Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Media’

The Public Education Swamp Refuses to Learn Anything from A Year of Embarrassing Failures


REPORTED BY: ROBERT BUSEK | JUNE 08, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/08/the-public-education-swamp-refuses-to-learn-anything-from-a-year-of-embarrassing-failures/

school bus

Instead of welcoming self-reflection and accountability, the educational establishment and its media allies are trying to gaslight parents.

Author Robert Busek profile

ROBERT BUSEK

MORE ARTICLES

The 2021-2022 school year is coming to a close. As usual, students, parents, teachers, and administrators are looking over the past year to see what worked, what didn’t, and how to improve.

This year, the educational establishment’s report card is even worse than usual. It has failed to address the learning losses due to unnecessary Covid lockdowns and inspired parental uproar over critical race theory and LGBT advocacy in the classroom. It has suffered a surprising electoral defeat in Virginia and a not-so-surprising legislative setback in Florida, as well as an unprecedented number of school board recall elections. Most damaging of all, close to 2 million students have abandoned government schooling for greener (not to mention safer) pastures.

Faced with such massive public losses, one might think a little self-reflection would be in order. Instead, the educrats, with the help of their friends in the legacy media, have decided to address these serious problems by gaslighting the American public.

Avoiding Accountability at All Costs

The most recent example of this deception comes from the continuing saga of the National School Boards Association’s (NSBA) effort last fall to smear parents who complain at school board meetings as “domestic terrorists.” The now infamous letter and even more infamous Department of Justice memo that followed it represent the depths to which the educational establishment was willing to sink to protect itself from accountability to the families it theoretically serves.

A recently completed independent review exonerated the NSBA’s board from culpability in this fiasco, fixing the blame for “both the ‘origin and substance of the letter’” on former Interim Director and CEO Chip Slaven. The review also found that while unnamed members of the Biden administration “collaborated” with Slaven, it “did not find direct or indirect evidence suggesting the administration requested the letter.”

In an effort to “clear the record,” Slaven recorded an interview last week with Fox News Digital, where he whined about being “betrayed” and “completely backstabbed” by the organization that he led. He also admitted that he disagreed with the NSBA board’s futile efforts to walk back the language of the letter, claiming that “it drenched an already inflamed and out-of-control narrative with another helping of gasoline.”

Neither Slaven nor the NSBA’s announcement bothered to address the elephant in the room: that the

organization sees engaged parents and community members who attend school board meetings as potential threats that need to be watched and possibly prosecuted by federal authorities. When pressed about this during the interview, Slaven lamely defended the substance of the letter he penned by saying, “The word ‘parents’ is not in the letter anywhere,” despite the examples cited in the letter’s footnotes.

The NSBA has offered vague platitudes about “advocat[ing] for local control” and being “committed to parent engagement” as it pursues its “nonpartisan” goals. These attempts to rewrite history come as 25 state school boards have chosen “to withdraw membership, participation, or dues from NSBA.”

Meanwhile, an FBI whistleblower has claimed that “counterterrorism tools” were indeed used against parents in accordance with the DOJ’s memo. It remains unclear whether these efforts continue presently despite the NSBA’s repudiation of the letter and its alleged author.

Legacy Media Provide Covering Fire

Of course, the left-wing corporate media have gone all in to support educrats’ efforts to deceive the public into believing they remain the valiant heroes in this ongoing drama. Lately, they’ve decided to focus their attacks on a favorite target of the left: homeschooling families.

This is hardly surprising, as the number of these families at least doubled during the lockdowns of 2020-2021. What’s more, that number has been largely maintained despite schools re-opening in the fall of 2021.

On Mother’s Day, Keith Olbermann fired an opening salvo in this new campaign against educational choice when he tweeted that a homeschooling mom was “ruin[ing] the lives of five innocent children.” Not to be outdone, MSNBC columnist Anthea Butler initiated a preemptive strike against Kirk Cameron’s upcoming documentary “The Homeschool Awakening” by disingenuously linking homeschooling not just with conservative Christianity, but also with the “segregation academies” of the post-Brown v. Board of Education South.

After grudgingly admitting the recent increase in homeschooling “may [in part] be attributed to Black parents and other diverse groups who might not otherwise dare to disagree with her leftist party line, Butler ended her hatchet job with a dire warning: 

Homeschooling may have greater appeal now because of these debates and the desire for parents to play a big part in their children’s educational life. It may also arise out of pandemic concerns, but parents unfamiliar with the existing networks of homeschooling run the danger of being drawn into Christian conservative networks and theocratic teaching. [Cameron] says that people choosing homeschooling are having an awakening, but the public needs to awaken to the reality that public schools may disappear if people with his extreme beliefs have their way. 

The left’s message to parents is loud and clear: Exercise your right to homeschool your kids and you are complicit in the cold-blooded murder of public schooling.

Institutional Suicide

In these efforts, Slaven, Olbermann, Butler, and their comrades studiously deflect from the simple truth: If American government-run schools are dying, it is not a case of murder, but of suicide.

The self-inflicted wounds keep coming despite all the warning signs of the past academic year. Last month, the school district in Kiel, Wis., accused three middle schoolers of sexual harassment for failing to refer to another student by her chosen pronouns. What parent wants to go through that as a consequence of sending his kids to public schools?

Meanwhile, in Virginia, Fairfax County Public Schools is planning to adopt a policy to suspend or even expel students who “maliciously misgender” classmates. The vote, originally scheduled for May 26, has been suspiciously delayed until June 16, perhaps so the happy chaos of the last day of school will allow the board to avoid further public scrutiny and outrage.  

As kids across the nation start their summer vacations, the battle for their minds and souls rages on. True to form, the educational establishment fights dirty, using cheap manipulation tactics to distract the public from its pursuit of ideological “business as usual.”


Robert Busek is a Catholic homeschooling father of six who has taught history and Western Civilization in both traditional and online classrooms for over twenty years. His essays have also been published in The American Conservative and The American Spectator. The views he expresses here are his own.

Stop The Gaslighting. Conservatives Did Not Inflame the Culture War Over Trans Ideology


POSTED BY: CASEY CHALK | MAY 24, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/24/stop-the-gaslighting-conservatives-did-not-inflame-trans-ideology-the-culture-war/

man in drag costume reads book to children at library

Leftists push their gender ideology on children, yet conservative parents complaining about Drag Queen Story Hour are blamed for starting a culture war.

Author Casey Chalk profile

CASEY CHALK

MORE ARTICLES

Can the gaslighting on gender and sexual identitarianism from the left get any more absurd? The Washington Post last month ran a story about how a decision by the community center in McLean, Virginia to co-sponsor a “Drag Story Book Hour” for children during Pride Month has, in their awkward wording, “set off culture wars.”

The May election for three open seats at the community center has attracted nine candidates, including Katharine Gorka, a former Trump administration official who has criticized the diversity, inclusion, and equity policies that resulted in the drag event. WaPo reporter Antonio Olivo observed, with editorial flourish, that this is “an example of how nothing is safe from the nation’s raging culture wars.”

A suburban community center hosts a drag queen story hour (DQSH) for elementary school students, yet it’s conservatives who are the ones stoking the culture war by complaining about it? A Florida school board member last year chaperoned a group of elementary school children on a field trip to a gay bar and the state’s community centers promote DQSH, but it’s conservatives who are the dangerous extremists for supporting a Florida parental rights in education bill?

Drag queens do bizarre, borderline pornographic acts in front of children, but it’s conservatives who are responsible for miseducating and damaging American youth? Come on.

Anything but Innocent

DQSH, as Gorka recently told me, “is not, as the American Library Association dishonestly describes it, an effort to combat ‘marginalization and underrepresentation.’” Rather, as the DQSH website itself declares, it is “drag queens reading stories to children in libraries, schools, and bookstores” in order to “capture the imagination and play of the gender fluidity of childhood and gives kids glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models.”

That word “play” is a bit concerning, especially given the sexually explicit nature of DQSH, and the many allegations that this pedagogy equates to grooming. A drag performer at one DQSH event in D.C. last year sang shirtless with duct tape on her breasts, sported a thong, and pretended to have fake sperm over her mouth.

Another DQSH event in Portland, Oregon in 2019 showed photos of children “lounging atop of the costumed queens on the floor, grabbing at false breasts, and burying their faces in their bodies.” This is not exactly light-hearted, appropriate public entertainment, notes Gorka.

A Concerning National Phenomenon

It would be more accurate to say that DQSH events bring the culture war directly to America’s children, with an ideological gameplan expressly dedicated to sexualizing our nation’s youth and urging children to consider themselves gender dysphoric. The first DQSH event in the United States was held in San Francisco in 2015. Since then, the events have spread across the country.

As of 2020, the official DQSH website boasted almost 50 independently operated chapters across the United States, including in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Chicago. It is also supported by the American Library Association, whose extensive resource page includes information on how libraries can resist and censure people in local communities who object to these events.

Terrifyingly, the grooming charge is reality. In 2021, the former president of an organization that served as a sponsor for the Milwaukee Drag Queen Story Hour was charged with possessing child pornography depicting the sexual abuse of underage boys, including toddlers. In 2019, the Houston Public Library admitted a registered child sex offender to read to kids in a DQSH event. Allyn Walker, a transgender former assistant professor of sociology and criminal justice at Old Dominion University in Virginia, sought to defend people who are attracted to minors.

As I noted in a recent Federalist article, the media and schools aggressively promoting transgenderism have created a national crisis. There has been a dramatic, unprecedented surge in people identifying with sexual identities other than heterosexual.

As Abigail Shrier documents at length in her alarming book “Irreversible Damage,” the consequences for those who seek hormone treatment and/or sexual reassignment surgery are lifelong. DQSH marks an attempt to push the boundaries even further, not only for children entering puberty but to early elementary school and pre-K.

This truly is a national challenge. DQSH now reportedly has chapters in 29 different states, which means there is plenty of local political work to be done. As Gorka notes, “pornographic books such as ‘All Boys Aren’t Blue’ can be found in hundreds of school libraries across the country, thanks in part to the fact that The Young Adult Library Services Association (a division of the American Library Association) put the book at the top of its Teens’ Top 10 book list in 2021.”

Malevolent Gaslighting

This makes the left’s abusive and hyperbolic rhetoric on conservative resistance to DQSH and other grooming activities all the more insulting and infuriating. The Washington Post provocatively featured a political cartoon in April portraying Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis as responsible for the deaths of trans children. Liberal media outlets are claiming that conservatives should be held responsible for the suicides of children struggling with dysphoria.

Yet who encouraged prepubescent children to think about myopic topics like gender dysphoria in the first place? I certainly never heard of such things when I was in grade school in the 1990s. Who told children that their gender and sexual identity were the most important thing about them, and that misidentifying or misgendering amounted to the worst possible offense? Who is making millions of dollars off lying to and emotionally damaging impressionable, easily-manipulated children?

The answer is those advocating DQSH and the many other ubiquitous forms of sexual and gender propaganda influencing millions of American youth. It is they who are deceiving — and often permanently damaging — an entire generation of Americans for the sake of their own ideological agenda, the normalizing of bizarre, pornographic behavior.

No, conservatives did not inflame the culture war over trans ideology and drag queens. But we sure would like to stop it.


Casey Chalk is a senior contributor at The Federalist and an editor and columnist at The New Oxford Review. He has a bachelor’s in history and master’s in teaching from the University of Virginia and a master’s in theology from Christendom College. He is the author of The Persecuted: True Stories of Courageous Christians Living Their Faith in Muslim Lands.

This Insane 2020 Time Magazine Article Explains Exactly Why the Left Fears Losing Twitter


REPORTED BY: DAN O’DONNELL | APRIL 28, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/04/28/this-insane-2020-time-magazine-article-explains-exactly-why-the-left-fears-losing-twitter/

Twitter app on phone

An astonishing but largely forgotten story in Time Magazine explains why there is so much leftist concern today about Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter.

Author Dan O'Donnell profile

DAN O’DONNELL

MORE ARTICLES

Of all the hysterical leftist reactions to Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter on Monday, MSNBC host Ari Melber’s was easily the most revealing.

“If you own all of Twitter or Facebook or what have you, you don’t have to explain yourself,” he gravely intoned during his show Monday evening. “You don’t even have to be transparent. You could secretly ban one party’s candidate or all of its candidates, all of its nominees, or you could just secretly turn down the reach of their stuff and turn up the reach of something else, and the rest of us might not even find out about it ‘til after the election.”

You don’t say. This was in fact the way the left used social media to win the 2020 presidential election. They even admitted it openly in a stunning yet largely forgotten February 2021 article in Time magazine entitled “The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign that Saved the 2020 Election.”

“For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President,” wrote reporter Molly Ball. “Their work touched every aspect of the election.”

And they wanted credit for it, Ball continued, “even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream — a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information.”

Their aim, they insisted, wasn’t to rig the election but to “fortify” it against then-President Donald Trump and his allies, whom they believed to be a threat to democracy itself.

“Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears.”

The final piece was critical, especially in the waning days of the campaign, when an October surprise in the form of Hunter Biden’s laptop threatened to derail his father’s candidacy and undo the organized left’s hard work.

The New York Post’s exclusive story dropped like a grenade less than a month before Election Day, providing “smoking-gun emails” showing that the younger Biden introduced his father “to a top executive at a Ukrainian energy firm less than a year before the elder Biden pressured government officials in Ukraine into firing a prosecutor who was investigating the company.”

The emails, the Post explained, were obtained from a computer dropped off and apparently forgotten at a repair shop in Delaware. Under the terms of the repair agreement, the store’s owner took possession of the laptop when it was deemed to be abandoned. Twitter and Facebook, though, determined without any evidence that the emails were actually “hacked materials” and thus distributed in violation of their terms of use agreements.

Facebook quickly acted to limit the reach of the story, while Twitter took the extraordinary step of locking the Post’s account and preventing other users from sharing its story or even pictures from it. Neither Hunter Biden nor the Joe Biden presidential campaign denied that the laptop was Hunter’s, and the younger Biden’s business partner, Tony Bobulinski, went on the record a few days later with documents that confirmed the Post’s reporting, which seemed to uncover an international bribery scheme.

It didn’t matter. Once 50 obviously partisan intelligence officials issued an evidence-free statement calling the laptop materials “Russian disinformation,” it was determined that they would be censored in both legacy and social media.

Of course, more than a year after Biden was safely elected, both The New York Times and Washington Post confirmed that the laptop was genuine, but the censorship did its job: A Media Research Center poll of swing state voters confirmed that 16 percent of Biden supporters would have changed their votes had they heard of the laptop story, including 4 percent who would have switched their vote to Trump. This obviously would have swung the entire election to Trump, but that would have been an unacceptable result for the leftist cabal intent on “fortifying” democracy by stacking the deck against him. In light of the Media Research Center’s findings, social media censorship was very possibly the most effective way they did it. And naturally they had to brag about it in Time.

“Trump’s lies and conspiracy theories, the viral force of social media and the involvement of foreign meddlers made disinformation a broader, deeper threat to the 2020 vote,” Ball reported. “Laura Quinn, a veteran progressive operative who co-founded Catalist, began studying this problem a few years ago. She piloted a nameless, secret project, which she has never before publicly discussed, that tracked disinformation online and tried to figure out how to combat it.”

She ultimately concluded that engaging with this supposedly “toxic content” or trying to debunk it was ineffective, so “the solution, she concluded, was to pressure platforms to enforce their rules, both by removing content or accounts that spread disinformation and by more aggressively policing it in the first place.”

This research armed liberal activists to pressure social media companies like Twitter and Facebook to far more aggressively and creatively enforce their rules, prompting a crackdown on “disinformation” that was in fact completely accurate. Because it was harmful to the effort to “save democracy” and defeat the “autocratic” Trump, it was censored.

“Democracy won in the end,” Ball concluded. “The will of the people prevailed. But it’s crazy, in retrospect, that this is what it took to put on an election in the United States of America.”

This reveals the real threat of Musk’s Twitter takeover: If it is no longer possible to suppress factual information in the name of rescuing democracy from its alleged enemies, then those enemies (read: Republicans) might start winning more elections. And that is simply unacceptable.


Dan O’Donnell is a talk show host with News/Talk 1130 WISN in Milwaukee, Wis. and 1310 WIBA in Madison, Wis., and a columnist for the John K. MacIver Institute.

The Only Way to Fight Disinformation Is to Fight Political Censorship


REPORTED BY: STELLA MORABITO | APRIL 18, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/04/18/the-only-way-to-fight-disinformation-is-to-fight-political-censorship/

Chicago Disinformation Conference

The surest way to kill a democracy is to practice political censorship under the guise of protecting society from disinformation.

Author Stella Morabito profile

STELLA MORABITO

VISIT ON TWITTER@STELLA_MORABITO

MORE ARTICLES

If outfits like the Aspen Institute’s Commission on Information Disorder,” along with Big Tech’s faceless “fact-checkers,” ever get a total monopoly on dictating reality, the result will be a 24/7 mix of falsehoods with the occasional limited hangout to cover up their lies. The icing on this fake cake is the use of conferences about disinformation, such as the recent stunt at the University of Chicago that served as cover for justifying political censorship. There former President Obama presented the perfect picture of psychological projection: a panel of propagandists accusing others of wrongthink.

The Atlantic’s Anne Applebaum, for example, sought to censor the reality of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal by announcing she didn’t find it “interesting.” See how that works? Truth depends upon how our elites personally feel about what should be true. But it gets much worse, because political censorship creates deep dysfunction in society. In fact, the surest way to kill a democracy is to practice political censorship under the guise of protecting society from disinformation.

Censorship causes disinformation. It’s the grandaddy of disinformation, not a solution to it. The sooner everyone recognizes this obvious fact, the better off we’ll be. Whenever a self-anointed elite sets up a Ministry of Truth, the link between censorship and disinformation becomes clear. Before long, they invent reality and punish anyone who expresses a different viewpoint.

So, it’s no small irony that those who claim to be protecting “democracy” from disinformation are the biggest promoters of disinformation and greatest destroyers of real democracy. Their dependence on censorship obstructs the circulation of facts. It prevents any worthwhile exchange of ideas.

Unchecked Censorship Isolates People

Consider what happens if a society is only permitted one propagandistic narrative while all other ideas and information are silenced. People start self-censoring to avoid social rejection. The result is a form of imposed mental isolation. Severely isolated people tend to lose touch with reality. The resulting conformity also perpetuates the censorship. This is unnatural and dangerous because human beings depend on others to verify what’s real. People weren’t able to verify reality in Nazi Germany, during Joseph Stalin’s Reign of Terror, or during Mao Zedong’s brutal Cultural Revolution. All were societies in the grip of mass hysteria because of ruthless censorship to protect a narrative.

As psychiatrist Joost Meerloo noted in his book “The Rape of the Mind,” no matter how well-meaning political censorship might be, it creates dangerous conformity of thought: “the presence of minority ideas, acceptable or not, is one of the ways in which we protect ourselves against the creeping growth of conformist majority thinking.”

The only way we can strengthen ourselves against such contagion is through real freedom of speech that allows fully open discussion and debate. However, if we’re confined by Big Tech to a relentless echo chamber and punished for expressing different thoughts, we’ll just keep getting more and more disinformation. In fact, we are now drowning in the distortions produced by “fact-checkers.” Take, for example, narratives that promote the gender confusion and sexualization of children. Public school teachers routinely post TikTok videos of themselves spewing forth their gender confusion. And if someone calls out Disney for its open grooming of children, Twitter suspends them.

If we never push back against such absurdities, we ultimately end up in a state of mass delusion, each of us a cell in a deluded hive mind, obedient to commands about what to say, how to act, and what to think. To get an idea of what that looks like in a population, check out this clip from North Korea:

Censorship-Invoked Social Contagion Is Real

One of the most telling incidents of censorship over the past year was YouTube and Twitter’s take-down of virologist and vaccine inventor Dr. Robert Malone, claiming he was “spreading misinformation”—i.e., spreading a second opinion—about Covid vaccines and treatments. But big tech saw an even bigger threat in Malone’s discussion of Mattias Desmet’s study of Mass Formation Psychosis (MFP) on Joe Rogan’s popular podcast. This is a big reason Spotify was under pressure to de-platform Rogan entirely. Open discussion of such things would erode the illusions big media and big tech so doggedly prop up.

Malone explained how a propaganda-saturated population can end up in a state of mass hypnosis that renders people incapable of seeing reality. He described Desmet’s theory about how social isolation, a high level of discontent, and a strong sense of free-floating anxiety are keys to the development of this psychosis.

The anxiety is so painful that it causes people to cling, trancelike, to any narrative that seems to offer stability. Once all other views are censored, people become so invested in the narrative that they cannot consider any alternative views. They will even mob anyone who endangers the narrative. This phenomenon was prevalent in the German population under Nazism. Their obedience to the propaganda rendered them incapable of understanding any opposing narrative.

Mass psychosis should not sound farfetched. There’s nothing new about it. Hundreds of instances of mass hysteria are documented. In the 19th century, Scottish journalist Charles MacKay wrote up a whole catalog of them. In 2015 medical sociologist Robert Bartholomew co-authored a compendium of popular delusions or “mass sociogenic illness.”

Most past incidents of mass hysteria have been confined to geographic regions, such as the witch trials in 17th century Salem, Massachusetts. But with the internet accessible and addictive in the 2020s, the possibility of mass delusion on a global scale is upon us. Censorship—in the name of protecting “democracy” from disinformation—is the key to creating it.

Propagandists Guard Their Illusions Like Magicians

By definition, propaganda aims to psychologically affect people and change their attitudes. So, our social survival depends upon becoming aware of such phenomena. Building self-awareness about our vulnerability to crowd psychology would serve as a sort of psychological vaccine. Of course, elites do not want us even entertaining the possibility that we can be manipulated or vulnerable to social and psychological pressures. Propagandists are illusionists by nature. If their illusion falls apart, then the game is over for them. This is why they depend so heavily on the slur “conspiracy theorist” to distract us from the truth and from their use of censorship to cut us off from other ideas.

The late Nobel laureate Doris Lessing spoke against the dangers of social conformity and censorship in 1986. She noted there was a great body of knowledge that was continuing to be built about the laws of crowd psychology and social contagion. It was odd that we weren’t applying this knowledge to improve our lives. Lessing concluded that no government in the world would willingly help its citizens resist group pressures and learn to think independently. We have to do it ourselves. Fast forward to the twenty-first century, and it sure looks like the keepers of this secret knowledge use it as a means of social control.

No sane person would want to live inside the boxes that the censors who claim to be fighting disinformation are building around us. If we want to escape this Twilight Zone existence, we must destroy that canard and insist on real freedom of speech everywhere.


Stella Morabito is a senior contributor at The Federalist. Her essays have also appeared in the Washington Examiner, American Thinker, Public Discourse, Human Life Review, New Oxford Review. In her previous work as an intelligence analyst, she focused on various aspects of Russian and Soviet politics, including communist media and propaganda. She has also raised three children, served as a public school substitute teacher, and homeschooled for several years as well. She has a B.A. in journalism and international relations from the University of Southern California and a Master’s degree in Russian and Soviet history, also from USC. Follow Stella on Twitter.

Did The New York Times Admit Joe Biden Is Corrupt So Democrats Can Get Rid of Him?


REPORTED BY: JOY PULLMANN | MARCH 23, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/did-the-new-york-times-admit-joe-biden-is-corrupt-so-democrats-can-get-rid-of-him-2657022515.html/

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris wearing facemasks

It is painfully obvious, as was predictable, that Joe Biden’s presidency is a dumpster fire. As demonstrated by the party’s destructive callousness towards children, the elderly, and the poor during their Covid lockdown frenzy, Democrats care about none of these real-world results of their policies. But they do care about polling, and Joe Biden’s is abysmal.

According to even heavily politicized polls, Biden is at least performing as badly as Donald Trump. Biden is between the third- and fifth-most ratings-underwater president ever in American history at this point in his first term.

Biden of course also has the advantage of a wildly favorable press and social media monopoly while Trump had the strong headwind of a wildly negative one. That factor obscured for a great many of American voters actions that easily demonstrated long before his election that Biden was unfit for the presidency.

Now that he’s president, however, and very publicly bungling essentially every major issue all the way up to U.S. national security, Biden’s weakness and incompetence have been impossible for the corrupt media to entirely cover up. Biden’s appalling withdrawal from Afghanistan may have been the first major blow to public confidence in his governing ability, and it’s been followed by blow after blow: the repercussions of ending U.S. energy independence, historic inflation caused by massive government spending, aggression by America’s foreign foes, a tacitly open border with human trafficking of historic proportions, not to mention fueling America’s legalized mass killings of unborn infants and forcing schools to inflict gender dysphoria on the children in their care.

So yes, the polls look bad. That’s why Democrat officials suddenly switched away from their Covid mania, lifting mask mandates in blue states, ending the daily falsified “body counts” on TVs and newspapers, and jumping immediately into European war hysteria. But that’s not been enough to turn those polls around. Historic indicators presently suggest a “red wave” in the upcoming midterms.

That brings us to The New York Times’s recent limited hangout“: its highly suspicious, very late acknowledgment that, hey, that laptop containing evidence that Joe Biden is just as corrupt as his son Hunter Biden told Russian prostitutes — that laptop is real, and so is its data. Yes, the United States’s top foreign adversaries likely have blackmail material on the U.S. president, and likely paid him some very big bribes.

Oh, and yes Twitter and Facebook did use their global communications monopolies to rig the election for Joe Biden by hiding this information (and who knows what else).

Why would The New York Times do this — and Facebook and Twitter not ban this information release just like they did before? Well, one explanation is hierarchy reinforcement. As I wrote Monday, like forcing their “minions” to wear face masks, the ridiculously belated laptop confirmation also equals the ruling class “flexing their power to say things they won’t allow their political opponents to say.”

There’s another explanation, though. It’s that Joe Biden is no longer useful to the ruling class. After being used to win an election, he’s now making it impossible for them to credibly foist on Americans the idea that his party could win another one with him on their masthead. The donkey is showing through the lion skin, and so they need a new donkey.

So while it seems utterly legitimate to insist on accountability such as appointing a special counsel to investigate the Biden family’s apparent corruption, that also could relieve the Democrat Party of their greatest liability. They’d probably deeply appreciate that, in fact. Biden got the ruling class what they wanted, and they don’t need him any more. Getting rid of him now would in fact be highly convenient for maintaining their power.

There’s only one problem with that. Kamala isn’t at all going well for them either.

Enjoy that bed you made for yourselves, Democrats. I hope it’s at least as uncomfortable as that bed you’ve made for all the Americans whose long-term outlook is more suffering, thanks to Democrats’ criminal prioritization of power for themselves above all else.


Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of six children. Sign up here to get early access to her next ebook, “101 Strategies For Living Well Amid Inflation.” Her bestselling ebook is “Classic Books for Young Children.” Mrs. Pullmann identifies as native American and gender natural. She is also the author of “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books. In 2013-14 she won a Robert Novak journalism fellowship for in-depth reporting on Common Core national education mandates. Joy is a grateful graduate of the Hillsdale College honors and journalism programs.

8 Joe Biden Scandals Inside Hunter Biden’s MacBook That Corporate Media Just Admitted Is Legit


Reported BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND MARCH 22, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/22/8-joe-biden-scandals-inside-hunter-bidens-macbook-that-corporate-media-just-admitted-is-legit/

Biden speaking to reporters

Last week, The New York Times quietly acknowledged that the emails recovered from the MacBook Hunter Biden abandoned at a Delaware computer store were authentic. The admission came nearly a year-and-a-half late, after the corrupt media — legacy and social — buried the scandal the New York Post broke just weeks before the November election.

Merely admitting the laptop is legitimate is not enough. Rather, by concurring in the authenticity of the laptop and the emails, the supposed standard-bearers of journalism have also implicitly acknowledged the validity of the scandals spawn by the porn-filled MacBook. And notwithstanding the salacious source of the documentary evidence of the scandals, the scandals are not about Hunter Biden: They are about now-President Biden.

Here are the eight Joe Biden scandals deserving further coverage.

1. Pay-to-Play in Ukraine

The most obvious scandal bared by the emails and text messages contained on Hunter’s laptop concerns the influence profiteering Joe Biden apparently participated in during his eight years as Barack Obama’s vice president, with Ukraine featuring heavily in the pay-to-play scheme.

The New York Times, in its likely “get ahead of the story,” coverage from last week, touched on the Ukrainian angle by noting Hunter’s connection to Burisma and then quoting emails recovered from the laptop indicating the younger Biden leveraged his dad’s position — then as vice president. But the Times’ surface coverage of the Burisma scandal doesn’t nearly suffice.

Surface it was: The Times made no mention of Hunter’s appointment to Burisma Holdings Board of Directors at a reported salary of $50,000 per month during his dad’s time as vice president. Hunter Biden had no experience in energy. So, a deep-dive on the entire Biden-Burisma connection is a first step.

2. China Gets in the Game

Ukraine is but a patch on the influence-peddling undertaken by Hunter on behalf of “the big guy,” as the younger Biden referred to his dad. China also played a large role in the family enterprise, as demonstrated by, again, passing coverage in November 2021. Then, the Times reported, in brief, that Hunter Biden’s joint global equity firm, the Bohai Harvest Equity Investment Fund, had helped coordinate the purchase by a Chinese mining company of the world’s largest cobalt source in the Congo.

That deal gave China control over a huge chunk of the world’s known cobalt supplies — an ingredient necessary to make electric car batteries. And the role of Hunter Biden’s company, Bohai, in the transaction again connects directly to Joe Biden, as Hunter reportedly launched that new joint enterprise with Chinese business partners less than two weeks after he traveled to China on Air Force Two with his then-vice president father.

In exploring this scandal, the press needs to push beyond the emails recovered from Hunter’s abandoned laptop, and do what Tucker Carlson did when the pay-to-play scandal first surfaced: talk to Hunter’s former business partner Tony Bobulinski. Bobulinski provides further proof that this scandal reaches the top of the Biden family.

3. Moscow, Kazakhstan, and More

While Ukraine and China likely hold the most significant revelations, once those threads are pulled, investigators should move on to Moscow, which according to a Senate report, holds another possible scandal. That report documents that Hunter also received a combined $3.5 million from the wife of the former Moscow mayor, a Kazakhstan investor, and several other individuals. After all, there is no reason to think that a person willing to let his son sell access to the vice president of the United States would close the money train to just a few countries.

4. Ukraine’s Firing of the Prosecutor Investigating Burisma

With the elite media now deigning coverage of Hunter’s laptop appropriate, the public knows the Burisma scandal was real and threatened to be spectacularly devastating to the elder Biden. That makes questions concerning then-Vice President Joe Biden’s demands that Ukraine fire the state prosecutor who was reportedly investigating Burisma ripe to revisit.

That prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was fired, according to statements Joe Biden made during a 2018 event, after Biden threatened to withhold a billion-dollar loan guarantee if the Ukrainian government refused to ax Shokin. A video of the event captured Biden recounting the event:

I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours.’ If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a b-tch. He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.

While the Obama administration attempted to spin Biden’s push for the firing of Shokin, by claiming the international community had demanded Ukraine terminate the state prosecutor, a State Department official contradicted that claim during congressional testimony. George Kent, who worked on issues related to Ukraine at the State Department, reportedly told lawmakers it was the Obama administration that “spearheaded the efforts to have Shokin removed from his position as the top federal prosecutor in Ukraine.”

Biden needs to answer questions anew over his threats to withhold money from Ukraine unless the country removed the state prosecutor responsible for investigating Burisma. Democrats have impeached a president for less.

5. Obama-Biden Administration Ignoring Conflicts of Interest

Biden also needs to answer questions about his decision to ignore the clear conflicts of interest involved with him negotiating with the same countries Hunter was shaking down. Of course, since “the big guy” was in on the scam, bowing out over conflicts of interest is the lesser of the evils, but it is still worth investigating to assess how Biden handled the concerns raised by the Obama administration’s State Department.

Here, the testimony of the State Department official charged with issues related to Ukraine again proves significant. Kent told lawmakers that after learning Hunter sat on the board of Burisma, he raised concerns with the vice president’s office about the relationship.

“I raised my concerns that I had heard that Hunter Biden was on the board of a company owned by somebody that the U.S. Government had spent money trying to get tens of millions of dollars back and that could create the perception of a conflict of interest,” Kent testified before House members in October of 2019. “The message that I recall hearing back was that the vice president’s son Beau was dying of cancer and that there was no further bandwidth to deal with family-related issues at that time … That was the end of that conversation.”

The question for now-President Biden, then, is whether anyone in his office raised concerns about the clear conflicts-of-interest with him personally, and if so, why did Biden ignore the problem?  

6. The Intelligence Community’s Briefing of Biden

Another scandal reaching President Biden concerns his interactions with the intelligence community after the FBI, and presumably the CIA and other such agencies, learned in December of 2019, that Hunter Biden believed Russians had stolen Hunter’s laptop, rendering the Bidens susceptible to blackmail.

Here, it is important to understand that there are two separate Hunter Biden laptops at issue. The most-discussed laptop was actually the second laptop. That laptop was the one Hunter had abandoned at the Delaware repair shop. Then, after the repair shop owner discovered concerning material on the MacBook, the store owner handed it to the FBI in December of 2019. The owner of the repair shop, however, had first made a copy of the hard drive, which resulted in The New York Post’s coverage in October 2020.

But there was another laptop — one Hunter believed Russians had stolen from him when he was binging on drugs with prostitutes in the summer of 2018 in Las Vegas. While the public did not learn about the existence of this earlier laptop until August of 2021, the FBI knew about it as early as December 2019, when they took possession of the second laptop Hunter had left at the repair store.

Among other material contained on the second laptop was a video of Biden recounting the circumstances of his first laptop disappearing with some Russians. Significantly, on that video Hunter Biden said his first laptop contained a ton of material leaving him susceptible to blackmail, since his father was “running for president” and Hunter talked “about it all the time.”

It is inconceivable that the FBI and the intelligence communities did not brief Biden on this discovery and the risk of blackmail, given that former FBI Director James Comey briefed Trump on the fake Steele dossier. On second thought, that is the initial question reporters should ask the president: “Did the FBI brief you, Mr. President, on the fact that Hunter believed Russians had stolen a laptop containing compromising information?”

From there, an inquiring press should investigate to ensure that Joe Biden did not direct the intelligence community to bury this national security risk to protect himself or his son.

7. Possible Collusion to Interfere in the 2020 Election

An honest press should also investigate whether now-President Biden or anyone connected to his then-presidential campaign pressured reporters, media outlets, or companies such as Twitter and Facebook to censor the Hunter Biden story. And what about the “fifty former intelligence officials” who publicly declared the laptop resembled a Russian disinformation campaign—something clearly untrue? Did Biden or his campaign coordinate with those individuals, several of whom had endorsed the Democratic candidate, in the release of the letter?

Given that polls show that 17 percent of Joe Biden voters would not have voted for him in 2020, if they had known about the Biden family scandals, the collective burying of the laptop scandal represents the most significant interference in elections ever seen in our country. So, “Did Biden or his campaign have anything to do with the decision to kill the New York Post’s reporting on Hunter’s MacBook?” And “What about the ‘fifty former intelligence officials?’”

From there the follow-ups flow quickly: “Who was involved in the push to silence the story and who were the executives or ‘journalists’ who bowed to the demands?” “Who coordinated with the intelligence officials?” “Were any threats or promises made?” “What were they?” “What did Joe Biden know?” “What about other Democrats and the Democratic National Committee?”

8. Joe Biden Is a ‘Lying Dog-Faced Pony Soldier’

The final Joe Biden scandal the press should push President Biden to answer concerns his lies to the American public. While there are too many to count, two merit further questioning.

First, the media should demand Biden answer for lying to the country when he seethed, “I have never discussed, with my son or my brother or with anyone else, anything having to do with their businesses. Period.” The evidence overwhelmingly shows that Biden not only knew of the family business deals but was part of them.

The second bold-faced fabrication from Biden came during his pre-election debate with Trump, when Trump raised “the laptop from hell.” When Trump asked Biden if he was saying the “laptop is now another Russia, Russia, Russia hoax?” the then-Democratic candidate replied, “That’s exactly what [I] was told.”

Unlikely. Biden also countered with this doozy, which again raises the question of whether Biden had a role in the intelligence officials’ statement:

There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what he’s accusing me of is a Russian plant. They have said that this has all the … five former heads of the CIA, both parties, say what he’s saying is a bunch of garbage. Nobody believes it except him and his good friend, Rudy Giuliani.

We can now add The New York Times to Giuliani. It remains to be seen, though, whether the Old Grey Lady and the other legacy outlets will report on the further scandals the laptop revealed—the ones that reach the president of the United States.


Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

The New York Times Doesn’t Care If You Know That Big Tech Helped Rig Joe Biden’s Election


REPORTED BY: JOY PULLMANN | MARCH 21, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/21/the-new-york-times-doesnt-care-if-you-know-that-big-tech-helped-rig-joe-bidens-election/

Joe biden and hunter biden

On March 17, 2022, The New York Times stated it had verified the authenticity of a laptop and its data as belonging to the president’s son, Hunter Biden. This was the same laptop holding information that Twitter, Facebook, and other corporate media immediately suppressed when The New York Post, a right-leaning competitor of The New York Times, reported on it three weeks before the 2020 presidential election.

If they had known about one of the Biden family scandals, such as the Hunter Biden laptop information, 17 percent of Joe Biden’s voters wouldn’t have voted for him, found a 2020 post-election poll. This means big tech’s suppression of this story likely made enough difference to tip Joe Biden into his low-margin win in the Electoral College.

Back in October 2020, Twitter and Facebook immediately responded to The New York Post’s publication of information from Hunter Biden’s laptop by effectively banning it from their platforms that effectively monopolize public discussion. Twitter punished the Post for reporting the repeatedly authenticated laptop information by suspending its account for two weeks.

“What this means is that, in the crucial days leading up to the 2020 presidential election, most of the corporate media spread an absolute lie about The New York Post’s reporting in order to mislead and manipulate the American electorate,” commented independent investigative reporter Glenn Greenwald.

Major National Security Implications

That laptop provides evidence Joe Biden was involved in Hunter Biden’s pay-for-play schemes with foreign oligarchs, an obvious national security risk. Some of these corrupt deals involved Ukraine, a notoriously corrupt country that is currently petitioning the Biden administration to engage militarily with Russia on their behalf.

Russia also has blackmail material on Hunter Biden, according to videos from his laptop, and the FBI knew about this as early as 2019, according to Federalist reporting: “This explosive revelation establishes that either Joe Biden lied to the American public, or the intelligence community lied to him,” wrote Federalist Senior Contributor Margot Cleveland in 2021.

Other Hunter Biden business deals involved China, the United States’ top security threat. Texts between business partners indicate Joe Biden was financially involved in Hunter Biden’s China deals, contrary to Joe Biden’s public claims.

China also has blackmail material on Hunter Biden and possibly on Joe Biden. All of this means major conflicts of interest for the president’s foreign policy at a time of significant global instability. It also was deliberately hidden from the voting public by collusion between big tech companies and the Democrat Party.

Hiding Democrats’ Dangerous Scandals

The same presidential administration that benefitted from Big Tech hiding damning true information is openly colluding with Big Tech to maintain and expand these information operations. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters in July 2021, “We’re flagging posts for Facebook that spread disinformation.” Soon after, Psaki confirmed, “We’re in regular touch with social media platforms…about areas where we have concern.” You might call it a public-private partnership.

Democrats have demanded that the Biden administration create a task force to suppress “misinformation” and “disinformation.” What did corporate media and big tech call the laptop information they suppressed in 2020, only for The New York Times to confirm in 2022? That’s right: Disinformation.” In fact, as Greenwald notes, intelligence operatives immediately enacted a real disinformation campaign against the New York Post reporting in 2020, pushing the false narrative that the Hunter Biden laptop was “disinformation.”

That’s called projection, and you should assume that’s one of the things going on every time the media runs some wild news cycle—such as accusing the Republican president of treasonous collusion with Russia when it’s actually the Democrat presidential candidate who did that.

Reinforcing the Power Hierarchy

This New York Times article, after all the lies and manipulations about the Hunter Biden laptop, is also a chilling public affirmation that the ruling class believes Americans are helpless to choose their own government. They’re even bold enough to confirm their power openly.

Just like requiring only the hired help and those under the thumb of government agencies to wear masks while their masters wine and dine mask-free, The New York Times openly revealing that corporate media including itself, Twitter, and Facebook lied and got away with it is a hierarchy flex. It’s a display of their power. They are saying, “We can lie to Americans and get away with it.”

They’re also flexing their power to say things they won’t allow their political opponents to say. Again, Covid is another clear example, as when Trump advisors such as Scott Atlas faced vicious media smears for pointing out facts that The New York Times finally acknowledged months later, such as that kids don’t need to wear masks and it’s perfectly safe for them to go to school. In the intervening time, children needlessly suffered, but The New York Times doesn’t care. They owned the rubes, and that matters more to them than truth or children’s suffering.

People this corrupt don’t deserve to have media platforms, control of the presidency, or any power of any kind. At the very least, those who use their power this cynically should be respected by absolutely no one.

Big Tech Is a Threat to Democracy

Big Tech is also clearly manipulating public discourse for highly partisan ends. Social media has become what the “big three” cable news networks were decades ago: falsely “nonpartisan” manipulators of elections. Like ABC, CBS, and NBC, Twitter and Facebook’s ability to control culture and politics through brain drips feeding lies into millions of Americans’ minds needs to end, yesterday. This is not a pissing contest. It’s about our continued existence as a nation.

Greenwald notes the corporate press and big tech “all ratified and spread a coordinated disinformation campaign in order to elect Joe Biden and defeat Donald Trump.” That’s not a democracy, no matter how many slogans about that word propaganda outlets put out. It’s tyranny.

When elections are an elaborate charade and their outcomes are openly manipulated by giant special interests, we don’t have self-government, self-determination, democracy, constitutional government, representation, or any of the above. For those of us who love these things because we believe they are our God-given and precious rights and responsibilities, this is a dark reality to behold.

One might call this world the left wants to live in Chinese communism with American characteristics. Well, I don’t want to live in that world, and neither do at least 74 million other Americans. We’re not going to keep being abused by our own government quietly. And we’re not going to believe these liars, no matter what they say.

The top names on everyone’s mind when they hear the word “disinformation” ought to be The New York Times, Twitter, Facebook, The Atlantic, and all their corrupt, self-congratulating Aspen Institute friends. That’s something we can all work to help our neighbors see.


Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of six children. Sign up here to get early access to her next ebook, “101 Strategies For Living Well Amid Inflation.” Her bestselling ebook is “Classic Books for Young Children.” Mrs. Pullmann identifies as native American and gender natural. She is also the author of “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books. In 2013-14 she won a Robert Novak journalism fellowship for in-depth reporting on Common Core national education mandates. Joy is a grateful graduate of the Hillsdale College honors and journalism programs.

The Press Has Lied To Drag The United States Into War Before. Don’t Think They Won’t Again


REPORTED BY: ELLE REYNOLDS | MARCH 17, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/17/the-press-has-lied-to-drag-the-united-states-into-war-before-dont-think-they-wont-again/

wreckage of the Maine in Havana

The night of Feb. 15, 1898, the U.S. battleship Maine sat at anchor in Havana, Cuba. A few minutes after 9 p.m., the nightly ritual of “Taps” from Fifer C. H. Newton’s bugle descended over the ship. Some half an hour later, the forward end of the ship rose suddenly above the water.

“Along the pier, passersby could hear a rumbling explosion,” detailed author Tom Miller. “Within seconds, another eruption — this one deafening and massive — splintered the bow, sending anything that wasn’t battened down, and most that was, flying more than 200 feet into the air.”

The explosion, which killed more than 250 men on board, was quickly memorialized with cries of “Remember the Maine!” Without directly accusing Spain, which controlled Cuba at the time, a U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry decided a month later that the explosion was from a mine. (A U.S. Navy investigation decades later found it was likely an accidental coal bunker fire.)

Shortly afterward, the United States declared war on Spain, starting the Spanish-American War. One of the biggest warmongering forces in America, capitalizing on the Maine‘s explosion, was the press — a position American media pundits continue to hold as they work overtime to drag Americans into a war with Russia over Ukraine.

When you see talking heads uncritically parroting propagandist stories about Ukraine that turn out to be false, from the “Ghost of Kyiv” to that Snake Island story to old photos taken years ago, you should be asking why the corporate media is so willing to spread such fake news (while it censors conservatives for factual critiques of disproven Covid narratives, no less). It wouldn’t be the first time the press lied to pull Americans into war.

How Newspapermen Helped Start a War in Cuba

It was the so-called golden age of newspapers, after the influence of the Industrial Revolution gave rise to the “penny press” — newspapers you could buy at the street corner without a subscription. Competing magnates like William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer fought for readers, and they did so by trying to produce the most sensational news possible.

As the story goes, in the year before the Maine exploded, Hearst had commissioned reporter Frederic Remington to go to Cuba, where Cuban revolutionaries were skirmishing with their Spanish colonizers. When Remington sent Hearst a wire to explain he was leaving Cuba because there was no war to cover, Hearst reportedly replied, “You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war.”

After the sinking of the Maine, headlines like “Spanish Treachery!” and “Destruction of the War Ship Maine Was the Work of an Enemy!” and “Invasion!” and “Who Destroyed the Maine? $50,000 Reward” splashed across front pages. The United States went to war in April, two months after the Maine perished.

The media’s eagerness to gin up a war mirrored the push for involvement from other voices in politics and culture. Some Americans had sympathy for Spanish-owned Cuba as fellow colonial revolutionaries, while others wanted to see U.S. influence and territory expand internationally.

Half a century prior, when the phrase “manifest destiny” was being coined, the United States had gone to war with Mexico over Texas but also ended the war with acquisitions of what is now California, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. By 1898, the United States had purchased Alaska from Russia and claimed several Pacific islands.

Many Americans saw a similar opportunity for territorial expansion in a fight with Spain over Cuba. Sure enough, the United States exited the Spanish-American War with new acquisitions from Guam to the Philippines to Puerto Rico.

While the warmongers weren’t limited to the press, they were certainly concentrated there. The State Department Office of the Historian writes: “Hearst and Pulitzer devoted more and more attention to the Cuban struggle for independence, at times accentuating the harshness of Spanish rule or the nobility of the revolutionaries, and occasionally printing rousing stories that proved to be false.” Sound familiar?

A Century of Dishonesty

“Remember the Maine!” may have been at the height of the yellow journalism era, but it was certainly not the last instance of dishonest reporting in favor of sensational warmongering. During the Spanish Civil War, which saw Nationalist revolutionaries clash with Republicans in the years directly preceding World War II, some Western outlets were criticized for covering the conflict sensationally. The New York Times devoted far more manpower to the war than papers at the time traditionally did, with “highly partisan” perspectives.

George Orwell, who fought alongside Republican forces, wrote in his memoir “Homage to Catalonia” that “for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie.”

“I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that never happened,” he recalled. “I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines.’”

Newspaper propagandists’ willingness to cover wars in self-interested ways didn’t always run in the same direction, either. Orwell’s contemporary and fellow writer Ernest Hemingway had similar criticism for propagandist writers who downplayed the carnage of World War I, insisting it was “the most colossal, murderous, mismanaged butchery that has ever taken place on earth. Any writer who said otherwise lied, So the writers either wrote propaganda, shut up, or fought.”

Later in the 20th century, The New York Times’ Berlin bureau chief Guido Enderis was providing friendly coverage of Hitler’s Germany, according to writer Ashley Rindsberg’s book “The Gray Lady Winked.” Meanwhile, the paper’s Moscow correspondent Walter Duranty, Rindsberg noted, was downplaying Joseph Stalin’s role in the 1932-33 famine in Ukraine because “at the time, The New York Times was actively pushing for American recognition of the Soviet Union.” President Franklin Roosevelt obliged, recognizing the USSR in 1933.

A more recent example is that of The New York Times and other corporate media outlets reporting baseless stories about the existence of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq to gin up support for President George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq in 2003. A year afterward, the Times editors admitted their lopsided reporting on the matter in a lengthy editorial piece.

“We have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been,” they wrote. “In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged.”

“Administration officials now acknowledge that they sometimes fell for misinformation from these [Iraqi] exile sources. So did many news organizations — in particular, this one,” the editors continued. With the rapid dissemination of sensational photos, videos, and information via social media today, there’s no indication the corporate press is any less immune to disinformation when it fits their narrative.

When you see corporate outlets rushing us into war in Europe with sensational stories and flat-out dishonest polling, think twice. The corrupt media has lied to drag Americans into war before, and none of their recent lies on other issues should incline you to think they won’t do it again.


Elle Reynolds is an assistant editor at The Federalist, and received her B.A. in government from Patrick Henry College with a minor in journalism. You can follow her work on Twitter at @_etreynolds.

DirecTV’s Attempt to Cancel Right-Leaning News Network OAN Provokes Lawsuit


REPORTED BY: TRISTAN JUSTICE | MARCH 16, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/16/directvs-attempt-to-cancel-right-leaning-news-network-oan-provokes-lawsuit/

DirecTV

DirecTV announced in January the digital satellite service would no longer carry One America News Network (OAN), owned by Herring Networks. The decision prompted a lawsuit by OAN in response Tuesday, arguing that DirecTV’s refusal to carry OAN could shut it down entirely.

“We informed Herring Networks that, following a routine internal review, we do not plan to enter into a new contract when our current agreement expires,” the company told USA Today two months ago, without expanding on its definition of an “internal review.”

The decision to drop the channel by OAN’s largest distributor is expected to take OAN off DirecTV airwaves by the end of April and threatens the outlet’s ability to operate in a crowded media environment. It’s essentially canceling the network from cable. Six Republican attorneys general last week issued a letter asking DirecTV to reverse its decision to cancel OAN.

The move also signals a sharp escalation of the weaponizing private market power to silence political dissidents. Silicon Valley has already engaged in rampant censorship, complete with a routine purge of those who don’t propagate the party lines.

Former President Donald Trump, who was banned from Twitter and Facebook at the end of his presidency while the Kremlin remains active on both, condemned the corporate censorship on Monday after calling for a boycott of DirectTV last month if the company owned by AT&T follows through on its decision.

“Time Warner, the owner of Fake News CNN, has just announced that they will be terminating a very popular and wonderful news network (OAN),” Trump said in a statement. “Between heavily indebted Time Warner, and Radical Left comcast, which runs Xfinity, there is a virtual monopoly on news, thereby making what you hear from the LameStream Media largely FAKE, hence the name FAKE NEWS!”

Trump may have confused Time Warner and DirecTV. While DirecTV made its plans clear, no reporting as of this writing suggests Time Warner is planning to follow suit. Neither Time Warner nor representatives for OAN responded to The Federalist’s inquiries.

Corporate collusion to strip a network off the airwaves, beginning with DirecTV’s crusade against OAN, would set a dangerous precedent. The left’s strategy to ban its way to a monopoly on discourse includes opposition silencing and self-righteous fact-checking. Never mind strict standards of censoring disinformation would have kicked every leftist news network off air years ago from endless amplification of the Russian collusion hoax alone.

Today it’s OAN. Tomorrow it could be Newsmax, and eventually Fox News, a more likely predicament if the network didn’t make satellite distributors so much money.

But what’s behind DirecTV’s decision to target OAN? As of now, its rival conservative networks remain untouched.

The move ostensibly comes from sealed findings in the corporate powerhouse’s “internal review” of its relationship with OAN. A spokesperson told NPR in January rising programming costs was driving the decision. The review is likely a smokescreen for executives dissatisfied with the network’s narratives, especially its reporting on the 2020 election.

Three days after Election Day in 2020, AT&T, the majority owner of DirecTV, announced that William Kennard, an alum of both the Clinton and Obama administrations, would chair AT&T’s board of directors. Kennard is also listed as an executive board member of the global equity firm Staple Street Capital. In 2018, Staple Street Capital acquired Dominion Voting Systems, the electoral tabulation company that came under fire after the 2020 election.

Fox News and Newsmax retracted their networks’ reporting on Dominion Voting Systems in the aftermath of the 2020 contest. OAN has not.

Is DirecTV’s move to cancel OAN a business decision for the satellite provider? Or is it a political decision? Regardless, the cancellation of entire news networks by satellite providers is a new level of private censorship against non-leftist views.


Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Don’t Look Down

A.F. BRANCO on January 19, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-dont-look-down/

The media has overhyped the Omicron virus that has turned out to be much less lethal than expected.

Omicron Danger
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.

9 Times Sen. Ron Johnson Triggered the Left — And Turned Out to Be Right


Reported BY: KYLEE ZEMPEL | JANUARY 14, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/14/9-times-sen-ron-johnson-triggered-the-left-and-turned-out-to-be-right/

Ron Johnson in the Senate

Sen. Ron Johnson is not planning his Senate retirement anytime soon. The Wisconsin lawmaker is running for reelection, he announced this week, at which the corrupt media predictably came out, guns blazing.

CNN’s Chris Cillizza, for instance, announced that the “Senate’s leading conspiracy theorist is running for another term,” and The Nation ran an article calling him an “off-the-deep-end” senator.

But while attention-seeking pundits attack Johnson for opinions that don’t conform to the left-wing narrative (opinions held among many Americans outside the Beltway, by the way), his opinions are often proved to be exactly right. There’s quite a long list of “Ron John” statements and actions that, after sending the media into a tizzy and Big Tech giants into a censorship spree, have held up quite well over time. Here are some of them.

Jan. 6

During a February 2021 hearing to examine the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, Johnson condemned the violence then went on to read an eyewitness account of the day’s events. Originally published in The Federalist, it detailed the presence of provocateurs in the crowd and confusion among many of the pro-police “MAGA” protesters who didn’t attend the rally to perpetrate violence.

The media lost it, ignoring his condemnation of the violence to smear Johnson as a conspiratorial nutjob. CNNNew York Daily NewsDaily BeastThe Washington Post, the Boston Globe, and even the Washington Examiner ran articles attacking him as “deranged.”

Yet the account Johnson read was entered into the record without objection from lawmakers of either party. And since then, instead of learning more information about Jan. 6 that refutes eyewitness accounts of “provocateurs,” Americans have been treated to political playacting (including literal musical theater) from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s sham commission, more hyperventilating from the media, and repeated stonewalling from the FBI on questions about potential provocateurs caught on video, such as Ray Epps.

Johnson was also ahead of the game on the Capitol Police component of Jan. 6, including pushing to correct the media and Capitol Police’s lies about what happened to the late Officer Brian Sicknick.

COVID Shots

Johnson has been a consistent voice for those who don’t feel they have one on Covid shots and the mandates that accompany them. He’s given Americans a forum to discuss their firsthand adverse shot reactions, for which he’s been smeared in the corrupt media as “fundamentally dangerous” and as a peddler of “misinformation.”

In November 2021, YouTube suspended Johnson’s channel for the fifth time for seven days for a video of a panel on vaccine-related injuries, labeling it “Covid misinformation.” Yet we know adverse reactions do occur.

In April 2021, when Johnson questioned forcing every American to get vaccinated and slammed the idea of pushing vaccine mandates on citizens, Anthony Fauci came after him on MSNBC — which other outlets amplified, calling the senator an “idiot anti-vaxxer.”

Fast-forward to 2022, and Johnson has been vindicated: Even with a federal vaccine mandate in place, case numbers are up higher than ever; and even the triple-vaccinated are still contracting and spreading the virus.

Early COVID Treatment

Big Tech has twice censored the sitting U.S. senator by nuking videos discussing early Covid treatments. In February 2021, YouTube removed videos of sworn testimony from Dr. Pierre Kory about early treatments. Then in June, YouTube suspended Johnson’s account for one week for remarks he made about early Covid treatments in Milwaukee.

Shutting down scientific inquiry and debate is inherently anti-science, however, as scientists who dissent from some of the questionable Covid conventional wisdom have pointed out.

“For science to work, you have to have an open exchange of ideas,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, has said of this type of censorship. “If you’re going to make an argument that something is misinformation, you should provide an actual argument. You can’t just take it down and say, ‘Oh, it’s misinformation’ without actually giving a reason. And saying, ‘Look it disagrees with the CDC’ is not enough of a reason. Let’s hear the argument, let’s see the evidence that YouTube used to decide it was misinformation. Let’s have a debate. Science works best when we have an open debate.”

[LISTEN: Sen. Ron Johnson Has Some Questions For The ‘Covid Gods’]

‘Rona Vaccines for Kids

In October 2021, Wisconsin radio host Dan O’Donnell’s YouTube account was suspended after he posted an interview with the senator about opposing vaccine mandates for kids.

We didn’t have to wait for ground-breaking scientific discovery on this one; we’ve known since the beginning of the pandemic that children are at almost zero risk of dying from coronavirus, and now we know that Covid shots don’t prevent people from contracting nor spreading the virus. Johnson was scientifically spot-on to oppose vaxx mandates for children, given children’s near-zero risk from a bout with Covid versus the potential risks of shot complications.

Hunter Biden

Corporate media ginned up all types of attacks when Johnson, as chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, dug into the Biden family corruption linked to Hunter Biden.

The New York Times described it using the “Russian disinformation” moniker. Time Magazine smeared him as the Senate’s “one-man Biden prosecutor.” And the Washington Post described Johnson’s investigation as a nakedly partisan ploy to get Donald Trump re-elected.

This was all a distraction from the fact that Johnson and Sen. Chuck Grassley successfully revealed millions of dollars in questionable financial transactions between Hunter Biden and his associates and foreign individuals, including the wife of the former mayor of Moscow and people with ties to the Chinese Communist Party.

Biden associate Tony Bobulinski confirmed aspects of the report after its release.

Climate Change

Johnson triggered the media in July when he mouthed to a Republican group that climate change is “bullsh-t.” The corporate media went berserk, with CNN and Chris Cuomo calling Johnson a climate change “denier.”

The senator has reinforced repeatedly that he doesn’t deny that the climate is changing, but rather that he isn’t an “alarmist” and doesn’t buy Democrats’ apocalyptic predictions.

Big surprise, plenty of data backs this up. The American Enterprise Institute has documented 50 years of failed doomsday predictions by so-called “experts” in the corrupt media and Democrat Party. For instance, ABC claimed in 2008 that Manhattan would be underwater by 2015. In 2011, The Washington Post claimed that cherry blossoms would bloom in winter.

Climate genius Al Gore also predicted in 2008 that five years later the North Pole would be free of ice. And in 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., predicted that Miami would be underwater in a few years. Yet in 2022, Miami is still very much above ground.

Mouthwash

Last month, Johnson noted a number of simple things Americans can do to keep themselves heathy, such as taking Vitamin D, Vitamin C, and zinc, and gargling mouthwash to reduce viral load if they get COVID.

He was swiftly berated in print and on-air by the likes of MSNBC’s Rachel MaddowHuffPostThe Washington Post, and Rolling StoneForbes said Johnson’s “Advice Exemplifies The Rising Tide Of Anti-Science,” and MSNBC’s Joy Reid called him a “fool” and a “public health menace.”

Johnson’s mouthwash claim about viral load is supported by scientific research, however, such as this study. Additionally, Dr. Bruce Davidson, a faculty member of the Georgetown Department of Otolaryngology, conducted a study on the use of antiseptic mouthwash to control coronavirus, published in the American Journal of Medicine, and found that mouthwash can help protect people from Covid-19 pneumonia.

Even FackCheck.org had to admit, “Johnson is right that mouthwashes ‘may’ reduce the virus’ ability to replicate in people.”

Natural Immunity

On July 14, Johnson claimed natural immunity is “as strong if not stronger than vaccinated immunity,” against which WaPo deployed its fake fact-checkers.

“Fact-checker” Salvador Rizzo gave it “four Pinocchios” (an analysis that Johnson’s team eviscerated), and WaPo’s bogus fact-checker-in-chief Glenn Kessler called it one of the “Biggest Pinocchios of 2021.”

Johnson’s claims, however, come straight out of a pair of studies that confirmed natural immunity is stronger than COVID vaccine-acquired immunity. The pre-print Israeli study found that people with natural immunity could be 13 times less likely to contract the virus than those who were solely vaccinated, contradicting CDC findings.

Martin Kulldorff, an epidemiologist and biostatistician who was a professor at Harvard Medical School for a decade, dissected and compared the CDC study and the Israeli pre-print and explained why the latter is more reliable.

Russiagate

Johnson’s years-long involvement in getting to the bottom of the Russia hoax and the Ukraine phone call impeachment is enough to fill a book (see hereherehereherehere, and here), but suffice it to say that, true to form, the media were relentless, and the right was pretty much right about everything. In fact, the truth about that story is likely far worse than most have heard. Here’s hoping Johnson continues to pursue that truth using the powers of a U.S. senator.


Kylee Zempel is an assistant editor at The Federalist. She previously worked as the copy editor for the Washington Examiner magazine and as an editor and producer at National Geographic. She holds a B.S. in Communication Arts/Speech and an A.S. in Criminal Justice and writes on topics including feminism and gender issues, religious liberty, and criminal justice. Follow her on Twitter @kyleezempel.

Corporate Media’s Jan. 6 Anniversary Coverage Is All About Silencing Republicans


Reported BY: JOHN DANIEL DAVIDSON | JANUARY 04, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/04/corporate-medias-jan-6-anniversary-coverage-is-all-about-silencing-republicans/

Alengthy New York Times editorial over the weekend has set the stage for this week’s Jan. 6 anniversary coverage. “Every Day Is Jan. 6 Now,” declare the Times editors, warning that Republican lawmakers in 41 states “have been trying to advance the goals of the Jan. 6 rioters — not by breaking laws but by making them.”

The argument itself, that tweaking state election law is somehow a subversion of democracy, is absurd and incredibly lazy. But it’s important to note, if only because it will serve as the baseline narrative for the entire corporate media’s Jan. 6 coverage this week. Their message — they will all have more or less the same message — is simple: all Republicans are insurrectionists, the GOP is the enemy of the people, and the only way to preserve American democracy is to ensure that only Democrats can win elections.

To make this case, the Times’ editors had to stage a kind of linguistic insurrection. Lawful, constitutional efforts by elected representatives to change state election laws amount, in the Times’ telling, to a “bloodless, legalized” insurrection that “that no police officer can arrest and that no prosecutor can try in court.”

That’s no different than saying “speech is violence.” It’s nonsensical. By definition, there’s no such thing as a “bloodless, legalized” insurrection, any more than there could be a “mostly peaceful” riot. That said, the Times editors are wrong about one thing: state laws, including state election laws, can and often are challenged in court. 

But the nonsense here serves a purpose. If the Jan. 6 riot can be conflated with perfectly valid GOP-led efforts to shore up state election rules, then perhaps those efforts can be wholly undermined, regardless of what voters in red states want. The irony is that it isn’t GOP lawmakers trying “to wrest control of electoral votes from their own people,” as the Times editors charge; it’s the Democrats and their media allies.

Consider that last year, 44 states enacted some 285 bills related to elections. In blue states, those bills tended to loosen certain election rules and requirements, especially for mail-in and absentee ballots. That makes sense given that Democrats tend to vote by mail-in ballot far more often than Republicans. Making mail-in and absentee voting easier is merely a way to boost Democratic votes in any given state. It’s simple.

By contrast, Republican-led states tended to pass laws limiting or more strictly defining the rules for mail-in and absentee voting, on the theory that absentee balloting is inherently less secure and more susceptible to fraud, especially when paired, as it often is, with practices like ballot-harvesting.

Republican lawmakers’ motivation here was to prevent a repeat of the free-for-all of the 2020 election, which saw a raft of last-minute changes to mail-in and absentee voting rules, justified on account of the pandemic. Many Republicans rightly felt that judges who overruled state legislatures and re-wrote state elections laws by fiat (as happened in Pennsylvania), undermined the integrity of the election.

By passing such reforms, Republican lawmakers were responding to actions taken by Democrats, unelected public health officials, and Democrat-friendly judges to overhaul state election rules ahead of 2020. If you wanted to be disingenuous about it, you could argue that Democrats staged a “bloodless, legalized” insurrection before the 2020 election even took place.

That’s why the Times and the rest of the corporate press want so badly to talk about Jan. 6 instead of getting into the nitty gritty of what these Republican-passed election reforms actually do. You’ll notice the media always describe these laws as “restricting voter access,” even when they do no such thing. The entire conversation is a bit of legerdemain, nothing more. That’s why you’ll never read a piece in the corporate press about how Georgia’s new election law, which President Joe Biden called “Jim Crow on steroids,” actually makes voting easier than it is in Biden’s home state of Delaware.

Remember that when you read breathless remembrances of the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol this week. Yes, the riot was bad and should have been put down with overwhelming force — just as the riots all throughout the summer and fall of 2020 should have been.

But the actions of a relatively small group of rioters that day have absolutely nothing to do with the perfectly valid efforts of GOP lawmakers to ensure that election rules are not changed at the last minute by unelected judges or public health officials. Equating the two, pretending they share a common cause and motivation, is a way to discredit the valid arguments of Republicans, smear them as “insurrectionists,” and eventually justify efforts to silence them.


John Daniel Davidson is a senior editor at The Federalist. His writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, National Review, Texas Monthly, The Guardian, First Things, the Claremont Review of Books, The New York Post, and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter, @johnddavidson.

Kyle Rittenhouse judge slams ‘vast amount’ of ‘irresponsible and sloppy journalism’ surrounding case


Reported by PHIL SHIVER | November 02, 2021

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/rittenhouse-judge-slams-irresponsible-sloppy-journalism/

The judge presiding over the highly anticipated Kyle Rittenhouse homicide trial recently criticized what he called a “vast amount” of “irresponsible and sloppy journalism” covering the events surrounding the case.

While speaking with potential jurors during the jury selection process on Monday, Kenosha County Circuit Court Judge Bruce Schroeder said that those selected for the task may need to disregard much of what they have heard in the media about the case.

“This case has become very political. It was involved in the politics of the last election year,” Schroeder said in the court session, adding, “To this day, you can go out and read things from all across the political spectrum about this case, most of which is written by people who know nothing.”

“The price we pay for having a free press is a lot of irresponsible and sloppy journalism,” he continued, adding that his charge “is not an attack on the media” but a reality check for potential jurors about the need for a fair and impartial trial.

Schroeder said that he has read some things about the case that have been “perfect,” but noted that most of the reporting has either been “sloppy” or “deliberately biased.”

“It can be frightening,” he added while urging jury candidates to abandon their presuppositions and focus solely on the evidence presented at trial. He reminded them that the right to a fair trial is an important right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

What’s the background?

The news comes only days after Schroeder ruled that the men Rittenhouse, 18, fatally shot or wounded on Aug. 25, 2020, in Kenosha, Wisconsin, can’t be referred to as “victims” by prosecutors — but can be called “rioters” and “looters.”

Rittenhouse — then 17 — allegedly took a gun to riots in the city in order to defend local businesses against looting and ransacking in the wake of a white police officer’s shooting of Jacob Blake, a black man. During the mayhem, Rittenhouse shot three men, killing two. Rittenhouse was charged with multiple felonies, including first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, attempted first-degree reckless homicide, and first-degree reckless endangering safety. If convicted, he could serve a mandatory life sentence in prison.

Rittenhouse’s defense team has insisted he was acting in self-defense, and videos of the shootings from that night appear to back up his claims. He later told reporters he doesn’t regret taking a gun to protests on the night of the shootings, saying he “would’ve died” if he hadn’t.

By Monday evening, 20 jurors had been selected, and now the trial is set to be heard.

(H/T: Townhall)

Potential Jurors In The Kyle Rittenhouse Trial Are Scared, And They Have Every Reason To Be

NOVEMBER 2, 2021 | By Eddie Scarry

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/02/potential-jurors-in-the-kyle-rittenhouse-trial-are-scared-and-they-have-every-reason-to-be/

Kenosha County, Wis., Circuit Court Judge Bruce Schroeder has a fanciful idea: That the trial he’s overseeing that includes murder charges against 18-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse can be removed from politics. He said so on Monday during jury selection. “We don’t want to fall into the trap,” he said, “that many in the media have, a large percentage of the media, and discuss this as a political trial or that there are bigger factors at stake in this trial.”

How naive. Of course this is a trial of political consequence and of course there are bigger factors at stake. The potential jurors know it, and that’s why during selection several of them expressed concern that their city or they personally might be the targets of rioting or harassment, regardless of the verdict the jury renders. All of the potential jurors are kept anonymous until after the trial is over but here’s a sample of what some of them said during selection:

—One said that no matter the verdict, “half the country will be up in arms about it.”

— Another said, “I’m more afraid of our community and the outsiders of our community that are coming in… It just brings us back to August (2020).” She also said she was “potentially” afraid of reliving riots depending on the verdict.

— A third said it was “scary” to be on a case like this one, specifically citing “riots” and wondering aloud, “Am I gonna get home safe?”

Those are legitimate concerns. We saw what happened earlier this year in Minneapolis, when businesses and restaurants boarded up their storefronts in anticipation of a possible acquittal of former police officer Derek Chauvin, who ultimately was convicted of killing George Floyd. If things don’t go a certain way in politically charged trials like that, despite evidence leading a deliberate jury to the opposite conclusion, well, that might very well mean more rioting, looting, arson, and violence. Potential jurors in the Rittenhouse trial received the message loud and clear that this isn’t just a murder trial. This is about the broader question of whether some types of political violence are acceptable, even necessary.

Rittenhouse is charged with the murder of two men and the attempted murder of a third. All relevant parties are white (sadly robbing the media of a beloved racially charged narrative) and it isn’t disputed that each of them had been chasing the teen and attempting to apprehend his weapon. All of it was in the context of several nights of destructive rioting in Kenosha, which resulted in a total of $50 million in damages to the city. The mayhem was sparked by the police shooting of Jacob Blake, a black man who was wanted for violating a restraining order stemming from claims he had sexually assaulted a woman. Blake is on video resisting his arrest and defying police orders by moving to enter his vehicle as they tried to apprehend him.

The city went up in flames and the national media to this day characterize the chaos as a “Black Lives Matter march” because they, along with leaders in the Democratic Party, believe all of it was justified.

Rittenhouse may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, but that’s not a crime and it’s not what he’s on trial for. He’s on trial for shooting men who pursued him and made moves to grab his gun, something that is seen on video, testified by at least one witness, and written out in the state’s own complaint against Rittenhouse.

A jury will inevitably render its verdict, but contrary to what the judge says, there’s no way around it— this is a political trial and that should scare the jurors.

Eddie Scarry is the D.C. columnist at The Federalist and author of “Privileged Victims: How America’s Culture Fascists Hijacked the Country and Elevated Its Worst People.”

How The Rachel Levine ‘Four-Star Admiral’ Photo-Op Will Damage U.S. Security


Reported John Lucas | OCTOBER 25, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/25/how-the-rachel-levine-four-star-admiral-photo-op-will-damage-u-s-security/

To great public fanfare, Joe Biden has anointed Rachel Levine a “four-star admiral” in the Public Health Service (PHS). The public relations campaign in support of Levine has emphasized his status as the first transgender four-star “admiral” in the “eight U.S. uniformed services.” That PR campaign is misleading, and it is part of a dangerous effort to undermine the military. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) kicked off the propaganda campaign, leading with the “four-star transgender” meme: On October 19, it announced “the nation’s first openly transgender four-star officer across any of the eight uniformed services of the United States. (emphasis here and below is added). HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra reinforced the theme: “Admiral Levine’s historic appointment as the first openly transgender four-star officer is a giant step forward towards equality as a nation.” The U.S. surgeon general touted Levine as “first openly transgender four-star officer to serve in any of the uniformed services.”

The media parroted the party line. Here is The New York Times: “She [sic] is also the first openly transgender person to become a four-star officer in any of the nation’s eight uniformed services.” USA Today’s contribution was virtually indistinguishable: “Rachel Levine becomes first openly transgender 4-star officer across uniformed services.” Here’s The Washington Post: “Rachael Levine, openly transgendered health official sworn in as four-star admiral in Public Health Service.”

This roll-out and publicity barrage leave little doubt that Levine’s primary qualification for his instant promotion is his transgender status. What’s worse, it will damage U.S. military recruitment and morale, thus damaging U.S. national security.

Yes, the Public Health Service is one of the eight “uniformed services” but, notwithstanding the uniforms and its bureaucrats designated as “admirals,” it is not part of the “armed forces.” The U.S. armed forces are the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Coast Guard, and Space Force. The other two government departments in the category of “uniformed services” are the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Commissioned Officer Corps and the Public Health Services Commissioned Officer Corps. In addition to their Navy-like uniforms, these two also are headed by bureaucrats designated “admirals.”

Four-star is the highest rank in the U.S. military. Although nine five-star admirals and generals served in World War II, the five-star rank was retired upon the death of Gen. Omar Bradley in 1981, leaving four-star generals as the highest rank. The four-star designation calls to mind such historical and accomplished military men as Admiral William Halsey Jr., who commanded the Pacific Fleet in the fight-to-the-death against Japan (and was promoted to five-star rank only after the end of the war), and such notables as Gen. George Patton, recipient of two distinguished service crosses for heroism in battle and the American commander most feared by the Germans in World War II.

Even Patton was a “mere” three-star general when he commanded the Third Army in its drive through Europe into the heart of Germany, and was only awarded his fourth star less than a month before the war’s end. Thus, while maneuvering his Third Army to relieve Bastogne during the Battle of the Bulge, Patton would have been outranked by now-Admiral Levine.

In short, promotion to the four-star level normally indicates decades of military service, often in dangerous and life-threatening circumstances, and military achievements of the highest order. Levine does not remotely merit any comparison with these or any of the other accomplished four-star officers, whether admirals or generals.

The administration’s publicity campaign seeking to present Levine as an accomplished four-star admiral is a fraud, particularly coupled with the references to all the uniformed services, as if they are somehow comparable. Although now designated as an “admiral,” Levine commands no sailors, no submarines, and no ships. At least the admiral managing the NOAA has ships and aircraft to command.

Unlike Navy admirals, Levin did not become an admiral after decades of service, including overseas deployments, time away from family, and the hazards that accompany military service. Nor did he attend Annapolis or any other service academy, or even Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) or officer candidate school. He was never an ensign, lieutenant, commander, captain, or even a vice admiral.

Others have documented Levine’s failures in the public health arena. In view of that record, no one can even claim that he is the best person to head PHS out of the hundreds of thousands of physicians in the United States. That is why the PR campaign emphasized his purported gender status. There is no doubt that he is most famous for claiming to be a woman, after 33 years of marriage and fathering two children with a real woman.

Americans should consider the cumulative effect that this and similar boneheaded decisions have on military retention and morale and whether they are done by design. Consider for a moment the perspective of, for example, an Army major or Navy lieutenant commander with 10 to 15 years of service. Or perhaps consider a Marine gunnery sergeant or Army master sergeant with the same amount of service.

Let us assume that he is in one of the special operations units, such as the Army Special Forces, Recon Marines or SEALS, since they are still engaged in combat. Such an officer or NCO has worked extremely hard to receive each promotion. He has been at war for his entire adult life and probably has between 6 and 10 combat deployments, which amount to years away from his family. He may have been wounded, perhaps multiple times. At the bare minimum, he and his family have had to cope with horrendous personal and family stress, among other issues. Now he sees a man with no military experience summarily appointed to six grades above him to the rank of four-star admiral—the equivalent of General Patton, for Pete’s sake—purely as a political sop.

Does anyone in this administration conceive of the damage to morale that this can cause? Do they care? This tells American servicemen and women that their sacrifices are not appreciated, their service is not valued, and that they will not be treated with equal fairness.

Are we going to see a rash of resignations in reaction to this one incident? No. But it most assuredly is another blow at the foundation of the military, another effort to use it as a lab for social experimentation and to force political conformity upon those who remain.

This is part of the effort to purge the military of non-leftists and to seed the ranks with “woke,” politically conscious officers and NCOs who will hew to the “progressive” party line. It is part of the pattern that includes Biden’s purge of Trump appointees from the service academies’ boards, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s search for alleged “domestic terrorists” in the ranks, and Gen.  Mark Milley’s focus on the “white rage” supposedly permeating the services. It is part of leftist ideology’s ever-growing danger to the U.S. military and therefore to the country.

John Lucas is a practicing attorney in Tennessee who has successfully argued before the U. S. Supreme Court. Before entering law school at the University of Texas, he served in the Army Special Forces as an enlisted man and then graduated from the U. S. Military Academy at West Point in 1969. He is an Army Ranger and fought in Vietnam as an infantry platoon leader. He is married with four children.

When Did Sexual Assault In Schools Become A Partisan Issue?


Reported By Elle Reynolds | OCTOBER 21, 2021

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/21/when-did-sexual-assault-in-schools-become-a-partisan-issue/

In 2014, Rolling Stone published a story about a female student named “Jackie” who claimed she was raped at a fraternity party at the University of Virginia.

“The 9,000-word story prompted a wave of outrage and revulsion,” said the Washington Post. The fraternity in question was graffitied within hours, protesters descended upon the campus in Charlottesville, Va., the university president suspended Greek life until the following year, and elected officials condemned the incident.

“University of Virginia Contends With Outrage Over Horrific Rape Reports,” Time Magazine headlined. CNN reported on the story and the university’s swift reaction to it, as did ABC News. The Huffington Post also picked up the story.

The story, we now know, later unraveled, leading to a retraction from Rolling Stone and massive defamation lawsuits. But not before the appalling tale of a helpless young woman being brutally assaulted on an educational campus shook Americans’ sensibilities. No one was disagreeing that, if true, the incident deserved horror, outrage, and efforts to try and keep such abuses from happening again.

The Story We Should All Be Up In Arms About

Just seven years later, a similarly harrowing tale has emerged just 100 or so miles away from U-Va., in Loudoun County, Va. An investigation from The Daily Wire earlier this month reported allegations from Loudoun County father Scott Smith that in May, “a boy allegedly wearing a skirt entered a girls’ bathroom at nearby Stone Bridge High School, where he sexually assaulted Smith’s ninth-grade daughter.”

“A boy was charged with two counts of forcible sodomy, one count of anal sodomy, and one count of forcible fellatio, related to an incident that day at that school,” according to Smith’s attorney.

But instead of receiving national outrage across the political and media landscape, the alleged incident was reportedly covered up by the Loudoun County School Board for months. In a June meeting, board members insisted they didn’t know of any such assaults. After showing up to a school board meeting in protest, Smith was arrested and smeared as a “domestic terrorist.”

Days after the Daily Wire investigation broke, another report alleged the school district had been failing to report sexual assault claims for years. Meanwhile, LCPS appears to have quietly transferred the alleged rapist to another school, where he has since been accused of another sexual assault of a female student.

Where Is The Outrage?

Where is the outrage? A search for “Scott Smith Loudoun” returns zero results on the Washington Post’s website, despite Loudoun County’s close proximity to the Post’s home city. On Tuesday, the Post finally published something on the story, but failed to mention Smith by name and initially failed to admit that the alleged attacker identified as “gender fluid.”

A search for “Scott Smith Loudoun” or “Loudoun sexual assault” returned no results from The New York Times on Wednesday. The extent to which CNN covered the story was to say “[Republican gubernatorial candidate Glenn] Youngkin on Tuesday promised action following parental outrage over two recent alleged assaults in public schools in the state’s Loudoun County,” immediately after a paragraph of damage control for Democrat candidate Terry McAuliffe’s statement that “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”

Can you imagine if, instead of discovering holes in the U-Va. story, additional coverage had revealed that the school had been covering up other sexual assault allegations for years? Or, if the allegations in the Rolling Stone story had been true, can you imagine if U-Va. had quietly moved the rapists to another fraternity and tried to cover the whole thing up? Or tried to smear Jackie and her family as “domestic terrorists”?

The Loudoun County incident has all the ingredients of a horrifying scandal worthy of the front pages of every newspaper in the country. It should provoke our outrage, not as conservatives, but as caring and compassionate human souls whose sympathies are pricked by the horrors allegedly endured by an innocent 15-year-old girl.

If We Can’t Agree Rape Is Bad, What Can We Agree On?

Ensuring the safety of young girls — in their places of learning and elsewhere — should not be controversial. But the loudest voices on the left, the same ones who screamed “Me Too” from the rooftops of their Hollywood mansions, are too allegiant to the fringe demands of transgenderism to speak up. Many voices in the middle, even, seem too cowardly to come to the defense of young women like Smith’s daughter.

In a widening partisan divide, if we can’t agree that young girls being raped at school is an outrage, what can we agree on? Does the left hate conservatives with such vitriol that, once voices on the right speak up for a young girl’s right to bodily safety, that issue is suddenly anathema, tainted by the fingerprints of concerned parents slandered as domestic terrorists?

Plenty of other common-sense perspectives that any Democrat nominee would have supported up to a couple of years ago have suddenly become “radical” conservative positions too: funding police departments, not segregating kids in school based on race, having international borders, or allowing people to make their own medical decisions without government coercion. Any of these should have been enough to make Americans stop and wonder why the rules of the game are changing so drastically — and who is changing them.

But even for those who had yet to notice, the harrowing tale from Loudoun County Public Schools — and the subsequent shrug that legacy media, Democrats, and the Me Too crowd gave it — should settle that the biggest war in America right now isn’t between Republicans and Democrats, nor between blustering, blundering congressmen battling over whether to sell your children’s future for $3.5 trillion or $1 trillion.

The biggest war in America is between the allegiances we’ve always taken for granted — those of the family, church, and local community — and a conglomerate of forces that will stop at nothing to break them down. Sacrificing a 15-year-old girl’s right to basic safety at her school on the altar of fringe identity politics is just part of that fight.

Elle Reynolds is an assistant editor at The Federalist, and received her B.A. in government from Patrick Henry College with a minor in journalism. You can follow her work on Twitter at @_etreynolds.

Copyright © 2021 The Fed

Op-ed: Why does the media give a pass to Biden’s faith?


Commentary By Jason Jimenez, Op-Ed Contributor

Biden, the 46th president, is America’s second Catholic President. The first was John F. Kennedy — when he became President in 1961.  From the start of his campaign, Biden wanted everything to be about his faith. A favored campaign slogan for the Biden camp was the “battle for the soul of the nation.”

(Courtesy of Jason Jimenez)

It didn’t matter the media outlet. They all loved reporting on how Biden was a “deeply devout Catholic” and that his faith is a huge factor in “shaping his politics.” Even Speaker Pelosi publicly praises Biden’s faith and willingly admits that his Catholic faith has shaped his career and public policies. An article in The New York Times stated, “President Biden, perhaps the most religiously observant commander in chief in half a century, speaks of how his Catholic faith grounds his life and his policies.”

Interesting, isn’t it? How the media and every single big-time progressive politician have no problem mixing Biden’s faith with politics. But suppose you are a Christian who is pro-life and not in favor of the Supreme Court legalizing same-sex marriage. In that case, the response you get from the Left is the complete opposite. How was Judge Amy Coney Barrett (also a deeply devout Catholic) treated during the Senate confirmation hearings? Senator Dianne Feinstein and her colleagues didn’t praise Judge Barrett for her faith. Instead, Senator Feinstein expressed her concern about how Judge Barrett’s faith might influence her decisions by stating, “The dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern.” But if the Left is so concerned about a person’s faith interfering with their public service, why isn’t the Left disparaging Biden from talking about how his faith shapes his public policies?

The main reason? Because President Biden is as much of a progressive as he is a Catholic. He is what I refer to as a “Progressive Catholic.” Don’t believe me? Listen to what he said in his book, Promises to Keep: On Life and Politics, “I’m as much a cultural Catholic as I am a theological Catholic.” Biden continues, “My idea of self, of family, of community, of the wider world, comes straight from my religion. It’s not so much the Bible, the beatitudes, the Ten Commandments, the sacraments, or the prayers I learned. It’s the culture.”

Because Judge Barrett is a conservative Catholic and not a progressive, liberal Democrats are concerned about her “dogmatic” positions embedding on her judgment. Therefore, she must be censored at all costs. However, in President Biden’s case, he gets a pass because he’ll keep on advancing progressive policies like the Equality Act (which will eviscerate religious freedoms in America), government funding of abortion, and the Green New Deal.

It’s not a question of whether President Biden has a right to express his religious beliefs. He has that right under the Constitution. It’s really about charging the media for being inconsistent by not allowing conservatives to do the same.

Let’s hope the media will admit to their intolerance and learn to be more receptive to Americans who hold conservative viewpoints.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Jason Jimenez is president of Stand Strong Ministries, a faculty member at Summit Ministries, and a best-selling author who specializes in apologetics and biblical worldview training. Check out www.standstrongministries.org.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Hard Pressed

Media fawns over Biden press secretary Psaki stumbling and uninformed. Would Kayleigh McEnany get away with this?

Press Secretary PsakiPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2021.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 –  $5.00 –  $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.

White House asks reporters to submit questions ahead of daily press briefings: ‘Not really a free press’


President Joe Biden’s administration apparently does not want to be caught off guard with tough questions by the media during its press briefings. According to the Daily Beast, Biden’s communications department has requested that reporters submit their questions to the White House staff in advance of press secretary Jen Psaki’s daily briefings, presumably to avoid being scrutinized by reporters with difficult questions.

The issue was reportedly discussed during a White House Correspondents Association meeting last Friday. Reporters are allegedly upset over the White House’s request, fearing it plays into the perception of coordination between the West Wing and media.

“That’s not really a free press at all,” one White House reporter said, according to the Daily Beast.

“While it’s a relief to see briefings return, particularly with a commitment to factual information, the press can’t really do its job in the briefing room if the White House is picking and choosing the questions they want,” the reporter added.

Indeed, WHCA leaders instructed to reporters to either “push back” against the requests or not comply altogether.

In contrast to the Trump administration, which jettisoned daily White House press briefings almost completely, Biden and his communications team promised to restore the daily briefings and have thus far delivered on that promise.

Biden’s administration claimed that asking reporters for their questions ahead of time is not an attempt to dodge questions, but rather to understand the pulse of reporting on any given day.

“Our goal is to make the daily briefing as useful and informative as possible for both reporters and the public,” a spokesperson told the Daily Beast. “Part of meeting that objective means regularly engaging with the reporters who will be in the briefing room to understand how the White House can be most helpful in getting them the information they need. That two-way conversation is an important part of keeping the American people updated about how government is serving them.”

Meanwhile, Eric Schultz, who served as a deputy press secretary in the Obama administration, claimed the Biden communication team’s request is fairly normal, allowing staff adequate time to prepare for the daily briefing.

“This is textbook communications work. The briefing becomes meaningless if the press secretary has to repeatedly punt questions, instead of coming equipped to discuss what journalists are reporting on,” Schultz told the Daily Beast. “In a non-COVID environment, this would happen in casual conversations throughout the day in lower and upper press. One of the few upsides to reporters hovering over your desk all day, is that you get a very quick sense of what they’re working on.”

Kylee Zempel Op-ed: To Democrats, ‘Unity’ Means Doing Everything They Want And Shutting Up About It


Commentary by Kylee Zempel NOVEMBER 12, 2020

To Democrats, ‘Unity’ Means Doing Everything They Want And Shutting Up About It

The only thing worse than listening to a screaming toddler is seeing his smug, tear-stained but smiling face after his parent gives in to his irreverent outburst and rewards him for his tantrum. That’s all I could think about as I walked the streets of Madison, Wisconsin, Saturday night after several news outlets called the presidential race for Joe Biden.

A hopeful energy pulsed through State Street, the bustling pedestrian mall of restaurants and storefronts bookended by the university and the Capitol. I walked past business after business boarded up tight in anticipation of a fiery post-election purge, but instead, front doors were propped open on the uncharacteristically warm November night as groups of friends chattered and shopped and drank in merriment. No sirens or chanting interrupted my pleasant patio dinner date.

I breathed easier than I would have under different circumstances, I’ll admit. Had the media called the race differently, I likely wouldn’t have left the apartment and I certainly wouldn’t have neared downtown. Underneath that peaceful veneer, however, remains the gross reality that things are calm only because the snotty toddler got his way.

Unity Is a Joke

These are the infantile adults that were told “no” in 2016 by the half of the country they most despised and spent the next four years screaming that everything was unfair and that those who disagreed with them were racists, sexists, bigots, and homophobes. Instead of biting and hitting, they looted and vandalized, and the equally childish media covered for them.

They promised to impeach the motherf-cker,” canceled dissenters, and maligned anyone who wanted to “Make America Great Again.” They smeared mask rebels and churchgoers as grandma-killers and squawked in our faces that boys are girls, silence is violence, and all women are inherently trustworthy, straight white men be damned. Only now that they think they’ve won do they have any interest in faux “unity.”

In a recent editorial, the Washington Examiner posited, “Biden has a historic opportunity to heal the country’s wounds, and if he wants an admired legacy, he will start now to fulfill the promise of his Delaware speech and bring uniter’s, not dividers, into his administration.” Conservatives who fall for this “unity” schtick are hopelessly naïve.

While things might be quiet now, all hell is sure to break loose again the moment things don’t go in the way of the tantrum-throwers. This is because the wrong side won — or at least the fact that they believe they did proves the point. The toddlers got what they wanted. Their abhorrent behavior was reinforced with their most prized reward: the end of the Trump presidency.

Now rather than watching the thugs tear down and set ablaze our livelihoods, we’re stuck looking at their smug faces instead. It was always going to be one or the other: Elect us and we’ll destroy the country, or elect Trump and we’ll destroy your property.

For this reason, the relative peace in our cities now is a bad omen. This cultural calm is a reminder that, like the short-sighted parent capitulating to her toddler, the electorate traded long-term stability for short-term quiet. We didn’t bring an end to the fearmongering and the incivility; we put the uncivil fearmongers in power, and they have sinister plans for their political opponents.

Political Religion Makes All of Life a Holy War

This all goes back to the infantilization of the left, and it’s not surprising. There’s a reason shop-owners were afraid of spurned Biden supporters but relaxed when they remembered the frustrated Trumpsters had no intention of acting out.

When Trump supporters heard the unwelcome news that Biden would ostensibly be the president-elect, they were bummed. Some were mad, others were suspicious, and others felt defeated and discouraged — but they dutifully returned to their daily grinds, clocking in for work, caring for their families, and carrying on their commitments to their churches. That’s because, for so many on the right, politics is an add-on. Family and faith, however imperfectly, inform civic values, but politics is no replacement for those superior institutions.

For many on the left, that isn’t the case. For those who have chosen to worship at the feet of progressivism as religion, this election was life or death because it was central to everything else.

For a population who has pushed off marriage, disposed of its children, abandoned church, and relinquished its independence to the nanny state and its individualism to identity politics, to lose an election is to lose it all. All battles therefore become moral, meaning victory by any means necessary — including stealing and destroying and sometimes even killing — is justified.

Don’t Let the Leftist Toddlers Get Their Way

That leaves us quite a divided America. How can we ever hope for unity when one side holds theother hostage? Give us what we want, or else. That’s no way to start a mutually beneficial negotiation.

So conservatives are left with a choice. Will we continue caving in to the boisterous toddler until it becomes an unruly and insufferable adult? Or will stand our ground and endure the tantrums until the left tuckers itself out on its own fickle rhetoric and runs its own cities into the soil? Don’t relish the present quiet; realize what it stands for.

Presidents come and go, and if Trump does finally lose re-election after all the legal battles run their course, so be it. The worst thing for our country isn’t a Biden presidency. It’s giving the leftist toddlers what they want.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Kylee Zempel is an assistant editor at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter @kyleezempel.

David French Joins NYT, New Yorker In Bashing Christians On Christmas


Reported by Nathanael Blake DECEMBER 28, 2020

So much for peace on earth and goodwill to men. America’s legacy media elites used the Sunday before Christmas for extra Christian-bashing, with white evangelicals the preferred targets.

Writing in The New Yorker, Michael Luo complained that “white evangelical Protestants, once again, overwhelmingly supported President Trump in the election,” and that “churches, particularly conservative ones, fought lockdown orders and rebuffed public-health warnings.”

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof interviewed leftist pastor Jim Wallis, with the conversation quickly turning to accusations that “White evangelicalism has destroyed the ‘evangel.’” At The Dispatch, Time columnist David French concluded that much of the scorn white evangelical Christians receive is deserved. He says the world often “rejects Christians because Christians are cruel.”

Yeah, well, merry Christmas to you too.

To be sure, Christians should humbly accept correction if it is deserved, even when the word of reproof is delivered by pagans. But the above writers’ broad indictments against American evangelicals do not withstand scrutiny. Although each criticism has particular errors, they are united by two shared mistakes. The first is a failure to account for differences of denomination and devotion. Lumping Pentecostals, Presbyterians, and prosperity-gospel preachers together is sloppy, as is neglecting to distinguish between those who are committed churchgoers and those who are only nominally evangelical.

It might be said that these varieties of white evangelicals have in common an overwhelming political support for Donald Trump, but this retort only highlights the second error shared by these writers: the assumption that voting for Trump was necessarily immoral.

It is easy to pick out Trumpian words and deeds that are not compatible with the gospel. It is also easy to do the same with his Democratic opponents and their policies. Asserting that voting for Trump is a moral stain on evangelicals, without weighing the alternatives, presumes what is in question. This error is shared by each writer (and Kristof’s interview subject), but each finds some unique ways to express it.

Luo, for instance, unfavorably compares the response of today’s Christians to the pandemic with Christians’ response to past plagues. But although he is correct that reckless churches should be rebuked, he makes no effort to distinguish between the reckless and those cautiously meeting in person, or to value preserving the gathering of believers. Nor does he quantify how many churches are foregoing precautions, or show how many of these congregations fall under the “white evangelical” category.

He suggests that, to eliminate risk, Christians should forgo all in-person meeting, and he dismisses the religious liberty claims that have been raised against capricious government restrictions on churches. But if the casinos, strip clubs, and abortion clinics are getting better treatment than churches, then anti-Christian discrimination has replaced public health policy.

Furthermore, even from a secular public health perspective, eliminating church services would do more harm than good, as churchgoing seems to have been essential to helping many Americans make it through the difficulties of this year. We are physical beings, not disembodied minds who can live in the cloud indefinitely.

Meanwhile, Kristof and his interview subject Wallis presume that technocratic welfare-statism is the obvious way to care for the poor and oppressed, so they dismiss anyone who disagrees with them as bad Christians. This complacent assumption of moral and political rectitude precludes them from understanding those they condemn.

Thus, although Kristof recently wrote a column of questions about Christians and abortion, he seems to have ignored the many responses explaining its paramount importance as a political issue for conservative Christians. His indifference is particularly notable at Christmas, because Luke’s advent narrative emphasizes the humanity of both the unborn John the Baptist and of Jesus. And if the unborn are human, then Christians cannot support the party of abortion on demand.

Kristof and Wallis’s reflexive acceptance of the left’s shibboleths of the moment also leads to ridiculous anachronisms such as declaring Jesus a “person of color.” This conceptual colonization of first-century Israel by modern American racial concepts is odious and misleading—“person of color” makes no sense in that context.

It is, indeed, worse than the depictions of a blond, blue-eyed Jesus (are there many of those?) that Wallis complains about. Portrayals of Jesus and other biblical figures in local style and appearance have been a common, if inaccurate, artistic practice across centuries and cultures.

Race is also central to French’s condemnation of his fellow white evangelicals. In his telling, they are guilty of “some outright racism” but perhaps even more of being seduced by a “Christian nationalism” that “will always minimize America’s historic sins and the present legacy (and reality) of American racism.” French is, for instance, upset that more white evangelicals do not believe that racism is an “extremely” or “very serious” threat to “America and America’s future.”

But even if white evangelicals are wrong in their assessment of the depth and danger of America’s racial problems, this is not enough to condemn them as cruel. It is, in fact, precisely the sort of issue on which Christians may reasonably disagree.

Furthermore, the data French cites does not account for crucial factors such as whether respondents are regular churchgoers or merely culturally evangelical. In addition, French ignores education and class in his analysis, even though the study he relies on emphasizes the importance of these factors in understanding the politics of white evangelical subgroups.

French’s article, like the others, is mostly an impressionistic interpretation of white evangelicalism in America. By their reckoning, white evangelicals have become reckless plague-bearers with no regard for the poor and oppressed, and their cruelty rightly earns them the world’s opprobrium.

There may be some individuals who match this grim depiction, but as a general description of tens of millions of evangelicals, it is obviously untrue. Look around the country and evangelical churches are holding services with masks, distancing, and lots of hand sanitizer. Evangelicals, both individually and corporately, are caring for those in need in their communities and around the world, and treating people of all races with dignity and respect.

In this Christmas season, French, Kristof, and Luo should stop building evangelical strawmen to burn in effigy. Instead, they, like all of us, should contemplate and rejoice in the miracle of God become man to save His people from their sins.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Nathanael Blake is a Senior Contributor at The Federalist. He has a PhD in political theory. He lives in Missouri.

9 Key Points from Trump Campaign Press Conference on Challenges to Election Results


Reported by JOEL B. POLLAK |

Read more at https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/11/19/9-key-points-from-trump-campaign-press-conference-on-challenges-to-election-results/

Rudy Giuliani (Jacquelyn Martin / Associated Press)

Rudy Giuliani and other lawyers representing President Donald Trump’s campaign outlined their case Thursday that the Nov. 3 presidential election was so deeply flawed in several key states that the results should be overturned in the president’s favor.

Giuliani said there was a pattern to the alleged irregularities in key states that suggested, he said, a “plan from a centralized place” to commit voter fraud in cities controlled by Democrats.

He said widespread adoption of vote-by-mail had allowed Democrats to take big-city corruption practices nationwide. “They picked the places where they could get away with it.”

Here are the key allegations the lawyers presented:

1. Observers were allegedly prevented from watching mail-in ballots being opened. Giuliani said that many mail-in ballots were opened without observers being able to check that they were properly signed, a key protection against fraud. Those votes, he said, were “null and void,” especially where the envelopes had been discarded, making recounts useless.

2. Allegedly unequal application of the law in Democratic counties. In Pennsylvania, whose state supreme court created new, relaxed voting rules before the election, Giuliani alleged that absentee voters in Democratic counties were allowed to “cure” defects in their ballots, while voters in Republican counties, which obeyed the state law as written, were not.

3. Voters allegedly arrived at the polls to discover other people had voted for them. Giuliani said that many provisional ballots cast in Pittsburgh were submitted by people who showed up to vote in person, only to be told that they had voted already. He alleged that Democrats had filled out absentee ballots for other people, hoping they would not show up.

4. Election officials were allegedly told not to look for defects in ballots, and to backdate ballots. Giuliani cited an affidavit from an official who swore she was told not to exclude absentee ballots for defects, and to backdate ballots so they would not appear to have been received after Election Day, to avoid a Supreme Court order to sequester those ballots.

5. Ballots casting votes for Joe Biden and no other candidates were allegedly run several times through machines. Giuliani said that there were 60 witnesses in Michigan who would attest to ballots being “produced” quickly and counted twice or thrice. He said that a minimum of 60,000 ballots, and a maximum of 100,000 ballots, were allegedly affected.

6. Absentee ballots were accepted in Wisconsin without being applied for first. Giuliani noted that Wisconsin state law was stricter regarding absentee ballots than most other states are, yet alleged that 60,000 absentee ballots were counted in the Milwaukee area, and 40,000 in the Madison area, without having been applied for properly by the voters who cast them.

7. There were allegedly “overvotes,” with some precincts allegedly recording more voters than residents, among other problems. Giuliani said there was an unusually large number of overvotes in precincts in Michigan and in Wisconsin, which he alleged was the reason that Republicans on the Wayne County Board of Canvassers had refused to certify the results there this week. He also alleged that there were some out-of-state voters in Georgia, and people who had cast votes twice there.

8. Voting machines and software are allegedly owned by companies with ties to the Venezuelan regime and to left-wing donor George Soros. Sidney Powell argued that U.S. votes were being counted overseas, and that Dominion voting machines and Smartmatic software were controlled by foreign interests, manipulating algorithms to change the results. Powell noted specifically that Smartmatic’s owners included two Venezuelan nationals, whom she alleged had ties to the regime of Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro. The legal team alleged that there were statistical anomalies, such as huge batches of votes for Biden, that could not be explained except as manipulation — which, they alleged, happened in the wee hours of the morning as vote-counting had stalled. (The companies have disputed these allegations vigorously.)

9. The Constitution provides a process for electing a president if the vote is corrupted. Jenna Ellis argued that the media, had usurped the power to declare the winner of the election. She made the point, citing Federalist No. 68, that the constitutional process of selecting a president had procedural safeguards against corruption and foreign influence.
Giuliani said that the campaign believed that enough votes were flawed — more than double the margins between Biden and Trump in key states — that the president had a path to victory.

Giuliani presented evidence in the form of sworn affidavits, citing two and noting that the campaign had many more from private individuals.

He noted that several lawsuits that had been dismissed had been filed by private individuals, not the campaign directly. He said lawsuits might be filed in Arizona, and that the campaign was also examining irregularities in New Mexico and Virginia, though he said he did not think there were enough disputed votes in the latter.

Giuliani also took on the media, arguing that they had provided misleading information and condoned threats against Trump’s legal team.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book is The Trumpian Virtues: The Lessons and Legacy of Donald Trump’s Presidency. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Biden Appoints ‘Anti-Free Speech’ Richard Stengel to Transition Team Media Post


Reported by JOEL B. POLLAK | 

Read more at https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2020/11/17/biden-appoints-anti-free-speech-richard-stengel-to-transition-team-media-post/

Richard Stengel (Jemal Countess / Getty for TIME)

The New York Post reported last week:

Richard Stengel is the Biden transition “Team Lead” for the US Agency for Global Media, the US government media empire that includes Voice of America, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

Stengel, an Obama administration alumnus, wrote last year in a Washington Post op-ed that US freedom of speech was too unfettered and that changes must be considered.

In the Post op-ed, “Why America needs a hate speech law,” Stengel argued:

[A]s a government official traveling around the world championing the virtues of free speech, I came to see how our First Amendment standard is an outlier.

All speech is not equal. And where truth cannot drive out lies, we must add new guardrails. I’m all for protecting “thought that we hate,” but not speech that incites hate.

As Breitbart News noted in May, Stengel, an MSNBC analyst, also defended restrictions on speech about the coronavirus:

The First Amendment doesn’t protect false speech about a virus or false speech that endangers the health of your users. And by the way, Facebook and Twitter have been taking things down, but they need to be even more vigilant about it, and Google needs to be even more vigilant about what they prioritize in their search results.

Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley warned about Stengel’s appointment in a column Tuesday: “[I]t would be difficult to select a more anti-free speech figure to address government media policy, one has to assume that Biden will continue the onslaught against this core freedom as president.”

He noted that Biden himself had publicly advocated restrictions on speech during the campaign: “Biden called for greater speech controls on the Internet and denounced Twitter for allowing others to speak freely.”

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book is The Trumpian Virtues: The Lessons and Legacy of Donald Trump’s Presidency. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

To Democrats, ‘Unity’ Means Doing Everything They Want And Shutting Up About It


Commentary by Kylee Zempel NOVEMBER 12, 2020

The only thing worse than listening to a screaming toddler is seeing his smug, tear-stained but smiling face after his parent gives in to his irreverent outburst and rewards him for his tantrum. That’s all I could think about as I walked the streets of Madison, Wisconsin, Saturday night after several news outlets called the presidential race for Joe Biden.

A hopeful energy pulsed through State Street, the bustling pedestrian mall of restaurants and storefronts bookended by the university and the Capitol. I walked past business after business boarded up tight in anticipation of a fiery post-election purge, but instead, front doors were propped open on the uncharacteristically warm November night as groups of friends chattered and shopped and drank in merriment. No sirens or chanting interrupted my pleasant patio dinner date.

I breathed easier than I would have under different circumstances, I’ll admit. Had the media called the race differently, I likely wouldn’t have left the apartment and I certainly wouldn’t have neared downtown. Underneath that peaceful veneer, however, remains the gross reality that things are calm only because the snotty toddler got his way.

Unity Is a Joke

These are the infantile adults that were told “no” in 2016 by the half of the country they most despised and spent the next four years screaming that everything was unfair and that those who disagreed with them were racists, sexists, bigots, and homophobes. Instead of biting and hitting, they looted and vandalized, and the equally childish media covered for them.

They promised to “impeach the motherf-cker,” canceled dissenters, and maligned anyone who wanted to “Make America Great Again.” They smeared mask rebels and churchgoers as grandma-killers and squawked in our faces that boys are girls, silence is violence, and all women are inherently trustworthy, straight white men be damned. Only now that they think they’ve won do they have any interest in faux “unity.”

In a recent editorial, the Washington Examiner posited, “Biden has a historic opportunity to heal the country’s wounds, and if he wants an admired legacy, he will start now to fulfill the promise of his Delaware speech and bring uniters, not dividers, into his administration.” Conservatives who fall for this “unity” schtick are hopelessly naive.

While things might be quiet now, all hell is sure to break loose again the moment things don’t go in the way of the tantrum-throwers. This is because the wrong side won — or at least the fact that they believe they did proves the point. The toddlers got what they wanted. Their abhorrent behavior was reinforced with their most prized reward: the end of the Trump presidency.

Now rather than watching the thugs tear down and set ablaze our livelihoods, we’re stuck looking at their smug faces instead. It was always going to be one or the other: Elect us and we’ll destroy the country, or elect Trump and we’ll destroy your property.

For this reason, the relative peace in our cities now is a bad omen. This cultural calm is a reminder that, like the short-sighted parent capitulating to her toddler, the electorate traded long-term stability for short-term quiet. We didn’t bring an end to the fearmongering and the incivility; we put the uncivil fearmongers in power, and they have sinister plans for their political opponents.

Political Religion Makes All of Life a Holy War

This all goes back to the infantilization of the left, and it’s not surprising. There’s a reason shop-owners were afraid of spurned Biden supporters but relaxed when they remembered the frustrated Trumpsters had no intention of acting out.

When Trump supporters heard the unwelcome news that Biden would ostensibly be the president-elect, they were bummed. Some were mad, others were suspicious, and others felt defeated and discouraged — but they dutifully returned to their daily grinds, clocking in for work, caring for their families, and carrying on their commitments to their churches.

That’s because, for so many on the right, politics is an add-on. Family and faith, however imperfectly, inform civic values, but politics is no replacement for those superior institutions.

For many on the left, that isn’t the case. For those who have chosen to worship at the feet of progressivism as religion, this election was life or death because it was central to everything else.

For a population who has pushed off marriage, disposed of its children, abandoned church, and relinquished its independence to the nanny state and its individualism to identity politics, to lose an election is to lose it all. All battles therefore become moral, meaning victory by any means necessary — including stealing and destroying and sometimes even killing — is justified.

Don’t Let the Leftist Toddlers Get Their Way

That leaves us quite a divided America. How can we ever hope for unity when one side holds the other hostage? Give us what we want, or else. That’s no way to start a mutually beneficial negotiation.

So conservatives are left with a choice. Will we continue caving in to the boisterous toddler until it becomes an unruly and insufferable adult? Or will stand our ground and endure the tantrums until the left tuckers itself out on its own fickle rhetoric and runs its own cities into the soil? Don’t relish the present quiet; realize what it stands for.

Presidents come and go, and if Trump does finally lose re-election after all the legal battles run their course, so be it. The worst thing for our country isn’t a Biden presidency. It’s giving the leftist toddlers what they want.

Kylee Zempel is an assistant editor at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter @kyleezempel.

Democrats Turn On Minority Voters For Discovering Trump Isn’t The Real Racist


Reported by Helen Raleigh NOVEMBER 10, 2020

One of the biggest stories in this election is how President Trump, whom leftists and their media allies have constantly called a “racist,” made great inroads with minorities. The left is clearly shocked. Rather than humbly spending some time on self-reflection, however, they are doubling down on identity politics by blaming minority Trump voters.

Since Election Day, leftists have been attacking minority Trump voters from two angles. First, they claim minorities who voted for Trump are “white” voters who shouldn’t be classified as minorities. This nonsense is nothing new. Prior to the election, Joe Biden famously said black voters who vote for Trump “ain’t black.”

Immediately after the election, this nonsense came up again courtesy of none other than Nikole Hannah-Jones, the creator of the now-debunked 1619 Project. When it became clear that Trump would win Florida thanks to enthusiastic support from Latino voters, Hannah-Jones tweeted: “One day after this election is over I am going to write a piece about how Latino is a contrived ethnic category that artificially lumps white Cubans with Black Puerto Ricans and indigenous Guatemalans and helps explains [sic] why Latinos support Trump at the second highest rate.”

National Public Radio’s Gene Demby quickly endorsed Hannah-Jones’ assertions. In an NPR post-election segment, titled “Who is the White Vote?” Demby said:

It’s important that, you know, we think about the ways that there are many, many white Latinos. And because whiteness so thoroughly informs voting behavior, we should probably be asking better questions about Latino voters, like whether they identify as white or not. That might be more illuminating than simply whether someone refers to themselves as Latino in some ways.

No, Democrats Don’t Own Brown People

Here is the thought process behind these kinds of comments Only white people vote for Republicans. Since skin color trumps ethnicity, of course, light-skinned minorities would vote for a Republican candidate because of their “whiteness.” They shouldn’t be counted as minority voters at all.

This thought process is deeply flawed. Dividing the Latino community by skin color is possibly the most racist thing to do. Latino voters are unique, both as individuals and based on their diverse Latin American countries of origin, but it’s wrong to use colorism to explain Latino voters’ behaviors. Regardless of skin color, many Latino immigrants have suffered or watched their families suffer under socialist policies in their home countries. Many came to America to escape socialism, so naturally, they will not vote for Democrats, whose party enthusiastically embraces it.

Further, claiming skin color drives a voter’s behavior is an insult to minority voters’ intelligence. During Trump’s first term and prior to the pandemic lockdowns, both black and Hispanic unemployment rates were at historic lows. The black and Hispanic household median annual income increase (adjusted for inflation) more than doubled during Trump’s term compared to the Obama years. Minority voters, like any other voters, will naturally support the candidate whose policies have benefited them.

By the same token, minority voters will reject candidates whose policies might bring them harm. Domingo Garcia, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, explained to a puzzled NPR journalist why Biden lost Latino support in Texas. “For example, a lot of the Border Patrol law enforcement are heavily Latino in the Rio Grande Valley,” Garcia said. “So when you are talking about defunding the police, and you don’t stand up to those types of rhetoric, then it leaves an opening for Republicans to come in and take advantage of that.”

When will leftist pundits such as Hannah-Jones and Demby ever realize it is the radical policies and ideas they support that have driven away minority voters?

The Left Believes Minorities Have No Agency

Apparently, blaming minority Trump voters’ “whiteness” doesn’t go far enough for some on the left. Charles M. Blow, a New York Times columnist, complained that some minority Trump voters have Stockholm syndrome, a psychological response that occurs when abuse victims bond with their abusers.

In his most recent article, Blow listed statistic after statistic showing that “a larger percentage of every racial minority voted for Trump this year than in 2016,” including Trump doubling black women’s support from 4 percent in 2016 to 8 percent in 2020, and increasing black men’s vote from 13 percent in 2016 to 18 percent in 2020. “It is so unsettling to consider that many of our fellow countrymen and women are either racists or accommodate racists or acquiesce to racists,” Blow said, calling all Trump voters either racists or accomplices of racism.

There’s more. According to Blow, the number that really put him on his heels was “the percentage of L.G.B.T. people voting for Trump doubled from 2016, moving from 14 percent to 28 percent. In Georgia, the number was 33 percent.”

Although none of the statistics Blow presented even remotely support the title of his piece, “Exit Poll Points to the Power of White Patriarchy,” he found a way to blame white patriarchy and demean minority Trump voters in the end. According to Blow, Trump’s widening support across racial and gender groups “points to the power of the white patriarchy and the coattail it has of those who depend on it or aspire to it. … Some people who have historically been oppressed will stand with the oppressors, and will aspire to power by proximity.”

In the eyes of leftists such as Blow, nonwhite voters and non-straight voters who supported Trump are nobody but coattail riders who have neither personal agency nor the ability to make it on our own in the world. I had never read anything more racist, more divisive, and more insulting than this, and I am not the only one. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a human rights activist and a fellow at the Hoover Institute, tweeted: “This is the dumbest, most divisive drivel I’ve read in a long time. We should be talking about what unites us now. Not doubling down on ID-Politics. Shame on you!”

Minorites Had Good Reason to Vote for Trump

It is obvious that leftist pundits are dumbfounded by Trump’s widening support among minority voters in 2020. Since the 2016 election, rather than trying to understand half of the country who voted for Trump the first time, these talking heads turned toward nurturing their hatred of Trump and getting him out of office as their full-time jobs.

They thought that after repeating “Orange Man Bad” day after day for four years, the electorate would just follow their lead. They have no clue why someone they despised so much could have attracted even more minority votes this time around. Since they are unable to come up with any reasonable explanation, let me shed some light on the matter.

Minorities like me voted for Trump because we like his policies: lower taxes, fewer government regulations, and strong national security. American people, especially minorities, have seen real economic benefits during Trump’s first term. He stands up to socialism and promises, “America will never be a socialist country,” and his unconventional foreign policy approach has brought a historical breakthrough of peace in the Middle East.

We want a safe environment to raise our families. We don’t want to see our cities burned, our shops looted, and our statues toppled. We want good-paying jobs so we can enjoy the lifestyle we desire through our own hard work. We want all families, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, to be able to choose the best school that matches their children’s educational needs. We want to continue to express ourselves without being censored or canceled.

We certainly don’t believe race and sex are the roots of nor the answer to every social ill. We are tired of identity politics, critical race theory, and cancel culture, all of which have sucked the fun out of life and shut down the exchange of ideas. We know our country has room for improvement, but it is not a racist nation. We take pride in being Americans and in all the progresses our nation has made, and we are tired of the left condemning our country’s founding and the American ideal.

As long as leftists continue to weaponize identity politics and dress us down as if we are mindless cattle, their candidates will continue to lose our support.

Helen Raleigh, CFA, is an American entrepreneur, writer, and speaker. She’s a senior contributor at The Federalist. Her writings appear in other national media, including The Wall Street Journal and Fox News. Helen’s new book, “Backlash: How Communist China’s Aggression Has Backfired,” is available for pre-order with a release date of October 20, 2020. Follow her on Twitter: @HRaleighspeaks.

Nolte: NBC Creates Decoy Disinformation Story to Protect Hunter and Joe Biden


Reported by JOHN NOLTE | 

Read more at https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/30/nbc-creates-decoy-disinformation-story-protect-hunter-joe-biden/

Vice President-elect, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., left, stands with his son Hunter during a re-enactment of the Senate oath ceremony, Tuesday, Jan. 6, 2009, in the Old Senate Chamber on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

As everyone now knows, the national political media are engaged in an active cover-up to protect Joe Biden from the exploding scandal surrounding his involvement in the shady business dealings of his son, Hunter Biden. The allegations against Biden are beyond credible and involve confirmed documents; two first-hand, on-the-record whistleblowers, and no denials from Joe or Hunter Biden.

What’s more, there is an active FBI investigation into Hunter’s business dealings, including money laundering.

Nevertheless, the media are so partisan and dishonest, they are not only ignoring a scandal that will certainly swamp a potential Biden administration; they are outright lying with the claim the scandal is all a hoax based on “Russian disinformation.”

And now, NBC News is deliberately looking to muddy the waters with a decoy story, a story based on something entirely different and meaningless, a story no one has even heard of, and it has been dressed up to look like a debunking of the scandal involving Hunter Biden’s laptop and the open FBI investigation of him.

The headline (sorry, I don’t link fake news) is…

How a fake persona laid the groundwork for a Hunter Biden conspiracy deluge

The sub-hed is…

A 64-page document that was later disseminated by close associates of President Donald Trump appears to be the work of a fake “intelligence firm.”

And this story has absolutely nothing to do with the credible allegations currently swirling around Joe and Hunter Biden. But as you can see, it has been positioned, angled, and headlined as a decoy to fool NBC News consumers into believing the allegations are all fake and have now been debunked.

What’s more, no one I know has ever even heard of this “64-page composition that was later disseminated by close associates of President Donald Trump [and] appears to be the work of a fake “intelligence firm” called Typhoon Investigations, according to researchers and public documents.”

I sure as hell have never heard of it.

Breitbart News didn’t cover it, and way down deep in the story, NBC is forced to admit that a few obscure blog posts about the document were only shared 5,000 times across Facebook and Twitter, which is nothing.

So you can see what NBC News is doing here… “Debunking” a story that has nothing to do with the credible corruption allegations against Joe and Hunter Biden and dressing it up to look like it’s Game Over with that laptop full of incriminating emails and whistleblower Tony Bobulinski.

The story even opens in a way meant to conflate the two:

One month before a purported leak of files from Hunter Biden’s laptop, a fake “intelligence” document about him went viral on the right-wing internet, asserting an elaborate conspiracy theory involving former Vice President Joe Biden’s son and business in China.

The document, a 64-page composition that was later disseminated by close associates of President Donald Trump, appears to be the work of a fake “intelligence firm” called Typhoon Investigations, according to researchers and public documents.

Later, the story again deliberately conflates the two…

“The document and its spread have become part of a wider effort to smear Hunter Biden and weaken Joe Biden’s presidential campaign,” NBC writes. “An unverified leak of documents — including salacious pictures from what President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani and a Delaware Apple repair store owner claimed to be Hunter Biden’s hard drive — were published in the New York Post[.]”

If that isn’t outrageously desperate and dishonest enough for you, the NBC News story does not even debunk the story it is claiming to debunk.  It throws around a lot of chaff, but the only real claim here is that Typhoon Investigations, the firm that put the document together, is a fake “intelligence firm” and — LOL — uses “anonymous sourcing.”

One of the document’s authors stands by his work and is challenging anyone, including NBC, to present him with any facts he got wrong.

“To hear journalists [w]ho use anonymous sources all the time [act] morally superior is disgusting,” he tweeted Thursday. “Second, no one has written about the contents of the paper or found factual fault with anything in the report.”

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

WATCH: L.A. Times ‘Undecided’ Focus Group Chooses Trump After Last Debate


Reported by JOEL B. POLLAK | 

Read more at https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/22/watch-l-a-times-undecided-focus-group-chooses-trump-after-last-debate/

Frank Luntz (Andrew Caballero – Reynolds / AFP / Getty)

Though many participants complained about Trump’s “personality” in general, many also felt he had been more “presidential” on the night. And many complained that Democratic Party nominee Joe Biden seemed vague and elusive in his answers.

 

 

 

Some voters expressed feelings of guilt in admitting they would vote for Trump, but said they simply could not trust Biden to do the job. One said that his age was a concern; another said that voting for Biden felt like voting for an “idea,” since he seemed unlikely to be running his own administration.

Another undecided voter said that he felt that Trump had shown, at least, what he could do over the past four years.

Luntz ended the discussion after asking participants whom they would choose, after watching the debate. Of the eight “undecided” voters he asked, seven chose Trump and one still seemed undecided.

Watch the full event at the Los Angeles Times.

A CNN poll of debate watchers gave the win to Biden by 14 points

 

That was considerably narrower than the margin in CNN’s poll of the first debate, which gave Biden a 32-point win.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book is The Trumpian Virtues: The Lessons and Legacy of Donald Trump’s Presidency. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Nolte: Washington Post Says Election Will End in Violence Unless Biden Wins Landslide


Reported by JOHN NOLTE | 

URL of the originating web site: https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2020/09/03/nolte-washington-post-says-election-will-end-violence-unless-biden-wins-landslide/

PORTLAND, OR – AUGUST 1: A protester burns an American flag in front of the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse in the early morning on August 1, 2020 in Portland, Oregon. Friday was the second night in a row without police intervention, following weeks of clashes between federal officers and …Nathan Howard/Getty Images

Because the Post piece is both fake news and irresponsible, I’m not going to compound those sins by linking it here. The Post’s tweet advertising the piece (which I also won’t link) sums up the threat perfectly: “The election will likely spark violence — and a constitutional crisis,” the tweet reads. “In every scenario except a Biden landslide, our simulation ended catastrophically.”

Only a Biden landslide can save America from a national catastrophe.

In other words…

That’s a nice country you got there. Be a shame if anything happened to it.

The Post’s bald-faced threat is couched in a piece of analysis that does not even attempt to be serious, especially in a country where, as I write this, countless Democrat-run cities are on fire thanks to Black Lives Matter and Antifa, two left-wing terrorists groups who operate as Brownshirts for the Democrat Party and media outlets like the Washington Post — who regularly encourage and protect these domestic terrorists.

Even more ludicrous, the Post’s threat is only made possibly by way of its cherry-picking of “experts.”

They make it all so official-sounding. I’ve emphasized the howlers:

President Trump has broken countless norms and ignored countless laws during his time in office, and while my colleagues and I at the Transition Integrity Project didn’t want to lie awake at night contemplating the ways the American experiment could fail, we realized that identifying the most serious risks to our democracy might be the best way to avert a November disaster. So we built a series of war games, sought out some of the most accomplished Republicans, Democrats, civil servants, media experts, pollsters and strategists around, and asked them to imagine what they’d do in a range of election and transition scenarios.

landslide for Joe Biden resulted in a relatively orderly transfer of power. Every other scenario we looked at involved street-level violence and political crisis.

I swear I’m not making that up. I know it sounds like something I’d make up, especially something as hilarious as a “Transition Integrity Project” operating from the same Washington Post hellhole that led the fake news propaganda jihad for the Russia Collusion Hoax coup plotters. But it’s all real. I swear. Look it up if you don’t believe me.

Anyway, the Transition Integrity Project’s war games (can you believe they used the term “war games?”) are staffed only with ringers. The “accomplished Republicans” are all — and I do mean all — bitter, half-witted, Trump haters:  Michael Steele. Bill Kristol. Trey Grayson.

On the other side are only Biden loyalists: John Podesta. Donna Brazile. Jennifer Granholm.

Not even one disgruntled Bernie Bro.

Not even one.

So the Transition Integrity Project asked six people who f–king hate Donald Trump something about Donald Trump and the answer is not looking so good for Donald Trump.

Transition Integrity Project?

More like the Transition Rigged Project.

So even though Joe Biden’s supporters are right now — I mean right now as I write this — burning down a whole bunch of Democrat-run cities and Joe Biden has said almost nothing to stop them and PLENTY to encourage them, the Transition Rigged Project talked to six people who fucking hate Donald Trump and came to this bottom line [emphasis added]:

In every exercise, both teams sought to mobilize their supporters to take to the streets. Team Biden repeatedly called for peaceful protests, while Team Trump encouraged provocateurs to incite violence, then used the resulting chaos to justify sending federalized Guard units or active-duty military personnel into American cities to “restore order,” leading to still more violence. (The exercises underscored the tremendous power enjoyed by an incumbent president: Biden can call a news conference, but Trump can call in the 82nd Airborne.)

Yep, the 82nd Airborne, y’all.

Here’s something else the Transition Rigged Project war gamed:

In the “narrow Biden win” scenario, Trump refused to leave office and was ultimately escorted out by the Secret Service — but only after pardoning himself and his family and burning incriminating documents.

Let me tell you what’s happening here…

If Trump wins, the organized left, and you can bet that includes media outlets like the Washington Post, intend to declare war on us. On you and I.

Not political war.

War-war.

That’s what they’re doing now.

That’s what the Democrat Party’s and the media’s Brownshirts in Black Lives Matter and Antifa are doing right now in Kenosha and Rochester and Minneapolis and Portland and will do in any other place where an excuse can be found or manufactured.

The war is a hot war. If Trump wins re-election it’s going to get hotter.

The Washington Post is warning us — not just that there will be a war if Trump loses, but that we will be blamed for the war.

Hey, we warned you if you didn’t pay for protection your store would burn down.

Hey, we warned you if you didn’t vote for Joe Biden your store and your home and your car and your life would burn down.

This is not a drill.

This is a threat.

Take this threat seriously.

Prepare yourself.

Prepare yourself before it’s too late to prepare yourself.

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

‘Cinderella’ Star Billy Porter: ‘Our Country Is in the Mess We’re in Because of Whiteness’


Reported by ALANA MASTRANGELO | 

URL of the originating web site: https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2020/08/25/billy-porter-our-country-is-in-the-mess-were-in-because-of-whiteness/

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA – FEBRUARY 09: Billy Porter attends the 2020 Vanity Fair Oscar Party hosted by Radhika Jones at Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts on February 09, 2020 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Frazer Harrison/Getty Images)

“The reason why our country is in the mess we’re in is simply because of whiteness. White supremacy. White people choke-holding power and sucking the life out of humanity,” said Billy Porter in a recent Vanity Fair portfolio interview. The Little Show of Horrors actor made his remarks in response to being asked “what is one specific fact, news story, or aspect that you feel has not received enough attention?”

Porter also went on to attack President Donald Trump, saying “Orangina 45, that cancer that is in our White House, has been handed the power, without consequence, to have his hate metastasize all over the people.”

“Why are we not talking about figuring out how to remove this monster from the highest office in the land right now! ‘Cause we might not be alive come November. And this is not hyperbole,” added the American Horror Story actor.

The Pose star, who is the first openly gay black man to win the Emmy for lead actor in a drama series, was recently featured at the Democrat National Convention (DNC), in which he ended the first night of the event by singing a bizarre rendition of Buffalo Springfield’s “For What It’s Worth.”

“The public lynching of George Floyd galvanized the people all over the world to rise up,” Porter told Vanity Fair. “It’s a wonder to see young people of all colors leading the charge.”

“And… white folks are mad now, so maybe something might get done,” he added.

You can follow Alana Mastrangelo on Twitter at @ARmastrangelo, on Parler at @alana, and on Instagram.

Pollak: Democrats Go Postal with Busted Mailbox Conspiracy Theory


Reported by JOEL B. POLLAK | 

URL of the originating web site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/08/17/pollak-democrats-go-postal-with-busted-mailbox-conspiracy-theory/

Mailboxes (Justin Sullivan / Getty)

The truth is that the mailboxes were removed because mailboxes are always being removed. At least 14,000 were removed during the Obama-Biden administration. Democrats are creating a new hysteria to cast Trump as a tyrant and motivate their conspiracy-theory-addled voters.

Former Vice President Joe Biden has enthusiastically inflamed this phony conspiracy theory — far more directly than Trump can be said to have “promoted” or “encouraged” the Kamala Harris “Birther” theory (which he declined to pursue).

The truth is far more mundane.

The U.S. Postal Service has been a problem for years, constantly losing money.

In 2009, the postmaster general proposed moving to five-day-per-week mail delivery to cut costs. President Barack Obama criticized the service that year for failing to keep up with private sector competitors. The Obama-Biden administration considered closing nearly 3,700 post office locations, and proposed cutting 12,000 postal jobs.

President Trump tried a different tack, demanding in 2018 that Amazon lower the prices it charged the U.S. Postal Service for delivering its packages to consumers.

One aspect of ongoing cost management is the removal of mailbox from areas where few people deposit mail. Kimberly Frum, a spokeswoman for the service, told The Hill (via the Blaze) that low-volume mailboxes are regularly removed to cut costs:

She said that low-volume mailboxes are a financial drag on the Postal Service, which lost more than $2 billion in the second quarter.

“It is a fluid process and figures can vary from day-to-day,” Frum said. “Historically, mail boxes have been removed for lack of use and installed in growth areas.”

“When a collection box consistently receives very small amounts of mail for months on end, it costs the Postal Service money in fuel and workhours for letter carriers to drive to the mailbox and collect the mail. Removing the box is simply good business sense in that respect. It is important to note that anyone with a residential or business mailbox can use it as a vehicle to send outgoing mail.”

(Update: Note that the photograph of “retired” mailboxes, above, is from 2009, during the first year of the Obama-Biden administration.)

The removal of mailboxes has been halted until after the election, to avoid further confusion (sown deliberately by Democrats and the media). But even with fewer mailboxes, the U.S. Postal Service can probably handle the delivery of ballots, Byron York argues in the Washington Examiner. It handles hundreds of millions of items daily.

The bottleneck is not necessarily the U.S. Postal Service, but rather the state and local election officials who set arbitrary deadlines for postmarking ballots, and who will have to sort out millions more additional mailed ballots than they are used to handling. In many states, they have never done anything like it before.

In New York’s Democratic primary, more than one out of every four vote-by-mail ballots was disqualified. In Clark County, Nevada, 223,000 mailed ballots were returned as undeliverable. That is not a postal problem; it is a government problem that cannot be fixed by November.

Democrats have targeted Postmaster General Louis DeJoy because he is a Republican donor. They ignore the fact that he  “made a fortune in shipping and logistics” and that his “former company was a contractor of the Postal Service for many years,” York notes. DeJoy’s plan to save the U.S. Postal Service involves delivering all mail in the morning, to avoid the expense of overtime pay. It is currently being tested across the country. Democrats have turned that into a dark conspiracy to steal the election — or cast doubt on mail-in voting.

But given that the Obama-Biden administration itself removed thousands upon thousands of mailboxes, this is a conspiracy theory that — like the others — has gone bust, at least for those of us living in the real world.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His new book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Tucker Carlson: NY Times Threatening to Reveal Where I Live — ‘To Hurt Us, to Injure My Wife and Kids’


Reported by JEFF POOR | 

URL of the originating web site: https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/07/20/tucker-carlson-ny-times-threatening-to-reveal-where-i-live-to-hurt-us-to-injure-my-wife-and-kids/

At the close of his program on Monday night, Fox News Channel’s Tucker Carlson revealed The New York Times had a story in the work that would divulge the location of his home, which could potentially put him and his family in harm’s way.

“Last week, The New York Times began working on a story about where my family and I live,” he said. “As a matter of journalism, there is no conceivable justification for a story like that. The paper is not alleging we’ve done anything wrong, and we haven’t. We pay our taxes. We like our neighbors. We’ve never had a dispute with anyone. So why is The New York Times doing a story on the location of my family’s house? Well, you know why. To hurt us, to injure my wife and kids so that I will shut up and stop disagreeing with them.”

Carlson reminded viewers that nearly two years ago, another such incident occurred when he was residing in Washington, D.C. An angry mob showed up at his home, forcing his wife to hide while the angry mob aligned with Antifa vandalized his home. He said the same could occur if The New York Times followed through with the story.

“Editors there know exactly what will happen to my family when it does run,” Carlson continued. “I called them today, and I told them. But they didn’t care. They hate my politics. They want this show off the air. If one of my children gets hurt because of a story they wrote, they won’t consider it collateral damage. They know it’s the whole point of the exercise: To inflict pain on our family, to terrorize us, to control, we say. That’s the kind of people they are.”

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

Ann Coulter OPED: Trump and China: A Love Story


Commentary By Ann CoulterAnn Coulter Posted: Apr 22, 2020 3:45 PM

Trump and China: A Love Story

Source: Xie Huanchi/Xinhua via AP

Liberals claim to be appalled that Trump didn’t issue his stay-at-home protocols for the Wuhan virus back in January or early February. What do you think the media’s reaction would have been if Trump had started babbling about a viral pandemic in the middle of his impeachment trial?

Let’s see. On Jan. 28, Trump released his long-awaited “Middle East Peace Plan,” which was immediately denounced by everyone except Jared Kushner and Sheldon Adelson. Still, the last 1 million Middle East Peace Plans led to tons of think pieces, analyses and arguments.

Here’s how Trump’s “Peace Plan” was reported:

“Tonight, impeached and indicted. Seems like a good time for a distraction: Their plan for peace in the Middle East.” — Becky Anderson, CNN, Jan. 28, 2020

“The Trump administration has dubbed it the deal of the century. Critics see it as a PR stunt to distract from Trump’s impeachment.” — Michele Kelemen, NPR’s “All Things Considered,” Jan. 28, 2020

“Many analysts and supporters of a two-state solution to the [Middle East] conflict have called the promised rollout of the plan this week a distraction from Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial.” — The New York Times, Jan. 25, 2020

There are plenty of reasons to attack Trump for the virus sweeping our country, but the media are mad at him for not doing something that would have been absurd: shutting down the country when there wasn’t a single Wuhan flu death in the nation and the media had barely mentioned it.

In fact, the first time most news consumers heard about the latest Chinese coronavirus was when liberals attacked Trump for shutting down travel from China at the end of January.

The Times responded with an op-ed titled, “Who Says It’s Not Safe to Travel to China?” bemoaning “xenophobic rhetoric and the building of walls.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders mocked the ban at a CNN town hall debate, saying, “I don’t know you have to stop travel from China,” but Trump likes “to build walls … to separate us from other people.”
Politico cited “a growing chorus of public health experts” who warned that the China travel ban could “stigmatiz[e] people of Asian descent.”
The Nation magazine reported that the risk to Americans from the Wuhan coronavirus was “low” and accused Trump of playing to “well-worn, racist tropes that depict Chinese people as dirty and disease-carrying.”

So go screw yourselves, media.

On the other hand, Trump does deserve a lot of the blame for the Wuhan virus by keeping — wait, checking my notes — NONE of his promises on China. This, the media will never mention.

During the campaign, Trump sure talked a good game. He said, “We can’t continue to allow China to rape our country.” He vowed to put tariffs on their goods and bring manufacturing home.

Then he got elected, and Jared Kushner, Gary Cohn and Trump’s other salt-of-the-earth advisers told him tariffs were a bad idea. So he imposed no tariffs for two long years and, today, almost all our pharmaceuticals, face masks and other crucial supplies are still being made in China.

On the bright side, China fast-tracked all of Ivanka’s trademarks!

Trump has allowed hundreds of thousands of Chinese students to keep attending American universities. He can’t stop gushing about the H-1B workers. In 2018, Trump tweeted a warm welcome to H1-B visa holders, promising them “a path to citizenship” and heaping praise on these “talented and highly skilled people” taking American jobs.

Norman Matloff, University of California, Davis, computer science professor recently wrote:

“Here is something you won’t read elsewhere: Silicon Valley leads the SF Bay Area in COVID-19 cases — leads by FAR ….

“Silicon Valley, of course, is home to very large numbers of immigrant engineers from China, who have the means to make frequent trips to China to visit family, especially during Chinese New Year, when the virus started to spread like mad within China and started to do so in the U.S.”

As we now know, the first two Wuhan flu deaths in America were in … Silicon Valley.

“Birth tourism” has also continued apace under Trump, with tens of thousands of pregnant Chinese ladies flying to America every year for the sole purpose of giving birth to an anchor baby, who will then be used to bring the whole family here.

There’s one way to stop it, and Trump could do it tomorrow. Sign an executive order ending the anchor baby scam. Not say he’s going to sign it, as he does whenever he wants to gin up the base. Actually sign it.

The Supreme Court has never ruled that the children born to illegal aliens or tourists are citizens, for the simple reason that that would be insane. The 14th amendment is about slavery, as the court has repeatedly held, not Chinese birth tourists or pregnant Mexicans.

But he won’t do it. Ivanka needs her trademarks — and Goldman might give Jared a job! Sorry about that Wuhan flu, America.

OUTRAGEOUS! Hidden from the American Public — 74-78% of COVID-19 Patients have At Least One Underlying Health Problem!


Reported By Jim Hoft | Published April 1, 2020 at 9:22am

As we reported earlier — There were 83,780 flu-pneumonia deaths in America this season. The CDC estimated 24,000 to 62,000 flu deaths this year.

We also have Washington DC experts continually changing their “scientific models.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci changed his estimates from 1.7 million deaths to 200,000 possible deaths in a span of 14 days!

TRENDING: In Midst of DC’s Coronavirus Shutdown, Ruth Bader Ginsburg Meets Trainer for Workouts at Supreme Court Gym

This is the same doctor who proposed shutting down the US economy.

The experts continue to promote “models” and “theories” at their press briefings.
Why not facts?

Jordan Schachtel

@JordanSchachtel

Birx looks at worst case scenario in Italy and decides we are going to model our response after them. Complete insanity, free from any data-based approach. The cure is not only worse than the disease. The cure is itself a poison pill.

VaPhilla Ice@newmanifest

Ugh. This isn’t rocket surgery. Quarantine the most vulnerable and continue common-sense social distancing and good hygiene, but plan to move back toward a functioning society within weeks, not months, or the economy won’t recover.

View image on Twitter

According to FOX News — 78% of COVID-19 Patients have At Least One Underlying Health Problem!

From this current CDC weekly report 74% had at least one underlying condition present (255/965 total).

When was the last time you heard this at a press conference?

And why do we not know the average age of the coronavirus patient in the US? In Italy the AVERAGE is 80-years-old. What about the US?

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Shelter in Place

Nadler doesn’t have far to go in order to shelter in place during the coronavirus crisis.
Nadler COVID-19 MaskPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Fake-News-O-Matic

CNN and the Mainstream Media can automatically twist Trump’s words into something they can use against him.
CNN is Fake NewsPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great Rush Limbaugh.

Nolte: All the Establishment Media’s Dangerous Coronavirus Lies


Reported by John Nolte | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2020/03/17/nolte-all-the-establishment-medias-dangerous-coronavirus-lies/

AP Photo/Evan Vucci
AP Photo/Evan Vucci
America’s deeply unserious but very corrupt and unreliable establishment media have no intention of changing their dangerous ways in the age of the Wuhan coronavirus. Watching the media spread lies and unnecessary panic over the last few weeks reminds me of the CNN Race Riots of 2014.

After the George Zimmerman Hoax failed, after it was discovered that a white man had not hunted down and murdered a black teen (Zimmerman is Hispanic and a jury ruled he killed in self-defense), the fake news media moved on to the Hands-Up-Don’t-Shoot Hoax, which was led primarily by far-left CNN and the far-left Washington Post.

The lies and hate spread by the corporate media resulted in multiple nights of rioting in the working class, predominantly black city of Ferguson, Missouri. Then, like a plague of locusts, and apparently under the impression the city doesn’t already have enough problems, CNN moved on to Baltimore.

Monsters

The reason the media’s coronavirus lies remind me of the CNN Race Riots of 2014 is because This Matters.

What I mean by that is that George Zimmerman, Ferguson, and Baltimore mattered. This was our malevolent media behaving exactly like a Bond villain: pushing a political agenda and looking to juice ratings at the expense of real people. Zimmerman, an innocent man, had his life and reputation ruined. The homes and businesses destroyed by those race riots are homes and businesses owned by everyday Americans, not the wealthy and certainly not CNN chief Jeff Zucker or anti-Trump activist Jake Tapper, whose fancy homes are miles away from the devastation they caused.

You see, as awful as the media have been over the last three years, the Russia Hoax and the Impeachment Hoax were D.C. food fights. That doesn’t mean there wasn’t collateral damage or that innocent people weren’t hurt — like President Trump and his family — but politics is politics. You know the risks going in…

Coronavirus is not a D.C. food fight. Like the CNN Race Riots of 2014, it affects everyday people: we have shut down our economy. The stock market is going insane. People are scared, worried, stressed, and have reason to be. Even if you remove the fear of the virus, no one can escape the fear of the panic, and the media’s blatant lies are only adding to this uncertainty and fear — and are doing so by design.

And for what? To what end..? Well, for the exact same reasons the media ginned up those race riots: a depraved indifference to human life driven by nothing more than a political agenda and the naked greed that comes with ratings and clicks.

Don’t believe me?

Here’s the evidence…

All the media’s coronavirus lies….

Keep in mind, these are not mistakes. Mistakes are random. Mistakes fall both ways. Our fake news media’s “mistakes” fall only one way — in the direction of ginning up panic in our streets and hatred of Trump and his supporters, who have already paid a very heavy price.

As you read this list, no matter what you do, do not call the media the enemy of the people … because that would be wrong.

  1. Trump Told Governors to Get Their Own Goddamned Ventilators!

Now that the media can no longer attack Trump over the coronavirus testing (as you’ll see below), we’ve moved to ventilators. “Ventilators” is the new Katrina, the new metric with which to beat Trump senseless… So naturally, the media are going to lie shamelessly, which is exactly what they are doing, even as I write these words:

At least eight New York Times authors shared a deceptively edited quote Monday from President Donald Trump’s recent call with state governors, creating the false impression that the president is denying federal support for ventilators that are needed in hospitals treating coronavirus patients.

In his message, the president recommended that states procure respirators and ventilators because it would be faster — but added that the federal government “will be backing you.”

The Times journalists omitted the bulk of the president’s statement as they shared the story on social media. The misleading, partial quote was also boosted by a CNN correspondent and became the lead headline at the left-wing Huffington Post.

Despite growing online backlash to this misinformation, the journalists have yet to delete or retract their comments.

Here’s the president’s full quote:

Respirators, ventilators, all of the equipment — try getting it yourselves. We will be backing you, but try getting it yourselves. Point of sales, much better, much more direct if you can get it yourself.

He’s telling the governors, Do what you can while we do what we can do. This is excellent advice the liars at the far-left New York Times are deliberately twisting to cause panic, to tell the public the president doesn’t care.

  1. Trump Seeks Monopoly on Coronavirus Vaccine

What better way to increase the world’s hatred of America, everyone’s hatred of Trump, and cause even more illegal aliens to crash into our country (seeking a vaccine) than to spread the fake news the American president is looking to monopolize any potential coronavirus vaccine?

But that is exactly what Reuters, The Guardian, Business Insider, and staffers at the New York Times and MSNBC did.

This lie doesn’t even make sense.

What good would it do America to corner the market on a vaccine? It costs us nothing to share the information so other countries can create their own vaccine. What good does it do the U.S. to sit around and watch everyone else die?

  1. Nationwide Curfew!

Good ol’ Jim Sciutto, one of the most infamous liars in the country, a former Obama official hired by the serial liars at CNN to serial lie.

“New: There are active discussions within the Trump administration to encourage a possible ‘curfew’ across the nation in which non-essential businesses would have to close by a certain time each night,” Sciutto wrote on social media, citing “CNN reporting.”

It’s not true. And unless you’re looking to sow panic, it also makes no sense. What good would a curfew do, most especially a nationwide curfew? Does the virus only strike at night? There are reports Patient Zero ate a bat.

Maybe it was a vampire bat!

  1. Trump Lied About the Google Website

“Google says it’s not publishing a national-scale coronavirus site,” CNN anti-Trump activist Jake Tapper tweeted to his 2.3 million Twitter followers last week.

He linked to a CNN story with the headline, “Google says it’s not publishing a national-scale coronavirus site anytime soon.” This was a story that smeared Trump as a liar for announcing Google will be building a national-scale coronavirus website.

The original and very fake CNN story can be found here.

Here’s the opener:

Google will not be publishing a national-scale website for coronavirus testing anytime soon, contrary to claims made by President Donald Trump during a Friday news conference.

Instead, a health-focused subsidiary owned by Google’s parent company, Alphabet, intends to launch a small-scale website next week to begin to triage California-based patients. The website will aim to serve a broader population only “over time” — not “very quickly,” as Trump said.

“What we’re building is a triage tool that will live on ProjectBaseline.com, and we plan to pilot it in California next week,” said Carolyn Wang, a spokesperson for the Alphabet subsidiary, Verily.

Here’s the Google Search screencap which captured CNN’s lie:

But now, if you click on that Google link, the CNN story says the exact opposite of what the original story said. Here’s the new headline and opener:

Google will partner with US government to develop a nationwide coronavirus website, company says

Google now says it is working with the government on the creation of a national website containing information about coronavirus symptoms and testing information.

“Google is partnering with the US Government in developing a national website that includes information about COVID-19 symptoms, risk and testing information,” the company said in a series of tweets Saturday evening.

The company did not give a time frame of when such a website would be up and running.

On Friday after the President said Google was helping to develop a website and it would be available soon, the company declined to say it would be publishing a national-scale website for coronavirus testing anytime soon.

PROPAGANDIST

Naturally, there is no editor’s note informing readers the original story was a lie or has been retracted or updated, which is highly unethical.

CNN spread a bald-faced lie to undermine the president, got caught, and did everything in its malevolent power to cover that lie up.

  1. Trump Shut Down the CDC’s Pandemic Department!

Do I even need to point out how virulent and widespread this talking point has been?

Sigh:

No, the White House didn’t ‘dissolve’ its pandemic response office. I was there.

It has been alleged by multiple officials of the Obama administration, including in The Post, that the president and his then-national security adviser, John Bolton, “dissolved the office” at the White House in charge of pandemic preparedness. Because I led the very directorate assigned that mission, the counterproliferation and biodefense office, for a year and then handed it off to another official who still holds the post, I know the charge is specious.

It is true that the Trump administration has seen fit to shrink the NSC staff. But the bloat that occurred under the previous administration clearly needed a correction. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, congressional oversight committees and members of the Obama administration itself all agreed the NSC was too large and too operationally focused (a departure from its traditional role coordinating executive branch activity). As The Post reported in 2015, from the Clinton administration to the Obama administration’s second term, the NSC’s staff “had quadrupled in size, to nearly 400 people.” That is why Trump began streamlining the NSC staff in 2017.

The reduction of force in the NSC has continued since I departed the White House. But it has left the biodefense staff unaffected[.]

It is this reorganization that critics have misconstrued or intentionally misrepresented. If anything, the combined directorate was stronger because related expertise could be commingled.

In other words, it wasn’t dissolved, it was streamlined.

  1. Trump Declared the Coronavirus a Hoax!

This desperate lie, launched by the far-left Politico, was quickly debunked by fact-checkers, including  the far-left Washington Post. That’s how big of a lie it is — the Washington Post conceded it was a lie.

Nevertheless, CNN continues to spread this lie.

  1. Calling the Wuhan Virus the ‘Wuhan Virus’ Is Racist

As has already been exhaustively pointed out, the naming of a virus or disease after a location — including a lily-white location like Lyme, Connecticut — is just how it’s done and has been done forever.

But now it’s racist, even though the very same media declaring it racist is the very same media that first called it the “Chinese Virus” or the “Wuhan Virus,” or some variation thereof.

Here’s a pretty comprehensive list that’s been floating around. There are probably more examples, but this more than makes the point:

  • “Japan and Thailand Confirm New Cases of Chinese Coronavirus,” The New York Times, 1/15/20
  • “The CDC and Homeland Security begin screening for Chinese Coronavirus at three major US airports as outbreak spreads in Asia,” CNBC, 1/17/20
  • “Vaccine for new Chinese coronavirus in the works,” CNN, 1/20/20
  • “First U.S. case of potentially deadly Chinese coronavirus confirmed in Washington state,” Washington Post, 1/21/20
  • “Chinese coronavirus outbreak has reached U.S. shores, CDC says,” Los Angeles Times, 1/21/20
  • “The First Case Of The Chinese Coronavirus Has Hit The US, CDC Reports,” Buzzfeed, 1/21/20
  • “First case of Chinese coronavirus confirmed in Washington state,” NBC’s Today Show, 1/24/20
  • “Chinese coronavirus infections, death toll soar as fifth case is confirmed in U.S.,” Washington Post, 1/26/20
  • “Japan confirms case of new Chinese virus, spread is ‘concerning,’” Reuters, 1/15/20
  • “How the Chinese virus outbreak impacts Lunar New Year travel,” National Geographic, 1/24/20
  • “China coronavirus ‘spreads before symptoms show,’” BBC, 1/26/20
  • “Over a thousand ‘likely’ infected by Wuhan virus in China: Study,” Al Jazeera, 1/18/20
  • “Stop the Wuhan virus,” Nature Magazine editorial, 1/21/20)
  • “China confirms Wuhan virus can be spread by humans,” CNN, 1/22/20
  • “First U.S. Case Reported of Deadly Wuhan Virus,” Wall Street Journal, 1/22/20
  • “Here are the symptoms of the deadly Wuhan coronavirus and when you should be worried,” Business Insider, 1/22/20
  • “Something Far Deadlier Than The Wuhan Virus Lurks Near You,” Kaiser Health News, 1/24/20
  • “With Wuhan virus genetic code in hand, scientists begin work on a vaccine,” Reuters, 1/24/20
  • “The Wuhan Virus: How to Stay Safe,” Foreign Policy, 1/25/20
  • “Something Far Deadlier Than The Wuhan Virus Lurks Near You,” USA Today, 1/29/20
  • “10-Year-Old Boy Raises Fears Wuhan Virus Could Spread Undetected,” Bloomberg, 1/29/20
  • “Your Questions About Wuhan Coronavirus, Answered, National Public Radio, 1/30/20
  • “Will the Wuhan virus become a pandemic?” The Economist, 1/30/20
    • NOTE: The photo in this article was on their COVER for this issue.

Additionally, the video below is nothing less than a devastating compilation of just how dishonest and unserious the media are:

To sum this up, the fake news media floods these words and terms into the American lexicon, and then sanctimoniously turns around and attacks those who repeat them as racist.

  1. Trump Rejected WHO Coronavirus Test Kits

Everyone from Grandpa Joe Biden to CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta to Esquire to NBC News to, to, to… This is such a lie, the far-left PolitiFact debunked it.

  1. Trump Blocked Testing Because Lower Numbers are Good for His Reelection

This lie arrives courtesy of the welfare queens at NPR and a Newsweek staffer’s hysterical amplification that has been retweeted almost a quarter-million times.

And once again, I ask, how does this makes any sense?

In the face of the facts, Trump is doing back-flips to start testing. What’s more, how does not testing benefit his re-election chances? It’s not as if people who test positive won’t eventually become symptomatic.

This is not just a lie (no other media outlet has confirmed it, which means even CNN couldn’t find a lying source that has lied to them so many times before to lie about this one), it’s by far the stupidest lie on this list.

  1. It’s Trump Fault Coronavirus Testing Was Delayed

Nope:

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said Tuesday that the blame for the slow pace of testing for coronavirus in the U.S. does not lie with either President Trump or the CDC.

Fauci told Hugh Hewitt on “The Hugh Hewitt” show that a “technical glitch” resulted in the delay in production of usable tests in the U.S., something Fauci prescribed to random error.

“This has nothing to do with anybody’s fault, certainly not the president’s fault.”

 

11. Trump Silenced Dr. Fauci

This lie spread like wildfire before Fauci himself was given a chance to tell the truth.

We are plagued with a dishonest, unreliable, unserious, dangerous media, driven only by political calculation and naked greed.

The media are so evil and indecent, even a pandemic can’t cure them. 

Dont-et-fear-control-you

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

please likeand share and leave a comment

MIT Biologist Says ‘Deep State Fear Mongering Will Go Down As Biggest Fraud’ to Manipulate Economies


Posted By  |

Where do you fall in the spectrum of the coronavirus response? Are you in panic over the virus? Maybe you’re just preparing for the worst and hoping for the best. That’s about where I am to be honest with you. Or do you feel like it’s all being blown way out of proportion and there’s really not much to be concerned about?

Wherever you may be on that spectrum, it’s perfectly fine to feel that way. There is a lot that we don’t know about this virus.

There is at least one person though who says that this is mostly a political play by the Deep State to manipulate the world economy through fear-mongering. This isn’t just anybody, this is MIT biologist and inventor of email, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai.

Ayyadurai said that this circumstance will actually go down in history as one of the biggest frauds ever.

Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai tweeted,

“As an MIT PhD in Biological Engineering who studies & does research nearly every day on the Immune System, the #coronavirus fear mongering by the Deep State will go down in history as one of the biggest fraud to manipulate economies, suppress dissent, & push MANDATED Medicine!”
Keep in mind that the Surgeon General Jerome Adams said, “What you’re going to hear from the president is what you’ve heard from him all along: that the risk to the average American of coronavirus at this time remains low,” he said. “However, we are seeing pockets in this country of increased cases of coronavirus. And so, we want people to prepare.”
Adams also said, “And so, what we want most of America to know is that you’re not at high risk for getting coronavirus, and if you do get it you are likely to recover. Ninety-eight, 99 percent of people are going to fully recover. And, we want the people who are at-risk…to know that you need to take extra precautions, you need to be extra careful about keeping your hands clean and about social distancing — making sure you’re staying away from large gatherings and people who might be sick.”

My thoughts are this: take precautions, be prepared, limit travel as much as possible.

Seen On A Doctor’s Office Door Today


The LEFT Stream Media Propagandist are constantly using whatever is in the news to bash, smear, put down, lie about President Trump and all who support him. Historically they have used things like coronavirus and use it to stock fear into the populace for whatever reason they think they need to in order to gain some political advantage. Terrorist do the very same thing. Anything to stock fear so the populace is negatively effected and The President is blamed

The image above squashes that fear by a doctor that won’t be manipulated. Please share it with everyone you can. This will help calm those fears and return our country to normal day to day operations. And also please remember,

.

 

 

 

 

Nolte: Media-Approved Hate Crimes Against Trump Supporters Explode Post-Acquittal


Written by John Nolte | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/02/14/nolte-media-approved-hate-crimes-against-trump-supporters-explode-post-acquittal/

A girl sits in a van next to an anti-Donald Trump poster during a demonstration against the US president in Brussels on May 24, 2017. US President Donald Trump is on a two-day visit to Belgium, to attend a NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) summit on May 25. / AFP … BRUNO FAHY/AFP/Getty

Nothing proves “silence is consent” more than the media establishment’s revealing indifference in the face of a recent wave of violent attacks and threats against Trump supporters.

First, a little background…

As of March of 2019, Breitbart News documented 332 separate, media-approved political hate crimes committed against Trump supporters. This list includes physical assaults, vandalism, and the open encouragement of violence against individuals and groups based only on their personal beliefs. Sadly, through its deafening silence and indifference, the corporate media not only give consent to commit acts of political violence against those of us on the right, as we have seen on countless occasions — especially at the far-left CNN — the media regularly encourage and openly call for violence against Trump and his supporters. And now the violence is once again exploding…

With the Russia Collusion Hoax exposed, President Trump forever acquitted of a frame-job impeachment, a Democrat presidential field filled with hapless, white, decrepit millionaires and billionaires; the president piling up a list of solid accomplishments and his re-election looking more likely by the day, the impotent rage of the media is increasing, and this is obviously spilling over into the public at large, which is why we have seen at least seven hate crimes against Trump supporters in just over a week.

  • February 9, 2020: Man Arrested for Driving Car Through GOP Voter Registration Booth

Witnesses told JSO that a man in his 20s driving an older brown Chevy van pulled up to the tent before driving through, running over their tables and chairs. Volunteers for the Republican Party were registering people to vote.

No volunteers were hurt, according to JSO. Witnesses said the driver of the van, stopped the vehicle, got out of the van and took a video while making obscene gestures before he left.

The vandalism occurred around 2:37 a.m. Saturday. Surveillance video picked up a vehicle parking in the lot outside the building. A man walked out of the vehicle with a can of spray paint in his hands, went over to the front of the building and spray-painted the words “Still Traitors” in yellow and gold paint on the stucco front of the headquarters.

  • February 10, 2020: California GOP Headquarters Vandalized for Sixth Time in Two Years

The latest act of vandalism at the Humboldt County Republican headquarters in Eureka is the sixth of its kind in just two years, though the damage this time may be far more costly than prior incidents, the party’s local chair said Monday.

“This was above and beyond anything that’s happened before,” said John Schutt. “Windows were broken and the suspect had thrown rocks, too. He poured liquid on merchandise .. a lot of stuff was destroyed that way.”

  • February 12, 2020: UC Santa Cruz College Republican Display Destroyed and Vandalized

A 14-year-old high school student wearing a “Make America Hat Again” hat was struck and called a “fascist” while leaving a New Hampshire polling place Tuesday night with the father of his friend, authorities said.

Windham Police Capt. Bryan Smith confirmed the details of the incident to Pluralist and said an investigation was underway but would not comment further.

  • February 13, 2020: Man Threatens to Cut Throats of Arizona State Students for Trump Event

 According to reports, the former cop, Daniel Sprague, was celebrating his 50th birthday at The Stage bar on Broadway in Nashville, Tennessee, and donned a red “Make Fifty Great Again” hat given to him by his wife.

Sprague told WSMV that people came up to him and were “just loving the little word play on the hat and taking pictures and wishing me happy birthday.” However, Sprague claims one woman approached him and ultimately punched him in the face, grabbing his hat and shouting, “How dare you.”

When a rodeo clown in Nowheresville, Nowhere, puts on an Obama mask, the media destroy his reputation and career.

When some guy makes a video mocking CNN, the Hate Network destroys his life by threatening to doxx him.

When the media want certain behavior to stop, they launch jihads.

But when Trump supporters, including children, are physically assaulted, the media shrug, and that shrug is a wink, a nod of approval, a way of saying, Carry on, we’re on your side. You heroes have nothing to fear from us.

The corporate media are a danger to every law-abiding American citizen, and their embrace of violence against us, their encouragement of that violence, will only get worse as the 2020 race heats up.

And never forget that as the media encourage this violence against us, they also seek to disarm us.

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

Project Veritas: Bernie Sanders Field Organizer Suggests Gulags to Help ‘Nazified’ Trump Voters


Written by Joshua Caplan | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/14/project-veritas-bernie-sanders-field-organizer-suggests-gulags-to-help-nazified-trump-voters/

(INSET: Project Veritas screenshot of Sanders field organizer Kyle Jurek) DES MOINES, IA – DECEMBER 31: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) leaves the stage after speaking at a New Year’s Eve campaign event on December 31, 2019 in Des Moines, Iowa. The focus of many democratic presidential campaigns … Stephen Maturen/Getty; Project Veritas

An undercover video published by Project Veritas on Tuesday shows a field organizer for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ 2020 campaign saying Soviet gulags were actually a positive phenomenon, suggesting that some similar program could re-educate Trump supporters and billionaires.

The video begins with a Project Veritas journalist asking an individual identified as Sanders organizer Kyle Jurek if “MAGA people” could be re-educated if Sanders wins the White House. “We gotta try,” Jurek replies. “In Nazi Germany, after the fall of the Nazi Party, there was a shit-ton of the populace that was fuck**g Nazified.”

“Germany had to spend billions of dollars re-educating their fuck**g people to not be Nazis,” he continues. “We’re probably going to have to do the same fuck**g thing here.”

“That’s kind of what all Bernie’s whole fuck**g like, ‘hey, free education for everybody’ because we’re going to have to teach you to not be a fuck**g Nazi,” he added.

In another part of the video, Jurek is seen discussing Soviet Union dictator Joseph Stalin’s use of gulags, where he claims that the CIA was overly critical of them. “People were actually paid a living wage in the gulags. They have conjugal visits in gulags. Gulags were meant for re-education,” he says.

Jurek is then seen suggesting that the most effective way to re-educate the billionaire class is to order them to “break rocks for 12 hours a day.”

“[The] greatest way to break a fuck**g billionaire of their privilege and their idea that they’re superior, go and break rocks for 12 hours a day. You’re now a working class person, and you’re going to fuck**g learn what the means, right?”

The video also shows Jurek warning that Milwaukee, host of this year’s Democratic National Convention, will “burn” if Sanders fails to win the party’s nomination. “If Bernie doesn’t get the nomination or it goes to a second round at the DNC convention, fuck**g Milwaukee will burn,” says Jurek. “It’ll start in Milwaukee and then when the police push back on that, other sites will fuck**g [explode].”

The footage concludes with Jurek issuing the chilling prediction that Milwaukee could see riots akin to the 1968 convention in Chicago, where left-wing activists engaged in violent riots in the streets. “Be ready to be in Milwaukee for the DNC convention. We’re going to make [1968] look like a fuck**g girl’s scout fuck**g cookout,” warns the Sanders field organizer. “The cops are going to be the ones fuck**g beaten in Milwaukee.”

The undercover video’s emergence comes as 2020 Democrats are slated to debate Tuesday evening — their final meeting before Iowa holds the nation’s first caucus on February 3. Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe has teased that Tuesday’s footage is one of several upcoming videos to be released as part of the group’s “Expose2020” campaign.

BOMBSHELL: Book to Reveal How Biden Family Siphoned ‘Millions in Taxpayer Cash’—Hunter Biden Just the ‘Tip of the Iceberg’


Written by Rebecca Mansour | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/09/bombshell-book-to-reveal-how-biden-family-siphoned-millions-in-taxpayer-cash-hunter-biden-just-the-tip-of-the-iceberg/

US Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden visits the Great Wall of China at Badaling, north of Beijing, 10 August 2001. After meeting Chinese leaders for two days, Biden and his delegation left Beijing to meet with villagers and visit the Great Wall. AFP PHOTO/POOL (Photo by Greg Baker … Greg Baker/AFP/Getty, HarperCollins

A forthcoming bombshell book from publishing giant HarperCollins will reveal how five members of Joe Biden’s family—the “Biden Five”—siphoned tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer cash and guaranteed loans. And the recent scandals involving Joe and Hunter Biden, Ukraine, and Burisma are just “the tip of the iceberg,” say sources close to the publisher.

The upcoming book, Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite, is the latest investigative work from Government Accountability Institute (GAI) President and Breitbart News senior contributor Peter Schweizer.

Publisher HarperCollins has the book under a strict embargo until its January 21 release. Sources with knowledge of its contents say the book will “upend official Washington,” similar to the way Schweizer’s past works like Clinton Cash and Secret Empires did when he broke the Uranium One and Biden-Burisma scandals.

Beyond the Biden revelations, Profiles in Corruption also contains chapters with breaking news on top progressive luminaries, including: Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobuchar, Kamala Harris, Sherrod Brown, Eric Garcetti, and Cory Booker.

In a statement to Axios’s Mike Allen, the author described the book as “a sweeping, detailed look at how the leading figures of progressivism have leveraged the power of their positions.” The book reportedly took a year and a half to research.

Amazon’s pre-sale book description of Profiles in Corruption states: “Washington insiders operate by a proven credo: when a Peter Schweizer book drops, duck and brace for impact.”

Nolte: The 2019 Breitbart News Fake News Awards


Written by John Nolte | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2020/01/01/nolte-the-2019-breitbart-news-fake-news-awards/

WASHINGTON, DC – APRIL 26: Jeff Zucker and Jake Tapper attend the CNN Correspondents’ Brunch at Toolbox Studio on April 26, 2015 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Riccardo S. Savi/Getty Images)

Here are the third annual Breitbart News Awards for fake news and overall bias and bad behavior.

The low-lights are endless, but if they’re still not enough for you, here are the awards from 2017 and 2018.

AND THE WINNERS ARE…

2019’s ‘Fox Staffer Caught Kissing Future Employer Jeff Zucker’s Ass the Most’ Award

Andrew Napolitano

 

2019’s ‘Fox Staffer Caught Kissing Future Employer Jeff Zucker’s Ass the Second Most’ Award

Chris Wallace

 

2019’s ‘Best Impression of Death Wish Meets Pajama Boy’ Award

Joe Scarborough

 

2019’s ‘Best Impression of Joe McCarthy Meets Pajama Boy’ Award

Chuck Todd

 

2019’s ‘Best Impression of Your First Wife’ Award

Tie: Jennifer Rubin and Ana Navarro

 

2019’s ‘Best News of the Year’ Award

CNN Ratings Hit 3-Year Low

 

2019’s ‘Worst Parent’ Award

Fredo

 

2019’s ‘Most Shameless Act of Stenography’ Award

The Daily Beast’s Molly Jong-Fast

 

2019’s ‘Worst Prediction by a Pundit Who Will Pay No Price for Being so Wrong’ Award

Douglas “Impeachment Will Turn Public Support Against Trump” Brinkley

 

2019’s ‘Best Overseer of CNN’s Racist Thought Plantation’ Award

Ana Navarro

 

2019’s ‘Rick Wilson Award for Working Through Your Sexual Hangups on TV’ Award

Rick Wilson

 

2019’s ‘Pauline Kael-esque Bubbled Cluelessness’ Award

The formerly worth-a-damn Peggy Noonan

 

2019’s ‘Bye, Felicia!’ Award

Shepard Smith

 

2019’s ‘Self-Ownage’ Award

Fredo

 

2019 ‘For Utter Spinelessness’ Award

Politico Disowning Its Own Reporting

 

2019’s ‘Worst Attempt to Make Up Decades of Rape-Enabling’ Award

NBC’s Disastrous All-Ladies Presidential Debate

 

2019 ‘Award for Being Exposed as a Racist and Not Getting Fired at Axios’ Award

Alexi McCammond

 

2019’s ‘Being So Dull You Can’t Beat the Hideous Nicole Wallace in the Ratings’ Award

Fox’s Neal Cavuto

 

2019’s ‘Joe McCarthy Meets the Albino Creature from the Black Lagoon Crossed with a Serial Liar’ Award

Carl Bernstein

 

2019’s ‘Homophobe with Most Unimaginative Insults’ Award

Joy Reid

 

2019’s ‘Adam Schiff’s Puppet’ Award

Chris Wallace

 

2019’s ‘Shrill and Dishonest Alarmist in an Unironic Goatee’ Award

Chuck Todd

 

2019’s ‘Worst Impression of SE Cupp the Morning After a Bender’ Award

Fox Business Channel’s Kennedy

 

2019’s ‘Watch Me Humiliate Myself to Please Jeff Zucker’ Award

CNN’s Dana Bash

 

2019’s ‘Exposed as a Sexist Pig and Still Not Fired by ABC News’ Award

Matthew Dowd

 

2019’s ‘I’m Just Gonna Say Some Stupid Shit to Please Jeff Zucker’ Award

John Avlon

 

2019’s ‘Spineless Chicken’ Award

MSNBC’s Mimi Rocah

 

2019’s ‘Best Impression of America’s Notorious Porn Lawyer’ Award

Anthony Scaramucci

 

2019’s ‘Best Coverup for a Child Rapist’ Award

ABC News

 

2019’s ‘WTF?’ Award

Tater

 

2019’s ‘WTF, Cuck?’ Award

Fox’s Chris Wallace

 

2019’s ‘Loving Me a Badass Islamic Terrorist Leader’ Award

The Washington Post’s Max Boot

 

2019’s ‘Nags Trump Like a Lonely and Bitter Old Woman’ Award

Jake Tapper and His Resting Bitch Face

 

2019’s ‘Failing Upward’ Award

CBS News Anchor Norah O’Donnell

 

2019’s ‘Most Opposed to Free Speech’ Award

Tater

 

2019’s ‘Nobody Misses You’ Award

Megyn Kelly

 

21st Century’s ‘Fakest Video Ever’ Award

ABC News

 

2019’s ‘Nobody Misses You Either’ Award

Sam Donaldson

 

2019’s ‘Most Gratifying Flop Written by Two Liars’ Award

The Education of Brett Kavanaugh

 

2019’s ‘Good Riddance to Fake News’ Award

Shepard Smith

 

2019’s ‘Still the Dumbest Woman on TV’ Award

April Ryan

 

2019’s ‘Fake News Addiction’ Award

The Washington Post

 

2019’s ‘Fake News Outlet that Harbors the Most Racists’ Award

New York Times

 

2019’s ‘Wishing a Serial Killer on a Husband and Father’ Award

Vice Media

 

2019’s ‘Lowest Rated Cable News Show by a Country Mile’ Award

CNN’s New Day

 

2019’s ‘Biggest Fabricator of Evidence Not Named James Comey’ Award

The New York Times

 

2019’s ‘9/11 Terrorist Denier’ Award

The New York Times

 

2019’s ‘Fact Checker Caught Blatantly Lying’ Award

PolitiFact

 

2019’s ‘Fact Checker Caught Blatantly Lying’ Award – Part 2

The Washington Post

 

2019’s ‘Thanks for Proving Feminists Are Weak Neurotics’ Award

New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg

 

2019’s ‘Fascist Oxygen Thief’ Award

Meghan McCain

 

2019’s ‘Serial-Lying Snowflake of the Year’ Award

New York Times’ Bret Stephens

 

2019’s ‘Serial Loser’ Award

MSNBC’s Five-Time Loser Donny Deutsch

 

2019’s ‘Being a Jew-Hater While Keeping Your Job at the New York Times Award

Tom Wright-Piersanti

 

2019’s ‘Most Gloriously Humiliating Retraction’ Award

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell

 

2019’s ‘No Joke, This Woman Is Dumb’ Award

CNN’s April Ryan

 

2019’s ‘Dangerous Fake News Outlet that Directly Incited the Most Physical Assaults’ Award

CNN

 

2019’s ‘Unhinged Harpy Incites Violence’ Award

Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin

 

2019’s ‘Failing Fake News Outlet’s Desperate Click-Whoring of the Year’ Award

Newsweek

 

2019’s ‘So Irrelevant No One Mentions Them Anymore’ Award

BuzzFeed Politics

 

2019’s ‘We Hired Only Terrible and Pedantic Writers with No Imagination’ Award

For the 9th consecutive year, something called Mediaite

 

2019’s ‘What a Total Dick’ Award

CNN’s Brian Karem

 

2019’s ‘Never Right but Always Certain’ Award

David French

 

2019’s ‘Credibly Accused of Sexual Misconduct and Still Working at CNN’ Award

Don “Smell My Fingers” Lemon

 

2019’s ‘Grab the Popcorn’ Award

The Hissy Fight Between Terrorist Lover Max Boot and the Alt-Right National Review

 

2019’s ‘Lady Joe McCarthy’ Award

CNN’s Joan Walsh

 

2019’s ‘Stupidest Take from Welfare Queens’ Award

NPR

 

2019’s ‘Bully with a Resting Bitch Face’ Award

CNN’s Jake Tapper

 

2019’s ‘She’d Be Just as Insufferable Without the Elitist Accent’ Award

Christiane Amanpour

 

2019’s ‘Taking Beto O’Rourke’s Stenography with a Resting Bitch Face’ Award

CNN’s Jake Tapper

 

2019’s ‘Proven Conspiracy Theorist Still Working for NBC News’ Award

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow

 

2019’s ‘It’s Okay When a Democrat Serially Assaults Women’ Award

The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer

 

2019’s ‘Let’s Rehabilitate a Child Rapist’ Award

Three-way tie: National Review, Forbes, HuffPost

 

2019’s ‘White Supremacist Promoter with Resting Bitch Face’ Award

CNN’s Jake Tapper

 

2019’s ‘Dude, Where’d My Audience Go?’ Award

Tater

 

2019’s ‘Global Warming Hypocrite of the Year’ Award

The New York Times and its 6,250-ton air conditioner

 

2019’s ‘Defender of Violence Against Journalists’ Award

Media Matters

 

2019’s ‘Enabling Violence Against Journalists’ Award

CNN

 

2019’s ‘That Piece of Analysis Held Up Really Well’ Award

MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace

 

2019’s ‘Chatty Cathy’ Award

MSNBC’s Chuck Todd

 

2019’s ‘Biggest Fake News Trainwreck’ Award

CNN’s Anderson “uhm, we’re gonna take a quick break” Cooper

 

2019’s ‘HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!’ Award

CNN’s Jim “Double Chin” Acosta

 

2019’s ‘Harvey Weinstein’ Award

CNN’s Jeff Zucker

 

2019’s ‘Vichy Republican’ Award

George Will

 

2019’s ‘Vichy Conservative’ Award

National Review

 

2019s ‘We Just Made Some Shit Up’ Award

The Daily Beast

 

2019’s ‘Guy Who Worked with Credibly Accused Rapist Says What?’ Award

MSNBC’s Willie Geist

 

2019’s ‘Shameless Kiss-Ass’ Award

Politico’s Michael Grunwald

 

2019’s ‘Yeah, That’s a Real Shame’ Award

CNN

 

2019’s ‘Brownshirt’ Award

CBS News

 

2019’s ‘Treated Like a Punk in His Own Home’ Award

Fox’s Chris Wallace

 

2019’s ‘They Deserve Each Other’ Award

Joe and Mika Brzezinski

 

2019’s ‘Global Warming Denier’ Award

CNN

 

2019’s ‘Blacklisting Spree’ Award

Poynter

 

2019’s ‘Domestic Terrorist Champion’ Award

CNN’s Chris Cuomo

 

2019’s ‘We Hate The Joooooozzzzz’ Award

New York Times

 

2019’s ‘Vichy Christian’ Award

National Review

 

2019’s ‘Most Lies in Shortest Amount of Time’ Award

CNN’s Chris Cuomo

 

2019’s ‘We Know Nothing About Anything Important to Everyday People’ Award

New York Times

 

2019’s ‘Here’s Even More Proof I’m a Hugh-Strung Neurotic’ Award

New York Times’ Maggie Haberman

 

2019’s ‘Russia Truther’ Award

ABC’s Jon Karl

 

2019’s ‘Russia Truther in a Skirt’ Award

CNN’s Dana Bash

 

2019’s ‘Book Burner’ Award

Library Journal

 

2019’s ‘Russia Truther with Sleepy Eyes’ Award

MSNBC’s Chuck Todd

 

2019’s ‘Almost Dumber than April Ryan’ Award

CNN’s Alisyn Camerota

 

2019’s ‘Joke Police’ Award

Snopes

 

2019’s ‘Politico Award for Spreading Very Fake News’ Award

Politico

 

2019’s ‘Only the Fake Media Should Have Free Speech’ Award

CNN’s Christiane Amanpour

 

2019’s ‘Me and My Resting Bitch Face Live in Jeff Zucker’s Butt’ Award

Jake Tapper

 

2019’s ‘Shameless Coverup of the Year’ Award

Reuters

 

2019’s ‘I Can Be Bought’ Award

National Review’s Rich Lowry

 

2019’s ‘Cucks I Can’t Tell Apart but Don’t Read Anyway’ Award

The Dispatch and The Bulwark

 

2019’s ‘Epic Fail of a Kingmaker’ Award

Vanity Fair

 

2019’s ‘Starf**ker’ Award

ABC’s Robin Roberts

 

2019’s ‘Homophobe with Resting Bitch Face Who Finds  Rape Funny’ Award

CNN’s Jake Tapper

 

2019’s ‘It’s Not Blackface When a Democrat Does It’ Award

New York Times

 

2019’s ‘It’s Not a Bombshell When It Hurts a Democrat’ Award

Washington Post

 

2019’s ‘I Really Want Trump Assassinated’ Award

The Atlantic’s Jemele Hill

 

 2019’s ‘It’s Not Rape-Rape If It Happens to Brown People’ Award

Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler

 

2019’s ‘Spineless Bully’ Award

CNN’s Andrew Kaczynski

 

2019’s ‘America Needs Computer Coders’ Award

BuzzFeed

 

2019’s ‘It’s Your Own Fault for Wearing that Short Skirt’ Award

NBC’s Savannah Guthrie

 

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

Adam Schiff Gives Democrats Only 24 Hours to Sign Impeachment Report


Written by Joel B. Pollak | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/01/adam-schiff-gives-democrats-only-24-hours-to-read-impeachment-report/

WASHINGTON, DC – NOVEMBER 4: U.S. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) speaks to reporters following a closed-door hearing with the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight committees at the U.S. Capitol on November 4, 2019 in Washington, DC. On Monday, House investigators released the first transcripts from … Drew Angerer/Getty Images

House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) is giving members of his committee just 24 hours to read and sign off on his report recommending articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. As Breitbart News reported Friday, House Judiciary Committee chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler has previewed the report, and suggested it will include claims of “collusion” with Russia — as well as Ukraine, Russia’s enemy.

And as reported Saturday, Schiff will provide the full report to committee members on Monday, who must sign off on Tuesday in time for the first hearing in Nadler’s committee on Wednesday, which will discuss the supposed constitutional and legal basis for impeachment.

It is a foregone conclusion that Democrats will sign off on Schiff’s report. Evidence does not seem to be the top priority for Democrats: a majority favored an impeachment inquiry by August 1, eleven days before the so-called “whistleblower” sent a letter to Schiff complaining about Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky.

However, as the Washington Examiner‘s Byron York has noted, Democrats are in such a rush that they are leaving potential facts out of their examination. For example, they could wage a court battle to force former National Security Adviser John Bolton to testify. Bolton reportedly disapproved of the role played by U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani in relations with Ukraine. He could be a key witness. However, Democrats did not want to wait to hear what he had to say.

As York noted recently in a column titled “Why the rush toward impeachment?”, Democrats “are racing to get the job done by Christmas. They’re not even trying to hear from some key witnesses, like former national security adviser John Bolton, because they don’t want to take the time to go to court over it.”

York notes that Democrats are fearful of letting impeachment drag into the 2020 presidential primary, when it will pull several U.S. Senators off the campaign trail. And they are also worried about the fact that public support for impeachment is stagnant at best, and slipping at worst, after lackluster public hearings last month.

But the rush has been a feature from the very beginning. On the day that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry, the president had already announced that he had declassified the transcript (or “readout”) of the phone call with Zelensky, and that it would be published the next day. Pelosi did not want to wait for the evidence: her decision was driven by political factors.

Likewise, the Intelligence Committee has rushed its proceedings before all of the evidence was available to most members of Congress, or the public. It often published lengthy transcripts of closed-door depositions on the eve of public hearings, and only released the most exculpatory transcript after public hearings were over.

Nadler has given Trump until Friday to respond to a request to participate, either directly or through his counsel, in the Judiciary Committee’s impeachment proceedings.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Fact Check: No, Gordon Sondland Did Not Prove Ukraine ‘Quid pro Quo’


Reported by Joel B. Pollak | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/05/fact-check-no-gordon-sondland-did-not-prove-ukraine-quid-pro-quo/

Gordon Sondland, the United States Ambassador to the European Union, adresses the media during a press conference at the US Embassy to Romania in Bucharest September 5, 2019. (Photo by Daniel MIHAILESCU / AFP) (Photo credit should read DANIEL MIHAILESCU/AFP/Getty Images)

CLAIM: Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland confirmed, contrary to earlier testimony, that there had been a “quid pro quo” between President Donald Trump and the Ukrainian government: military aid for “dirt.”

VERDICT: FALSE. Sondland said that he “presumed” there was a “quid pro quo.” But he did not have any first-hand knowledge of one, and other witnesses have testified that there was no such “quid pro quo” at all.

The House Intelligence Committee began releasing transcripts this week of its behind-closed-doors interviews with witnesses in the “impeachment inquiry.” On Tuesday, it released the transcripts of the appearances of Sondland and former Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker.

Volker testified that there had never been a “quid pro quo” — that he had never heard one discussed, and that Ukrainian officials seemed unaware of any such arrangement at all.

But Sondland, who had also testified earlier that there was no “quid pro quo,” had to amend that testimony after he was apparently contradicted by U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor, who testified last month that he believed there was a “quid pro quo,” under which the Trump administration was withholding key military aid to Ukraine unless it investigated alleged corruption related to former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.

In a supplemental declaration filed with the committee, Sondland said that “by the beginning of September 2019, and in the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid,” he “presumed that the [Ukraine] aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement” and the investigation of the Bidens. That led him to tell the Ukrainian government that “resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur” until it complied.

But there are two big logical leaps in Sondland’s statement.

The first is that he only “presumed” there was a “quid pro quo” — that is, he did not have direct knowledge of one.

The second is that he told the Ukrainians that a “quid pro quo” was “likely” — that is, he did not know with certainty.

In their rush to accuse the Trump administration of wrongdoing, Democrats and the media have overlooked one other key fact: the crucial August 2019 Politico article.

The article, “Trump holds up Ukraine military aid meant to confront Russia,” dated August 28, was the first that the Ukrainians ever knew about any withholding of aid — five weeks after the phone call between Trump and Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky which supposedly prompted the so-called “whistleblower” to approach Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and the Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee. Sondland refers specifically to September.

Therefore what changed his — and others’ — impression was not anything the administration (or its representatives) did or said. Rather, it was the media.

Since Sondland consumes the same media that everyone else does — indeed, it is part of a diplomat’s job to know what is being said — he drew his own conclusions. But when he asked President Trump directly, Trump told him there was no “quid pro quo”: he just wanted Zelensky to do “the right thing.”

All of this presumes there is something wrong with a “quid pro quo.” But even that seems untrue. In fact, “quid pro quo” arrangements are normal in diplomacy. A House bill passed recently by Democrats would establish a “quid pro quo” that bars Russia from access even to private U.S. funds until it can be shown not to have interfered in U.S. elections. Trump, Democrats say, sought his personal or political interest; it also happened to be a national interest.

For years, Democrats defended the investigations of President Barack Obama’s administration into then-candidate Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign by arguing that the country had to know if a major candidate was corrupt or compromised by a foreign power.

That investigation may have been conducted in an unlawful manner — and a grand jury is now on the case — but the logic they used then is even more appropriate to Ukraine and the Bidens.

Hunter Biden’s role as a go-between for Burisma — a Ukrainian gas company suspected of corruption — and his father’s administration has never been fully investigated. The so-called “whistleblower” worked for Biden at the time; that conflict of interest, too, has never been explored.

If Trump had demanded a “quid pro quo,” he would have been doing his job. As it is, there is no evidence of a “quid pro quo” — certainly not from Gordon Sondland.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Nolte: ABC Fails to Fact-Check Hunter Biden’s Claim of ‘Not One Cent’ from Chinese Govt. Deal


Written by John Nolte | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/10/15/nolte-abc-fails-to-fact-check-hunter-bidens-claim-of-not-one-cent-from-chinese-govt-deal/

Hunter-Biden-interview-5577c-abc-ps-191014_hpMain | ABC News

ABC News allowed Hunter Biden to get away with the claim he did not make “one cent” from his company’s mega-deal with a Chinese bank that is a subsidiary of the Chinese government — when its own past reporting has said just the opposite.

During the sit-down interview, ABC’s Amy Robach set up the segment about Hunter’s China deal with the background on President Trump’s desire to look into Hunter’s shady $1.5 billion — with a “B” — deal with the Chinese bank (starts at around 5:03)::

ROBACH: Also on Trump’s list of accusations against Hunter Biden: that Hunter flew on Air Force Two with his father during an official government trip to China in 2013, leveraging that connection for financial gain in an investment deal with Chinese businessman Jonathan Li.

What Robach’s question omitted is that the deal was not just with an individual businessman but with the Bank of China — a subsidiary of the Chinese government itself.

She then asks Hunter directly:

ROBACH: The president has repeatedly said you have received $1.5 billion, despite no experience and for no apparent reason. Obviously fact checkers have said that that is not true.

HUNTER: This literally has no basis in fact in any way.

ROBACH: Have you received any money from that business dealing?

HUNTER: No.

ROBACH: At all?

HUNTER: Not one cent.

ROBACH: Definitely not 1.5 billion.

HUNTER: It’s crazy. They feel as though they have the license to go out and say whatever they want.

Hunter is then allowed to trash Trump and his family as liars while Robach, who has just lauded fact checkers and their fact checking,  says nothing about the fact that — and this is important — according to her own network’s reporting,  and Hunter’s own attorney, Hunter has a ten percent stake in BHR, the company that made that mammoth $1.5 billion China deal.

Just a few months ago, ABC aired an in-depth report on Hunter’s shady business dealings that included this nugget (starts at about the 2:00 minute mark):

This video shows Chinese diplomats greeting Vice President Biden as he arrives in Beijing in December of 2013. Right by his side? His son Hunter. Less than two weeks later, Hunter’s firm had new business, creating an investment fund in China, involving the government controlled Bank of China, with reports they hopes to raise $1.5 billion. Hunter still plays a role in the fund. His lawyer says his stake is worth about half a million dollars.

Where was Robach’s followup question? Where was her oh-so-vital fact checking? Why did she let him get away with saying “not one cent” when her own network reported just a few months ago that he had equity in the firm that made a massive $1.5 billion deal?

Obviously, Hunter is playing a semantic game with that “not one cent” comment. Hunter’s attorney appears to do the same in a statement he released just two days ago, on October 13, 2019:

Hunter neither played a role in the formation or licensure of the company, nor owned any equity in it while his father was Vice President. He served only as a member of its board of directors, which he joined based on his interest in seeking ways to bring Chinese capital to international markets. It was an unpaid position.

To date, Hunter has not received any compensation for being on BHR’s board of directors. He has not received any return on his investment; there have been no distributions to BHR shareholders since Hunter obtained his equity interest.

So Hunter hasn’t “received” “one cent” because there has been no payout to investors. There was no direct commission for that deal, which dum-dums would obviously suspect like he’s a bottom-run sales rep. But here’s the rub, according to no less than FactCheck.org: Hunter might not have been paid “one cent” yet, but he is still could be looking at an eventual payoff that hits the $20 million mark:

[Hunter’s lawyer George] Mesires told the New York Times that while Hunter Biden now has a 10% stake in BHR, which he acquired through a company he created named Skaneateles LLC, “there have been no distributions to the shareholders since Hunter has been an equity owner.”

But that doesn’t mean Biden won’t eventually make millions from the deal. Steven Kaplan, who conducts research on issues in private equity, venture capital, entrepreneurial finance, corporate governance and corporate finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, told us that a private equity fund with $2 billion under management will typically generate fees over its life of hundreds of millions of dollars.

“It is difficult to imagine, if not incomprehensible, that a 10% stake in those economics is worth only $420K,” Kaplan told us via email. “The distinction they appear to be making is they capitalized the management company with $4.2 M even if the fund manages $2 B.  The value of that management company is likely far in excess of $4.2 M if they are managing $2 B.”

Kaplan pointed to two large publicly traded private equity firms for reference, both of which have a market value of about 10% of the assets under their management. Using that as a rough guide, that would put the value of Hunter Biden’s share closer to $20 million, he said.

Basically, it looks as though Hunter claiming not have made one cent off the China deal is like a CEO claiming he was not paid one cent to run a company because his compensation came from stocks or bars of gold or pearls or the gift of a home. But the fact is this: any deal that increases the value of the company that Hunter Biden has a stake in — and a $1.5 billion deal with a bank owned by one of the world’s biggest economies does just that — is a deal where Hunter Biden has a financial interest.

Maybe ABC will reveal Hunter’s semantic dishonesty when the rest of the interview airs later tonight. Maybe Robach will ask him what he has “earned” or “gained” as a result of the deal, rather than “received.” If not, it is a gross dereliction of duty on the network’s part. And all of this comes just one day after ABC was caught presenting 2014 video from a Kentucky gun range as video of  Turkish military operation against the Kurds.

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

Nolte: Climate ‘Experts’ Are 0-41 with Their Doomsday Predictions


Written by John Nolte | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/09/20/nolte-climate-experts-are-0-41-with-their-doomsday-predictions/

EDINBURGH, SCOTLAND – SEPTEMBER 20: Protesters march and hold placards as they attend the Global Climate Strike on September 20, 2019 in Edinburgh, Scotland. Millions of people are taking to the streets around the world to take part in protests inspired by the teenage Swedish activist Greta Thunberg. Students are … Jeff J Mitchell/Getty 

For more than 50 years Climate Alarmists in the scientific community and environmental movement have not gotten even one prediction correct, but they do have a perfect record of getting 41 predictions wrong.

In other words, on at least 41 occasions, these so-called experts have predicted some terrible environmental catastrophe was imminent … and it never happened.

And not once — not even once! — have these alarmists had one of their predictions come true.

Think about that… the so-called experts are 0-41 with their predictions, but those of us who are skeptical of “expert” prediction number 42, the one that says that if we don’t immediately convert to socialism and allow Alexandria Ocasio-Crazy to control and organize our lives, the planet will become uninhabitable.

Why would any sane person listen to someone with a 0-41 record?

Why would we completely restructure our economy and sacrifice our personal freedom for “experts” who are 0-41, who have never once gotten it right?

If you had an investment counselor who steered you wrong 41times, would you hang in there for number 42?

Of course not. You’d fire him after failed prediction two or three.

And if that’s not crazy enough, the latest ploy is to trot out a 16-year-old girl to spread prediction number 42, because it is so much more credible that way.

Sometimes you just have to sit back and laugh.

Anyway, I want you to have the data, so go ahead and print this out in advance of Thanksgiving dinner with your obnoxious Millennial nephew.

LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT RIGHT

NONE.

ZIP.

ZERO.

NADA.

BLANK

DONUT HOLE

NIL.

NOTHING.

VOID.

ZILCH.

LIST OF DOOMSDAY PREDICTIONS THE CLIMATE ALARMIST GOT WRONG

Here is the source for numbers 1-27. As you will see, the individual sources are not crackpots, but scientific studies and media reports on “expert” predictions. The sources for numbers 28-41 are linked individually.

      1. 1967: Dire Famine Forecast By 1975
      2. 1969: Everyone Will Disappear In a Cloud Of Blue Steam By 1989 (1969)
      3. 1970: Ice Age By 2000
      4. 1970: America Subject to Water Rationing By 1974 and Food Rationing By 1980
      5. 1971: New Ice Age Coming By 2020 or 2030
      6. 1972: New Ice Age By 2070
      7. 1974: Space Satellites Show New Ice Age Coming Fast
      8. 1974: Another Ice Age?
      9. 1974: Ozone Depletion a ‘Great Peril to Life
      10. 1976: Scientific Consensus Planet Cooling, Famines imminent
      11. 1980: Acid Rain Kills Life In Lakes
      12. 1978: No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend
      13. 1988: Regional Droughts (that never happened) in 1990s
      14. 1988: Temperatures in DC Will Hit Record Highs
      15. 1988: Maldive Islands will Be Underwater by 2018 (they’re not)
      16. 1989: Rising Sea Levels will Obliterate Nations if Nothing Done by 2000
      17. 1989: New York City’s West Side Highway Underwater by 2019 (it’s not)
      18. 2000: Children Won’t Know what Snow Is
      19. 2002: Famine In 10 Years If We Don’t Give Up Eating Fish, Meat, and Dairy
      20. 2004: Britain will Be Siberia by 2024
      21. 2008: Arctic will Be Ice Free by 2018
      22. 2008: Climate Genius Al Gore Predicts Ice-Free Arctic by 2013
      23. 2009: Climate Genius Prince Charles Says we Have 96 Months to Save World
      24. 2009: UK Prime Minister Says 50 Days to ‘Save The Planet From Catastrophe’
      25. 2009: Climate Genius Al Gore Moves 2013 Prediction of Ice-Free Arctic to 2014
      26. 2013: Arctic Ice-Free by 2015
      27. 2014: Only 500 Days Before ‘Climate Chaos’
      28. 1968: Overpopulation Will Spread Worldwide
      29. 1970: World Will Use Up All its Natural Resources
      30. 1966: Oil Gone in Ten Years
      31. 1972: Oil Depleted in 20 Years
      32. 1977: Department of Energy Says Oil will Peak in 90s
      33. 1980: Peak Oil In 2000
      34. 1996: Peak Oil in 2020
      35. 2002: Peak Oil in 2010
      36. 2006: Super Hurricanes!
      37. 2005 : Manhattan Underwater by 2015
      38. 1970: Urban Citizens Will Require Gas Masks by 1985
      39. 1970: Nitrogen buildup Will Make All Land Unusable
      40. 1970: Decaying Pollution Will Kill all the Fish
      41. 1970s: Killer Bees!

Sorry, Experts… Sorry, Scientific Consensus… Only a fool comes running for the 42nd cry of wolf.

Don’t litter, be kind to animals, recycling’s for suckers (it’s all going to end up in the ground eventually), so stop feeling guilty… Go out there and embrace all the bounty that comes with being a 21st century American — you know, like Obama, who says he believes in Global Warming with his mouth but proves he doesn’t with the $15 million he just spent on oceanfront that we’re told is doomed to flooding.

This piece has been updated to correct a duplicate posting and add another hoax prediction.  

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

On-Scene MSNBC Reporter Tells The Truth About The Migrant Caravan On Air — Will He Be Fired?


Written by Wes Walker on November 27, 2018

What do reporters look like before they become jaded and conformist? Like this guy, reporting the facts on the ground. But could honesty like this endanger his job? Media bias isn’t about what you TELL people, it’s also about the details you carefully ignore. A good example of that is how the media outrage over children being ‘snatched from mother’s arms’ at the border began in response to a single photo pushed by an Obama insider.

It was that photo of children sleeping in a glorified kennel. One problem — it was taken while Obama was in office. And yet, somehow, Trump got to be the lightning rod for the angry media outrage, and the politicians on the Left… how convenient for them.

Here we have a reporter walking among the migrants in the Caravan making political waves in Tijuana which unexpectedly broke out into what Rush calls a ‘random act of journalism’.

One part of it is just fine, from the perspective of that well-worn ‘sweet immigrants hoping for a better life’ narrative. He shows the audience that yes, indeed, there are women and children present. But he keeps on talking.

That is exactly the point that has been made by the Right, both with respect to this ‘caravan’ and also the swarm of humanity flooding into Europe for the last few years. For example: Hundreds Of ‘Sweet Refugees’ Storm Spain’s Border – Attack Cops With Acid

We’re not seeing impoverished women, children and the aged fleeing some war-torn hellhole. We’re seeing men making a play to climb the social ladder and get a better income. We can’t blame them for wanting a shot at the American Dream but that does NOT meet any criterion of seeking ‘asylum’.

Will this honest reporter get sat down and have the business side of journalism explained to him? Will he out on his ear? Or will his next assignment be somewhere in the Antarctic reporting on the condition of polar ice sheets?

New York Times Published Trump Assassination Fantasy Before Mail Bomb Scare


Reported by Justin Caruso | October 25, 2018

(INSET: Author Zoe Sharp) The New York Times building on 8th Avenue is seen August 21, 2018 in New York City. (Photo by Daniel SLIM / AFP) (Photo credit should read DANIEL SLIM/AFP/Getty Images)/DANIEL SLIM/AFP/Getty; Twitter/@authorzoesharp; New York Times

The New York Times published a fictional story Tuesday that fantasized about President Trump’s assassination at the hands of the Secret Service and a Russian operative — one day before the nation was gripped by news of apparent mail bombs sent to prominent Democratic figures.

In an article published in the New York Times‘ Book Review, five writers conjured up fantasy scenarios about President Trump’s future with the Russia investigation.

One writer, Zoe Sharp (pictured), took liberal fantasizing to the next level and wrote a story that ends with President Trump being assassinated by a Russian agent. The Times’ editors illustrate the piece, titled “How It Ends,” with a Russian flag sticking out of a pistol barrel.

In the story, the Russian attempts to shoot the president, but his gun misfires. A Secret Service agent then offers his own pistol to the Russian:

The Russian waited until they were a few steps past before he drew the gun. He sighted on the center of the president’s back, and squeezed the trigger.

The Makarov misfired.

The Secret Service agent at the president’s shoulder heard the click, spun into a crouch. He registered the scene instantly, drawing his own weapon with razor-edge reflexes.

The Russian tasted failure. He closed his eyes and waited to pay the cost.

It did not come.

He opened his eyes. The Secret Service agent stood before him, presenting his Glock, butt first.

“Here,” the agent said politely. “Use mine. …” [emphasis added]

This assassination fantasy was published just one day before the media exploded with criticism for President Trump’s rhetoric after a series of apparent mail bombs sent to many Democrat political figures Wednesday, including one sent to CNN’s New York office.

Media and entertainment figures fantasizing about the assassination of President Trump has become disturbingly common.

Last year, actor Johnny Depp joked, “When was the last time an actor assassinated a president?” He later apologized. Rapper Rick Ross released a song in 2016 with the lyric, “Assassinate Trump like I’m Zimmerman.”

A Julius Caesar play in Central Park featured the assassination of a faux Donald Trump-figure. And pop star Madonna said at the Women’s March that she had fantasized about “blowing up” the White House.

“Yes, I’m angry. Yes, I’m outraged. Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House, but I know that this won’t change anything,” she said.

And the left’s violent fantasies are not limited to Trump–anyone they disagree with can be targeted.

Republican Sen. Rand Paul, who was at the GOP baseball practice when it was targeted by left-wing mass shooter James Hodgkinson, said that Hodgkinson was screaming, “This is for health care!”

“He also had a list of conservative legislators–Republicans–in his pocket, that he was going to kill,” Paul also said.

Corporate media’s role in this downward slide cannot be ignored, either.

MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace has repeatedly fantasized about violence toward people she disagrees with, previously talking on air about Sarah Sanders getting choked and Trump getting punched in the face.

Further, CNN has excused and whitewashed the violence of Antifa, time and time and time again.

Finally, as Breitbart News has meticulously chronicled, there are several hundred incidents of Trump supporting Americans being targeted for violence, harassment, and intimidation by the left.

Steve Schmidt: Trump Stoked ‘Cold Civil War,’ His Rhetoric Makes Violence ‘Inevitable’


Reported by Joshua Caplan | October 25, 2018

BEVERLY HILLS, CA - OCTOBER 09: (L-R) Political Analyst at NBC Steve Schmidt and Elise Jordan speak onstage at Day 1 of the Vanity Fair New Establishment Summit 2018 at The Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts on October 9, 2018 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty …
Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images
In the wake of a series of bomb scares targeting prominent Democrat leaders, Steve Schmidt, a former campaign strategist for the late Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), called President Donald Trump the “greatest demagogue” in U.S. history — who has stoked a “cold civil war.”

“Trump has stoked a cold civil war in this Country. His rallies brim with menace and he has labeled journalists as enemies of the people,” Schmidt began in a series of tweets Wednesday. “That someone would seek to kill their political enemies is not aberrational but rather the inevitable consequence of Trumps [sic] incitement.”

The political strategist turned MSNBC contributor claimed, without evidence, that the intended recipients of the apparent crude mail bombs were linked to President Trump’s spirited rebuke of his Democrat rivals. “The targets are political not coincidental. Trump, the greatest demagogue in American history has celebrated violence over and over again,” Schmidt wrote. “It looks like someone finally took Trump both literally and seriously. The WH will feign outrage when this obvious point is made.”

Schmidt then went on to say members of media should be able to do their jobs without fear of retribution and warned against the damaging effects that “stoking of hatred and sundering” can have an American life.

“No journalist or commentator should be intimidated from making this point,” he continued. “The stoking of hatred and sundering of the American people was always going to lead to terrible consequences. Chief amongst them would be the initiation of partisan or sectarian violence within our country.”


Schmidt’s remarks came amid reports that the U.S. Secret Service had intercepted various explosive devices sent to former President Barack Obama, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, along with the New York Offices of CNN, which was evacuated after discovering a suspicious package addressed to the political strategist’s MSNBC colleague, former CIA chief John Brennan.

On Monday, progressive billionaire George Soros had an explosive device hand-delivered to his Westchester County compound. In a scathing New York Times opinion-editorial published Wednesday, the hedge fund manager’s son, Alex Soros, blamed the scares on President Trump’s “demonization” of his opponents.

The White House swiftly condemned the attempted attacks and called for those behind “despicable” acts to be brought to justice. “We condemn the attempted violent attacks recently made against President Obama, President Clinton, Secretary Clinton, and other public figures,” said White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. “These terrorizing acts are despicable, and anyone responsible will be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.”

President Donald Trump denounced the targeting’s and called on Americans to “come together.”

“Acts or threats of political violence have no place in the United States,” the president said. “This egregious conduct is abhorrent.”

“We are extremely angry, upset, unhappy about what we witnessed this morning and we will get to the bottom of it,”he added.

CNN Chyron: Mail Bomb Recipients Are ‘Trump’s Targets’


Reported by Justin Caruso |

A CNN chyron aired Thursday said Democrats who received mail bombs this week are “Trump’s targets” — hours after an anchor insisted “no one’s blaming the president.”

“Manhunt For Serial Bomber Going After Trump’s Targets” read the CNN chyron at about 1:13 PM. This came after another chyron that also referred to those targeted as “Trump Targets.”

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer ended the segment by saying, “The one common thread between all of these bombs–all of those who are being targeted are President Trump’s frequent punching bags.”

This segment came mere hours after CNN’s John King opened up a panel discussion by stating: “No one’s blaming the president. Is anyone blaming the president?”

And just one hour before this segment, the network’s chyron suggested that Trump bears “responsibility” for “inciting” the perpetrator to send these packages — but alleges the president is not owning up to it.

Although CNN personalities have repeatedly said that they are not blaming Trump or his supporters for the mail bombs, they have emphasized several times that those targeted by the bombs were frequently criticized by Trump and by right-wing media.

Brian Stelter said Wednesday that the targets of the bombs “have all been criticized mercilessly by right-wing outlets.”

CNN analyst Josh Campbell also insisted Wednesday that Trump’s rhetoric may still be to blame for the mail bombs, even if the perpetrator is mentally ill.

“If the package bomber turns out to be someone with mental health issues, that doesn’t mean Pres. Trump is off the hook. If it turns out the bomber was motivated to kill perceived enemies based on recent heated political attacks by officials, those spewing hate share the blame,” he said.

Peak Spock Speaks



disclaimerDrawn and Posted Chip Bok | June 5, 2018

URL of the original posting site: http://bokbluster.com/2018/06/05/peak-spock-speaks/

Aspiring novelist Ben Rhodes created narratives for the Obama administration. In a NYT story he once took credit for creating a media echo chamber to push the president’s Iran nuclear deal. But on election night 2016 Rhodes found himself at a loss for words. Peak Spock Speaks Now he’s written a book. It’s titled “The<!– AddThis Advanced Settings above via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Advanced Settings below via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Advanced Settings generic via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Share Buttons above via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Share Buttons below via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –>

<!– AddThis Share Buttons generic via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –>” data-title=”Peak Spock Speaks” data-url=”http://bokbluster.com/2018/06/05/peak-spock-speaks/”&gt;

 

peak spock speaks

Aspiring novelist Ben Rhodes created narratives for the Obama administration. In a NYT story he once took credit for creating a media echo chamber to push the president’s Iran nuclear deal. But on election night 2016 Rhodes found himself at a loss for words.

Peak Spock Speaks

Now he’s written a book. It’s titled “The World as It Is.” Or “Peak Spock” as Maureen Dowd calls it.

In the book President Obama consoles despondent young Ben by telling him, “There are more stars in the sky than grains of sand on the earth.”

Back on earth Obama says, “Sometimes I wonder whether I was 10 or 20 years too early.”

To which Matthew Continetti asks, “What was he early for?,” “Fundamentally transforming America?” “The moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow”?

Nope. According to Ms. Dowd, “We just weren’t ready for his amazing awesomeness.”

Ben Rhodes now works for MSNBC. His brother, David Rose, is president of CBS News.

Samantha Bee Full Frontal Parts


Drawn and Posted by Chip Bok | June 1, 2018

URL of the original posting site: http://bokbluster.com/2018/06/01/samantha-bee-full-frontal-parts/

Saturday Night Live had a Weekend Update sketch in the 70s called Point/Counterpoint. It starred Dan Akroyd and Jane Curtin playing pompous journalists debating the news. And it always degenerated into personal insults. Like this opening rebuttal remark by Akroyd: “Jane, you ignorant slut.” It was almost as funny as the Claudine Longet Ski Invitational.<!– AddThis Advanced Settings above via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Advanced Settings below via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Advanced Settings generic via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Share Buttons above via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –><!– AddThis Share Buttons below via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –>

<!– AddThis Share Buttons generic via filter on wp_trim_excerpt –>” data-title=”Samantha Bee Full Frontal Parts” data-url=”http://bokbluster.com/2018/06/01/samantha-bee-full-frontal-parts/”&gt;

 

Samantha Bee

Saturday Night Live had a Weekend Update sketch in the 70s called Point/Counterpoint. It starred Dan Akroyd and Jane Curtin playing pompous journalists debating the news. And it always degenerated into personal insults. Like this opening rebuttal remark by Akroyd: “Jane, you ignorant slut.”

It was almost as funny as the Claudine Longet Ski Invitational. Lorne Michaels had to apologize for that one.

Crude Crack

And so did Samantha Bee, for a crude crack she made this week about Ivanka Trump. But, like SNL, she’s still on the air. For now.

please likeand share and leave a comment

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: