he was reaching for an internal microphone.

I can't find it now but it sure does look like he was looking down and listening to something in his right ear.

No one in their right mind would ever suspect or think such cheating could have taken place.

 :roll: :wink:

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Captain Obvious Visits the Old Gray Hag
« Reply #4156 on: July 03, 2024, 08:39:23 AM »
Dear me, next they'll realize Mrs. Dr. Prof. First Spouse Jill wields and undue amount of influence, that water is wet, and that they ought to return that "Stalin is actually an effective, forward thinking leader" Pulitzer, among other areas wherein truth resided 180 degrees away from their position:

A New York Times Staffer Stumbles On The Truth About The Supreme Court’s Immunity Ruling

BY: EDDIE SCARRY

JULY 02, 2024

The court decided what it did expressly because there’s no way to make this system work if we don’t elect people to do what’s right.
Author Eddie Scarry profile
EDDIE SCARRY

Credit to Michael Barbaro of The New York Times for ever so gingerly happening upon the lesson Democrats should have taken from the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling, but didn’t. Or more likely, refuse to.

On Tuesday’s edition of the Times’ “Daily” podcast, Barbaro and Supreme Court correspondent Adam Liptak mulled over the ruling, and at the very end of the episode, Barbaro had his epiphany. “Another way to think about this ruling if you step way back,” he said, “is that it’s kind of the Supreme Court saying that when you elect a president, you have to accept, dear American people, that the Constitution gives them a tremendous amount of power and legal latitude to kind of do what they want …”

Barbaro was cooking. You could feel it.

He continued his revelation. “And we, the Supreme Court, are going to make it pretty hard to hold that president criminally responsible for their actions,” he said, “so, voters need to think really carefully about who they want to possess this level of immunity.”

I imagine Barbaro swelled with pride at having successfully followed that pure and true train of thought to its logical end. He did it! He really did it!

I just wish the rest of his peers in the media and the Democrat Party would do the same.

Immediately after the ruling, holding that a president carrying out his constitutional responsibilities can’t be held criminally liable for it once out of office (duh), Democrats and leftist triflers scurried to the Internet where they obnoxiously claimed the court had just given American presidents the authority to murder babies and rape nuns.

Hmm … Not seeing anything in Article II about that. Maybe I’m missing something.

They mused that President Biden must now have the legal right to assassinate Donald Trump.

The court’s opinion was admittedly ambiguous to the extent that it placed much of the burden of determining what constitutes “official” conduct by the president on lower courts. But it was clear in asserting that communications and deliberations between a president and anyone serving in his administration is immune from prosecution. In short, anyone wanting to press charges against a former president for things he did while in office is going to have to prove with great certainty that it’s for a good reason and not because, say, they’re mad.

This was more or less implied and accepted for the last 230 years. Then 2016 happened and because Democrats refused to accept the results of an election, they decided it was time to see how far this country can bend before it snaps. You know, just like the true vanguards of decency and democracy that they are.

The court decided what it did expressly because there’s no other way to make this system work if we don’t elect people we trust to do the right thing to keep it going. To even flirt with the belief that it would be the right thing to criminally prosecute a former elected official — let alone a U.S. president — for challenging the results of an election, tells you a lot about who’s in power right now. And that their response to the ruling wasn’t, “Yeah, maybe we took it too far,” but, “So we can legally assassinate Trump, right?” says the rest.

They either don’t understand it, or they’re ready to end it.

I’m glad at least Michael Barbaro understands it.

https://thefederalist.com/2024/07/02/a-new-york-times-staffer-stumbles-on-the-truth-about-the-supreme-courts-immunity-ruling/


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media
« Reply #4159 on: July 04, 2024, 12:45:44 PM »
Watching the media consider its role in Biden’s supposed sudden onset dotage has been amusing and revealing. Amusing as it seems many professional pontificators assume we are as willfully blind to their dereliction as they were to Biden’s glaring infirmities, and revealing as they seek a path allowing them to confirm the obvious while still keeping Trump out of the White House.

One thing I find particularly interesting are all the calls to out Trump for his “lies,” as though A). They don’t do so already, even it the “lie” isn’t a lie, but rather different and supportable interpretation, frequently of some pooch Biden has indeed screwed, B). Biden and his handlers don’t lie all the freaking time, witness claims about the rate of inflation when Biden took office, for one, and we won’t even get into Covid, “climate change,” mutilating children on the alter of transgenderism, et al, C). As though they don’t lie by omission as in where Biden’s obvious senility is concerned, or overtly as in Russian fables, calls for riots J6, and so on.

A former Gray Hag editor does an adequate job calling DC reporters out on some of this, though IMO the rot in the press corp spreads far beyond there:

The View from Jill Abramson,

It’s clear the best news reporters in Washington have failed in the first duty of journalism: to hold power accountable. It is our duty to poke through White House smoke screens and find out the truth. The Biden White House clearly succeeded in a massive cover-up of the degree of the President’s feebleness and his serious physical decline, which may be simply the result of old age. Shame on the White House press corps for not to have pierced the veil of secrecy surrounding the President.

Obviously, the President’s decline was a super hard story to report, even by those who wanted to get it, like the WSJ. Their story did not deliver, using mostly named GOP sources.

But I do think if enough reporters had pushed, the story was reportable. I worry that too many journalists didn’t try to get the story because they did not want to be accused of helping elect Donald Trump. I get that.

But this is no excuse for abandoning our first duty, which is to report the truth and hold power accountable. President Biden should be held accountable for his obvious lapses of mental acuity, even if there are periods of lucidity.

It is simply astounding for the entire country, including its most seasoned reporters, to be as shocked as everyone was by the ugly and painful reality of Biden’s debate performance.

And it is laughable and immoral for Democrats to blame the press now for over-reacting to that reality. The reports of how bad Biden was are certainly not exaggerated. Nor are the reports of Democrats in panic.

Jill Abramson was executive editor of the New York Times from 2011 to 2014.

https://www.semafor.com/newsletter/07/02/2024/mixed-signals-special-blame-the-media

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
David Knowles
« Reply #4160 on: July 04, 2024, 07:16:04 PM »
"Biden’s fitness for office is under scrutiny. Others are asking: What about Trump’s?"

https://www.yahoo.com/news/bidens-fitness-for-office-is-under-scrutiny-others-are-asking-what-about-trumps-200635582.html

My response:

no, but we should be asking what about David Knowles mental fitness?

or for that matter the whole left wing media industry.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Forest, Trees, & Truth
« Reply #4161 on: July 04, 2024, 08:24:35 PM »
Earlier today I was making the point that the MSM has very one-sided habits when it comes to investigating “lies,” being worse than hyper vigilant where Trump is concerned, and utterly silent when Biden prevaricates. This piece digs into that habit:

Fact-Checking the Two Presidents

July 2, 2024

By JOHN C. GOODMAN

Also published in Townhall.com Mon. July 1, 2024

Although news articles often call Donald Trump a “liar,” I don’t think I have ever seen that term used when discussing Joe Biden. Following the first presidential debate in June, fact-checkers at The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal accused Trump of numerous falsehoods. But they couldn’t find a single Biden falsehood.

It’s worse than a double standard. It’s bizarre reporting. Concerning Trump, the critics often seize upon a single misstatement of fact, while ignoring the larger truth connected to that fact. For Biden, they can’t seem to find the misstatement to begin with.

With respect to Trump, they can’t see the forest for the trees. With respect to Biden, they can’t see the trees.

Immigration. Let’s start with the most blatant falsehood in the entire election season. Last January, Biden claimed, “I've done all I can do” to secure the border. He has taken almost 300 executive actions on immigration. Nearly all of these actions made immigration easier, including revoking some of Trump’s policies on his first day in office.

The second worst falsehood is his claim that he needs Congress to act. “Just give me the power I’ve asked from the very day I got into office,” he told reporters. Yet he operates under the same congressional laws as presidents Obama and Trump.

Trump states correctly that innocent young girls have been raped and killed by illegal immigrants. He is justified in saying that those girls would probably be alive today if the Trump immigration policies were still in place.

We are not vetting the immigrants we apprehend, to say nothing of all the got-aways. We don’t really know who they are or where they are. Some are connected to terrorist organizations. FBI Director Wray has testified that there is a serious fear of another 9/11.

Trump may exaggerate some facts. But in doing so, he is actually underestimating the seriousness of the threat.

Abortion. There are two extreme positions on abortion during pregnancy: that it should never be legal, or that it should always be legal. Ever since the original Roe v. Wade decision, polling has shown that the great majority of us are somewhere in the middle. However, the people who care most about the issue are at the extremes. Politicians in both parties are fearful of alienating the extremes.

In the presidential debate, Joe Biden should have been asked, “Is there ever a time when abortion should be illegal?” Most Democrats refuse to answer a question like that—reverting to something like “leave it up to the woman and her doctor.” A reasonable inference from that answer is that abortion should always be legal, regardless.

In the debate, Donald Trump claimed that Democrats in general and Biden in particular believe in the legality of killing babies after they are delivered. Even though a Democratic Virginia governor once seemed to suggest that, it is probably not factually correct. But it is very, very close to being correct. For most Democratic candidates, abortion should be legal one minute before delivery, and possibly even during delivery.

During the debate, Joe Biden seemed to be calling for a return to a national Roe v. Wade standard. But this falls way short of what most Democratic women’s groups want. Roe v. Wade allows for abortion to be outlawed once the fetus reaches the point of viability outside the womb. Fact-checkers should have noted that this more moderate approach to abortion is nowhere in the White House position paper on “reproductive rights.”

The War in Ukraine. Donald Trump says that there would have been no war in Ukraine had he been president. This is not a falsehood. It may not be true, but a very persuasive case can be made for it. Our withdrawal from Afghanistan signaled weakness and a lack of resolve. As Russia amassed troops and armor on the Ukraine border, Biden made confusing statements that Russia might have interpreted as indifference on our part. And, of course, Russia only invaded when Obama and Biden were presidents, and not when the president was Trump.

Deficit spending. Some fact-checkers claim that when Trump attacked Biden for running up debt, that was another falsehood. It is true that the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget claims that Trump accumulated twice as much debt as Biden. Yet, this claim has been refuted by the House Budget Committee. Moreover, the official scorekeeper on this question is the Congressional Budget Office, whose ten-year projection finds that Biden's policies will add far more to the national debt than Trump's policies.

Corruption. The House Oversight Committee has documented that the Biden family has received more than $20 million—funneled through 24 shell companies. There is nothing wrong with Trump making an issue of this. It’s not a falsehood. Critics point out that there is no hard evidence that Joe Biden personally received any of this money (although there is circumstantial evidence). But that’s not the test. If money was given to influence policies, that’s illegal—even if the actual payment was made to family members, not the person making the policy decisions.

My suggestion to future fact-checkers: find the trees, but don’t miss the forest.

 
JOHN C. GOODMAN is a Senior Fellow at the Independent Institute, author of Priceless: Curing the Healthcare Crisis and President of the Goodman Institute for Public Policy Research.

https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=14977

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Re: Forest, Trees, & Truth
« Reply #4162 on: July 05, 2024, 06:15:42 AM »
Good to see MSM fact checked, and truth checked.

"Trump may exaggerate some facts. But in doing so, he is actually underestimating the seriousness of the threat."

Right.  Sometimes he'll make it sound like all people coming across the border are rapists, terrorists, criminals, but the truth is that if ANY of them are, then we need him as President to stop it. And we should stop the flow even if they're not rapists. (Trees and forest)

He may not get us out of Ukraine in a day but he will get it stopped quickly is the point.

Said in a previous race, Trump haters take him literally but not seriously. (Look for over statements and call him a liar) Trump supporters take him seriously but not literally. (The larger point is true, enemies were not emboldened when her was President.)

Criticizing his over-statements and imprecision is a joke up against Joe.as the alternative.

When he took office inflation was 9%. Oops it was 1.6, 1.4?. Last time it was 9% (before Biden) he was in the Senate supporting the incumbent President, Carter, opposing the solution, Reagan. Biden wrong for a half century or more.

The first time he said that they should have led him out to a (different) old folks home.

He used to be a truck driver. A man who never worked for a living.  His son died in Iraq.  He knew nothing about his son's business, or 8 other family members taking in $20 million.  He kept getting them on the flights but never said, what did you guys do today?

Deplorable lack of curiosity.

Makes you wonder what else does he know nothing about, economics, war, peace, race relations, crime, terror, running a government?

What it exposes is the lack of seriousness of our opponents, the voters who take in the B'S nodding their heads in agreement with him or with the biased fact checkers.

Where were the fact checkers during Russia hoax?

Where are the fact checkers on climate models, all wrong in the same direction by magnitudes.

As a famous tennis player used to say, you can't be serious.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2024, 09:58:59 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Come on Sanjay
« Reply #4163 on: July 06, 2024, 06:42:01 AM »
As a neurosurgeon he surely knows Biden is demented yet true to CNN-DNC form he wobbles and says this :

Dr. Sanjay Gupta: It’s time for President Biden to undergo detailed cognitive and neurological testing and share his results

I saw the interview and he even suggests Biden might have a treatable and reversible condition!
Me - > OMG !
He knows that is BS.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/dr-sanjay-gupta-it-s-time-for-president-biden-to-undergo-detailed-cognitive-and-neurological-testing-and-share-his-results/ar-BB1psEXu?ocid=BingNewsSerp

Come on Sanjay - repeat after me :  Biden is CLEARLY descending into progressive cognitive decline and needs to be replaced PERIOD.


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Now that Their Complicity is Known, the MSM will Destroy Biden …
« Reply #4164 on: July 07, 2024, 05:32:16 PM »
… to cover their tracks. I think this author is on to something here where the MSM is concerned:

The Media Want the Flaming Wreckage of the Biden Campaign to Explode — to Cover Their Tracks

President Joe Biden at the debate with former president Donald Trump in Atlanta, Ga., June 27, 2024.(Brian Snyder/Reuters)
Share

By JEFFREY BLEHAR

July 7, 2024 11:35 AM

It is July 7, 2024 — well before the conventions, well before what used to be known in my childhood as “the real campaign,” the one that theoretically begins after Labor Day — and every single Republican (or, to be honest, objective political oddsmaker) finds himself playing an idle holiday-weekend parlor game: “How can Trump or the GOP somehow screw this one up?” (Answer: It’s Trump and the GOP, so just like the bullet with your name on it, you’ll probably never see it coming.)

Understand that conservative commentators are profoundly unused to seeing Republicans in a commanding presidential lead unless they were around for the Reagan/Bush years, and we certainly never expected to associate it with Donald Trump of all people. But it’s sinking in. Because right now, every single moderately intelligent person not explicitly paid to claim otherwise believes — even if only in that darkest part of their hearts they examine when ruinously drunk or falling fitfully asleep — that Joe Biden is a dead man walking, in multiple senses of that term. (Ah, the rich metaphorical opportunities our present political moment offers.0

The debate car-crash from ten days ago has not been salvaged in any way. Biden is in fact still trapped in its media cycle, struggling to escape the bent wreckage, and the interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC was exactly the sort of sub-adequate response precisely calculated to strike despair into the hearts of Democratic partisans: not as “bad” as the debate but still appalling in any objective respect, and worse so after that kind of public priming. No, the Biden campaign is still a destroyed hulk ablaze by the side of the road; the only question is whether the fire reaches the gas tank (kaboom!) before it’s extinguished. Now here come the media, rushing to the scene of the disaster — but this time as pyromaniacs, not firemen.

This long holiday weekend has thus seen a gushing torrent of breaking stories reporting past incidents of Biden’s mental malfunctions, heretofore concealed from the public — as if a hundred spindly journalists had gathered for a collective Herculean effort, weedily laboring to reroute an entire river’s worth of “We Were Lied To” news coverage toward the Biden White House in order to clear out years of accumulated disgrace. They betray too much with their sudden overeagerness; this is a river of gasoline heading toward the flaming wreckage of the Biden campaign, not water.

For the media do not want to put out this fire, they want the car to explode — and ideally soon, while there’s still time to wheel Kamala out there on the road and see how bald her tires are. Which story caught your attention? Was it the one about Biden’s lapses at various foreign and G-7 meetings, known to world leaders and the traveling press at the time but kept quiet until now? Or was it the one about how the Biden administration has been doing pay-for-play “access” fundraising at the White House? Maybe it was the revelation that black radio broadcasters “interviewing” Biden during campaign season have instead been forced to choose from a small list of pre-written questions, the answers to which had been scripted in advance.

The honest answer for me was none of them. I have watched the mainstream media’s most connected and prolific journalists file one blazing-hot “scoop” after another about various scandalous and shocking Biden mental failures with a mixture of contempt and disgust. The stories may be new; their underlying thrust should have been addressed four years ago — and was indeed tentatively raised by media back then — before he won South Carolina and secured a nomination most journalists were hoping would go to Pete Buttigieg or Bernie Sanders. At that point the media’s class duties — promote the Democratic party line as long as it hews to progressive priorities — kicked in, and we were no longer allowed to discuss this matter. So forgive me if I am not as titillated as the rest of you to read yet another “breaking news” revelation about how Biden once drooled on Jake Sullivan’s French cuffs during a State Department briefing, or whatever. Instead I ask myself: Why now, friends? Whence have you found your steely new sense of journalistic purpose? Why this sudden attack of reportorial conscience?

The reason, of course, is that the mainstream media were caught not merely with their pants down but in flagrante delicto, making sweaty, grunting, undignified love to their true occupation: stewarding the Official Democratic Line that Joe Biden is so healthy he expects to compete in the next Ironman Triathlon. (“Don’t worry, kid — there’s a promotion around the corner for ya if you survive the next round of layoffs.”) Now they’re infuriated, not at being lied to, but rather at their loss of face with an American public they keep attempting to swindle. Almost everyone in the Washington press corps knew — or had heard through the grapevine — that Biden was asleep at the wheel of his own administration, but knew full well the consequences of pursuing that in their reporting: To do so was to be cast by the administration, social media, and your peers alike into the professional Phantom Zone. Instead, write a story about how “crazy right-wingers are lying about Biden” and move on. (“We already covered this in our paper!”)

Don’t take my word for it, take Jill Abramson’s. Take Olivia Nuzzi’s, who just wrote an intolerable piece for New York magazine titled “The Conspiracy of Silence to Protect Joe Biden” where she unwittingly revealed that she’d been sitting on this story for over half a year. Hence the media rage: They did their job — why, look at how enthusiastically they coordinated with the White House on the “cheap fakes” story a mere two weeks ago! — but Biden failed to keep up his end of the deal, and now he’s going to pay. Not for being a senile vegetable posing as commander in chief while directed by a coterie of Jill Biden’s secretaries, mind you, but for dropping the curtain and revealing how deep an inside game the press has always played with the Democrats. “We simply had no idea!” is not going to wash with an American public that itself has been deeply concerned with Biden’s decline for years, only to be told how ignorant we were for falling for “cheap fakes” and Fox News propaganda.

Never again. With each additional piece — each “Now It Can Be Told!” preface, each additional scandalous detail about Biden being non compos mentis — my blood begins to curdle. Oh, the sudden enthusiasm with which the media is now reporting on this! And why now? Because it can no longer be hidden! If Biden had succeeded somehow in hiding it — or had he declined to debate altogether, as most observers expected him to before he (surprisingly) agreed to an early debate — then it is undeniably true that none of these pieces would be written now. Did we experience an orgy of self-recriminative “make up” reporting about the implosion of the Russiagate hoax? Or about Hunter Biden’s laptop being authentic? How about Covid likely being a Chinese lab leak? Of course not — no apology was necessary in the media’s mind because those were no longer “live” issues, and their suppression of the truth had served its necessary purpose. This time the ruse was exposed before the con had been completed. Now the only job: Get a new shyster in to run at the top of the ticket and complete the mission.

It’s easy to get lost in bleak humor (or score-settling) and lose sight of the sheer magnitude of what it is we are living through: The president of the United States is an empty shell of himself mentally. His praetorian guard has been keeping his near-complete mental collapse a secret for possibly years now, and the media engaged in a “conspiracy of silence” (Nuzzi’s words, not mine) to conceal it from voters, out of reflexive (in the truest sense of the word) partisan and professional self-interest. Very Smart People tell me that my sense of complete betrayal and abiding disgust is a feeling peculiar only to Republicans and political anoraks — chumps who care too much, in other words. Perhaps so.

But the question Charlie Cooke posed last week should be the same one you hang on to as well: If the media claims it has been lied to about the state of Biden’s health for all these long years, then maybe they should investigate that? How that happened? How much did Kamala Harris — Biden’s almost certain replacement, should he step down — know? When did she know it? A real media would start from the premise that she is just as disqualified by helping to conceal Biden’s collapse as Biden and his people themselves are, and force her to prove otherwise. A real media wouldn’t play a balancing game in its head, saying, “Let’s not push her too hard, we don’t want to help the Other Guy.” This is not a real media, however, so I will invoke Betteridge’s Law by answering the question Charlie merely posed in his headline: Will the media seriously investigate how they were “misled” about Biden’s health? No. That would mean investigating themselves.


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Liars Lying about Lies Lay in the Hole they Dug
« Reply #4165 on: July 09, 2024, 12:03:47 PM »
The left’s kid gloves when reporting on Biden’s lapses are now coming back to haunt:

But Charlottesville!

Natalie Solent (Essex) · Deleted by the Woke Media · Media & Journalism · North American affairs

Why did Joe Biden’s poor performance in the debate last night come as a surprise to many on the left? The responses of two people writing in today’s Guardian give a clue:

Rebecca Solnit:

Trump’s positions on anything and everything shift and slide at will, and he lies about his own past with pathological confidence – in this debate he both denied that he had sex with Stormy Daniels and that he praised the white supremacists who stormed Charlottesville in 2017. More substantively he lied – unchallenged, except by Biden – about his role in the January 6 coup attempt, and the CNN pundits did not trouble him further about his crimes.

Lloyd Green:

Trump lied aplenty. He acted as if he never had said there were “good people” on both sides in Charlottesville, and pretended that he hadn’t dissed America’s war dead.

Emphasis added in both quotes. Why have I bolded the parts about Charlottesville? Because it seems that neither Rebecca Solnit nor Lloyd Green were aware that in that speech about Charlottesville, Trump said literally seconds later: “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the White Nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and White Nationalists, OK? And the press has treated then absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also you had fine people, but you also had troublemakers.”

Check for yourselves by watching this video of the 2017 press conference in which Trump referred to “Fine people on both sides” from CNBC news: “President Donald Trump On Charlottesville: You Had Very Fine People, On Both Sides” Aug 15, 2017.

Here is my transcription, with timestamps, of Trump’s answers to journalists’ questions in the relevant section of that press conference. I have not attempted to transcribe the questions, but everything Trump said is there. Bear in mind that it was very noisy, with people constantly shouting over each other, hence Trump’s constant repetition of “Excuse me – excuse me”.

*

0:04 I’m not putting anybody on a moral plane. What I’m saying is this: You had a group on one side, and you had a group on the other, and they came at each other with clubs, and it was vicious, and it was horrible, and it was a horrible thing to watch. But there is another side. There was a group on this side, you can call them the left – you’ve just called them the left – that came violently attacking the other group. So you can say what you want, but that’s the way it is.

0:35 Well, I do think there’s blame, yes, I think there’s blame on both sides. You look at – you look at both sides, I think there’s blame on both sides. And I have no doubt about it, and you don’t have any doubt about it either. And – and – and if you reported it accurately, you would say-

0:56 Excuse me, excuse me [inaudible] and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people – on both sides – you had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue, and the renaming of a park from “Robert E. Lee” to another name.

1:27 George Washington was a slaveowner. Was George Washington a slaveowner? So will George Washington now lose his status? Are we going to take down – excuse me – are we going to take down – are we going to take down statues to George Wash–

1:42 How about Thomas Jefferson, what do you think of Thomas Jefferson, you like him? OK, good, are we going to take down the statue, because he was a major slaveowner. Now, are we going to take down his statue? So you know what, it’s fine. You’re changing history, you’re changing culture,

1:57 and you had people – and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the White Nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and White Nationalists, OK? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly.

2:14 Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers, and you see them come with the, with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats. You get – you had a lot of bad – you had a lot of bad people in the other group too.

*

Despite what Trump actually said being on video for all to see, the mainstream media has repeated thousands of times that Trump praised the neo-Nazis and white supremacists, or that his “both sides” comment was intended to equate the entire group of left wing protesters to neo-Nazis and white supremacists, rather than to equate the extremists of the right to the extremists of the left, and to equate the fine people on the right (whom he explicitly defined as being those who were NOT neo-Nazis or white supremacists) to the fine people on the left.

Which journalists are lying and which genuinely believe this disinformation? It is reasonable to assume Rebecca Solnit and Lloyd Green genuinely believe it. They probably would not have wanted to make themselves look foolish in public, and, besides, the poor lambs probably get their news from the Guardian and the other organs of what is still called the “quality” press.

But didn’t anyone point out to the Guardian the many debunkings by Scott Adams (https://x.com/ScottAdamsSays) and others of what Adams calls the “Fine People Hoax”? Hey, I tried to do it repeatedly when commenting on those few Guardian articles that allow comments these days. About five per cent of my many attempts slipped through; the other 95% of them were censored immediately.

The same went for my comments about the genuineness of Hunter Biden’s laptop, however polite, however well-referenced. Deleted immediately.

The same went for my comments detailing the many times that Joe Biden came out with provable falsehoods (although he probably believes them, poor chap) or descended into meaningless gabble. Deleted immediately. And I am sure that in keeping its readers and its writers safe from disturbing evidence of Biden’s decline, the Guardian was only following the lead of the New York Times and the rest of the “respectable” media.

And thus the Democrats and their friends wove the net in which they now find themselves trapped.

https://www.samizdata.net/2024/06/but-charlottesville/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile
WT: Russian operation disrupted
« Reply #4166 on: July 10, 2024, 07:20:54 AM »
U.S. officials described the Russian propaganda campaign as part of an ongoing effort to sow discord in the U.S. through the creation of fictitious social media profiles that purport to belong to ordinary Americans but actually advance Moscow’s aims. ASSOCIATED PRESS

RUSSIA

U.S. disrupts online Russian propaganda campaign

Kremlin backed effort that used artificial intelligence technology

BY ERIC TUCKER ASSOCIATED PRESS

A Russian propaganda campaign backed by the Kremlin and boosted by artificial intelligence to spread online disinformation in the U.S. has been disrupted, the Justice Department said Tuesday.

U.S. officials described the internet operation as part of an ongoing effort to sow discord in the U.S. through the creation of fictitious social media profi les that purport to belong to ordinary Americans but are actually designed to advance the aims of the Russian government, including by spreading disinformation about its war with Ukraine.

U.S. officials said the scheme was organized in 2022 after a senior editor at RT, a Russian-state-funded media organization that has registered with the Justice Department as a foreign agent, helped develop technology for a social media “bot farm.” It received the support and financial approval of the Kremlin, with an officer of Russia’s Federal Security Service — the FSB — leading a private intelligence organization that promoted disinformation on social media through a network of fake accounts.

The RT press office did not respond directly to a question about the allegations.

The disruption of the bot farm comes as U.S. officials have raised alarms about the potential for AI technology to impact this year’s elections and amid ongoing concerns that foreign influence campaigns by adversaries could sway the opinions of unsuspecting voters.

“Today’s actions represent a first in disrupting a Russian-sponsored Generative AI-enhanced social media bot farm,” FBI Director Christopher A. Wray said in a statement. “Russia intended to use this bot farm to disseminate AIgenerated foreign disinformation, scaling their work with the assistance of AI to undermine our partners in Ukraine and influence geopolitical narratives favorable to the Russian government.”

Among the fake posts, according to the Justice Department, was a video that was posted by a purported Minneapolis resident that showed Russian President Vladimir Putin saying that areas of Ukraine, Poland and Lithuania were “gifts” to those countries from liberating Russian forces during World War II.

In another instance, the Justice Department said, someone posing as a U.S. constituent responded to a federal candidate’s social media posts about the war in Ukraine with a video of Mr. Putin justifying Russia’s actions.

As part of the disruption, the Justice Department seized two domain names and searched 968 accounts on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
The House Plant of the United States
« Reply #4167 on: July 10, 2024, 08:40:41 PM »
An amusing take on the media’s reaction to Biden’s cognitive issues:

YOU REALLY DON’T HATE THEM ENOUGH

10 JUL 2024 LAWDOG 5 COMMENTS

“Listen, if you didn’t know you were being scammed you’re too [deleted]ing dumb to keep this job. If you did know, you were in on it.”
~Casino (1995)

I’m listening to the Legacy Media clutching their pearls and expressing shock — shock, I say — over the state of President Biden’s mental faculties.

Claims from the Media that the “Biden inner circle” “concealed his mental state” are falling upon deaf ears, so they’re pivotting to the excuse of “It’s a sudden decline, over the last couple of months”.

Horse. Puckey.

The Media was there in 2019, when the then-candidate for FICUS called an Iowa farmer a “damned liar” and challenged him to a push-up contest.

They were there in 2020 when he called a voter a “Lying dog-faced pony soldier” for pointing out that he had only come in at 4th place in the Iowa Democratic caucus.

There were the requests for wheelchair-bound paraplegics to stand up; demands to talk to long-dead European country leaders, tripping over various stairs, ignoring and wandering off from meetings with leaders of allied nations, unprovoked angry outbursts at American troops, calling out to dead Congresswomen at a service where he was dedicating a building to her memory — all of which predate the “last couple of months”.

Hell, I’ve been referring to him as the FICUS* on the Livestream since he was sworn in.

But, no, the Media is “surprised” by his apparent mental state.

Snort.

Let me ask you a question that should nail home how bad you should be hating journalists right now: How many brain surgeries did Joe Biden undergo in 1988?

The answer is two. Both of them for leaking brain aneurysms, at least one of which was a berry aneurysm at the base of his brain. Not to mention that he got himself a romping pulmonary embolism while recovering from the first time someone went spelunking through his think-pudding.

None of this should be a surprise to any reporter, much less the White House Press Pool, but I’m willing to bet it’s a surprise to some of my Gentle Readers. Why is this, do you think, that the fact that the President of the United States has had people rooting around in his brain bucket not once, but twice, is a surprise to anyone?

Not like it’s Mission Critical Information or anything … oh, wait.

In a just world, after that debate the entire White House Press Corp should be decorating light standards for this bushwa; and the headquarters of CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, the New York Times, and every other “bastion of the First Amendment” should be on fire.

But we’re civilised now.

They’re going to pretend to be the shocked and outraged victims of a cover-up. They’re going to pretend that there’s no way they’re the propaganda arm of one political party, that this is a errant one-time event, and that they’ll “do better” in the future.

We’ll pretend we believe them.

And not a damned thing will change, because not a single one of the little bugsnipes will face any sanction for being morally degenerate sacks of o-rings, desperate to do anything to keep their favoured political party in office, and willing to lie, obfuscate, cherry-pick, ignore inconvenient facts, and straight-up propagandise to do so.

You think you hate journalists enough, but you don’t. You really don’t.

Pfagh on the lot of them.

LawDog

*Houseplant Of The United States.

https://thelawdogfiles.com/2024/07/you-really-dont-hate-them-enough.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=you-really-dont-hate-them-enough

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Advertising Group Lead Effort to Demonetize Twitter/X & Others
« Reply #4168 on: July 11, 2024, 11:49:59 AM »
It will come as no surprise that right leaning sites were deemed inaccurate while left leaners weren’t:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/07/10/house-judiciary-committee-report-exposes-shadowy-corporate-coordination-to-silence-conservatives/


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Hell just froze over as CNN fact checks Biden!
« Reply #4170 on: July 13, 2024, 08:20:20 AM »
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-biden-false-misleading-031751217.html

Where have they been for the past 9 yrs?

Of course, they only do it now at the behest of Axeldouche and Brock and now that Biden has good chance of losing in Nov.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
A Feckless Press Embarks on a Tone Deaf Quest
« Reply #4171 on: July 16, 2024, 11:47:28 AM »
Biden’s sorry state was there for all to see, including the press, but they failed to report on it accurately and now want to hold those who knew of it accountable save for members of the MSM:

Washington Post imitates the Babylon Bee

Their follow-up a on the Clooney fundraiser tells the true story of what donors saw

The Washington Post building at One Franklin Square Building on June 5, 2024 in Washington, DC (Getty Images)
Written By:

Charles Lipson
If you want to see a devastating snapshot of the partisan reports that now pass for journalism, just juxtapose two articles in the Washington Post. Published a month apart, they report on the same event: the Hollywood fundraiser for President Joe Biden, hosted by George Clooney and Julia Roberts and featuring former president Barack Obama.

The first article, published immediately after the event, stressed the glitz and glamour. The headline captured the tone, “Biden, Obama warn of Trump dangers in star-studded LA fundraiser.” It was all sunshine, lollipops and rainbows, marred only by a few sentences about pro-Palestinian demonstrators outside the event. The reporter, Yasmeen Abutaleb, didn’t say one word about Biden’s frail condition or, indeed, any of the problems the public now sees. Not one word.

A month later, WaPo effectively said it was all a cover-up, without mentioning the inconvenient fact that they were a big part of it.  In a huge article in the Friday paper, the Post noted that, although the fundraiser brought in lots of campaign cash, it actually undermined Biden’s backing among the glam, progressive crowd, who saw the president’s physical and cognitive decline up-close and personal. They were shocked. The article was entitled, “Inside the glitzy fundraiser where Biden lost George Clooney.”

The subtitle is even harsher. “Some donors who attended the June 15 event at LA’s Peacock Theater said this week that they noticed Biden seemed slow. He seemed frail. As he greeted donors lined up for photos, he trailed off or spoke too quietly to be heard.” The rest of the article, reported by Dan Diamond, Samuel Oakford and Carol D. Leonnig, was filled with damning but anonymous quotes about Biden’s declining health, which deeply disturbed major donors who hadn’t seen the president in several months.

Besides the three principal reporters, the article lists four more who contributed to the report. Ace reporter, Yasmeen Abutaleb, the one on the scene at the event, was nowhere to be found.

The money quote in the latest article, “Many attendees — led by Clooney — now say they watched a dud and a preview screening of what the nation saw two weeks later in Biden’s prime-time debate against Trump.”

The press, including the Post, failed in its core duty when it failed to report that salient health issue. They played the same role as partisan donors, who now tell the Post they deliberately lied to avoid hurting Biden’s reelection campaign.

“Several reporters were present for the president’s interview with Jimmy Kimmel at the LA fundraiser,” Lauren Hitt, a campaign spokesperson, said in a statement. “None of them reported out anything like this at the time.”

The donor [who remains anonymous] said she and her husband were asked by friends after the event about Biden’s condition and “struggled to answer them honestly,” fearful of eroding Biden’s support.


“We were worried that if we told the truth — that President Biden was stiff, slow and dare we say it, fragile — that we risked losing their support for the president,” said the donor. “It was painful to be deceptive. Now, we realize we were not alone in withholding what we experienced.”

Why did the Post report it now? For the same partisan reasons they failed to report it earlier. They are part of the Democratic elite that now grasp what the party’s voters have been telling pollsters for months, what the public could see as Obama guided Biden off-stage in Los Angeles, what the nation saw in the catastrophic debate against Trump.

What the insiders now realize is that Biden could not only lose the White House, he could cost the Democrats the House and Senate and any chance to make Supreme Court appointments for another four years.

Those Democratic insiders include the legacy media, led by the New York Times, Washington Post and three major networks. They are an integral part of that Democratic Party’s institutional base. Faced with Biden’s electoral troubles, they have turned on him and keep turning up the volume to force him out. That’s why the latest Washington Post report looks so different from the one a month ago.

Two things had changed over that month. First, the debate and Biden’s subsequent stumbles made it impossible to persuade the public that their own eyes were fooling them. Second, the polls show that the Democrats face a hard, uphill battle in November with Biden at the top of the ticket. A partisan media fears that defeat.

Who captured the media’s shame? It was the true newspaper of record, the Babylon Bee. Their deliciously ironic headline, “Media Who Refused To Report On Biden’s Decline Furious That Nobody Reported On Biden’s Decline.” The Bee’s parody reporting is pitch perfect.


“Whose job was it to report about this?!” demanded CNN correspondent Jim Acosta…  “The fact that there weren’t reliable people on hand to witness President Biden’s decline and make sure everyone was made aware of it is unacceptable. We deserve answers.”

Yes, we do. But don’t expect to hear any from the feckless folks who spent the last year sweeping mounds of dirt under the rug.

By
Charles Lipson

Charles Lipson is the Peter B. Ritzma professor of political science emeritus at the University of Chicago, where he founded the Program on International Politics, Economics and Security, and a Spectator contributing writer.

https://thespectator.com/topic/washington-post-imitates-babylon-bee-la/

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media
« Reply #4172 on: July 17, 2024, 06:41:29 AM »
Was JD Vance a Marine?  A look at the military record of Trump's VP pick
Story by Melissa Cruz, USA TODAY • 14h •

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/was-jd-vance-a-marine-a-look-at-the-military-record-of-trump-s-vp-pick/ar-BB1q6xby?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=f74ea65fd3754dccebdd9ce2b4ccae95&ei=28

Why is the first part of the headline "WAS [he] a Marine?"

Should not the headline read more like this:
"details of JD Vance's military service in the Marine Corp."


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
The Media's Undeserved Arrogance
« Reply #4175 on: July 23, 2024, 12:02:59 PM »
The MSM acts like it has clout and assumes it pronouncments are respected. Meanwhile Twitter beats 'em like a gong:

To survive, news media must be more like Twitter
JUL 23, 2024

David Sacks tweeted, “When LBJ announced that he would not seek reelection in 1968, he gave a 40 minute address from the Oval Office. Biden posted a letter on X and hasn’t been seen or heard from directly. MSM just applauds, doesn’t ask any questions. Very strange.”

The press asks only the question the intelligence community allows, which is why the press demanded that President Donald John Trump disclose his medical records on being shot.

AP said, “Four days after a gunman’s attempt to assassinate former President Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania rally, the public is still in the dark over the extent of his injuries, what treatment the Republican presidential nominee received in the hospital, and whether there may be any long-term effects on his health.”

The demand was bogus. The public was not in the dark. Everyone saw him being shot from various angles via videos posted on Twitter. The long-term effect of the failed assassination is he likely will spend four years recuperating at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue beginning on January 20.

What the press has not demanded is an update on the FBI investigation of the attempt on a president’s life. My guess is the G-men are too busy destroying evidence to hold a press conference.

By the way, no one has seen our president since Thursday.

Old: Where’s Waldo?

New: Where’s Pedo?

One month ago, the press said Biden was unquestionably mentally capable and the press labeled any proof otherwise as a lie. AP said on June 21:

President Joe Biden’s simple act of sitting down while commemorating the 80th anniversary of D-Day in Normandy, France, gained more attention than the ceremony itself in some circles as social media users shared a shortened version of the clip to falsely claim he was reaching for a nonexistent chair.

The clip was the first of at least three out-of-context or trimmed videos shared widely over less than two weeks in June to fuel a narrative that Biden is mentally and physically unfit for office.

It’s long been standard practice in politics to spin real moments to make an opponent look bad. Yet the recent spate of misleading videos — which amassed millions of views and were picked up by right-leaning outlets around the world — shows how the reach of social media and real concerns about Biden’s age have made the tactic especially powerful in 2024.

NBC also had Biden’s back:

Misleading videos and false claims that President Joe Biden wandered off aimlessly from the G7 conference last week continued to go viral despite debunkings and fact-checks that tried to correct the record.

Google recommended false versions of the story as “top stories.” Deceptive video clips continued to accumulate millions of views on X. Copies of the videos were replayed on TikTok and YouTube with little context. Meta, the parent company of Instagram and Facebook, applied fact-checking labels to some posts but not to all.

The persistent nature of the misleading videos illustrates how major tech platforms and partisan media are playing off each other in the 2024 election cycle, keeping viral stories in people’s feeds after they’ve been proven to be misleading or even false.

Of course, the videos were not misleading. AP and NBC were flat-out lying.

That is not new. In 2016, AP reported, “California's Kamala Harris becomes first Indian-American U.S. senator.”

In 2020, AP reported, “Biden picks Kamala Harris as running mate, first black woman.”

She’s two — 2 — two minorities in one.

This is the filter our news used to go through before we were allowed to see it. That has changed. The power of the press is no more.

Lauren Boebert tweeted, “If Elon Musk hadn’t bought X when he did, I doubt Biden drops out. We’d probably have been banned off Twitter for posting clips of that debate.

“It’s pretty amazing how fast the discourse changed in this country once people were actually allowed to speak freely on this platform.”

She is correct. Twitter helped oust Biden by presenting the truth to the American people.

But don’t discount the role of the very sane genius in ending Biden’s political career. Trump’s acceptance of a debate that was clearly designed to favor Biden surprised the Biden campaign. Their candidate did so poorly that they hastily scheduled an interview on Disney’s ABC by Bill Clinton’s former spokesman. That went so poorly that a few weeks later, Biden dropped out.

On Twitter.

There was nothing presidential about his announcement. He failed to go on national TV. Perhaps he is too far gone. More likely it is a nod to the credibility of Twitter because a televised address would reach just as many people instantly. Likely more people would tune in if announced in prime time on a Sunday night.

But Biden can no longer pull off a 90-second speech. LBJ could do 40 minutes but he was 59 and while physically worn, he was mentally sharp.

Another factor is TV’s arrogance. There was no live fact-checking back when grownups ran network news. The respect for the office of president and more importantly, the desire to be impartial and show dignity, meant no one in the media would dare call a president a liar to his face — especially given the piss-poor track record of accuracy of such fact checks.

Obama indeed used the FBI to spy on Donald Trump, no matter how many times the press calls Trump a liar.

As is said in Romans 6:23, “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

And the news media is dying. Newspaper circulation today is a joke and advertising is shrinking as national brands go elsewhere and local shops close down as the economy continues to reel from 15 Days To Flatten The Curve, which was supported by every newspaper in America.

Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter was not altruistic. His was a remarkable business decision that wound up giving him the fastest and most accurate format for the broadcast of news and information. For a mere $44 billion he received more clout than AP, AFP, Reuters and every other Western wire service combined.

Even AP admitted that Twitter is still powerful among lefties despite allowing righties to use the platform freely.


Converting Twitter’s influence into cash flow and profit is another matter, but Huntley-Brinkley Report had no advertisers in 1957. By 1965, it was the most profitable half-hour on television. I have faith in Musk’s ability to solve a problem — any problem.

The rest of the media could learn from him. He took over a leftist social platform and opened it to all viewpoints again. He canned the censors of conservatives and quickly regained the credibility that Jack Dorsey had sold out to the federal government for a lousy few million bucks.

Newspapers should follow suit. The Dallas Morning News and Houston Chronicle earned accolades in recent presidential elections by divorcing themselves from their conservative roots and endorsing a Democrat for president. Liberal praise doesn’t pay the bills and their revenues are shrinking.

Why not endorse Trump this year? What do they have to lose? It’s not like Texas is suddenly going to turn blue because the local rag endorsed whoever Democrats nominate. Such an editorial, however, would inform readers that the paper no longer is an arm of the Democrat propaganda machine.

Here in Poca, West Virginia, not a single newspaper in the state has endorsed Trump in the last two elections. The state is second only to Wyoming in its support of President Trump. Nothing quite says out of touch like routinely dumping on the favorite president of your readers.

On Sunday, a president decided to not seek re-election. It was a shot heard around the world not through TV but through a tweet.

As for today’s poll, that really was Al Smith’s slogan.

https://donsurber.substack.com/p/to-survive-news-media-must-be-more?r=1qo1e&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&triedRedirect=true
« Last Edit: July 25, 2024, 01:08:09 PM by Body-by-Guinness »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
White Supremacists is in Michigan march
« Reply #4176 on: July 25, 2024, 12:44:02 PM »
https://www.hngn.com/articles/262276/20240725/white-supremacists-march-through-michigan-city.htm

I never heard of HNGN before but 6 to 8 people standing on a lawn with weird flags and garments is not a race war
or a threat to democracy.

Compare this to 30 million illegals in the US.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
LA Times Complains About What it Helped Create
« Reply #4178 on: July 30, 2024, 03:55:24 PM »
An apt excoriation of the LA Times and its tin ear when bemoaning the death of journalism in CA. Apparently they are unaware of their role in what befell newspapers in particular in the Golden State. This piece takes them to task for their contribution to what they complain about.

Note there are itals and videos embedded at the link, making the piece best viewed there:

https://californiaglobe.com/fr/la-times-bemoans-death-of-california-journalism-fails-to-acknowledge-it-helped-kill-it/
« Last Edit: July 30, 2024, 03:59:54 PM by Crafty_Dog »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
speaking of Stephapolous
« Reply #4179 on: August 04, 2024, 08:33:38 AM »
https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/08/31/time/spin.html

We can all remember when as a White House spokesperson for Clinton how unbelievably he would spin and twist arguments on their head.

Indeed, I recall watching him on CNN and thinking I cannot believe the deceit and outright corrupt lying like I had never seen before.

He brought lying spin to the mainstream from my arm chair experience in watching political discourse unfold.

A convenient back stabber when it suits him.
The slimiest of the slime.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Re: speaking of Stephapolous
« Reply #4180 on: August 04, 2024, 08:50:20 AM »
https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/08/31/time/spin.html

We can all remember when as a White House spokesperson for Clinton how unbelievably he would spin and twist arguments on their head.

Indeed, I recall watching him on CNN and thinking I cannot believe the deceit and outright corrupt lying like I had never seen before.

He brought lying spin to the mainstream from my arm chair experience in watching political discourse unfold.

A convenient back stabber when it suits him.
The slimiest of the slime.

But he does a great job of looking into the camera and appearing earnest which, other than reliably mouthing “Progressive” tropes, seems to be what it takes to get an MSM gig these days.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media
« Reply #4182 on: August 05, 2024, 06:55:41 PM »
I happened to have watched it last night.  Good fun!

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Left wing media : "Houthis are freaked!"
« Reply #4183 on: August 06, 2024, 08:58:07 AM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
"experts" tell us Trumps SoSec plan unsound
« Reply #4184 on: August 06, 2024, 11:37:32 AM »
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-says-seniors-not-pay-143020908.html

who Robert Reich?
the fraud from Princeton?
AOC?

experts......

the same experts who have left us holding the bag.......




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
anyone notice the DNC's rapid responses
« Reply #4185 on: August 07, 2024, 05:04:14 AM »
I read a few times this person or that person joining the Democrat / Harris rapid fire team.

Then notice that CNN is the rapid response outlet for the rapid responses to all things Republican say.

Trump was on Newsmax and Fox giving a rally
and literally at the same time CNN through hashtags and soon pundits were all over saying he is lying picking the irrelevant but useful idiots things he says and blowing it all up out of proportion, and while, of course , ignoring his important points or truths about how bad Harris is and denying Harris is what he said.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Woodward of course with his pre election pro Democrat novel
« Reply #4186 on: August 07, 2024, 12:54:54 PM »
https://apnews.com/article/bob-woodward-book-war-harris-trump-biden-a89ea7f31fc5aa1338e8e8361c57eee3

I think I was wrong about the exact topic though.

It will try to make Biden and his left hand woman to look like hard working ace diplomats .

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
This Ugly Media Climate Began Long Before Trump
« Reply #4187 on: August 09, 2024, 03:42:29 PM »
An interesting excerpt from and upcoming book about weaponized media hate:

'Nixon and the Weaponization of Media Hate'
He had no use for the press.

MICHAEL WALSH
AUG 09, 2024
An excerpt from Against the Corporate Media, coming Sept. 10 from Bombardier Books. "Nixon and the Weaponization of Media Hate," by Monica Crowley.

The origins of the press’s Nixon hatred go back to his earliest political days. From the moment he first ran for Congress in 1946, he was a staunch anti-communist, committed to fighting Marxists both abroad—and at home. And rather than cast his lot safely with the Establishment, he stood for and with the American people—whom he later famously called the Great Silent Majority—and championed them and their interests ahead of those of permanent Washington. He was America First long before Donald Trump came down the escalator in Trump Tower.

Thanks for reading Michael Walsh at The Pipeline! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.


Subscribe
This forever earned him the deep, abiding enmity of anti-American agitators, communist sympathizers, and garden-variety leftists everywhere, including in the press, among the Democrats, and in what we now know as the Deep State.

That enmity was evident right from the start of his political career. In 1948, freshman Congressman Nixon was a member of the House Un-American Activities Committee, investigating communist infiltration in the U.S. government. The Committee became aware of Whittaker Chambers, a former communist functionary who left the party completely disillusioned and later went on to be a senior editor at Time magazine. In his blockbuster testimony to the committee, Chambers identified the depth of communist infiltration, pointing directly to senior members of the government, including Alger Hiss, a former State Department official and prominent Democratic functionary involved in the creation of the United Nations.


You really can't hate them enough.

Hiss was a darling of the press with the perfect establishment pedigree: A graduate of Harvard Law School, he served as secretary to Supreme Court Justice Oliver Holmes, was a top adviser to President Roosevelt at the Yalta Conference, and was a major force behind the creation of the United Nations. Tall and handsome, Hiss glided through the corridors of  power with ease. The only problem was that he was a communist who had passed secrets to the Kremlin, and Nixon proved it. Hiss was eventually convicted of perjury, and Nixon was catapulted into the national political limelight. That sensational event set Nixon on a collision course with the press, many of whom had communist sympathies and hated that he had exposed one of their own. Nixon himself identified the Hiss case as the origin story of his war with the press.

Nixon ran for and won a seat in the U.S. Senate from California in 1950, in part by insinuating that his opponent, Helen Gahagan Douglas, was a communist sympathizer. One of his campaign’s leaflets, comparing her record to that of a notorious communist party-line congressman from New York, was printed on pink paper, and later in the campaign, Nixon suggested that she was a “pink right down to her underwear.”

These tactics were condemned as below-the-belt and set many in the press off on career-long jihads against Nixon, including Herblock, The Washington Post’s star political cartoonist, who first drew Nixon as a sewer rat after the Senate race—and never stopped vilifying him. But the tactics worked: Nixon won that race and further cemented his anti-communist credentials.

In addition to the Hiss case, another event accelerated his sour relationship with the press. In late 1952, as he headed into the general election as Dwight Eisenhower’s choice for vice president, he was hit with allegations that he had misappropriated campaign funds. Reporters smelled blood. Sensing that his place on the ticket might be in jeopardy, Nixon delivered a national primetime address—known as the Checkers speech—in which he laid out the facts, attacked the smear merchants behind the story, and asked the audience to let the Republican National Committee know if he should stay on the ticket.

The public response was overwhelmingly in support, Nixon became vice president, and the press once again was proven wrong. Prior to the speech, Nixon and some in the press still courted each other, but following the address, they turned on each other. When some reporters were late for a campaign bus, Nixon reportedly snapped, “F-ck ’em, we don’t need ’em.” His press secretary, Jim Bassett, summed it up: “By the end of the ’52 campaign, he had utterly no use for the press.”

https://thisweekatthepipeline.substack.com/p/nixon-and-the-weaponization-of-media?r=1qo1e&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&triedRedirect=true

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
A Press So Shameless They Don’t Bother to Hide It
« Reply #4188 on: August 09, 2024, 09:18:10 PM »
2nd post. I too sometimes feel as though I need an ouija board to find what the press seeks to hide and ignore what it puts forward as a story:

The Sins of Omission

I see dead stories

JUPPLANDIa

AUG 09, 2024

Way back in 1999 a young Haley Joel Osment said “I see dead people”. The Sixth Sense was the big surprise hit that really made M.Night Schyamalan’s career, a psychological thriller and a ghost story combined that had one of the most impactful twist reveals in cinema history.

I feel pretty safe in not ruining it for anyone a quarter of a century later. Bruce Willis is a ghost. That’s why Haley can see him. Bruce doesn’t realise he’s a ghost until the very end.

I was suddenly reminded of the film when thinking about the way the mainstream media work and the odd way those of us not reliant on them now inhabit an entirely different reality to those of us who do get our understanding of the world purely from mainstream sources.

The mainstream media of course selectively report the news. They constantly try to focus attention in one direction, and divert attention from another direction. Everything they allow to be seen is filtered through a lens of perpetual and oppressive bias. Stories which support the worldview they want you to have are massively emphasised and exaggerated, with endless supplementary comment and discussion. Things they don’t want you to see and they don’t want to acknowledge are ignored, or massively underreported.

None of this is based on some kind of rational assessment of what is important and what is not important. It’s not even based on a commercial judgement of what will sell newspapers or interest readers. Neither the genuine significance of the event (politically, culturally, and historically) nor the desire to sell stories that will interest people and generate sales or viewership, are the considerations determining which stories run and which are swiftly dropped.

Every such choice now is solely about which news items support the pre-determined narrative, the agenda, and which don’t.

What this means is that those of us who still judge by whether an event is significant, and judge between the importance of stories and news items on old criteria like how true they are or like how many of us are affected and impacted by these events, are now in a siruation similar to that of a small boy with a sixth sense not possessed by others.

We can see dead stories.

For us, an attempted assassination of a Presidential candidate was a very big story. It’s an important story that says important things about the divisions in US society, and perhaps too about which side of those divisions is the side prone to violence and irrational behaviour. It might tell us, to some extent, which side are more innately fascistic, if for example a significant number of those people celebrate an assassination attempt or lament its failure. It might tell us which side are prone to delusions, if for example a third of them insist that the event we all saw unfold and can easily research was staged by its intended victim.

For those of us who are aware that the mainstream media apply focus only where it suits them, that assassination attempt raises a whole flurry of questions that require exactly the kind of continuing discussion and assessment that is not happening.

Some of those questions pertain to the media itself. We might note for instance that CNN had enforced a policy on itself of not reporting on Trump rallies, of ignoring these events as if the levels of support for a Presidential nominee from a main party, the things he is saying, and the enthusiasm of his backers do not matter in an election year.

That itself of course is an example of the kind of bias and selective reporting I am referring to. Trump rallies should be a matter of interest to the media. He’s the Republican nominee. He’s a former President.

And he’s been the main topic of conversation at CNN for nearly a decade. It’s not as if Trump hating liberal media does not want to talk about Trump. They are sometimes incapable of talking about anyone or anything else. They set aside 90% of their content for talking about Trump. But of course all of that content is negative.

The thing about just reporting on a rally is that simply by showing that level of support, and simply by letting the candidate speak and people hear what they have to say, you risk that attention being positive attention. People might be impressed by what they see and hear. This shouldn’t be a risk if their hate filled criticisms of Trump’s style, manner and substance are all accurate, but they still seem surprisingly reluctant to show these rallies.

It’s a reluctance that can only be based on selectivity, on bias, and that can only exist because they want every story on Trump to be a negative one.

But interestingly, the rally at which he was almost murdered was a rally CNN broke their reporting embargo for. It was a rally where several anti Trump mainstream outlets sent reporters to, contrary to their usual policy of deliberately ignoring these rallies.

Surely just an odd coincidence, that.

It can’t be that these Trump hating media organisations were expecting something particularly dramatic and interesting at this particular rally, sufficient to break their usual embargo, and sufficient to justify filming it all with….should we say, anticipation?

This of course is the territory of ‘conspiracy theory’. God forbid the idea that media organisations that have lied about everything and tried to encourage Trump’s assassination for years would also have some foreknowledge of a likely attack and a salivating desire to film his head being blown off.

What a ridiculous idea. Can you imagine the level of corruption and hate that would entail? Thank goodness we don’t live in THAT reality, but rather the one where no western liberal democracy would encourage assassinations, conduct them, or adjust security to make them easier. No sirree.

Even more reassuringly, we live in a reality where the media are simply the impartial and objective reporters of established facts, who do not routinely lie, and who do not have insanely vicious hatreds of a specific individual. No, no, honestly, we do (stop snickering at the back there).

Rowing back from these dark conspiratorial waters, we can say this much. An assassination attempt on Donald Trump is a huge story. It’s not a story that should completely disappear in three weeks, not unless it’s followed a week later by a nuclear war.

It’s a YUUGE story.

And Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 race, while also very significant, should not have made the assassination attempt something that is no longer of interest.

This was the closest America has come to the murder of a President since the Reagan assassination attempt in 1981. And it’s the closest America has come to the febrile and dangerous political chaos of the 1960s, to the assassinations of John F.Kennedy (JFK), Robert ‘Bobby’ Kennedy (RFK), Martin Luther King Jnr and Malcolm X.

It was an assassination attempt on a former President at a massive rally, filmed live, preceded by security ‘blunders’ that should require months of investigation and analysis, and followed by the single most iconic visual image of recent times. That photo of Trump just after being shot clenching his raised fist, surrounded by security, and backed by the US flag, is an astonishing image.

Like or loathe Trump if you look at in terms of newsworthiness or in terms of iconic moments, this was indeed huge. That image has to be one of the greatest political photos ever taken. It’s up there with the Iwo Jima flag or with the lone protestor in front of a Chinese tank in Tiananmen Square in terms of political drama and the pure power of a political photograph.

And it was disappeared.

Time magazine picked it for a cover, and then pulled it.

It’s on pro Trump merchandise and it’s shared by people who love Trump, but as far as mainstream media is concerned that photograph (from one of their guys) never happened.

As far as mainstream media is concerned, the assassination attempt never happened. Despite there being massive questions still unanswered. Despite there being vitally significant security issues and cultural issues to analyse. Despite their obsession with Donald Trump.

They spent more time discussing how Donald Trump feeds fish than they have spent discussing the attempt on his life. They have devoted more comment to his hair than they now give to his head nearly being blown off.

In traditional Christian theology there are sins of commission (things you do that are wrong) and sins of omission (things you ought to do, but don’t do). In James 4:17 the Bible teaches us:

“Anyone, then, who knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, commits sin.”

In more modern form, this becomes sentiments such as “the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing” (first ascribed to Edmund Burke) since that represents the effect of sins of omission on society as a whole.

It is the Catholic definition of a sin of omission that seems closest though to what the media do. That is, it is “…a failure by a person to take an action that one "ought to do", and that is within ones power, and when attentively and willfully done…”.

The media malignly and deliberately ignore news they ought to pay attention to. They bury true stories. They refuse to comment on important stories. They kill stories that go against their narrative or that might generate sympathy for their political opponents.

They make some riots “mostly peaceful”. They make others worse than Pearl Harbor. They make an assassination attempt on Donald Trump a dead story dropped after a day.

And they do this wilfully and attentively, trying to blind everyone else. Their reporting and their lack of reporting is pure propaganda and pure sin.

So that those of us who can see and wish to see, those of us using our eyes, have a sense that others have deferred to mainstream media, and that mainstream media seeks to deny. We are astonished by all the things that are not discussed.

We see dead stories everywhere.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Minnesota Media, How Walz got away with it for so long...
« Reply #4189 on: August 10, 2024, 09:07:19 AM »
Same is true for Keith Ellison, Ilhan Omar, Wellston, Mondale, Humphrey and every Dem politician since the 1960s, the states dominant newspaper (and television stations) run cover.

With a little irony, it was the Minnesotan founders of Powerlineblog that brought down the blatant lies of Dan Rathergate.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/08/the-role-of-the-star-tribune-2.php

Walz, March 2005:  “As Command Sergeant Major, I have a responsibility not only to ready my battalion for Iraq, but also to serve if called on,”

Shirked.

He knew of the Iraq deployment for his unit when he resigned his command.  I don't fault someone not wanting to go to Iraq in 2006.  I fault his lying about it.  Then for political purposes and self aggrandizing he "mis" speaks of the weapons he carried in war.  He forgot he didn't go??

Minneapolis StarTribune is still running front page cover for him, false fact checking his detractors.  They think JD Vance is the liar.  But Powerline has the above statement from his campaign release.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; Jonathon Karl Kramps Up
« Reply #4190 on: August 12, 2024, 06:01:34 AM »
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/08/karl-kramps-up.php

"Moderator" just can't contain his bias.

But watches opposing candidate JD Vance eat his lunch.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media
« Reply #4191 on: August 12, 2024, 06:13:27 AM »
Yes he did good job!
:)

and yup this "moderator" jurnolister would NEVER give Harris such a hard time.

and nope she probably will not do real interview(s) only a performance of scripted questions and answers.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Media Silence on Media Blackout
« Reply #4192 on: August 12, 2024, 06:32:55 AM »
"The president, the Democratic presidential candidate, and the vice presidential nominee all either cannot or will not speak casually and publicly to elected representatives, reporters, or the people."

https://amgreatness.com/2024/08/12/our-three-silent-mice/

"So, for the present, no one knows who is in charge of the United States."

What can they say, it worked last time...

"leftists endlessly conspire not only because they have little confidence in the people, but because they have absolutely none in themselves."

[Doug] VDH doesn't engage in this kind of speculation but the ruling cabal, I think, has told Biden if he speaks in public without their permission, without their script, they will end his Presidency. 
« Last Edit: August 12, 2024, 06:50:54 AM by DougMacG »



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth Issues; foreign manipulation of US media
« Reply #4195 on: August 13, 2024, 04:32:40 AM »
Well, this part sounds reasonable to me:

"10 million nationwide encounters with removable noncitizens since 2021. The 51 million figure is also not plausible because estimates by immigration and research groups of the number of people living in the country illegally – regardless of when they arrived – ranges between 11 million and 17 million."

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3226
    • View Profile
Media Narrative Graphs
« Reply #4196 on: August 13, 2024, 11:05:42 PM »
Interesting series of graphs charting media mention of divisive topics, revealing it’s about sowing division/feelings of oppression rather than reporting actual news. Indeed, note the WSJ line on all the graphs. It’s little wonder they are my primary MSM go to.

https://x.com/therabbithole84/status/1823370959665144140?s=61

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72240
    • View Profile
This is pretty good
« Reply #4197 on: August 20, 2024, 06:58:27 PM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19440
    • View Profile
Re: Media, Ministry of Truth, Electrify, Electricity in the room
« Reply #4198 on: August 21, 2024, 07:31:42 AM »
Need a link for the montage, but when Barack and Michelle enter the dead arena, the word is electrify, electricity in the room, it's said by every anchor, every pundit on every channel.

Here is the BBC; they got the talking point:  https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2n1v4k4rzo

"Barack and Michelle Obama electrify Democrats"
------------------------------------------------------
Oh good grief, I thought we were against electricity, majority of which in the US is made from fossil fuels.

I heard the superlatives.  Picking Joe was his best decision ever.  No one believes it.  More like, 'leave it to Joe to bleep things up', he allegedly said to a more private audience.

Michelle:  Kamala worked her way up the hard way...
https://x.com/libbyemmons/status/1826092664468435282
Right.  Electrifying.

Speaking of electricity, how are those new nuclear plants coming along?  Did you guys 'flip' on nuclear power or just lie to us to get elected?
« Last Edit: August 21, 2024, 07:50:51 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19748
    • View Profile
george schmuckalopolous right on que
« Reply #4199 on: August 23, 2024, 06:38:00 AM »
Insult after insult of Trump and us during convention.

Trump, on cue responds.

but only on "Truth Social and Fox" [gee, I wonder why only those two - could it be he is blacked out, censored everywhere else]

MSM responds to him by totally ignoring the substance of what he says and only that he is angry complaining and full of personal insults.

Yet when I read this, I hear what he says and agree it is ALL TRUE.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-responds-angrily-to-harris-dnc-speech-in-posts-on-social-media-platform/ar-AA1phNpZ?ocid=msedgntphdr&cvid=42f4b8f8c0f4468eafa59b18805c99c1&ei=14

BTW. half the country is angry with Dems and probably more with much of their failures.

Harris wants to represent all Americans but everything she has said historically would hurt me.

They even showed the clip of her saying Kick the f..n door down then cackling like a loon at how proud she was to insert the F word as though we should be impressed .   

Remarkable how they complained about all the wrongs when indeed she was VP the past 4 yrs when this all happened.   And the media is silent and cackling right along with her.