In a powerful monologue deserving recognition, Fox News host Greg Gutfeld Thursday not only called out the hypocrisy of left media when it comes to rioting, he also reiterated the fundamental ethics that many on the left overlooked during months of summer rioting, saying definitively that “Americans do not need lectures from hypocrites in hair and makeup who pick and choose their favorite protesters.”
I combine (stitch together) two topics that are related to each other. That is, how the media distorts and covers up important issues by actively censoring topics… bias by omission. This bias is also seen in how the media and academia have characterized our nation for decades — as well as Donald Trump for over 4-years. If our nation if systemically racist and Donald Trump is a white supremacist “nazi,” why should minorities feel safe regarding government activity. (Which is what the Left wants, victims made through fear are easier to control.) The MSM drives the narrative for the lazy.
…For the post-election survey, The Polling Company interviewed 1,750 Biden voters in seven swing states: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, six of which (excluding North Carolina) were called for Biden. The voters were asked about their knowledge of eight news stories, all of which the liberal media had downplayed or censored.
The survey showed “a huge majority (82%) of Biden voters were unaware of at least one of these key items, with five percent saying they were unaware of all eight of the issues we tested,” reported the MRC.
For instance, despite the #MeToo movement and the media coverage it garnered, the survey found that 35.4% of Biden voters were unaware of the serious allegations of sexual assault made by Tara Reade against Joe Biden. Reade had worked for Biden in the 1990s.
“If they had known about Tara Reade’s sexual assault allegations, 8.9% told us they would have changed their vote — either switching to Trump or a 3rd party candidate, not voting for any presidential candidate, or not voting at all,” said the MRC.
“By itself, this would have flipped all six of the swing states won by Biden (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin), giving the president a win with 311 electoral college votes,” said the organization.
Another important story buried by the major media was the Hunter Biden laptop story, which showed that Joe Biden was aware of his son’s business dealings in the Ukraine and in Communist China.
Yet 45.1% of Biden voters said they were unaware of the laptop story.
“According to our poll, full awareness of the Hunter Biden scandal would have led 9.4% of Biden voters to abandon the Democratic candidate, flipping all six of the swing states he won to Trump, giving the President 311 electoral votes,” reported the MRC.
Similar results were found when Biden voters were asked about the other six censored stories – Kamala Harris’s radical left-wing policies; positive economic and job reports; Middle East peace deals brokered by Trump; energy independence; and the swift vaccine production as a result of Trump’s Operation Warp Speed.
“Looking at all eight of these issues together, our poll found that a total of 17% of Biden’s voters told us they would have changed their vote if they had been aware of one or more of these important stories,” reported the MRC.
“This would have moved every one of the swing states into Trump’s column, some by a huge margin,” said the MRC. “The President would have trounced Biden in the electoral college, 311 to 227.”
The MRC noted that the Biden voters who said they would have voted differently had they been properly informed by the media, did not have to vote for Trump for the president to have won a second term.
“Just by choosing to abandon Biden, these voters would have handed all six of these states, and a second term, to the President — if the news media had properly informed them about the two candidates,” said the MRC. (Emphasis added.)
I heard about the “Twitterverse” not even allowing a story by the NEW YORK POST to grace their site. When I got home I tried it. And sure enough, the story would not post. So I tried it again early this morning… nope:
I just tried it again this evening. HUGH HEWITT in his first hour played Tucker Carlson and then the President… I also include a call from Detective Tom – as – he asks good questions as usual.
….Misinformation? Lack of authoritative reporting? The story explained exactly The Post got the material, and the supporting evidence. Yet the past four years have seen left-of-center outlets devote millions of column inches to anti-Trump stories that turned out to be utter bunk — yet neither Facebook nor Twitter took similar action as part of any “standard process”:
Remember when four CNN reporters claimed, in June 2017, that James Comey was about to dispute in congressional testimony Trump’s claim that the FBI director had reassured the president he wasn’t under investigation? Comey did no such thing, but did Twitter and Facebook censor the story? Nope.
Or recall when The Guardian newspaper concocted a story, seemingly out of thin air, about Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort and WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange meeting at Ecuador’s embassy in London? There was no such meeting, as the special counsel’s report confirmed. So did Facebook or Twitter block that story? Nope, you can still post the debunked nonsense on either platform.
Or remember when The Atlantic published a several-thousand-word story suggesting that then-Sen. Jeff Sessions had lied when he said he didn’t meet the Russian ambassador as a Team Trump surrogate, but as a routine matter? The Mueller report debunked The Atlantic decisively with its finding that the meeting in question didn’t “include any more than a passing mention of the presidential campaign.” So is The Atlantic story blocked as misinformation? Nope.
Or how about when the McClatchy news agency claimed that Trump attorney Michael Cohen had secretly traveled to Prague to meet with his Kremlin handlers? “Cohen had never traveled to Prague,” the Mueller report found. So is the McClatchy report blocked? You know the answer — of course it isn’t.
Then there was BuzzFeed’s big bombshell that fizzled: a major story claiming that Trump had ordered Cohen to lie to Congress. The Mueller report’s verdict: “The president did not direct [Cohen] to provide false testimony. Cohen also said he did not tell the president about his planned testimony.” Did Facebook and Twitter block the link or otherwise “reduce distribution” pending fact-checking? Of course not. You can still post the lies freely.
Then there was the biggest of whopper of all: the salacious — and utterly discredited — Steele dossier, first reported by David Corn of Mother Jones and later published by BuzzFeed. Blocked by Big Tech? Ha!
The Post will continue to chase the truth wherever it takes us. But this episode should alarm every American. A very few people can unaccountably shape what you read.
This is how freedom dies.
The New York Post has published two bombshell stories that raise more questions over whether Joe Biden abused his power as the vice president of the United States for the financial benefit of his family. It’s a made-for-TV tale of foreign business dealings, money, corruption, and power – and the social media gods really, really don’t want you to read it.
Continuing their use of Orwellian tactics, NBC Nightly News featured hypocrisy that jumped out from the pages of Animal Farm: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” That notion was on full display during Monday’s newscast as anchor Lester Holt immediately pivoted from a segment bashing President Trump’s upcoming rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, to boosting the “crowded” Seattle “Autonomous Zone,” now renamed the Capitol Hill Occupy Protest (CHOP).
Their hypocrisy was stunning. Even just listening to Holt’s introductions to the segments showed that NBC didn’t care about how blatant it was. “The spread of the virus is also a concern as the Trump campaign gets set to resume large scale rallies this coming weekend in Oklahoma,” he decried; only to turn around at the top of the following segment and boast: “In Seattle this evening, protesters continue occupying part of the city and demanding police reform.”
Turns out, some people’s ability to exercise their First Amendment rights were more equal than others…..
…He also wasn’t happy with how Trump’s campaign director planned to hand out masks and hand sanitizer. “The President’s campaign manager tonight announcing that all attendees will get a temperature check, hand sanitizer, and a mask. But it is not clear whether they will be required to wear it,” Alexander huffed.
For correspondent Jo Ling Kent’s part, she touted how “[p]rotesters [were] showing no signs of leaving this six-block area, after taking it over a week ago. Now, festive, crowded, and peaceful, demonstrators pitching tents and planting gardens this weekend in the newly reclaimed Capitol Hill Occupied Protest.”
Besides turning a blind eye to the street fights, gunpoint shakedowns of businesses, and the general lawlessness of the zone, Kent also downplayed their radical list of demands. “Their demands? Reduce funding for the Seattle Police Department, invest in the black community, and release arrested protesters,” she cherry-picked.
Kent didn’t utter a single word about the coronavirus….
It’s the kind of story that echoes citations of postmodernist linguistic maneuvering in the decades-long battle over the politicization of language. (See more at MRCTV’s BLOG)
An excellent definition incorporating the old Webster’s and the Safire Political Dictionary:
Webster’s says this: a. belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
So we see that Webster’s main definition are based on a belief in a genetic superiority of one ethnicity (falsely called race) over another. A more in-depth definition comes from Safire’s Political Dictionary, and reads (in-part):
racism Originally, an assumption that an individual’s abilities and potential were determined by his biological race, and that some races were inherently superior to others; now, a political-diplomatic accusation of harboring or practicing such theories.
“This word [racism],” wrote Harvard Professor J. Anton De Haas in November 1938, “has come into use the last six months, both in Europe and this country… Since so much has been said about conflicting isms, it is only natural that a form was chosen which suggested some kind of undesirable character.” In fact, racism came into use two years earlier, in his 1936 book The Coming American Fascism, Lawrence Dennis wrote, “If … it be assumed that one of our values should be a type of racism which excludes certain races from citizenship, then the plan of execution should provide for the annihilation, deportation, or sterilization of the excluded races.”
Racism, a shortening of racialism, was at first directed against Jews. In the nineteenth century, anti-Semites who foresaw a secular age in which religion might not be such a popular rallying force against Jews put forward the idea of Jewishness being less a religion than a race. Adolf Hitler, with his “master race” ideology, turned theory into savage practice….
Note also that the above started to get into what Hitler thought. See more via my letter to a teacher at Arroyo Seco [my sons school] many years ago:
Since the death of George Floyd, athletes and activists have been saying that Colin Kaepernick’s kneeling protests were misunderstood and that they were never about the American flag. However, Kaepernick’s reasoning back when he first took a knee in 2016 say otherwise. Join MRCTV’s Nick Kangadis for a new edition of Out Of Left Field where he’ll remind everyone that his protest was, at least in part, about the American flag for Kaepernick. If you’re sick of being talked down to like you don’t understand what’s going on, Kangadis dishes out a little common sense, reason and logic that are typically non-existent when people become too self-righteous about a cause.