It seems that the folks on the Left “got woke” to the deception about “Russia/Russia/Russia”. Brian Stelter, Rachel Maddow, Chris Cuomo, Chris Hayes, Anderson Cooper, Don Lemon, Chris Mathews, Morning Joe and wife Mika turned out to be the REAL “Fake News”
Fox News’ Tucker Carlson absolutely dominated CNN last week, beating their entire prime time line up combined in total viewers by over 1,000,000 viewers — and CNN is not handling the news well.
CNN’s entire prime time line up garnered 2,474,000 total viewers compared to Carlson’s 3,475,000 total viewers.
After the ridiculous assertions from the “MSM”, it turns out that Media Matters (far left website) was really the one yielding the racist comments:
CNN’s report promoted the attacks against Carlson from far-left Media Matters, despite the fact that Media Matters’ president came under intense fire last month afterit was revealed that he wrote multiple racist, anti-Semitic, and transphobic things before running Media Matters.
Carlson responded to the far-left’s attempts to silence him in a fiery statement on Fox News, saying: “One of the only places left in the United States where independent thoughts are allowed is right here, the opinion hours on this network. Just a few hours in a sea of television programming. It’s not much, relatively speaking. For the Left, it’s unacceptable. They demand total conformity.
CNN and MSNBC are flailing at Tucker Carlson. Good luck with that, read on!
The LEFT simply doesn’t get it, that it’s they who are the ideology of separatism. In the USA, “separate but equal” was once considered an acceptable way of handling the differences in race between “people of color” and caucasians. It was struck down as being segregationist (which of course it was!). Today, the modern Left however, thinks it’s a good idea.
PRAGER U VIDEO: DIVESTU – Don’t give to your Alma Mater by Prager University. What can we do about leftist indoctrination on college campuses?
Charlie Kirk is the Founder and Executive Director of Turning Point USA, a national student movement dedicated to identifying, organizing, and empowering young people to promote the principles of free markets, and limited government.
It’s worse than we could have ever thought. Watch and weep for the Western world. As Ronald Reagan brilliantly said,
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
Ed Note: the foregoing is true for all Western Democracies, not just the United States.
Free speech and its sister concept, free thought are seemingly on trial here. Dr. Peter Ridd, respected in his field had the audacity to question “the party line” – to use his expertise in the line of scientific inquiry and quite literally – “Question Authority” in the guise of James Cook University. For this, he was sacked in essence for being “disrespectful” and is rightly seeking justice. Scientific evidence, well researched and documented is to be respected. Opinions in the vernacular are like “rear end orifices” – everybody has one.
From Dr. Marohasy’s blog: (Bold is wentworthmaven’s emphasis).
PETER Ridd’s trial in the Brisbane Federal Circuit Court has just wrapped-up after three days. With Judge Salvadore Vasta presiding, Stuart Wood QC acting for Peter Ridd (the applicant) argued the case with great skill. However, on the most critical of issues the university (the defendant), and important media, refused to engage at all. Specifically, Chris Murdoch QC, acting for James Cook University, refused to outline to Judge Vasta what processes it has in place for quality assurance of scientific research, and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (the ABC) simply didn’t attend or report.
At the heart of this court case is the matter of Peter Ridd disputing media’s reporting of the health of the Great Barrier Reef back in 2015 and 2016. Specifically, Peter Ridd was first censured for proposing to a journalist in April 2016 that he investigate the state of the fringing coral reefs around Stone Island, which is part of the Great Barrier Reef.
Instead of investigating, the journalist sent Dr Ridd’s evidence that the reefs were in good health with spectacular coral, to his arch adversary at the university, Terry Hughes, who was claiming the exact opposite, and who promptly forwarded the evidence from Dr Ridd to university management. This began a disciplinary procedure that would eventually result in Peter Ridd’s sacking.
The trial opened on Tuesday with Mr Wood QC outlining Dr Ridd’s honestly held expert opinion that the Great Barrier Reef is in good health, but that many of his colleagues, particularly Professor Hughes, suggest otherwise, that their research is “untrustworthy” and is not subject to any “quality assurance”.
The Judge seemed genuinely interested in this issue of “quality assurance” of the research. Towards the end of Day 2 he specifically requested that Mr Murdoch QC explain to the court what quality assurance procedures were in place.
I had assumed that Mr Murdoch QC, the Barrister acting for the University, would thus begin Day 3 with some explanation of this – but he didn’t. The University continued to refuse to engage on any matters of science, particularly the issue of quality assurance. Rather the University simply argued that because there is a code of conduct that expects professors to be collegial – they thus had a right to sack Peter Ridd because he had become disrespectful of his colleagues and also had broken confidentiality.
At the beginning of Day 2 Peter Ridd clearly explained that he was concerned about the trustworthiness of the science, and the lack of quality assurance because it was having a significant negative economic impact on rural and regional economies – because of the bad publicity for tourism and increasing government regulation of farming.
It is generally agreed that modern, cohesive democracies work because there is an independent judiciary (legal system), impartial media, and a government that makes public-policy based on evidence. The judiciary and the media are generally educated university-graduates. Universities are expected to be dominated by intellectuals, who are curious and dispassionately seek out the truth.
Mr Wood QC, acting for Dr Ridd, emphasized the importance of intellectual freedom in his closing remarks today – that it is integral to a university.
Universities are expected to be places where there is vigorous discussion of contentious issues. It would be expected that where there is disagreement – for example about the condition of the fringing coral reefs at Stone Island – there could be a debate that followed rules of logic and considers evidence in an attempt to arrive at the truth.
This requires both sides to engage.
Back in 2016, and again today, instead of considering Dr Ridd’s evidence and concerns, the University choose to look away. It showed no interest in finding out about the real state of the corals surrounding Stone Island, or at the Great Barrier Reef in general.
There is a crisis in our democracy and as clearly illustrated by this court case, it is at least in part because the mainstream media, and our universities, too often refuse to engage in any real discussion with those who hold an opinion contradicting their own.
Thanks for caring. Sincerely, Dr Jennifer Marohasy Researcher & Writer
The LEFT has been in the habit of screaming “white privilege” for the last several years. However, it’s usually found just to be their “psychological projection” kicked into high gear, for as we know, what matters is who you’re connected too and how high up the “intersectional” ladder you reside.
Smollett, who had been facing three years in prison, was glad to hear it.
Tonight, Laura Ingraham on the “Ingraham Angle” gave the definitive satirical discourse on the Lefts “5 Stage of Grief”. Though directly speaking about the Trump didn’t collude decision, it’s just as applicable in the Smollet case.
The Chicago Police Department released their full findings on the case and despite Kim Foxx’s having the records sealed (which means we may never know what Smollett admitted too?), he went before the Mainstream Media and repeated his claim:
“I have been truthful and consistent on every single level since day one,” said Smollett
Needless to say, Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie John, wasn’t pleased and his department has asked the FBI to look into what may have been an improper handling of the case by Ms. Foxx.
Police superintendent Eddie John said justice had not been served, and that Smollett “committed this hoax, period.”
As cronyism on the Left is virtually in plain sight: Ms. Tchen (Michelle Obama’s former Chief of Staff, contacted Ms. Foxx (who herself has political aspirations):
Tchen contacted Foxx on behalf of Jussie Smollett and family members who “have concerns about the investigation.”
How many accused of such crimes have taken the unusual if not bizarre step of contacting the alleged perpetrators family to discuss their “concerns”? If you’re a political sycophant of the Obama’s; anything is within the realm of possiblity.
This all goes to the point that there is one system of justice for the rich and famous, high up the intersectional ladder whom are favored by the Left – and – everyone else.
The case, Eddie Johnson lamented, “sends a clear message that if you’re in a position of influence and power you’ll be treated one way and if you’re not you’ll be treated another way.” The superintendent has a point, but there’s a bit more to it.
…..If the fakery perpetrates the narrative that the election of Donald Trump unleashed a tide of hatred, leading Democrats and the establishment media will believe it without question.
Ladies and Gentleman, this is how “Democracy dies in Darkness”. It’s more of the Left projecting and acting out in their “5 Stages of Democrat Grief”. We’re watching it happen, right before our eyes.
Ed Note: This post from Joannenova.com.au compiles the essence of what truly is the “WMD” canard of the Mainstream Media for this generation. Perhaps one day they’ll look up the word “journalism” and stop confusing it with “advocate” or “propagandist”. I won’t hold my breath, neither should you!
Trump is vindicated. The real substance of Russiagate is what it says about the media
Dragged out for two years of hate, denigration and abuse in the media, in the end the Muller inquiry found no collusion. How many journalists predicted this? How many even wrote as though it was possible? Credit to Matt Taibbi for the scathing WMD comparison.
Nothing Trump is accused of from now on by the press will be believed by huge chunks of the population, a group that (perhaps thanks to this story) is now larger than his original base. As Baker notes, a full 50.3% of respondents in a poll conducted this month said they agree with Trump the Mueller probe is a “witch hunt.”
Joanne states the hopes and dreams of the Left:
The Special Prosecutor literally became a religious figure during the last few years…..
Trump wins: Russiagate becomes the weapon of mass destruction for Mass Media’s reputation.
Ed Note: I add several key quotes from Taibbi’s article here. The article is quite lengthy, but worth the read for those who want to see the detailed timeline and techniques that led the media (willingly!) astray. The following morsels may pique your interest.
As has long been rumored, the former FBI chief’s independent probe will result in multiple indictments and convictions, but no “presidency-wrecking” conspiracy charges, or anything that would meet the layman’s definition of “collusion” with Russia.
A senior Justice Department official said that Mr. Mueller would not recommend new indictments.
[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.
Over the weekend, the Times tried to soften the emotional blow for the millions of Americans trained in these years to place hopes for the overturn of the Trump presidency in Mueller.This is a damning page one admission by the Times. Despite the connect-the-dots graphic in its other story, and despite the astonishing, emotion-laden editorial the paper also ran suggesting “We don’t need to read the Mueller report” because we know Trump is guilty….
Nothing Trump is accused of from now on by the press will be believed by huge chunks of the population, a group that (perhaps thanks to this story) is now larger than his original base.
Stop. Just stop. Any journalist who goes there is making it worse.
CNN told us Trump officials had been in “constant contact” with “Russians known to U.S. intelligence,” and the former director of the CIA, who’d helped kick-start the investigation that led to Mueller’s probe, said the President was guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” committing acts “nothing short of treasonous.
”Of course, there won’t be such a reckoning. (There never is). But there should be. We broke every written and unwritten rule in pursuit of this story, starting with the prohibition on reporting things we can’t confirm.
At the same time, Buzzfeed made the historic decision to publish the entire Steele dossier, bringing years of pee into our lives. This move birthed the Russiagate phenomenon as a never-ending, minute-to-minute factor in American news coverage.
This trick has been used before, both in Washington and on Wall Street, to publicize unconfirmed private research……This same trick is found in politics.
Buzzfeed’s decision exploded traditional journalistic standards against knowingly publishing material whose veracity you doubt. Although a few media ethicistswondered at it, this seemed not to bother the rank-and-file in the business. Buzzfeed chief Ben Smith is still proud of his decision today. I think this was because many reporters believed the report was true.
Adam Schiff, held hearings on March 20, 2017 that blithely read out Steele report details as if they were fact. From Schiff’s opening statement:
But here was Schiff, telling the world Trump aide Carter Page had been offered huge fees on a 19% stake in Rosneft – a company with a $63 billion market capitalization – in a secret meeting with a Russian oligarch who was also said to be “a KGB agent and close friend of Putin’s.”
Schiff had not spoken to Steele before the hearing, and read out the allegations knowing they were unsubstantiated.
Bob Woodward said, “I did not find [espionage or collusion]… Of course I looked for it, looked for it hard.” The celebrated Watergate muckraker – who once said he’d succumbed to “groupthink”
The Isikoff story, which claimed Page had met with “high ranking sanctioned officials” in Russia, had relied upon Steele as an unnamed source……This was similar to a laundering technique used in the WMD episode called “stove-piping,” i.e. officials using the press to “confirm” information the officials themselves fed the reporter.
If neither “side” feels the need to disclose its own errors and inconsistencies, mistakes accumulate quickly.
Years ago, in the midst of the WMD affair, Times public editor Daniel Okrent noted the paper’s standard had moved from “Don’t get it first, get it right” to “Get it first and get it right.” From there, Okrent wrote, “the next devolution was an obvious one.” We’re at that next devolution: first and wrong.
CNN has its own separate sub-list of wrecks. Three of the network’s journalists resigned after a story purporting to tie Trump advisor Anthony Scaramucci to a Russian investment fund was retracted.
With Russiagate the national press abandoned any pretense that there’s a difference between indictment and conviction.
How was the existence of these communications confirmed? Did anyone from the Guardian see or hear these intercepts, or transcripts?” Their one-sentence reply: The Guardian has strict and rigorous procedures when dealing with source material. That’s the kind of answer you’d expect from a transnational bank, or the army, not a newspaper.
Another painful practice that became common was failing to confront your own sources when news dispositive to what they’ve told you pops up. The omnipresent Clapper told Chuck Todd on March 5, 2017, without equivocation, that there had been no FISA application involving Trump or his campaign.
Being on any team is a bad look for the press, but the press being on team FBI/CIA is an atrocity, Trump or no Trump. Why bother having a press corps at all if you’re going to go that route?
We won’t know how much of any of this to take seriously until the press gets out of bed with the security services and looks at this whole series of events all over again with fresh eyes, as journalists, not political actors.
The author concludes:
We had the sense to eventually look inward a little in the WMD affair, which is the only reason we escaped that episode with any audience left. Is the press even capable of that kind of self-awareness now? WMD damaged our reputation. If we don’t turn things around, this story will destroy it.
It is interesting to note that, the more that is penned on the subject, the more skepticism prevails, the messenger becoming a Cassandra. The Greek mythological Cassandra was cursed to voice prophecies that were true, but her prophecies were not believed.
As evidence, Dr. Johnson Paugh sites this youtube video by Katie Hopkins – another “Casandra” of the UK:
Katie Hopkins warned (“America Needs to Wake Up” – video link is 2:12 seconds), Americans about the dangers of unrestricted Islamic immigration and described in frank detail how it has affected the U.K. and Europe, contributing to a social decline and an inimical atmosphere. Thanks to Barack Obama’s eight-year islamophillic presidency, unrestricted immigration has spread to the United States.
And another brilliant tome written by Douglas Murray – yet another “Casandra” of the UK:
Douglas Murray explained that Europe has been afflicted by a fatal disease that is impossible to cure.
“As a result, by the end of the lifespans of most people currently alive Europe will not be Europe and the peoples of Europe will have lost the only place in the world we had to call home,” said Murray.
Dr. IJP opines – The Mainstream Media, their acolytes and financial contributors; succinctly exposed:
The politicians and corporatist billionaires have decided that our civilization is passé and must be replaced by fresh blood from the third world—easily duped and manipulated.
The UN, the supposedly neutral NGOs and the continuing influence of their Agenda 21:
The U.N., with help from its affiliated NGOs (non-governmental organizations) aims to dictate population control and birth, diversity, border erasure, education, immigration, business, transportation, commerce, energy consumption, private property, housing, food production, water use, and healthcare.
For decades, they have chipped at our lives bit by bit, making incremental progress at local, state, and federal levels via their 1992 U.N. Agenda 21 now morphed into Agenda 2030. Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s New Green Deal is not new, it is not green, and it is not a deal. It is a derivative U.N. Agenda 2030 on steroids.
The Elites (our “betters”) have “plans” for the rest of us: Ed Note: Does anyone see the hand of George Soros, Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg and other billionaires at work here?
Their plan is that each country is meant to become a “home for the entire world,” no borders, endless welfare, all controlled by the United Nations and the billionaire elites who hold the purse strings of each former government.
The tactic is to discourage the dream of a free and truly open society by tarnishing, obfuscating and simply lying about our forbearers intentions. As Orwell said: “Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.”
(the) American people seem to have lost faith in their own beliefs, traditions, and argue against their historical legitimacy to exist, an “existential tiredness,” or as my wise grandmother used to say, being tired of the good life and having democracy gone to their heads.
Dr. IJP then describes and lists her 11 bullet points of why immigration continues and has been justified:
We’ve heard many justifications as to why we are importing so many immigrants who refuse to assimilate and change the face and future of many countries:
We have an ageing population Diversity is important Immigration cannot be stopped This is not who we are as a country The downtroddenare flooding the West for a better life Illegals come It is very easy to deceive the authorities
The borderless world agenda Multiculturalism
Destroying free speech
Europeans still believe that a core culture can be maintained
Douglas Murray she adds, states that:
They are here, there is nothing we can do about it “The tyranny of guilt”
“If free countries have to have unsightly security controls, why don’t they have them around the national borders rather than around every single thing inside those borders?” (Murray, p. 333)
In conclusion, Dr. IJP states and quotes T.S. Eliot:
And academia has filled the heads of their students with pipe dreams of Marxism and communism, where everyone’s problems will be solved by the benevolent government.
As T.S. Elliott said, “dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good” and nobody will have to ever work if they don’t want to.
Overall, a brilliant package that tidily sums up where the Left is directing Western societies.
The only thing we must ask ourselves now is: Will we let them and what can we do to stop them?
Ed Note: I found this editorial particularly poignant in it’s explanation of what is happening throughout Western civilization. Its application is universal and shows how we’re truly going down the rabbit hole into unprecedented territory for the experiment of self governing societies. As the editorial points out:
Not since slavery has there been such a stark contrast between the ideologies of the states. America survived, but barely.
“We’re at war,” one frustrated Californian wrote to her local paper. “Not with another country, not with terrible diseases and plagues, not with ruthless dictators. We are at war with ourselves.” Red, blue, purple – America is a tangle of ideologies all pulling in different directions. These days, as the debates rage on, the map no longer seems to show state lines – but ideological battle lines. It’s not as if Americans have always seen eye to eye on every issue. But the days of even general consensus seem lost. Things that we used to take for granted – values like common decency and civility – are suddenly rare. Issues that were once uncontested – the value of a fully born human life – are suddenly grounds for fierce debate. In the states, the see-saw battles are even more pronounced.
In Illinois, New York, and Rhode Island, locals have watched leaders fight to make newborn killing legal – while Missouri, North Carolina, and Arkansas try to stop doctors from dismembering fetus in the womb. In one state, legal infanticide is a street party. In another, it’s a cause for community mourning. And it’s not just abortion. On education, sexuality, gender identity, immigration, and counseling, the gulfs are growing.
But how people think about the issues is just one part of the divide. As noted in the Harvard Political Review, “According to Pew Research, there are no issues that are widely considered top priorities by both Democrats and Republicans today. The average partisan gap between the parties’ rankings of priority issues in 2019 is 19 points, representing a 36 percent increase over the last two decades.” As reported by Pew, “[E]ven as recently as 2014, the top priorities of Democrats and Republicans were much more aligned than they are today.”
There are profound differences in how the two sides view the world today. Not since slavery has there been such a stark contrast between the ideologies of the states. America survived, but barely. Of course, the silver lining is that things can shift quickly. We’ve seen entire scripts flip on abortion after the New York law. In a matter of weeks, the number of people calling themselves “pro-life” jumped by 17 points. Change is possible – but it’s also up to us. As William Penn once said, “Governments, like clocks, go from the motion men give them … and as governments are made and moved by men, so by them they are ruined too … Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad.”