A PolitiFact article written by Bill McCarthy declares “there’s no proof that” a left-wing anti-Trump activist named John Sullivan incited rioting at the U.S. Capitol. As a result of this claim, Facebook flagged and reduced distribution of a post that accused Sullivan of doing so.
However, video footage indisputably proves that Sullivan encouraged people to storm and vandalize the Capitol. Moreover, Sullivan was subsequently arrested and charged with “violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds” and “interfering with law enforcement” during the riot. In the wake of these revelations, PolitiFact “updated” its article twice but has not changed its conclusion despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
The Facebook post targeted by PolitiFact states that “Anti-Trump founder of radical left-wing group ‘Insurgence USA’ John Sullivan, incited insurgence of U.S. Capitol.” PolitiFact proclaims “there’s no evidence that he ‘incited’ the violence himself or led the charge into the Capitol.”
PolitiFact’s first evidence for its conclusion is Sullivan’s claim that he was “not leading” the mob in “any shape, form, or fashion” and “was only there to experience and witness what went down.” PolitiFact then cites Jade Sacker, a photojournalist who has done work for NBC and NPR to back up his account. Sacker claims to have been with Sullivan for half of the riot and says that Sullivan was “vocal” and “actively there and interested in what was going on,” but not “directing the charge” or “inciting violence.”
However, law enforcement obtained videos from Sullivan that show him provoking and participating in the riot. As such, the FBI sought and was granted a warrant to arrest him. Per the affidavit and other videofootage, Sullivan:
yelled through a megaphone outside of the Capitol, “Get in that shit! Let’s go! Let’s go! Move! Move! Move! Move! Storm that shit! This shit is ours! This is our fucking house!”
wore a “ballistic vest and gas mask” as he entered the Capitol and declared, “Let’s burn this shit down,” “We gotta get this shit burned,” “It’s our house motherfuckers.”
pointed his camera at a door and said, “Why don’t we go in there?” After someone hit the door, Sullivan said, “That’s what I’m sayin,’ break that shit.”
broke a window and said, “I broke it. My bad, my apologies. Well, they already broke a window. I didn’t know I hit it that hard. No one got that on camera.”
joined a crowd of rioters that were trying to break through a door, and said, “I have a knife. Let me through. I have a knife.”
Moreover, the videos show that Jade Sacker, the photojournalist who PolitiFact used to exonerate Sullivan, was complicit in his plan. Sullivan’s video shows Sacker and him inside the Capitol saying to each other:
Sacker: “I’ll give you your hug now. We did it!” Sullivan: [Laughter] Sacker: “You were right, we did it.” Sullivan: “Dude, I was trying to tell you. I couldn’t say much.” Sacker: “You were right [laughter].” Sullivan: “You just have to watch my chat.” Sacker: “Oh my God!” Sullivan: “Is this not gonna be the best film you’ve ever made in your life?” Sacker: “Yeah [unintelligible].” Sullivan: “Nah, you gotta give me a real kiss for that shit.” Sacker: “That’s it.” Sullivan: “Hell, yeah!” Sacker: “Hell, yeah?” Sullivan: “Hell, yeah!”
Then realizing that they were incriminating themselves, they say:
Sacker: “Wait, you weren’t recording, were you?” Sullivan: “I’ll delete that shit after. But I didn’t record you or me. We’re just voices.”
“one count of knowingly entering or remaining in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority.”
“one count of violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds.”
“one count of interfering with law enforcement engaged in the lawful performance of their official duties incident to and during the commission of civil disorder.”
Faced with those facts, PolitiFact “updated” its original article two separatetimes to include “more detail” from the video and the FBI affidavit. Yet, PolitiFact deceitfully:
ignores the vast bulk of damning content in the video.
summarizes the footage by saying that “it doesn’t show Sullivan clearly engaged in the violence or leading the run up to the Capitol, although it does show him animated as he spoke with police and rioters from the frontlines.”
insists “there’s no proof” Sullivan incited insurgence.
POLITIFACT’S DOUBLE STANDARDS
In contrast to PolitiFact’s claim that Sullivan’s calls to “storm” and “burn” down the Capitol don’t constitute incitement, PolitiFact has not fact-checked any of the hundreds of Congressional Democrats who declare in their impeachment resolution that President Trump incited the riot. This is in spite of the fact that Trump didn’t call for violence and emphasized in his speech on that same day that people should go “to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
Yet, the impeachment resolution alleges that Trump is guilty of “inciting violence against the Government of the United States” because he stated in his speech: “if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” This quote is taken out of context, as Trump used the word “fight” 20 times in the speech, making clear that he was speaking about legal, not physical, fighting. For example, he said that Rudy Giuliani has “guts, he fights.”
PolitiFact also uses a dishonest debating technique called a “straw man.” This involves debunking an argument that someone did not make. Again, the Facebook post says: “Anti-Trump founder of radical left-wing group ‘Insurgence USA’ John Sullivan, incited insurgence of U.S. Capitol.” Yet, PolitiFact twists this by arguing “there’s no evidence that Sullivan ‘incited (the) insurgence’ alone amid a crowd of thousands.”
In short, the post does not claim that Sullivan is solely or even mainly responsible for inciting the riot, but PolitiFact inserts the words “alone” and “the” to make it seem like the post said he was the lone ringleader.
Rumble — One America’s Jack Posobiec is continuing to investigate the events that took place at the Capitol on Jan. 6. He recently sat down with Michael Yon, a war correspondent with years of experience studying tactics of Antifa and other groups. Jack asked Yon to compare what he has seen in other countries to the scenes at the Capitol earlier this month. Here’s what he had to say, take a look.
The below is built off of my Facebook Post on the matter. I post this here to highlight the idea for clarity — as the Left like to misinterpret what is said. THAT IS: “Remember, I am NOT saying Trump supporters weren’t involved.”
A couple UPDATES since I started this post:
Feds back away from claim that Capitol rioters were looking to capture and assassinate officials — Acting U.S. Attorney Michael Sherwin told reporters Friday that prosecutors don’t have concrete proof of such an effort.(POLITICO)
CNN Forced To Walk Back Story That Rioters At U.S. Capitol Building Were Specifically There To Kill Politicians… (WEASEL ZIPPERS)
So, since the beginning of the Capital Hill Incident, I have maintained the same point of view. First, riotess gatherings involve people that wouldn’t usually do criminal activity do such things. Which is why I mentioned a book in my first response to the Incident, here is an excerpt of that:
I suggest that every person who has not read Ann Coulter’s book, Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America, read it. This “mob mentality” does not just exist on the Left, but when caught up in the energy of a large crowd, many will make a decision that alone, in a less stressful environment, wouldn’t make. We are human and are vulnerable at times to peer pressure.
Another thought is that I don’t care who you are — Antifa, Trump supporter, progressive, conservative, libertarian… whatever. If you storm the Capital you stand a high chance of being shot.
So, I acknowledged that part of the crowd was made up of Trump supporters (see DAILY BEAST and HEAVYfor instance), but I also noted from the beginning that LEFTIES were involved as well. TO WHICH I got many people on my Facebook saying “no” to. And within 2-days I got links to stuff where the FBI supposedly said that no Antifa was involved — which seems improbable because the investigation would and is a long term investigation. If — within days — the FBI could immediately access that sort of situation, I would ask people to check for responders surgically placed in their body.
“We have no indication of that at this time,” Washington Field Office assistant director Steven D’Antuono said during a briefing when asked about any potential involvement of antifa.
Again, “We have no indication of that at this time,” THAT statement within 2-days seems fair. I was confident Antifa would be found in the crowd. And as a response to my detractors I sent pics of this guy on January 7th (these are not from the 6th at the Capital, they are just meant to show his affiliations… MOONBATTERY has more as well):
(These pics are from a 2nd tear news source [100% FED-UP] I noted to my son who asked for sources to go to while on his tour of duty. Second tear are sources generally good, but may need to be verified — Reagan’s “trust but verify” — by checking their linked sources.) At the time 100% posted this on the 7th… John Sullivan, he was interviewed on CNN — more on that in a bit. Here is a portion of an older story on Antifa John noting how easy to connect him to a Leftist “revolutionary” past of activist activity (at least a good producer from CNN would not have him on):
….Last summer, Sullivan organized a BLM protest with other leftist groups, including a local ANITFA chapter. The event became violent and one person was shot. He was arrested at the time. …. (TOWNHALL)
Far-Left Antifa/BLM activist John Sullivan has been identified as one of the activists who were part of the group of people who illegally entered the Capitol building on Wednesday. Sullivan is not, however, a Trump supporter, in fact, he’s just the opposite. On his Instagram page that has now been deleted, the BLM activist who is also the self-proclaimed founder of the “Insurgence USA” group, posted warnings like “An armed revolution is the only effective way to bring about change.”
Only 6 months ago, extreme BLM activist and Antifa leader Sullivan was arrested during a protest he organized. He was also caught on video standing next to a fellow protester who shot an innocent woman.
Sullivan was arrested and was booked into the Utah County Jail for investigation of rioting, making a threat of violence and criminal mischief. Sullivan was an organizer of a protest in Provo, UT, where an innocent motorist who was trying to get around Sullivan’s roadblock/protest, was shot.
The Deseret News reports- John Earle Sullivan, 25, of Sandy, was captured on video threatening to beat a woman in an SUV, according to the affidavit, and then kicking her door, leaving a dent.
“As a protest organizer, John Sullivan is heard talking about seeing the shooting, looking at the gun and seeing smoke coming from it. John did not condemn the attempted murder nor attempt to stop it nor aide in its investigation by police.”
Sullivan’s Instagram page is filled with activist posts that contain language like “F*ck Trump.”
Sullivan is also the self-described founder of the Insurgence USA group. On their website, they provide a handy little guide on how to be an Anarchist. The guide explains how to disregard previous and predictable strategies, and instead, to use “guerilla tactics to overwhelm your adversary.” Hmmm…that almost sounds like what happened at the White House?
Strangely, when CNN’s Anderson Cooper interviewed Sullivan, he never mentioned his recent criminal history, his threats of preventing President Trump from serving a second term, including “ripping” him from the White House, or the radical group he founded that supports Anarchy and an armed revolution.
Watch his interview with Anderson Cooper that’s impossible to find anywhere on the internet. It’s almost like CNN doesn’t want anyone to see Anderson Cooper pretending that Sullivan is simply a “left-wing activist” or treating him like was a reporter on the scene who just happened to be standing next to Ashli Babbit when she was shot to death:…
Well… Antifa John was arrested by the FBI. Ooopsie Daisy CNN — here is the PDF of the charges. They have seen enough evidence to include him (and other Lefty activists involved as part of the mixed group). Video of him antagonizing the police at the spot of where that nutty gal was shot — rightly shot.
ANTIFA JOHN’S BROTHERS SAYS OVER 200 ANTIFA
So since this last story… Antifa John was turned in by his brother, James — who has spoken at Proud Boy events… a light vs. darkness (fire n ice) thing going on here [called the authorities and said his brother was in charge (100% FED-UP). And noted there were over 200 Leftists at that January 6th rally (NOQ REPORT).
ANTIFA JOHN CALLING ALL ANTIFA
Here is Antifa John leading the charge in getting Lefty BLM and Antifa to go on the 6th (*click to enlarge):
So, just as a recap, the HEADLINE (“No evidence antifa involved in Capitol riot”) mentioned above is in fact wrong. The FBI didn’t state that but rather said “at this point in the investigation.” Not only that, but the FBI HAS been wrong many times — so stating it like a definite is not always the best thing to do either. For instance I told a person I know the following:
A violent radical BLM/Antifa leftist was arrested in Florida after his plot to organize an attack on peaceful protests ahead of Biden’s inauguration was uncovered by the FBI. You remember Antifa, the group that doesn’t exist and also is mostly peaceful and also is just like the D-Day troops according to Chris Cuomo? Yeah, THAT one….(RIGHT SCOOP)
Rioting first started on May 28 in Minneapolis, Minnesota, over the death of George Floyd, who was allegedly murdered by police officer Derek Chauvin. Since then, the riots have spread to major cities like New York City, Los Angeles, Seattle, Portland, Oakland, Louisville, and St. Louis. The riots have led to more death, especially among black Americans. The victims include: Dave Patrick Underwood….. David Dorn…. Italia Marie Kelly…. David McAtee…. Chris Beaty…. (BREITBART)
It would not be fair to judge the left on the violence and property destruction carried out by unhappy anti-Trump protesters. After all, didn’t Anti-Obama conservatives smash windows, assault Obama supporters, and set fires after Obama won the election?
Oh, wait, we didn’t do any of those things, did we?
These people call themselves Anarchists, and yet they are committing violence because they want more socialism, socialism being a maximized amount of Government control. Do they see the irony? Or are they just violent and stupid and have latched onto the progressive left because that side of the political spectrum is more accepting of hate and violence?
And I’m sure some lefties are saying (nasal, high-pitched, know-it-all liberal voice), “Oh, I think violence is wrong no matter which side does it.” Yeah, nice virtue signaling, but you’re just evading the reality that most of the time… an overwhelming amount of the time… it’s *your side* that’s doing it. Mainly because, your side tells people that temper tantrums and hatred are okay if they are directed against…. [insert name here]
Another example that makes me put “tolerant” Leftists in air-quotes is this story via MOONBATTERY:
Some entertainers have refused to participate in the inauguration because they are moonbats who put their self-indulgent leftist posturing ahead of their profession — others, because they are afraid:
Opera star Andrea Bocelli backed out of singing at Donald Trump’s inauguration after receiving death threats, The Mail on Sunday has learnt.
It was rumored that Bocelli backed out because he didn’t want to face a boycott from intolerant liberal fans…
Bocelli isn’t alone:
The revelation came as another singer – Broadway legend Jennifer Holliday – last night pulled out of the President-elect’s festivities after being threatened and branded an ‘Uncle Tom’.
Singer Holliday, 56, famed for her performance as Effie in Dreamgirls, had originally said she was ‘determined’ to sing for Trump despite voting against him.
She also denounced the abuse she was getting and called it an attack on freedom of speech.
However, she knuckled under to this attack, not only canceling her performance but validating the thugs who forced her to….
NEWSWEEK points out that “A new survey report shows that 8.5 percent of current college freshmen expect to participate in a student protest while in college. That figure is up 2.9 percentage points from 2014, and it is the highest percentage to respond that way in the annual survey since 1967.”
As the rapper Tef Poe sharply pointed out at a St. Louis rally in October protesting the death of unarmed teenager Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo.: “This ain’t your grandparents’ civil rights movement.” (WaPo)
GAY PATRIOT notes this violence in trying to feel as relevant as the 1960s generation:
…The protests began peacefully, but quickly escalated into violence as protesters jumped the barricades set up by campus police. The news station confirmed that one anti-Milo protester threw hot coffee at its camera crew and their equipment.
The DAILY CALLER notes the anti-free-speech movement of the fascist left:
A new Pew Research Center poll shows that 40 percent of American Millennials (ages 18-34) are likely to support government prevention of public statements offensive to minorities.
It should be noted that vastly different numbers resulted for older generations in the Pew poll on the issue of offensive speech and the government’s role.
Around 27 percent of Generation X’ers (ages 35-50) support such an idea, while 24 percent of Baby Boomers (ages 51-69) agree that censoring offensive speech about minorities should be a government issue. Only 12 percent of the Silent Generation (ages 70-87) thinks that government should prevent offensive speech toward minorities.
The poll comes at a time when college activists, such as the group “Black Lives Matter,” are making demands in the name of racial and ethnic equality at over 20 universities across the nation.
Government Agent Whose Altered Email Enabled the Russia Hoax Won’t Spend a Day in Jail or Pay Any Fine
The Russia hoax undermined a duly elected president and continues to divide the nation. But one of the key figures who abused the trust of the people will not face prison time, reports Fox News.
Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was sentenced to 12 months probation and 400 hours of community service Friday after pleading guilty to making a false statement in the first criminal case arising from Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe.
That false statement had major consequences. The altered email cast suspicion on Page and thereby Trump, and created a false justification to wiretap Page.
What about the abuse of trust, the destruction of the FBI’s reputation, undermining the FISA court system, and the Russia hoax Clinesmith enabled and which still infects millions of American minds to this day?
“Altering the email has forever changed the course of my life,” Clinesmith said. “I have lost the means to provide for my growing family…lost the ability to give back to my nation… the shame and remorse will stay with me forever.”
The Trump presidency was not allowed to get off to anything like a normal start and was undermined by this case for most of its four years. Trump never truly overcame it despite being exonerated by the Mueller report, which found no American anywhere colluded with the Russians to impact the 2016 election.
Politico reports the prosecutors wanted Clinesmith to spend time in jail.
While prosecutors urged the judge to send Clinesmith to prison to send a message to others in government not to try something similar, Boasberg said he believed that message had already been sent.
Another message has been sent. Clinesmith will be the only Russia hoax figure prosecuted and he need not worry. Some left-wing foundation will give him a do-nothing job before long. Or CNN or MSNBC will give him an on-air analyst role.
POLITICO noted the judge saying “he believed that message had already been sent.” I doubt anyone in my own family — bedsides me and my boys and wife — knows that the Russian Collusion case has been shown to be a hoax. These are like retractions in a paper… front-page headlines splash the New York Times or the Washington Post, and then a month later a retraction is given on D3… which no one sees… so they think the headlines are still true. Trump was correct when referring to it as a witch hunt.
Recent declassified documents do not add information to the issue, they merely show that the above authors of books and columns to be 100% vindicated!
People making decisions based off of the NYTs, CNN, NPR, ABC, NBC, CBS, Washington Post, MSNBC, and the like… were LIED to for 3-years. The result?
Gallup Poll Shows 78% Of Democrats Mistakenly Believe Russia Changed Election Results
Not one intelligence agency or even Obama’s head of the Homeland Security Dept has supported that. I bet a lot of people (I would say almost all except for my sons) know the following:
President Donald Trump rejects the narrative that Russia wanted him to win. USA Today examined each of the 3,517 Facebook ads bought by the Russian-based Internet Research Agency, the company that employed 12 of the 13 Russians indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller for interfering with the 2016 election. It turns out only about 100 of its ads explicitly endorsed Trump or opposed Hillary Clinton. Most of the fake ads focused on racial division, with many of the ads attempting to exploit what Russia perceives, or wants America to perceive, as severe racial tension between blacks and whites…. [RPT addition: about 50 were pro-Hillary]
Democrats and “Republicans” just continue to believe nonsense based on some late-night talk show comedians and CNN/NPR. (I say “Republicans” because many who claim to be “Reagan Republicans” would today think his favorite publication [HUMAM EVENTS] is for white supremacists.) The L.A. Times use to carry columns by Dennis Prager and other conservative thinkers. No more are they carried by the paper.
Frankly, it’s sad. And dangerous… they are ripe to believe BIG LIES about Republicans and Trump.
Poll: 61 Percent of Democrats Say Republicans Are ‘Racist,’ ‘Bigoted,’ ‘Sexist’ (2016)
49% of Democrats think Trump voters are racist…. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of self-described political liberals believe those who vote for Trump are racist. (2019)
86% of Democrats think Trump is a racist
How do you make headway with these corporate news feeders of CNN/MSNBC?? I imagine Trump gaining in almost every major demographic means nothing to them? Trump gained more in these categories than in 2016…
When Barry Goldwater accepted the 1964 Republican nomination, California’s Democratic Gov. Pat Brown said, “The stench of fascism is in the air.”
Former Rep. William Clay Sr., D-Mo., said President Ronald Reagan was “trying to replace the Bill of Rights with fascist precepts lifted verbatim from ‘Mein Kampf.'”
Coretta Scott King, in 1980, said, “I am scared that if Ronald Reagan gets into office, we are going to see more of the Ku Klux Klan and a resurgence of the Nazi Party.”
After Republicans took control of the House in the mid-’90s, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., compared the newly conservative-majority House to “the Duma and the Reichstag,” referring to the legislature set up by Czar Nicholas II of Russia and the parliament of the German Weimar Republic that brought Hitler to power.
About President George Herbert Walker Bush, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said: “I believe (Bush) is a racist for many, many reasons. … (He’s) a mean-spirited man who has no care or concern about what happens to the African American community. … I truly believe that.”
About the Republican-controlled House, longtime Harlem Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel, in 1994, said: “It’s not ‘s—-‘ or ‘n——-‘ anymore. (Republicans) say, ‘Let’s cut taxes.'” A decade later, Rangel said, “George (W.) Bush is our Bull Connor,” referring to the Birmingham, Alabama, Democrat segregationist superintendent of public safety who sicced dogs and turned fire hoses on civil rights workers.
Donna Brazile, Al Gore’s presidential campaign manager, in 1999, said: Republicans have a “white boy attitude, (which means) ‘I must exclude, denigrate and leave behind.’ They don’t see it or think about it. It’s a culture.” The following year, Brazile said: “The Republicans bring out Colin Powell and (Rep.) J.C. Watts, (R-Okla.), because they have no program, no policy. … They’d rather take pictures with Black children than feed them.”
About President George W. Bush, former Vice President Al Gore said: “(Bush’s) executive branch has made it a practice to try and control and intimidate news organizations, from PBS to CBS to Newsweek. … And every day, they unleash squadrons of digital brownshirts to harass and hector any journalist who is critical of the President.” Digital “brownshirts”?
About George W. Bush, George Soros, the billionaire Democratic donor, said: “The Bush administration and the Nazi and communist regimes all engaged in the politics of fear. … Indeed, the Bush administration has been able to improve on the techniques used by the Nazi and communist propaganda machines.”
Former NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, in a 2006 speech at historically Black Fayetteville State University said, “The Republican Party would have the American flag and the swastika flying side by side.”
Former Gov. Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee in 2005, described the contest between Democrats and Republicans as “a struggle between good and evil. And we’re the good.” Three years later, Dean referred to the GOP as “the white party.”
After Hurricane Katrina, Democratic Missouri Senate candidate Claire McCaskill said George W. Bush “let people die on rooftops in New Orleans because they were poor and because they were Black.”
Feminist superlawyer Gloria Allred, in 2001, referred to Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice as “Uncle Tom types.”
Then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, in 2006, said, “The (Republican-controlled) House of Representatives … has been run like a plantation. And you know what I’m talking about.”
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democratic National Committee chairwoman in 2011, said “Republicans … want to literally drag us all the way back to Jim Crow laws.”……
I bet almost all of my family believes Trump mocked a disabled man’s handicap; think that when he said “there are fine people on both sides” he was saying there were “fine Nazis or white supremacists;” or think that racists and white supremacists have voted Republican in general; or that the bodies natural defenses in immunity are non-existent and only “vaccines” can bring immunity.
These are dangerous lies to believe.
Here is more regarding the latest declassified documents… one of the biggest lies the media has pushed in it’s life
The First Trump Declassified “Russia Document” Christopher Steele’s 2017 Confession To The FBI — Steele told FBI he leaked Russia collusion story to help Clinton and Great Britain, and was connected to his primary dossier source by former NSC staffer and impeachment witness Fiona Hill. (JUST THE NEWS)
….The FBI report of an interview agents conducted with Steele in September 2017, nearly a year after he had been terminated as an informant, provided explosive information about his motives in working simultaneously for the FBI and the opposition research firm for Clinton’s campaign. The document was obtained by Just the News and at times reads like a confession from the now-infamous former MI6 agent and author of the anti-Trump dossier.
Steele told agents that then-FBI Director James Comey’s decision to reopen the Clinton email investigation in fall of 2016 became his tipping point for leaking the anti-Trump collusion research that his company Orbis Intelligence had gathered and given to the FBI.
“STEELE explained that as the election season went on, they as a company were riding two horses — their client and the FBI — and after FBI Director James Comey’s reopening of the Hillary Clinton investigation, they had to pick one horse and chose the business client relationship over the relationship with the FBI,” the interview report stated.
“They followed what their client wanted, and they spoke to the press,” the report noted.
Steele and his partner Christopher Burrows even suggested the FBI deserved some of the blame for the decision to leak to the news media and Sen. John McCain’s office.
“STEELE and BURROWS described the overall situation as being one where it was ‘your [FBI] fault’ and ‘our fault,'” the memo reported, adding that Burrows was also upset the FBI had not paid Steele for his anti-Trump work.
The two British citizens told the FBI that concerns about the impact of a Trump presidency also motivated them…..
Mainstream Media before Trump was President and immediately when he set foot into the Oval Office was creating false stories about him. For instance, MLK’s Bust story an hour after Trump was elected: “On the evening of January 20, TIME White House correspondent Zeke Miller incorrectly reported that the bust of Martin Luther King Jr. had been removed from the Oval Office.” Most major news outlets carried it right away, and this was the beginning of 16 fake stories by early February that people ate up: Hence #FakeNews
The same people lapped up the phony Russia investigation, helping push the false narrative of Democrats for almost 3-years:
People who believed in this stuff and made decisions based on it ARE the problem with our body-politic. More than Trump. Spreading lies that were bigger than Obama’s Iran Deal thingy and bigger than any Trump lie. Seditious lies cooked up by Hillary in 2016.
(RED STATE) For five years, CNN has fed us a non-stop string of stories claiming, without — and contrary to — evidence, that President Trump was a tool of Vladimir Putin and that just about every foreign policy move by the US, from confronting North Korea to disarticulating the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Quds Force to slaughtering Russian mercenaries in Syria, was actually designed to give Russia some huge but unspecified advantage over the United States.
Now that President Trump seems destined to leave the White House later this month, CNN has openly violated their own editorial policy and decided to take a stab at telling the truth. This is CNN foreign policy wonk and noted plagiarist (yes, plagiarists can still find employment on CNN if nowhere else) Fareed Zakaria on CNN’s New Day on January 1:
(I added a Facebook conversational response by myself at the bottom — JUMP)
Sebastian Gorka goes through a few items that is evidence against the idea that Trump is a Russian asset.
If you think Russia spent money to get Trump in office, that was the biggest waste of money in history. Alternatively, if you think Putin has something on Trump, it has failed to dissuade Trump to act in Putin’s favor at all… Putin, then, would be the worse con-artist in history then.
This admin reversed the policy of the Obama administration, which stood silently when Putin’s Russia annexed Crimea and attacked Ukraine. The Trump admin has sold the Ukrainians lethal defensive weaponry, including anti-tank missiles designed to destroy Putin’s Russian tanks in the hands of separatist rebels. (THE HILL)
The Trump administration has expelled 60 Russians, labeling them “spies” pretending to be diplomats. (DAILY WIRE)
About 300 men working for a Kremlin-linked Russian private military firm (many were Russian special operatives) were either killed (about 200) or injured in Syria on orders from the Trump administration (WASHINGTON TIMES)
Now, President Donald Trump approved sanctions on 38 different Russian companies and entities in response to Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, its presence in Ukraine, and support for the Assad regime in Syria. These entities include 7 Russian oligarchs, 12 companies they own and control, 17 Russian senior government officials, and a state owned Russian weapons trading company…. even sanctioning a member of Putin’s family. (DAILY CALLER)
President Trump is pressuring Germany to stop paying Russia BILLIONS of dollars a year via the gas-pipeline deal (YOUTUBE).
Donald Trump employed jawboning to persuade, arm-twist, and threaten NATO member-states if they didn’t raise the level of their spending on defense…. “by the end of next year, NATO allies will add hundred – 100 billion extra U.S. dollars toward defense.” (FOX)
The Obama Administration worked unsuccessfully to persuade the Kremlin to stand down the program through diplomatic talks. The Trump Administration, in contrast, directly confronted the violation by funding development of its own missile. The research is allowed under the INF (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty), and only breaches the deal if that missile is ever tested or deployed (TIME). “We’ll have to develop those weapons, unless Russia comes to us and China comes to us and they all come to us and say let’s really get smart and let’s none of us develop those weapons, but if Russia’s doing it and if China’s doing it, and we’re adhering to the agreement, that’s unacceptable,” Trump told reporters (DAILYWIRE).
After Sergei Skripal’s poisoning, US exports to Russia that could have military uses — so-called dual use technologies, are cut off completely (CNN)
President Trump signed an executive order to improve America’s critical infrastructure against electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attacks. (EPOCH TIMES)
President Donald Trump called on Russia to pull its troops out of Venezuela on March 27, following reports that two Russian military planes touched down in Caracas over the weekend with about 100 soldiers aboard. “Russia has to get out,”…. President Donald Trump’s national security adviser warned Russia on Friday about its military presence in Venezuela, saying any move to establish or expand operations there would be considered a “direct threat” to international peace.(EPOCH TIMES | REUTERS)
…when oil prices rise above $60-$65 a barrel… fracking increases supply, serving as an effective cap on energy prices. (Broadly speaking, the same principle is true of natural gas prices.) Putin’s government revenue and foreign policy are dependent on high crude prices and foreign nations buying their crude from Russia. Lower prices due to U.S. or other nations’ competition cost him a lot of money, and put the Russian economy and his public support at risk. Even more importantly, it deprives him of the tool of energy blackmail, which he has used to extort other countries into adopting Kremlin-friendly foreign policy choices. This is why Russian intelligence services have been so active in supporting western environmental groups and other interests opposed to fracking. (WASHINGTON EXAMINER — in other words, our energy policy, under Trump, is anti-Putin. By contrast, ALL of the Democratic 2020 candidates energy policies will enrich Putin.)
…the truth remains: Democrats are Russian President Vladimir Putin’s best allies. The anti-fossil fuel energy policy promoted by Democrats aligns perfectly with Russia’s economic needs. Russia is highly dependent on fossil fuel exports for revenue, and competition from the U.S.’s vast energy natural resources poses a direct threat to Putin. Restrictions on the development and use of coal, oil, and natural gas resources through heavy-handed federal regulations are the ideal U.S. policy for Putin. Limits on fossil fuel development and regulation were the foundation of Obama’s energy policy, and Clinton did not deviate far from her prior boss’ platform. As with Obama, climate change was the cornerstone of Clinton’s proposed energy policy, and she supported Obama’s war on coal and also sought to replace fossil fuels with so-called “clean energy.” To the dismay of Democrats and Putin, President Trump wants the U.S. to be an energy superpower, and his policies are unleashing our energy natural resources by reducing regulations and opening up areas for development. When President Trump decided to pull the U.S. out of the United Nations’ Paris climate accord, he was blasted by a choir of left-wing politicians, environmental activists, and the agenda driven liberal media. [….] Climate change, blocking pipeline construction, and stopping development of natural gas through fracking were the top priorities of the social media effort under accounts created by the Internet Research Agency in Russia, the same company special counsel Robert Mueller indicted for interfering with the 2016 presidential election. Previously, news reports discussed the possibility that environmental activist groups are being funneled Russian funds to promote government adoption of anti-fossil fuel policies. Clinton and Obama are by far not the only Democrats acting as Putin’s energy useful idiots. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo banned fracking in the state, and his Department of Environmental Conservation has so far blocked the construction of the Constitution Pipeline by denying a water permit to allow the project to move forward. The Constitution Pipeline would transport natural gas from Pennsylvania to upstate New York. New England is running an extreme anti-fossil fuel energy policy that is starving the region of cheap and reliable energy. During last winter’s cold snap, New England’s inadequate natural gas pipeline infrastructure reached its limit, and the region’s power was supplemented by liquefied natural gas from Russia. The pro-fossil fuel energy policy advanced by President Trump is being used to challenge Russia. President Trump is confronting Russia’s energy dominance in eastern Europe by exporting liquefied natural gas to Poland and the Baltic states. In addition, the U.S. is actively trying to stop the Nord Stream 2 pipeline from Russia to Germany. When it comes to energy policy, Putin and Democrats are on the same team….(NEWSMAX)
…The strategic implications if the Russian lock on those markets is broken are lost on no one, least of all Putin. His economy is dependent on gas and oil exports, and 76 percent of the gas he pipes out of Russia goes to Germany, Turkey, Italy, France, Britain and other European countries. Already, the fracking revolution in the United States threatens Russian dominance on several fronts. In the last six years, the Americans have become the world’s biggest producer of natural gas, which costs in the United States a small fraction of what it costs in Europe or Asia. The result has been a massive conversion of electrical power generation from coal to gas in the United States; strong economic incentives for manufacturers to bring their factories back onshore; and newly revived American power in the international energy marketplace. Facilities that, ten years ago, were being built to import liquefied natural gas (LNG) to the United States are now being converted to export it. Moscow tried hard to downplay the challenge. Just a year ago, Alexei Miller, chairman of the Russian energy behemoth Gazprom, said he thought the American shale gas production was “unprofitable” and the boom in the United States would prove to be a “bubble.” But others in his company admitted that after Gazprom had spent hundreds of billions of dollars to develop fields in the Arctic around the Barents Sea, with the idea the gas there would be sold to North America, that market just dried up: the Americans didn’t need the Russian supply anymore…. (THE DAILY BEAST)
…The fact that Kremlin opposition to European fracking has nothing to do with environmental concerns should be clear even to the dullest among us, because Russia has massive fracking projects of its own underway in Siberia. The real goal is to keep Europe dependent upon Russia for its fuel supply. Natural-gas prices in Europe are quadruple those prevailing in the United States, and by maintaining a near-monopoly on overpriced European natural-gas imports, the Putin regime assures itself of a vast source of revenue. This allows it to rule and rearm Russia without permitting the freedom necessary to develop the country’s human potential. Furthermore, so long as Europe is kept critically dependent upon Russia for fuel, Moscow can paralyze and render ineffective any Western response to its plans for conquest, whose initial steps are currently being demonstrated in Ukraine. More, and much worse, is certain to follow so long as Europe remains helpless. In a recent four-hour television appearance in Moscow, Putin explicitly embraced Kremlin fascist ideologue Alexander Dugin’s grand design of creating a united totalitarian Eurasia, “from Lisbon to Vladivostok.” If he can maintain control of Europe’s critical fuel supplies, he just might be able to pull it off. So it should come as no surprise that the Putin regime is pulling out all the stops in fomenting the global anti-fracking movement, with Europe as its central target. Leading the propaganda campaign has been RT News, Russia’s state-owned television network, which broadcasts around the world in English and other languages…. (NATIONAL REVIEW)
The United States is flexing its military muscles as a powerful warning to Russia. CNN’s Frederik Pleitgen got exclusive access as US warships started their own show of force in the Mediterranean Sea (YOUTUBE).
The Trump administration is taking dramatic steps to revamp the nation’s arsenal and prepare for a theoretical nuclear war with Russia in Eastern Europe…. The Pentagon last week took a major step forward by fielding its first new nuclear warhead in decades…. Analysts say that is just the first move in a grand long-term nuclear strategy to counter Russia and contend with an ambitious China… (WASHINGTON TIMES)
Hell of a “MOLE” who gets sequester rolled back so DOD can rebuild, demands NATO increase defense spending, provides lethal weapons to Ukraine, has American military wipe out a Russian force of irregulars in Syria, and urges Russia pipeline to Germany be cancelled (Hewitt: TWITTER) | The @realDonaldTrump-as-Russian-mole theory also must include that he has successfully fooled fmr SecDef Mattis, @SecPompeo @AmbJohnBolton. Helluva spy.
If Putin paid for Trump, Trump is a smart mother-effer, because he first used Russian interests to get the White House, and then immediately turned on Russia’s interests.
Putin, then, is an idiot, and Trump? The smart-as-hell-tactician.
THE ENTIRE 3-HOURS is magnificent. I wish all Republicans pushed back like this. The truth is on our side!
“Just Like Obama, Trump’s Russia Policy Speaks Louder Than His Words”
….The Helsinki summit did not change my view of the Russian president. As I have reiterated many times, Putin is pure evil. There is no doubt in my mind that U.S. intelligence agencies arrived at the correct conclusion: Russia did meddle in the U.S. 2016 election, and Putin himself directed the operation. Again, I speak from personal experience on this topic: In 2012, Russian intelligence services interfered in the Georgian parliamentary elections, boosting the Kremlin’s preferred candidate through disinformation operations.
Thus, my opinion of President Trump’s policy vis-à-vis Russia is perhaps more positive than one might assume from my background. My reasoning is two-fold: After a lifetime of firsthand experience with Russian aggression, I must evaluate Trump’s actions against the proper historical context. In doing so, I have found that Trump’s actions speak for themselves.
The Outrage Seems Selective
On the first point, I consider it unfair that Trump’s performance in Helsinki has garnered harsher criticism than other incidents in recent memory. In 2012, for example, a hot microphone at a global nuclear security summit picked up then-President Barack Obama assuring Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that he would have “more flexibility” to negotiate with Putin after the presidential election.
During a debate with GOP opponent Mitt Romney the same year, Obama casually dismissed the Russian threat, quipping: “The 1980s called; they want their foreign policy back.” Although Trump could certainly have been more forceful by condemning Putin’s crimes, his statements at the Helsinki press conference were nowhere near as concerning as his predecessor’s remarks about Russia.
This brings me to my second point: Trump’s actions toward Russia speak louder than words—and so did his predecessor’s. Indeed, the Obama administration’s foreign policy undermined America’s credibility in my region, which Putin considers Russia’s “backyard.” There are many opinions about Trump’s rhetoric on Crimea, but it is a fact that the Russian land grab in Ukraine happened on Obama’s watch.
How, exactly, did this happen? During and after Ukraine’s revolution of 2014, which ousted a Kremlin-backed dictator, on a daily basis the United States cautioned Ukraine not to escalate in response to Russian aggression. Thus, Putin saw an opportunity to annex Crimea without risking a direct confrontation with the West—and he seized it. Putin is a bully, but not a fool.
What a Difference Two Years Makes
Rather than changing his course after Moscow redrew the borders of Europe by force, Obama doubled down. Despite bipartisan consensus in favor of selling lethal defensive weapons to Ukraine, and vocal support from his own administration officials (including Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton), Obama repeatedly refused to authorize the sales.
Instead of anti-tank weapons, the Ukrainians defending their territory from Russian invasion received hot blankets and canned goods from the Obama administration. At the same time, Obama asserted that the Ukraine conflict had “no military solution.” With these words—and more importantly, these actions—he was perceived by some on the Russian side as accepting the Kremlin’s sphere of influence in Ukraine.
Despite my warnings, the Obama administration also essentially turned a blind eye to Russian meddling in Georgia’s 2012 elections. The result was devastating not only for Georgia, but for American interests: A Kremlin-backed oligarch (who has substantial interests in Russian energy firm Gazprom) ascended to power in a strategic U.S. ally. Moreover, Russia’s meddling in Georgia’s elections functioned as a proving ground for information operations later used in the United States. To his credit, Obama accepted this reality in 2016, when he expelled dozens of Russian diplomats, but this response was too little, too late.
By contrast, Trump authorized the sale of lethal defensive weapons to both Ukraine and Georgia in 2017. The Trump administration went beyond the congressional mandate in sanctioning Russian authorities involved in the annexation of Crimea. Earlier this year, the United States imposed the harshest sanctions yet, targeting Russian oligarchs as well as government officials.
Trump’s rhetoric on energy at the Helsinki summit, which has been largely overlooked, is also a reason for optimism. The backbone of the Russian economy is energy, and Russia’s dependence on fossil fuels is Putin’s Achilles heel. At Monday’s press conference, Trump stated that U.S. liquefied natural gas exports would “compete” with Russian gas in Europe. This reflects Trump’s comments at the NATO summit, where he criticized Germany for supporting the Nord Stream II pipeline. Trump was correct to call attention to this project, which will enrich the Kremlin at the expense of struggling pro-Western allies like Ukraine…..
Stuff That Didn’t Age Well
If there was one thing I have learned over the years of attacks against Bush over eight years, and now Trump… the rule of thumb is to wait about a week (or more) for the truth of the situation to come out. This is a prime example. Many who have a visceral hatred for Trump immediately jump on the band wagon [just like BDS, Bush Derangement Syndrome — there is TDS, Trump Derangement Syndrome]… and… the below meme is a prime example.
During conversation with a Facebook friend about a meme posted regarding the Dianne Feinstein with Attorney General Bill Barr, I linked theFULL exchange to the exchange. After some talk, the below meme was posted:
After incorrectly reporting that President Trump had discussed former White House counsel Don McGhan’s potential testimony in the House with Russian President Vladimir Putin, NBC News was forced to issue a correction:
CORRECTION (May 3,2019, 1:51 p.m. ET): An earlier version of this article incorrectly included one topic that White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Presidents Trump and Putin discussed on Friday. They did not discuss the possibility of former White House counsel Don McGahn appearing before Congress. Sanders was answering a question from reporters about whether McGahn would testify before Congress.
HILARIOUS. I bet “unnamed sources” are at the center of this story. You can add this to theTRUMP IS CHUMMY WITH PUTINconspiracy the Left and NeverTrumpers have:
Secretary of State Michael Pompeo said the U.S. has a full range of options available to help oust Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and didn’t rule out “ultimately” using military action on top of diplomatic, political and other pressure points.
“We’re preparing those for him so that when the situation arises, we’re not flat-footed,’’ Pompeo said on ABC’s “This Week,” one of three scheduled appearances on Sunday morning political shows.
Trump on Friday said Russian President Vladimir Putin assured him he isn’t seeking to “get involved” in the crisis, although Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton both said earlier in the week that the Kremlin talked Maduro out of leaving Venezuela after U.S.-backed Guaido attempted to end his regime by calling for a military uprising.
“The president has made clear, we want everyone out, and that includes the Russians,” Pompeo said.
They are no longer hiding it any more. The leftists are publicly demanding that government intervene using the same tactics deployed against ISIS propaganda to target wrong-think by conservative American citizens.
Those who helped install the JoeBama administration cannot have subversive voices refusing to comply with their ideological dictates. This is not the slippery slope, this is the full-blown advocacy of the totalitarian state. They openly demand that alternate points of view and opinions must be shut-down to advance the left-wing agenda. Remarkable.
This is from yesterdays show (1/7/2021), and is a large sample of why The Sage is great at what he does. I add some video which radio only allows audio to play, as well as adding some of the video from @The Larry Elder Show — HERE: Enjoy, it is a stitching of large sections from all three hours.
Last segment of the above is a great shorter listen. This is the last portion of a larger audio, HERE. Larry Elder discusses new studies – but included one from the 1970s… this is the first time I have heard this particular study
So we’ve all been talking a lot about the investigation into Hunter Biden and how the mainstream media seems to have finally caught up to the fact that yes, it’s real and it’s Russian disinformation as some tried to claim before the election.
Now that they think Joe Biden won, they’re free to just say “oh, well, here’s this thing.”
Never mind that they consciously suppressed it from the American people and completely failed in their supposed job prior to the election.
We saw a lot of conservatives chastising the media today for what they did.
But I wanted to talk about another group.
We expect the Democrats to cover for Biden. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) told CNN it was a “smear” straight from the Kremlin. CNN’s Jeff Zucker said in his morning conference call to impress upon people this stuff about Hunter was just more “Russian disinformation.” A lot of mainstream media has become little more than Democratic operatives at this point.
There’s a group that we don’t expect and for sure shouldn’t be playing this game and that’s the intelligence community.
But they have and they did in this instance as well.
There were 50 former senior intelligence officers who signed a letter saying that Hunter Biden’s emails had all the signs of a Russian disinformation campaign……
(Posted April 2014, Updated December 2017 and Today)
This comes via THE BLAZE, and is merely a confirmation of what many fair minded people already know, these are some quotes from Sharyl Attkisson during an interview on CNN. I think that CNN was a bit late to the party, maybe, feeling the hit to their ratings for not doing what Fox had already done with Miss Attkisson, that is, interview her:
Attkisson added in her interview with CNN’s “Reliable Sources” host Brian Stelter that while she never was discouraged from hard-hitting reports on the George W. Bush administration, when it came to her critical coverage of the Obama White House, CBS regularly balked.
“There are very sophisticated efforts to manipulate the images and the information that you see every day, in ways that you won’t recognize,” she said. “And I think we can all be a little more savvy about that.”
As for the differences between how CBS News brass treated and covered the Bush compared to the Obama administration, Attkisson noted that she “didn’t sense any resistance to doing stories that were perceived to be negative to the Bush administration by anybody ever.” But as for the Obama White House, she said “I have done stories that were not received well because people thought they would reflect poorly upon this administration.”
Attkisson went further, noting a “fairly well-discussed” topic inside CBS News “that there are some managers recently who have been so ideologically entrenched that there is a feeling and discussion that some of them, certainly not all of them, have a difficult time viewing a story that may reflect negatively upon government or the administration as a story of value.”
“So you’re saying they are liberal or Democrats?” Stelter asked.
“I don’t know what their registered party is, I just know that the tendency on the part of some of these managers who have key influences has been they never mind the stories that seem to, for example — and I did plenty of them — go against the grain of the Republican Party, but they do often seem to feel defensive about, almost, personally defensive about stories that could make the government look bad. Even if it’s something as simple as a government waste story that doesn’t pinpoint anybody in particularly and it takes on both parties. It seems as though some of them were sensitive about any story that might appear as though it criticizes the government.”
THE BLAZE continues the story with the video interview:
UPDATED WITH CURRENT GRAPHS (12-6-2020)
This brings us back to some older news, but refreshing it in our minds helps us remember the uphill battle we face. Lets compare the first 100-days of each of our recent presidents. And as you will see, the media was most fair (down the middle, so-to-speak) with Clinton. But as the Left gets more entrenched due to brainwashing at the university, you see a slide to one end:
Overall, roughly four out of ten stories, editorials and op ed columns about Obama have been clearly positive in tone, compared with 22% for Bush and 27% for Clinton in the same mix of seven national media outlets during the same first two months in office, according to a study by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism.HOT AIR mentioned the Pew Poll a while back, noting: “In their 100-day look released last week, Pew notes that Obama got twice as much good press as Bush and 50% more than Clinton.” They continue by quoting Pew:
The study found positive stories about Obama have outweighed negative by two-to-one (42% vs. 20%) while 38% of stories have been neutral or mixed.
When a broader universe of media—one that includes 49 outlets and reflects the more modern media culture of 2009, is examined, the numbers for Obama’s coverage are similar, though somewhat less positive and somewhat more negative. In this expanded universe of media—which includes news websites, additional regional and local newspapers, plus cable news, network morning news, and National Public Radio, 37% of Obama’s coverage has been positive, 40% neutral and 23% negative.
Pew also notes that the types of coverage Obama receives seems designed to cast a halo on him. Unlike Bush (22%) and Clinton (26%), almost half of all news stories on Obama (44%) focus on his personal and leadership qualities. Those are the kinds of stories that usually take a soft focus, work in generalities, and put public figures in the best possible light.
Obama’s coverage differs in another key way. Much of the Obama coverage (31%) reports on what can only be called Obama’s campaign mode, in which Obama communicates directly with the American people. Only 8% of Bush’s coverage focused on those efforts. The media focused much more on Bush’s relationship with Congress and his legislative agenda.
In other words, the media has given us a heapin’ helping of fluff in the first 100 days, and very little in specifics. They’re allowing Obama to manipulate them into campaign coverage rather than shine a light on his governance….
Well, Sharyl Attkisson, a 21-year vet at CBS confirms to us what Bernie Goldberg years ago already did. That CBS (obviously not the only network) has sold its soul to the gods of progressivism. While Fox should remain center-right, they should always allow the other voice an opportunity to speak. Scott Whitlock at NEWSBUSTERS, for instance, noted that “as of April 3, 2014, it’s been 140 days since the once-vaunted Nightline covered ObamaCare or any of the problems associated with it. Instead, the ABC News program has mostly avoided hard news, focusing on tabloid-heavy topics such as a city in Brazil that has become known as the “model factory.” So it isn’t just WHAT you report as it is what you choose to ignore that affects the public’s perception. Sad.
…with GATEWAY PUNDIT’S erudite [not always mind you] fishing into what was just revealed (that I missed):
What has not been widely known until today was the Democratic Party front group’s role in actually producing the news.
Attkisson: “Media Matters, as my understanding, is a far left blog group that I think holds itself out to be sort of an independent watchdog group. And yes, they clearly targeted me at some point. They used to work with me on stories and tried to help me produce my stories, and at some point…”
After Sunday’s broadcast, CNN posted a follow-up story that included a response from Media Matters. The response does not mention previous collaborations with Attkisson and CBS News in producing news reports for the network.
“We also sought comment from Media Matters; Attkisson said she thought it was possible that the liberal media monitoring group had been paid to discredit her. Media Matters responded:
‘Sharyl Attkisson is continuing a pattern of evidence-free speculation that started at the end of her tenure at CBS. We have never taken contributions to target her or any other reporter. Our decision to post any research on Attkisson is based only on her shoddy reporting’.”
There was no mention of Media Matters working with Attkisson to produce news reports for CBS News in the recent hit piece by David Brock’s Senior Fellow attack poodle Eric Boehlert posted at Media Matters on April 17th with the laughably dishonest headline (if Attkisson is to be believed):
CBS News should disclose which reports by the network were done in collaboration with the Democratic Party front group Media Matters. Attkisson should also disclose on which stories she collaborated with Media Matters.
“It appears the real assault on ‘history’ can be found at CNN, where pundits compare a presidential administration they simply don’t like to one of the evilest and most violent regimes in human history” (LEGAL INSURRECTION)
More can be found at THE DAILY WIRE. Christiane Amanpour compared the Trump administration to Kristallnacht, a horrifying event that took place in November 1938 when Nazis “torched synagogues, vandalized Jewish homes, schools and businesses and killed close to 100 Jews,” according to History .com.
So, the only people “burning books” today (besides Muslims in Arab countries) is the Left. Here is a excerpt from a previous post:
Dennis Prager discusses Amazons attempt to silence freedom in banning Dr. Joseph Nicolosi’s books. The son of the author in question calls into the show. Maybe the updated edition to the book, “120 Banned Books,” can have a “Jeff Bezos” chapter. In fact, If Barnes and Noble were smart, they would have a “Jeff Bezos Box-Set” of banned books during “Banned Books Week.” At any rate, I find it fascinating that Freud was a book burned by Nazis in Germany, and now we have another psychologist’s work being burned. The attack on free speech by the Egalitarian Left since the New Left’s birth is now being “fast tracked” via the WWW. These groups of activists are essentially no different than the jack-boot brown shirts of pre-war Germany: shouting down those who they disagree with, violently attacking those who merely hold another opinion, banning books, and the like…..
….Here are some stories detailing the above:
Amazon Bans Books on Conversion Therapy for Homosexuals Who Want to Change Their Lives (RED STATE);
Amazon Bans Books on Gay ‘Conversion Therapy’ – Is the Bible Next? (LIFESITE);
Amazon Bans Books On Gay ‘Conversion Therapy’ (DAILY WIRE);
Amazon Stops Selling Books by Catholic Psychologist Amid LGBT Activist Pressure (CHRISTIAN POST);
Amazon Bans Books On “Conversion Therapy” (DENNY BURK).
I just wish to note that I am as conservative of an Evangelical as can be. I am a young-earth creationist, believe the Biblical when it self-ascribes literalness, etc., etc. In my extensive library is the Satanic Bible (LaVey), the Book of Laws (Crowley), most anti-creationist books, most books by atheists, the Communist Manifesto, Mao’s Red Book, Margaret Sanger’s “Pivot of Civilization,” etc., etc…..
I would like to note as well the only people tearing down history are Leftists:
Are conservative ideas allowed at American colleges? Protestors routinely try to shut down speeches by conservatives, like Heather Mac Donald, a Contributing Editor of the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal. She also wrote the book “The War on Cops,” which argues that Americans are less safe because police, for fear of being called racist, back off.
Dennis Prager sheds some thinking and light on the recent issue of the fascist left shutting down free speech. While I may parse a little of his position – for instance Cruz should have come out and have been clear on the main issue that this is a tactic of the left, to shut down freedom of speech while at the same time noting just how un-presidential Trump has been – Dennis Prager is still correct in his overall premise.
AND REPUBLICAN missed an opportunity to separate what conservatism “is” – the protection of all sides being heard; versus only one side using brown shirt type tactics:
Free Speech loses to Rollkommandos again:
JIHAD WATCH chimes in with the example from Richard Evans:
…Although this violence and brutalization of political opponents is a new phenomenon in American politics, it has a historical antecedent: the Nazi Brownshirts. In The Coming of the Third Reich, historian Richard J. Evans explains how, in the early days of National Socialist Germany, Stormtroopers (Brownshirts) “organized campaigns against unwanted professors in the local newspapers [and] staged mass disruptions of their lectures.”
To express dissent from Nazi positions became a matter of taking one’s life into one’s hands. The idea of people of opposing viewpoints airing their disagreements in a civil and mutually respectful manner was gone. One was a Nazi, or one was silent (and fearful). That is just the kind of public arena that the Left has been trying to bring to the United States for years, and is bringing to us now….
You can see a recent upload in this regards HERE. Free Speech is not a value of the Democrats…
(Just some reminders of how I am — and those Trump voters — are thought about by many) After more than 4-years of relentless attacks on Trump and those who voted for him (me)… calling us NAZI’s, racists, bigots, and the like — now the MSM and Democrats are calling for unity. Really?
Here is a small sample of what NEWSBUSTERS could probably have posted but chose just a few examples: “The Media’s ‘Unity’ Chickens From 2016 Coming Home to Roost”
….After spending four years assailing Donald Trump, suddenly the media wants to give peace a chance. Fox’s Greg Gutfeld astutely observed this the other night on Fox’s The Five. Said Greg:
GREG GUTFELD: “It’s like a miracle! The media and Democrats converge on one message! It’s time to just move on. Time to heal! Here’s how the president-elect and some in the liberal media described it over the weekend:
JOE BIDEN ON SATURDAY: This is the time to heal in America!
CNN ANCHOR DON LEMON: America needed a release valve at that moment. Finally, the relief came.
MSNBC ON SUNDAY: We’re getting decency back in our country.
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: [It’s] a time to heal America but a time to heal the world as well.”
And I would add The Washington Post’s columnist Alexandra Petri headlined her post-election column this way: “It’s time to unite, but if it’s not too big a bother, could you accept the results?”
Then there’s MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough: “It’s time for us to take a deep breath and move forward.”
Really? Really? These media figures and oh so many more want us to “unite”, “heal” and “accept the results”?
Let’s take a look back at the media’s idea of healing and moving on over the last four years after the 2016 election won by President Trump.
“CNN’s Brian Stelter speculated Sunday on President Donald Trump’s mental health and called for more media coverage of the issue.
‘So something is wrong,’ Stelter said in the opening monologue of his show, Reliable Sources.
‘There are lots of theories about what it is. There are some doctors who think they know,’ he said. ‘Others say we shouldn’t speculate. There are ethical questions about having this conversation at all, but we can’t tiptoe around it anymore. We’ve got to talk about this.’”
Here is CNN’s Chris Cuomo in 2019 interviewing Kayleigh McEnany: The President, he said, is “patently racist.”
Here is The Washington Post headline on an Op-Ed by one Erika Lee, the director of the Immigration History Research Center at the University of Minnesota. “Trump’s xenophobia is an American tradition — but it doesn’t have to be
Here is The Washington Post on January 20, 2017 at 12:27 pm – a mere 27 minutes after Trump was sworn into office. “The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.”
Got all that? The media spent their time after Trump was elected demanding a special prosecutor and impeachment, calling the president mentally unstable, a racist, xenophobic and more. They were utterly unwilling to accept the 2016 results, and made it their mission to overturn those results in whatever way feasible.
One could go on and on and on with examples like this from the mainstream media over the last four years.
And now they demand Americans come together in a kumbaya moment?
Somehow, in someway, I suspect the answer from most if not all 70-plus million Trump voters will listen to all this be a resounding, decidedly emphatic no.
Or put another way? I suspect that the liberal media’s last four years of chickens are about to come home to roost.
MORE EXAMPLES AND ARTICLE’S HERE:
Liberal Opponents ‘Trashed’ Trump’ s Presidential Transition In 2016 (WASHINGTON TIMES)
Democrats Labeled Me and Now They Want Unity? No Way (TOWNHALL)
LARRY ELDER notes some of the “unity” proffered by Democrats:
…Yes, nearly all polls show Biden ahead both nationally and in the battleground states. Imagine where Trump would rank in the polls but for the constant, relentless negative media coverage and deranged opposition that would have suffocated the average politician. Nearly one-third of the Democratic caucus boycotted Trump’s inaugural address. Several Democrats never attended a single State of the Union speech.
Immediately after Trump’s election, Democrats attempted to invoke the 25th amendment, arguing that the real-estate-developer-turned-politician lacked the mental fitness to hold a job. To counter this perception, Trump allowed his personal physician to hold a press conference to assure the country and the world that yes, this man is actually sane.
For nearly three years, a special counsel investigated thin and, in retrospect, virtually baseless allegations of collusion, conspiracy and/or coordination with Russia to win the election and to then, presumably, become a Russian stooge. Critics called Trump “soft on Russia.”
Never mind that it was the Obama administration that, to curry favor with the Iranians and Russians, turned its back on missile agreements with Poland and the Czech Republic negotiated during the previous administration. At the beginning of the Obama administration, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced their “reset” policy, a major policy redirection to change what President Barack Obama perceived as President George W. Bush’s dangerously hawkish relationship with Russia.
It was Obama who, during the 2012 presidential debate, ridiculed opponent Mitt Romney for calling Russia our biggest geopolitical threat. It was Obama who, on a “hot mic,” told then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, “This is my last election … After my election, I have more flexibility” to negotiate a missile defense treaty between our two countries.
Oh, and Trump was impeached on grounds so weak that neither Biden nor running mate Sen. Kamala Harris even bring up impeachment while campaigning….
…You want unity? That’s fair. We will give you unity:
1. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and deny the legitimacy of the 2020 election for the next four years.
2. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and investigate the Biden family’s every business dealing at home and abroad.
3. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and question Biden’s mental fitness to hold office.
4. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and question Biden’s physical fitness to hold office.
5. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and blame Biden for every person who dies from the coronavirus.
6. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and blame Biden personally for every Black person who is shot anywhere in America.
7. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and never stop publicizing that Biden has been accused of grabbing a woman’s crotch against her will.
8. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and emphasize that, any time a woman makes a claim of sexual harassment against Biden, she must be believed.
9. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and continue publicizing that Kamala Harris, like Evita Perón, slept her way into public life.
10. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and remind people that, no less than Stormy Daniels, Kamala Harris was a public figure’s mistress.
11. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and accuse Biden of treason for consorting with enemies like the wife of the Moscow mayor, who gave the Bidens $3.5 million, the Chinese who put the Bidens on their payroll, and the Ukrainians of Burisma.
12. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and investigate the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop, and if and when those photos can be released, they will be distributed to the tune of Maurice Chevalier’s “Thank Heaven for Little Girls.”
13. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and demand that Biden condemn racism, anti-Semitism, and misogyny every second of every minute of every hour of every day of every month of every year.
14. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and remind the American public that, even with dead people casting votes for Biden — Democrats just dying to oust Trump — and with Republican poll watchers kept outside of range in the counting rooms of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin; and with mail ballots without postmarks being accepted after election deadlines … Biden still did not receive 50 percent of the vote, so lacks the mandate that would have come from winning support from at least a majority of the living electorate.
15. In unity with you, and to advance the national healing, we humbly will acknowledge that Biden indeed won the coveted Obituary Vote, as Democrats, shrouded amid grave circumstances, emerged furtively from their plot to flock in from their cemeteries and mausolea to cast ballots for the candidate to whom they most related in style and substance — and the the one with the most skeletons in the closet. Biden knew how to urn every dead voter’s ballot by invoking the ultimate rule of social distancing: every extra needed Democrat vote must come from a distance of six feet … under. Perhaps on Memorial Day, Biden will lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Voter.
16. In unity with you, we will follow your example of the past four years and will work to disrupt and slow down every cabinet appointment and every nomination that requires Senate advice and consent. However, we will make one small exception and will not impeach. Just as Richard Nixon knew precisely what he was doing when he made Spiro Agnew his running mate (aka his life insurance policy), so did Biden by running with his.
I am starting out with wetting your whistle with some audio by Larry Elder (0.00 to the 8:18 mark) showing the difference between how MSNBC and others are reporting the Hunter Biden lap-top story vs. other European based news channels. Some are even saying it is a new “Russian Conspiracy.”
Which brings me to the following days show by Armstrong and Getty (from the 8:18 mark till the end) , who talk about the same characters involved in the “Russia Hoax” that enraptured the Left and #NeverTrumpers for over two years. They signed a letter saying this is a Russian Undercover Intel Attack (rough synopsis). A friend on Facebook linked to a POLITICO story regarding these 50[+] intel persons signing a letter: “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.”
However, 2-days ago Fox news confirmed with the DNI (Director of National Intelligence) that this laptop in no way is Russian Intel. Yesterday, CBS confirmed via their contacts at the FBI AND DOJ that the fox report is correct. Fox News contacted someone in the “cc” portion of the email discussing the “Big Guy” and who that was… the person involved as a person in the email chain said that was Joe Biden. AND, there are signatures from Hunter dropping it off.
Here is how I responded to my friend:
It shows that without a shred of evidence intel ppl are biased … inflicted with TDS. The DNI said there was no Russian disinformation program (Fox, yesterday). Then CBS confirmed through their sources that both the DOJ and the FBI confirmed that this is true.
The FBI has had the computer since December.
Maybe, the Russians trained a dopey back woods computer repair guy as a mole/sleeper agent for just such a moment, when, a VP’s son would drop off water damaged computers and SIGN for them to be serviced.
Larry Elder recaps one of the biggest lies by the media and Democratic Presidential nominee… Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. (e.g., Good Ol’ Joe). I include video “The Sage” had audio for, as well as extending some other audio – like Michael Smerconish doing what real reporters and media persons should do… that is… track down the real story [the truth of the matter]. This is Larry at his best, I only tried to embolden his points [hopefully I did]. I will be making a smaller truncated version to accent my just uploaded video, HERE.
Did President Trump call neo-Nazis “very fine people” during a famous press conference following the Charlottesville riots of August 2017? The major media reported that he did. But what if their reporting is wrong? Worse, what if their reporting is wrong and they know it’s wrong? A straight exploration of the facts should reveal the truth. That’s what CNN political analyst Steve Cortes does in this critically important video.
Do not let what Dr. Risch said get lost in the below. He said 70-to-100-thousand people could be alive today is we had treated our patients with the Hydroxychloroquine protocols other countries have followed. 70,000 to 100,000!
Dennis Prager has Dr. Harvey Risch (MD, PhD , Professor of Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health) on his program to discuss the issue of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), its use, and the seemingly political fallout from the media and the Left (Democrats in Congress and Democrat governors). There is also discussion of how or why there is pressure or push-back against it’s use. I would say partly because of “TDS” (Trump Derangement Syndrome), but also BIG-PHARMA. Otherwise known as “Crony-Corporatism”. Previously Dennis discussed his earlier NEWSWEEK article.
Dennis also mentions in passing the French United Nations official, who has served as Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations, Special Adviser on Innovative Financing for Development in the UN and chairman of UNITAID — PHILIPPE DOUSTE-BLAZY. But shortly after discussing the issue Dennis asks the $64,000 question, “has the ban on HCQ led to deaths?” [adapted]… that shorter response is isolated here:
While Dr. Risch did not want to impugn motives, Robert Kennedy Jr. was not so coy:
The problem is Anthony Fauci put $500 million of our dollars into that vaccine. He owns half the patent. He and these five guys who are working for him were entitled to collect royalties from that.
So you have a corrupt system and now they have a vaccine that is too big to fail. And instead of saying this was a terrible, terrible mistake, they are saying we are going to order 2 billion doses of this and you’ve got to understand Alan with these COVID vaccines these companies are playing with house money. They’re not spending any dime, they have no liability. Well if they kill 20 people or 200 people or 2,000 people in their clinical trials, big deal. They have zero liability. And guess what, they’ve wasted none of their money because we’re giving them money to play with.
….On July 23, 2020, the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons (AAPS) provided the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration copious amounts of data showing, among other things, that countries using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) are attaining far lower mortality rates than the United States. “The mortality rate from COVID-19 in countries that allow access to HCQ,” said the AAPS, “is only one-tenth the mortality rate of countries where there is interference with this medication, such as the United States.”
Did you catch that? One-tenth the mortality rate means that our country’s current death count of about 160,000 could be and perhaps should be, as low as 16,000.
Oh, but I assume you’ve been told that the AAPS is a “fringe group” of “conservative” doctors who should be discredited?
Well, aside from the fact that such a claim is a textbook example of the Socratic fallacy of an ad hominem attack, i.e., “shooting the messenger rather than attending to the message,” there’s more, lots more.
First, there’s the Henry Ford Health System in Michigan, which recently published a study involving thousands of patients where HCQ proved to be both very safe and highly effective in treating COVID-19. This study reports reducing mortality by 50%. Did you catch that? Fifty percent.
Then, there’s the Palmer Foundation report published last week highlighting the Indian slum of Dharavi. This is Asia’s biggest and densest slum, housing more than a million people. In the early days of the pandemic, Dharavi suffered a cluster outbreak. Doctors report containing it by using proactive measures, “including the use of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis (preventive) treatment.” As a result, Dharavi’s COVID-19 infection rate dropped drastically from April through June, and in July, new infections were very low, almost reaching zero on July 9.”
Yes, you read that correctly. “Almost reaching zero.”
Still the stuff of right-wing nut jobs, you smirk?
Well, there is Harvey, A. Risch, MD, Ph.D., professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health (generally not known as a bastion of conservative political thought), who recently wrote in Newsweek magazine: “I am … flummoxed to find that, in the midst of a crisis, I am fighting for a treatment that the data fully support but which, for reasons having nothing to do with a correct understanding of the science, has been pushed to the sidelines. As a result, tens of thousands of patients with COVID-19 are dying unnecessarily.” …..
AGAIN, besides the studies Dr. Risch mentions (12), the total worldwide that shows benefite to using Plaquinel are 68 studies (41 peer reviewed). One of the better posts on this topic comes from REAL CLIMATE SCIENCE — of which some of these graphs are from or updated from the MAIN SITE tallying all this:
Death Becomes the MSM
Okay, I just want to say that we have heard many media types and Democrat Lefties say that by the President touting Hydroxychloroquine he is killing people. My first example comes from Neil Cavuto:
Fox News host Neil Cavuto warned viewers that hydroxychloroquine “will kill you” after Donald Trump’s surprise announcement that he was taking the unproven drug to prevent Covid-19 infection.
Mr Cavuto, who appeared stunned at the US president’s decision, said he was not making a “political point, but a life-and-death point”.
“If you are in a risky population here, and you are taking this as a preventative treatment … it will kill you. I cannot stress enough. This will kill you,” said the Fox News host…..
But all this is based on a Lancent study published May 22nd (that media heads caught wind of a couple days early)… the only problem? The entire study was faked — here is a fair dealing with it via MEDCRAM. (A previous post where the known issues with “peer review” is noted: Peer-Review Issues | Sharyl Attkinsson). Here is the indomitable Press Secretary tearing shit up:
So the above and below “concern” about a drug many-many millions of people have taken for decades, safely, ALL OF A SUDDEN is a health emergency. I wonder why? (I refer you to the already posted Washington Times article title above.) The “blood on the hands” argument is really more apt in the 70-100-thousand lives that very possibly could have been saved had our country done what other countries had… save the MSM Derangement with Trump.
Here is some more examples of what I am saying:
Brianna Keilar spars with Trump campaign spokesman, says hydroxychloroquine ‘kills people’. Laura Ingraham gets reaction from Dr. Harvey Risch, professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, regarding CNN’s anchor who is accused of ‘ludicrous’ claim about hydroxychloroquine.
(Decent montage) The discredited and subsequently retracted hydroxychloroquine study had hardly appeared in Lancet magazine before CNN pounced on it with great eagerness to try to prove President Donald Trump wrong. This is yet another of their horribly WRONG reports on this treatment which on July 3 was contradicted by a Henry Ford Health System study which showed that hydroxychloroquine significantly reduced mortality among COVID-19 patients. Once again, CNN WRONG and Trump RIGHT!
CNN’s John Harwood went after President Donald Trump for “extending false hope” and “recklessly” touting unproven coronavirus treatment hydroxychloroquine, after a study published Friday revealed the drug is linked to “increased risk of death and increased risk of heart issues.”
Medical journal The Lancet’s study found that there was a 34 percent increase in death and a 137 percent increased risk of heart arrhythmias in those who received hydroxychloroquine alone. There was also a 45 percent increased risk of death and a 411 percent increased risk of heart arrhythmias for those given the drug with and an additional antibiotic.
CNN medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen explained that although other studies exposed the potential dangers linked to the drug, the Lancet’s is much larger.
“This new one looks at 671 hospitals over six continents. The one before was looking at 25 hospitals,” Cohen said. “This is a very, very large study. And what they found was increased risk of death and increased risk of heart issues. Now, these were hospitalized patients, some quite ill.”
She reiterated Trump’s claim that these studies look at sick people taking the drug, while he is healthy and taking it as a preventative measure, but questioned that if hydroxychloroquine has any positive effect at all if does not help the infected.
They then played a clip of the president’s “reckless” promotion of the drug, during which he calls hydroxychloroquine “a gift from heaven” but admits he is not a doctor.
“Increasingly, this study gives the impression that this president was extending false hope to people and he has gotten negative judgment from the American people for his handling of coronavirus, this is not going to make that any better,” CNN White House correspondent John Harwood added after the clip aired…..
Metro Nashville At-Large Council Member Sharon Hurt said Wednesday during a virtual meeting of the Joint Public Safety and Health Committee that there should be stronger legislation for those not wearing masks and suggested they be charged with murder or attempted murder.
Hurt said that she works for an organization that, “If they pass the virus, then they are tried for murder or attempted murder.”
Hurt thinks the same standard should apply to the general public.
“This person who may very well pass this virus that’s out in the air because they’re not wearing a mask is basically doing the same thing to someone who contracts it and dies from it,” she said.
“Maybe there needs to be stronger legislation to say that if you do not wear a mask, and you subject exposure of this virus to someone else then there will be some stronger penalty as it is in other viruses that are exposed,” the council member added…..