Category: Fake News and Its Results

The “Inconvenient Truth” Isn’t an Al Gore Movie

January 7, 2020

Do you think that Democrats are petrified to believe that Donald Trump is looking more and more likely to be re-elected in 2020? Few will acknowledge that the 45th President’s support among Americans is NOT falling in the wake of the non-stop attacks mounted by Democrats and their bevy of Leftist supporters. Their attacks seem to encourage Americans who have tired of the “same old thing” in Washington: tax and spend, political corruption, ignoring federal laws, refusal to enforce immigration laws while repairing U.S. immigration, and tearing apart American healthcare. Add to that the massive loss of jobs of all kinds to foreign nations that drove millions even to quit looking for jobs in the U.S. Americans just had enough. Then came Donald Trump.

In the wake of the three-year plethora of amazing accomplishments on all fronts during Trump’s first term, one would think Americans — ALL Americans — would trumpet (pun intended) the American achievements in every sector and fall in line. Instead, the Left has just ramped up their nonstop attacks on the President. Tagging right along (if not leading the charge) is the Lame-Stream Media. They not only miss-report actual news, but manufacture story after story that demean the President personally and professionally. They report fake news as real news while ignoring every accomplishment achieved for Americans during Trump’s first term. They even use Americans on a personal level to fuel their attacks:

“Mark” tells a really sad story in this political ad. According to media reports, Mark is just one of the millions of Americans who, with the hope of change, voted for Donald Trump in 2016 who are appalled and ashamed of their 2016 votes. The only problem with this story is that “Mark” didn’t even vote in the 2016 election! BL News reported the story recently this way:

News reports revealed that a man who appears in an ad saying he regrets voting for Donald Trump did not even show up to vote in the 2016 presidential election. The controversial video was funded by Democratic Party supporters.

The controversial American Bridge 21st Century ad features Mark Graham, a man from Erie, Pennsylvania, who claims to have voted for Trump in 2016 and today regrets his decision.

“I voted for Donald Trump in 2016 because I thought he would make a change,” Graham said in the video urging Pennsylvanians not to support President Trump and even comparing voting for him to pouring “gasoline on a fire.”

However, Erie County elections office records indicate that Graham did not vote in the 2016 election.

What could be going on here? Was this an honest mistake that happened to a group of American patriots diligently trying to get the truth out that Pennsylvanians who voted for Trump are so disappointed they regret those votes? That doesn’t appear to be the reason for this ad and others like it.

American Bridge 21st Century, the entity that financed the ad, is considered a Super PAC. Political action committees (PACs) are organizations that pool contributions from donors to use those funds for campaigns for or against candidates, election initiatives, or legislation.

The American Bridge PAC, one of the significant liberal groups coordinating election fundraising, is funded mainly by Democratic donors and unions. Controversial billionaire speculator George Soros was the group’s largest donor for the 2012 and 2014 cycles, contributing $1 million in 2012 and more than $1 million in 2014, according to reports by the NGO Fact Check.

It’s one thing to point to the actual failures and wrongdoings of elected officials as reasons for voting for their removal or against their re-election. But it’s another thing to unethically seed the ground with falsehoods and fake ads to try to in underhanded fashion impact election results.

Wait a minute: isn’t that what the Mueller Investigation was about? Didn’t the Media implicate the Russians for subversively through social media ads and fake accounts to induce American voters to vote against Hillary and for Trump in 2016? I guess, in this case, it’s OK because it’s not a foreign government committing the fraud. Most would probably agree that both were incorrigible attacks on America’s election system. But only one was illegal.

The “Real” Story

Mark Graham’s story — at least as used in the context of that television ad — is not unique. One can put two and two together and conclude that if Mr. Soros and others of his political persuasion are willing to conflate facts and even outright lie, there are far more campaign tricks with which to fool Americans.

Democrats for generations have shouted from the mountaintops that they alone have been the supporters of minorities in America. They with the support of numerous African-American leaders have successfully led the majority of Blacks in the U.S. to their staunch support of the Democrat Party. Why? Because “conventional wisdom” proves that the GOP has always fought against the rights of African-Americans and even fought to keep Blacks suppressed in every way.

Indeed, there have always been Republicans who have discriminated against African-Americans.  But, it’s a fact that Republicans have pushed through legislation that gave the African-American community more freedom, more opportunity, more justice than have Democrats. Doing so created more chances to fulfill the promises made by our forefathers to all Americans in the Constitution.

In this brief audio/video report, one gets the truth of the Democrat Party’s lies about their Civil Rights gifts to African Americans:

It comes as no surprise to most that the tools of the Left are NOT legislative, social, or racial accomplishments for the poor or disenfranchised. In fact, Democrats fought against such freedoms for 100 years or longer. Their purpose is so obvious to some while so confusing to others that they have been successful in keeping members of the African-American community and other minorities from “seeing” the truth. Democrats are undoubtedly masterful communicators. But their achievements for minorities in America do not support their promises, nor their touted accomplishments.

Most Americans have known for decades the truth of the Democrat Party: their existence as a party depends solely on the maintenance of a nationwide voting majority. In the last twenty years or so, they watched as their voting majority began to slip. Why? Because Americans realized that Democrats had actually become the Taskmasters of minorities. How could these minority members allow this? Democrat Party leadership planted the seeds of deception that taught minorities that Democrats are the only Americans who care. Democrats supposedly were the only ones that would help them achieve the American Dream. That lie has been perpetrated in minority communities for more than half-a-century.

Under Donald Trump, Democrats have been exposed!

Summary

Here’s what’s happened: Donald Trump’s policies in total have given minorities massive life improvements in just his first three years. They are fleeing the Democrat Party in droves. Why? They are tired of empty promises, party policies implemented to perpetuate party power over its members, and legislative proposals that, if ever signed into law, would do nothing but further stifle opportunities for ALL Americans.

Democrats have been exposed.

It’s not just African-Americans that have seen the truth. Native Americans, Latino Americans, Asian Americans, and immigrants from all over the world who have emigrated to the U.S. SEE the benefits in their lives they never saw under Democrat presidents. They more than ever understand the promises given to them for decades by Dems have been empty promises devised to do nothing but keep their votes.

The video ad at the beginning of this story today proves just how desperate they are. The Democrat Party lies in shambles. They watch as its storied history fades into a distant past. Their power is dwindling, and that scares them the most. They know that without that power, they are doomed. They refuse to admit it, but to their horror, the Democrat Party is taking its last gasps.

The George Soros millions put into advertising and promotion along with the zillions of dollars from Bloomberg and Stern flooding this election cycle has done little to attract new Democrat voters. Polls show dramatic numbers of Democrats are leaving the party altogether.

The alternative for Democrat voters — Donald Trump in 2020 — leaves them speechless. Donald Trump and the Republican Party together form “The Inconvenient Truth”  of today’s political landscape. They are clamoring to overcome that “Truth.” But everyday ends for them saying, “What can we possibly do to prevent this from happening?”

There’s not much they CAN do: Americans have awakened.

The Beginning of The End

December 9, 2019

It’s over! President Trump is done: his presidency is in tatters, NATO nation leaders laugh at the American president, American voters have lost confidence in President Trump’s ability to lead, and the nation is doomed.

That’s the message that has been presented to Americans for month after month by the American Press. While doing so non-stop since the 2016 election, they giggle with glee for Trump’s non-existent failures! The irony of all this? Americans don’t agree with them!

Likely Articles of Impeachment Content

It is not likely the House Judiciary Committee will complete as soon as this week’s proposed Articles of Impeachment against President Trump. What will those probably include?

The articles of impeachment are likely to cover two major themes — abuse of office and obstruction. But they could be divvied up into multiple articles.

An impeachment article accusing Trump of abuse of office, or abuse of power, would focus on the findings of the Ukraine investigation and his efforts to persuade the Ukrainian government to investigate Democrats as the U.S. withheld military aid. That conduct is the focus of a House Intelligence Committee report that will be presented to the Judiciary panel for consideration in a Monday hearing.

Some lawmakers have suggested that Democrats could break out “bribery” as a separate article. It would likely center on Trump withholding the aid and also withholding a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in exchange for the political investigations.

Obstruction articles could be broken up into obstruction of Congress and obstruction of justice, or the two could be combined.

The administration’s repeated refusals to provide documents and testimony would serve as the basis for an article charging Trump with obstruction of Congress. If Democrats decide to draft an article on obstruction of justice, it could mention the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

The Impeachment Process

If the House continues down the impeachment road, here is how it will most certainly look like:

  • The Judiciary Committee will present their finalized charges — “Articles” — to the full House for approval by a House vote. Each Article will be presented, debated, and determined by a House vote one at a time.
  • It is likely as few as three Articles to as many as five or six will be presented, considered by the House, and determined by votes whether to move forward.
  • At the completion of the House process, however many of those Articles are approved by the House will then be presented to the Senate for a trial.
  • The Senate could actually via a motion determine to not even take impeachment under consideration. That is unlikely to happen.
  • If/when the Senate initiates a trial, each “charge” (or Article) will be presented by an appointed prosecutor who will present evidence that will include documents and the testimony of witnesses. The President’s defense team will also counter with the cross examination of each prosecution witness presented as well as evidence. Then the defense team will also present witnesses and evidence that the prosecution will also cross examine and challenge as desired.
  • U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts will preside over the Senate trial. He will have total control of the process of the Senate trial according to Senate rules. When trial details are completed a vote will be taken. The President would if found guilty of any charges be removed from office.

Summary

How likely is it that President Trump will be removed from office? The answer to that question depends on who you ask. Most Americans when confronted with facts of Democrats’ allegations will shake their heads in disbelief this is actually happening. Sure, many Americans disagree with the President’s demeanor, his way of speaking, his brash, confrontational communication, and even his bragging. But most Americans question those things are impeachable offenses.

But I must be honest: this is only the third time in U.S. history this has happened. And the fact the Democrats are actually pushing down this road with the tremendous across-the-board Trump accomplishments that have and are significantly impacting Americans is scary. Common sense should dictate impeachment of a president might be appropriate for criminal activity by a President or unethical actions in office that include ”bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors.” But no one has presented any evidence of any of those necessary wrongdoings by this president.

Because those facts have not been sufficient to shut the door on impeachment is giving millions of Americans pause: this really could happen!

Fear is gripping the hearts of millions! This fear is of a government that is considering overturning the votes of 63 million Americans. Their doing while ignoring not just those voters but the best economic data in the nation in decades should make all Americans afraid. The fear is that Democrats just might pull this off.

The next two weeks will show the World exactly where the U.S. is in support of the Constitution, the American people, and the Rule of Law. If Democrats succeed in this, it will be the death-nail in history’s greatest country ever.

Democracy will die.

 

 

Media Problem: We Give Them Passes For Lies

November 26, 2019

Please do not think that our frequent mentioning of media corruption means we are conspiracy nuts. Why do we have so many media stories? The U.S. media has become the universal “go-to” source for information, especially information regarding the U.S. government. And with Donald Trump in the White House (who is regarded as probably the most controversial POTUS in at least a generation), there is plenty of Trump news on a daily basis.

Certainly that substantively should not be bad news at all. In fact, media sources should be delighted at the constant stream of Trump news. Why? It gives their viewers, listeners, and readers reason to spend more time, listen and watch more often and longer to news stories which interpret into ratings and circulation. Ratings and circulation turn into advertising dollars. And those evil media capitalists like gross revenue!

I strongly believe that those in the media purposely react as they do to the President’s verbal assaults on the lack of accuracy in much of their reporting to create stories about themselves to perpetuate the attention of their followers — for money! That certainly makes sense. With social media, the internet, satellite radio and television instant news programming, conventional news sources have suffered horrible financial losses over the last decade plus. A Trump White House has made them all more relevant and therefore more financially viable.

Enter “Fake News”

Media outlets rail frantically against the term assigned to them by President Trump: “Fake News.” While the President has made it abundantly clear again and again he is NOT speaking of all news from all news sources, it seems that all news sources stay on defense pointing their retaliation attacks at the President for the term.

Americans are not caught in that frenzied war of words between the media and POTUS. And the media understand that. Do you remember the Denzel Washington 1:00 minute video we presented several days ago when speaking to the media?

This Media functions totally on getting to print or on-air first, often at the expense of the truth. Who in good conscience can even claim news today is NOT biased, politically driven, and prospectively “in the tank” for specific purposes?

 

 

Media Lies: Which Story is Truthful?

                    Jim Acosta of CNN
             Germany’s Economy
              Comey, Comey, Comey!
CNN: One Day Apart
     Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and War
              Russia, Russia, Russia!

            Social Media Confusion

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Summary

Do you get the correlation of “Fake News” and Media disdain for the integrity of Americans? Do those in Media think Americans have no memory, no ability to search the internet? Do they think Americans don’t think about checking out a story on YouTube? Or do they just not care?

One thing is certain: today’s Mainstream Media cannot be trusted.

It’s a shame that Americans today that desire honesty, truthfulness, and facts in the news of the World can no longer trust the major media outlets for any of the above.

What’s ahead? Maybe, just maybe Americans have awakened in this horror thrust upon our nation with the Mueller Investigation, “Ukraine-Gate,” the faux House Impeachment Inquiry, and whatever is next in their incessant attacks on President Trump. Maybe now that the truth of the dishonesty of media (it’s odd to use that description of our media, isn’t it?) has demonstrably been exposed the nation will begin to question what is seen and heard and demand facts: not opinions or editorial comments or political narrative or “he said, she said.” Maybe Americans will begin to make the free market of ideas work just like the free market of trade and economics have for centuries. Maybe Americans will embrace the system of “supply and demand” in the news just as happens in the Service Industry, Retail, and international trade. In those, the products and services that are considered by consumers to be the fairest in price and delivery and substance are demanded before competitors’ similar products and services that are not as good or better when compared. That’s what Americans MUST demand in news.

Unless and until consumers send that type of message to today’s media of all kinds, they will continue to shovel the partisanship ideological “news” down our throats and tell us that if we do not accept what they give to us, we’re stupid.

I’ve had enough. Have you?

The Media Trump “Bombshell”

November 24, 2019

“The Walls are closing in,” “We’re at a tipping point,” and “It’s the beginning of the end!” These are the incessant cries from the Leftist Mainstream media in America. And these are not new warnings or new allegations. These began even before the day of President Trump’s inauguration.

So what is this all about? Corruption in the Media.

In our series entitled “Corruption U.S. Government Style,” we promised to give you six certain pieces of proof of existing corruption in the U.S. government. We gave you five, but told you we would give you the sixth “in a few days.” We did tell you the sixth would come from the formerly “unofficial” branch of the government that has been made official by the Democrat Party: the Mainstream Media. One might argue regarding the term “official.” I would agree there has been no formal appointment by the DNC of their media sycophants as part of their party, let alone, no Congressional appointment for them. But what cannot be disputed is the daily precise coordination between Democrats and the Media in messaging. It seems that every network and newspaper that are known for being “Anti-Trump” carry and broadcast the same canned headlines and stories as each other during the same Newsday. It is so common it would be disingenuous for anyone to argue that coordination does not happen. If you are one of those Americans who live in a world void of television news, or if you are one who believes the claims of independence in news and truthfulness of those who present it to us, let’s try to bring you back to Planet Earth!

TruthNewsNetwork could spend hours of your day showing and playing for you actual date and time-stamped examples of these same things happening not just during the Impeachment Inquiry, but since the 2016 election campaign. There exists volumes of examples that confirm what many formerly claimed was nothing more than a conspiracy. It’s real and…

American Mainstream News IS coordinated!

Who’s In Charge?

Naming a person, a group, or an organization as the “Boss” of these coordinated attacks on President Trump would be speculative. I’m reasonably confident I know where it originates, but I refuse to speculate. On this subject, I’ll be just like Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) regarding the whistleblower’s identity: “We must protect the guilty so lies can sacrifice the innocent!” (Of course my speculation there was not real and was emotional: please forgive me.)

It is much easier to determine who is NOT in charge. All of these Trump allegations target a sitting president that was elected by 63 million Americans. That process was conducted legally, fairly, and its results are indisputable. Those results were based not on emotion or opinion, but on the elements of presidential choice alone: an election. That process was implemented by a group of intelligent people who set out to do so with one objective in mind: to craft a government structured entirely to operate at the behest of Americans — ALL Americans. No American has ever been more important than their neighbors or other family members. And any variations of that one fundamental are attacks against the foundation blocks that constitute the United States of America. Those variations are nothing more than the opinions of people who are driven by “self-agendas.” And “Self-agendas” are NOT Constitutionally protected.

It doesn’t matter who is in charge and who — if anyone — is organizing a “messaging process, what matters is that the Media have let Americans down.

Propaganda

In third-world and totalitarian countries, news organizations controlled by the State have had their news justifiably labeled as “Propaganda.” Propaganda is the State’s version of the truth. But it certainly is not. In each such situation, the Media has become a combined messaging entity controlled by the latest messaging entity in each country. And, sadly, it’s true in the U.S. today just like in those third-world countries we referenced.

The Media have:

  • become a propaganda machine for the Left;
  • become a clear and ever-present bias purveyors against all things conservative;
  • A source that is pushing narratives that are ripping this country apart;
  • A reference to promote racism and bigotry where there is NO evidence of such behavior;
  • A source of misinformation and outright LIES without vetting sources or fact-checking stories.

In essence, they’ve stopped telling Americans the truth.

The Media Is Failing At Its Job

They’re supposed to be the 4th Estate, the “checks and balance” for the American people to war against the government growing too comfortable in their inevitable shift towards tyranny. It’s the media’s job to STOP that shift—or at least slow it down—and they’re not doing that.

Trump has called them the “enemy of the people,” and the fact that they’ve chosen sides and refused to do their actual job goes a long way in proving him to be 100% correct. And, unfortunately for them, Americans are FINALLY starting to notice.

Evidence

  • A recent Rasmussen poll indicates that the vast majority of American voters (including 69% of independents) are angrier at the media than they are at either President Donald Trump or his political opponents.
  • 61% of Americans expressed anger at the media (up from 53% last year) while voters’ anger at the press is also higher than their anger at either President Donald Trump (53%) or his political opponents (49%) and far more Republicans (83%) than Democrats (33%) say they’re angry at the media.
  • More than two-thirds (69%) of unaffiliated voters say they’re angry at the media.

Republicans being angry at the disproportionate bias makes sense. The treatment of the president and all things from the Right is horrendous. The most prominent news outlets in the country all lean to the Left. And the one company that is supposedly in Trump’s corner – Fox News – is only 47% favorable towards the President, while 53% of its reports are negative. So, if anything, Fox News is CLOSER to being fair and balanced towards the president.

It is fair to note that although FOX News is not harmful in their overall reporting of the President, that is NOT Pro-Trump.

So what is news supposed to read like, look like, and sound like?

Real News Defined

“News is information about current events. This may be provided through many different media: word of mouth, printing, postal systems, broadcasting, electronic communication, or through the testimony of observers and witnesses to events. Common topics for news reports include war, government, politics, education, health, the environment, economy, business, fashion, and entertainment, as well as athletic events, quirky, or unusual events. Government proclamations concerning royal ceremonies, laws, taxes, public health, and criminals have been dubbed news since ancient times. Humans exhibit a nearly universal desire to learn and share news, which they satisfy by talking to each other and sharing information. Technological and social developments, often driven by government communication and espionage networks, have increased the speed with which news can spread, as well as influenced its content.”

This definition originates from that bastion of news independence, journalistic integrity, truth, and honesty: Wikipedia. If one performs an internet search to find actual descriptions of News, its purposes, and its abuses, you’ll find that news has never been without bias and personal opinion.If anyone says to youthat “their” news IS 100% truthful, without prejudice, and without political or personal perspective, run away as fast as you can! Why is that? Because we are all people, all human, and all embodied with a brain with which to observe, consume, process and spew to others the consensus of what our minds have prepared from all those elements we have absorbed from outside sources woven into our minds.

We in no way are trying to excuse and or all those in the news media who practice untruthful production and dissemination of news regularly. Most of those abandoned the fundamentals of real journalism long ago. Journalism 101 teaches that regarding news, reporting should contain these elements: “Who,What, When, Where.” Stories passed along to news audiences are to include those elements and nothing more. But there is a problem with doing just that.

Humans investigate, compile evidence with which stories that chronicle those investigation findings are written, someone else may give those stories in a newspaper, television news report, radio news broadcast, or even from a stage. And in each such case, seldom if ever are those details given in a manner held to that “Who, What, When, and Where” template. Personal opinion and personal or business agendas most often color the “news” that is transmitted.

It’s that personal opinion that has become both the opiate and the thunderbolt for those who receive news. News organizations know that and have created an environment in which they can feed the hunger — a specific drug a consumer looks for — to anyone and everyone to keep them committed to that news source for that type of news about that type of subject.

Alas, Truth of stories given to the public is no longer mandatory. What IS compulsory is the inclusion of the personal opinion of the one reporting to not indoctrinate the viewer or listener, but to “persuade” that person toward a particular conclusion that is seldom based on fact.

We’ll close today’s story with a Summary note from actor Denzel Washington. He explains succinctly what has been and is still happening in the news industry. Without saying it, Denzel is portraying the evil of today‘s Mainstream Media and the horrors it is spewing on us all.

We’ve said this many times before but it bears repeating: if we choose to NOT awaken to the plethora of untruthful information flooding our lives and the lives of those around us, we deserve the results we receive from the absorption of it all. What are those results?

We form opinions based on information we digest no matter if true or not. We share those with others who then create their own ideas to share with others. To be  blunt: the Media are being allowed by Americans to paint a new picture of our World each day that has had the truth excised before its dissemination, replaced with opinion and specific narratives the reporting entity or individuals want us to consider as Truth.

Denzel expressed it best:

Google: Gone Rogue

August 8, 2019

There’s something up with social media giants Google, Facebook, and Twitter. You’ve heard about it continuously during the last two years: conservative posts are being blocked or taken down, “demeaning” or supposed “hate” speech posts are quarantined. Users’ accounts are even being blocked and sometimes deleted.

The conclusion: the Big Three are no longer just social media, news and information platforms — they are “Political Machines.” And they’re political leanings are obviously tilted to the left. And they’re using political bias to regulate what Americans see and read. In fact, in their doing so, “they” are choosing which political narratives and opinions are acceptable to the general public and which are not.

Yesterday we gave you examples of concrete proof that Democrats now have a choke-hold on their Media lapdogs. The Big Three network news divisions along with CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times and others are releasing news stories that are not just biased but are in-the-tank for Democrats already in office and for those who want to be. (If you haven’t already, take about twelve minutes and take a look/listen to yesterday’s story at https://truthnewsnet.org/fact-democrats-control-mainstream-media-content/)

Of the three — Google, Facebook, and Twitter — the media giant Google seems to be the one which is further Left politically and more intense in their editing of its users. But who is Google?

Google

Google was founded in 1998 by Larry Page and Sergey Brin while they were Ph.D. students at Stanford University in California. Together they own about 14 percent of its shares and control 56 percent of the stockholder voting power through supervoting stock. They incorporated Google as a privately held company on September 4, 1998. An initial public offering (IPO) took place on August 19, 2004, and Google moved to its headquarters in Mountain View, California, nicknamed the Googleplex. In August 2015, Google announced plans to reorganize its various interests as a conglomerate called Alphabet Inc. Google is Alphabet’s leading subsidiary and will continue to be the umbrella company for Alphabet’s Internet interests. Sundar Pichai was appointed CEO of Google, replacing Larry Page who became the CEO of Alphabet.

The company’s rapid growth since incorporation has triggered a chain of products, acquisitions, and partnerships beyond Google’s core search engine (Google Search). It offers services designed for work and productivity (Google Docs, Google Sheets, and Google Slides), email (Gmail/Inbox), scheduling and time management (Google Calendar), cloud storage (Google Drive), instant messaging and video chat (Google Allo, Duo, Hangouts), language translation (Google Translate), mapping and navigation (Google Maps, Waze, Google Earth, Street View), video sharing (YouTube), note-taking (Google Keep), and photo organizing and editing (Google Photos). The company leads the development of the Android mobile operating system, the Google Chrome web browser, and Chrome OS, a lightweight operating system based on the Chrome browser. Google has moved increasingly into hardware; from 2010 to 2015, it partnered with major electronics manufacturers in the production of its Nexus devices, and it released multiple hardware products in October 2016, including the Google Pixel smartphone, Google Home smart speaker, Google Wifi mesh wireless router, and Google Daydream virtual reality headset. Google has also experimented with becoming an Internet carrier (Google Fiber, Google Fi, and Google Station).

Here’s the most interesting and most important segment of today’s article: Google.com is the most visited website in the world. Why is that so important? Because Google has access to almost every electronic device on Earth that is connected to the internet.

Google In Politics

The driving force between any of these social giants is revenue. How do they each create $$? There are only two ways to do it: the sale of goods and products, and the sale of advertising. Google has a lock on the ability to rake in the dough because of their bevy of products, devices, (even their own cellphone line) and advertising. Google, as do all of these companies, do the best they can to parlay their goods and products into expansion and growth opportunities. In the media industry the statement that “he who is first is best” holds true as it does in all sectors of business. Google started the internet browser industry.

Founders Page and Brin were technology innovators who pounced on the importance to find ways to use the internet. In their quest to conceptualize, then create and build a product that could easily be used by a world market just awakening to the world of the Internet and its potentials, they needed to capture other technology gurus to join-in this project. Where else in the U.S. is there a larger and more qualified such group than in Silicon Valley? Answer: Nowhere. Google has captured the largest group of electronic techno-geeks not just in the U.S. but on Earth. And they’re good — really good at what they do.

But here lies the problem: almost all of those at Google 20-years later are born from the prevailing west-coast liberal philosophies that have overtaken America’s political system. This group of Americans — and not just from Silicon Valley — are the products of a generation of educators who promoted liberal political ideas to these young people.  As a result, this generation of computer hackers are almost all far-left. And here’s where the social media problems at Facebook, Google, Twitter, and even Amazon and Apple originate. What are they? Left-wing activists using their technology outlets to surreptitiously impact American politics. And they’re changing millions of Americans’ fundamental political ideals and sometimes even their votes!

Mark Zuckerberg’s testimony before Congress just gave us a small peek at how prevalent this is. Add Apple, Google, Twitter, Amazon and other techno giants into the mix and we could POSSIBLY be at the verge of a new generation of young Americans driven by a technology-created political ideology unto itself!

Do you know what’s scarier? It’s already been done!

What Has Happened?

Take Facebook and Google for example. Here’s a few minutes of a real expert — Dr. Robert Epstein, a Hard Left Professional — testifying before Congress about Facebook and Google’s significant and already in place operations to impact elections:

What better way than to use something already in your hands to secretly play with and directly impact the results of American elections! According to Dr. Epstein, it’s already been done! More astonishing and egregious is that no one (but probably Facebook and Google) knows how much of this was done, how many people were included in such attempts, and exactly how many people’s votes were impacted. But as Dr. Epstein testified to, MILLIONS of votes were changed.

Social Media Gone Amuck

(The following segment published by FOX News August 5, 2019)

“When President Trump won in 2016, Google executives went on stage right away and cried — literal tears streaming down their faces. They vowed that it would never happen again and they want to use all the power and resources they have to control the flow of information to the public and make sure that Trump loses in 2020,” Kevin Cernekee said on “Fox & Friends” Monday.

Cernekee said Google will “ramp up the censorship” as a method to ensure Trump loses the election — including the censoring of political advertisements, and the filtering of search results to promote its political agenda.
“They are very biased. There is bias at every level of the organization…and if you disagree with them even one iota, they will come after you, they’ll target you, they’ll make you an example.”— Kevin Cernekee, former Google engineer

“Google has a huge amount of information on every voter in the U.S.,” Cernekee explained. He claimed the company will use it to “build psychological profiles” in an attempt to change the minds of voters across the country.
The former Google worker said he noticed early on that the tech giant was mistreating its conservative employees, and he raised his concerns with human resources. In response, he received an official warning, which he took to the labor board. Cernekee was eventually fired in 2018.

Summary

Every American should be horrified. Think about this: the U.S. just came through 2.5 years and $30 million of the exhaustive Robert Mueller investigation into the alleged 2016 campaign violations of members of the Trump Campaign who purportedly worked with Russia to impact 2016 election results. These companies on the west coast are NOT comprised of Russians and are — on the most part — comprised of Americans. Yet Americans employed by American companies have been shown to have aggressively impacted the final vote results of the 2016 election — and not for the benefit of President Trump, but his opponent.

Oh, in case you forgot, here’s the former President’s response on election hacking claims by Candidate Trump during the 2016 election campaign:

“Because democracy, by definition, works by consent, not by force. I have never seen, in my lifetime or in modern political history, any presidential candidate trying to discredit the elections and the election process before votes have even taken place.

It’s unprecedented. It happens to be based on no facts; every expert, regardless of political party, regardless of ideology, conservative or liberal, who has ever examined these issues in a serious way, will tell you that instances of significant voter fraud are not to be found, that — keep in mind, elections are run by state and local officials, which means that there are places like Florida, for example, where you’ve got a Republican governor, whose Republican appointees are going to running and monitoring a whole bunch of these election sites.

The notion that somehow if Mr. Trump loses Florida, it’s because of those people that you have to watch out for, that is both irresponsible and, by the way, doesn’t really show the kind of leadership and toughness that you want out of a president.

If you start whining before the game’s even over, if whenever things are going badly for you and you lose, you start blaming somebody else, then you don’t have what it takes to be in this job because there are a lot of times when things don’t go our way or my way.

That’s OK, you fight through it, you work through it, you try to accomplish your goals. But the larger point I want to emphasize here is that there is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even — you could even rig America’s elections, in part, because they are so decentralized and the numbers of votes involved.

There is no evidence that that has happened in the past or that there are instances in which that will happen this time. And so I’d invite Mr. Trump to stop whining and go try to make his case to get votes.”

Every American should be horrified. Election tampering DID happen in 2016. It certainly happened again in 2018. Yet no one in Washington is shouting about the violation of the most basic institution of the United States, not by foreign governments, but by U.S. companies!

Did President Obama know this was going on? It’s likely. We are still waiting for investigation results into the U.S. elements of government intervention in the 2016 election. But more and more testimony and simple addition are showing that the Obama White House at least “knew” about the shenanigans going on if not initiated them. We may never know for certain.

But what we DO know for certain is that 2020 and the federal elections in November of that year are rapidly approaching. All this knowledge and information screams for transparency of the existing investigations and what DOJ processes have been implemented to clean up the certain social media voter-changing attempts that will occur unless stopped.

It’s shameful that Americans are just now discovering how deep is this intrusion into our election process. It’s MORE shameful to discover that heretofore revered American companies seem to be joining forces with political entities to purposefully impact election results to favor certain candidates!

No wonder millions of Americans stay away from the polls and when asked why, they respond “My vote doesn’t mean anything.”

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Fact: Democrats Control Mainstream Media Content

August 7, 2019

If you questioned our claims that the Mainstream Media are the communications arm of the Democrat Party and nothing more, STOP! It was made abundantly clear that Democrats DO control on the most part Mainstream Media. How so?

Here is the Tuesday, August 5, New York Times front page first edition: “TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM:”

Please note: this was the ORIGINAL headline that The Times published early Tuesday, August 5th. But it did NOT last long: a number of Democrats — several of which are 2020 presidential candidates — did not like the headline and lashed out at the paper on Twitter:

  • Democrat presidential candidate and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, “Hey, @nytimes — what happened to “The Truth Is Worth It?” Not the truth. Not worth it.”
  • Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Cory Booker (NJ) wrote, “Lives literally depend on you doing better, NYT. Please do.”
  • Democrat presidential candidate and former El Paso Congressman Robert “Beto” O’Rourke commented, “Unbelievable.”
  • New York City Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), leader of The Squad, commented, “Let this front page serve as a reminder of how white supremacy is aided by – and often relies upon – the cowardice of mainstream institutions.”

And, of course, The Times complied. After the above Twitter assault, the NEW headline in the second edition said: “ASSAILING HATE BUT NOT GUNS.”

“Where’s the Beef?” That’s a great question. The “beef” is the “meat of the matter,” which is that Democrats control the Mainstream Media. TruthNewsNet began making that point at least two years ago. Many laughed at what was then just our “allegation.” But this snafu and immediate correction by The Times proves that the premiere Leftist media outlet in the U.S. — The New York Times — is afraid of the Democrat Party. That could only happen if there was some type of at least benign control or coordination of the New York paper by someone at the DNC.

This confirms the suspicions of many. But, more importantly, it reveals why so much of what Americans have seen and read in The New York Times, The Washington Post and many other print and internet sources for so long have seemed to not be news, but in many cases actual contrived and prepared talking points. Suspicions of Conservatives grew as they daily watched the Democrat Party mantra play out verbatim beginning on the East Coast in New York across the nation each day through newspapers in large and small cities throughout the U.S.

It has been orchestrated! And it certainly has been at least guided by someone or some group that has power — power over Mainstream Media print news outlets.

Not Just Newspapers

Ever wonder why the big three network news divisions plus CNN, MSNBC, and CNBC seem to parrot the New York Times and Washington Post assault on conservative politicians, conservative causes, and even everyday conservative voters? Their doing so actually confirms the tie between the Democrat Party and Mainstream Media.

We could play video clip after video clip, audio soundbyte after soundbyte, that prove this is NOT a conspiracy theory. For once, this one IS true. We won’t play a bunch, but how about the “parrot” (or coordinated) use of the words “Concerned” and “Propaganda” by “in your face” Democrat news hacks?

Still don’t believe someone coordinates these anti-conservative news stories? Let’s throw Rep. Adam Schiff’s analysis of the Mueller Memo into the picture to start an alliteration of the seldom-used term “Cherry Picked:”

Summary

It is clear that someone with at least the nation’s largest newspapers and cable television networks that lean left or that are simply in the tank for the Democrat Party are taking story content and even stories themselves from the Democrat National Committee and shoving them down the throats of their “intellectual” readers, watchers, and listeners. Need we say that NONE of these stories are slanted toward the right. They are very obviously all hard-left, anti-Conservative and anti-Trump. And these “stories” therefore cannot even be considered “news” at all. Guess what they are: FAKE NEWS!

Uh-Oh: now you’ll say we’ve gone off the deep end here. No. What we do is follow the stories and dig until we find facts. Honestly, these were pretty easy to ferret out and give to you. That in itself is pretty scary. The ease of identifying what these major news sources are doing shows just how callous, caustic, and so political ideology-driven these people are.

Think about it: for decades in America, newspapers were the friends of the common man. They were charged with informing the working people of the United States with the facts of all things important to citizens that were not readily available for consumption. There was no television as we know it today, radio and certainly no internet. Americans relied on impartial, unbiased newspaper reporters to find out what things that were happening were important to the people. Then daily or weekly put that information in some format and deliver it to Americans.

True journalism was once a well-respected vocation. And many true journalists were revered by millions. But what we have today are people who are nothing more than political pundits who each have a political perspective and ideology that is the foundation of their news reports. And, sadly, “truth in reporting” is no longer an intrinsic element of what we see and hear. Those political perspectives are all that matters.

I’ll close with this: often we encourage you to read, watch, and listen to today’s news outlets of your choice, but to never accept what you see and hear as “fact.” Make it your responsibility to fact-check them all! And “fact-check” does NOT mean go to Snopes.com or Politifact.com to get your proof. These both and most other fact-checking sources are themselves operated by political hacks and organizations that disseminate “facts” that are actually propaganda and nothing more.

I know: it’s really sad that we cannot do as our parents and grandparents did to get the news. They just went to the street in the morning, grabbed the paper and read the truth while drinking a cup of coffee. That was a long time ago — way before Al Gore invented the internet!

Let’s cloud this picture a little more. Tomorrow, TruthNewsNetwork will present sworn testimony and actual proof that the current cries for a government investigation of social media giants Facebook, Twitter, and Google are absolutely necessary. Why? Tomorrow the evidence we show  will prove that in the 2016 presidential election, vote tallies were actually fiddled with. Doing so actually resulted in vote changes in the millions! And you won’t believe who those vote changes were in favor of!

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Rhetoric Weaponization: By Democrats

August 2, 2019

“Rhetoric Weaponization: By Democrats” is only click-bait today! I wanted to make certain you joined us for this conversation.

Rhetoric is the art of discourse, wherein a writer or speaker strives to inform, persuade, or motivate particular audiences in specific situations. It can also be in a visual form. However, “Rhetoric” certainly IS being weaponized.

Weaponization: How is it Done?

To create a successful weaponization of something, one must first determine what will be used. Example: a kitchen knife can be just a kitchen knife. Or a crazed and angry person can take that kitchen knife and weaponize it to use to cut someone’s throat. A gun is simply a gun when manufactured. But a crazed and angry person can take that gun and weaponize it to use to slaughter a bunch of people at a country concert in Las Vegas. Knives or guns alone are NOT weapons — until “someone” turns them into weapons. The same holds true for “words.” And that’s the meat of this story today.

Rhetoric is not necessarily evil. In fact, most sales presentations are a type of rhetoric because they are used “to inform, persuade, or motivate particular audiences in specific situations.” A completed sale is the goal.  But sales presentations are rarely weaponized. Why? Because the objective of sales rhetoric is always positive: the close of a sale.

The most common backdrop today for weaponized rhetoric is politics. And politicians have taken that art-form to an entirely new level. It’s important to know here that Democrats do not hold an exclusive on doing so. There are plenty of openings at the “School of Rhetoric” for enrollees from every different political perspective. But Democrats are on the debate stage now — Republicans I’m certain will join the fray as quickly as they can.

Let’s look at what was the first political term weaponized during the early days of the Donald Trump presidency: “Nationalism.”

Charlottesville

Who can forget the travesty that played out in Charlottesville, Virginia? A group of American history buffs applied for and received a permit from the City of Charlottesville to protest the decision of Charlottesville City Council to order the removal of Confederate monuments and memorials from public spaces. Unfortunately, a large group of White Supremacists showed up along with neo-Nazi sympathizers who did NOT apply for permits to legally protest. What ensued was an all-out riot that resulted in several injuries and even one death.

In its aftermath, the use of the term “Nationalism” popped up in numerous political situations. To understand what resulted and remains on the public political stage regarding that word, we must first define “Nationalism:” Nationalism is a political, social, and economic system characterized by the promotion of the interests of a particular nation, especially with the aim of gaining and maintaining sovereignty.” But, unfortunately, the word has been “re-defined” to be a synonym of the term “White Nationalism,” or “White Supremacy.”

There WERE White Supremacists there who initiated the violence — even the Ku Klux Klan. But the term “Nationalism” was NOT the driving force behind those people. They were NOT there to support the fundamentals of the United States of America, rather support and attempt to force their White Supremacist ideology on others.”

Subsequent to that day, “Nationalism” was weaponized by many Democrats who adopted its use to attack non-Black Americans — especially President Trump. In a post-Charlottesville rally, the president famously stated this:

“The term Nationalist is a word that some people do not like. But I AM A NATIONALIST.”

“Nationalism” has been compared to “Patriotism” most often this way: Patriotism is extreme loyalty and allegiance to one’s country. “Nationalism” takes “Patriotism” one step further — allegiance to one’s country OVER all other countries.”

In the wake of Charlottesville and that statement by Mr. Trump, the weaponizers took off! The demonization of the president that was already at a fever-pitch escalated from there. The Mainstream Media relished receiving a new tool with which to attack President Trump — even promoting (without stating it) that Nationalism means the same thing as “White Supremacy.”

As an example of how rhetoric weaponization is stealthily crafted in the marketplace, here’s how Wikipedia weaponized the entire Charlottesville situation with their explanation of Charlottesville:

“The Unite the Right rally was a white supremacist rally that occurred in Charlottesville, Virginia, from August 11 to 12, 2017. Protesters were members of the far-right and included self-identified members of the alt-right, neo-Confederates, neo-fascists, white nationalists, neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and various right-wing militias.”

Wikileak’s description explicitly shows the weaponization of language and events for political purposes that had NO correlation to what truly happened. Don’t dare conflate “Patriotism” and “Nationalism” either. To “help” everyone understand how evil “Nationalism” is compared to “Patriotism,” Leftist Media pundits use illustrations like this:

Notice the smooth segue from Patriotism to re-defining Nationalism as White Supremacy. Know this for a certainty: the Left Media doing so is NOT accidental. They weaponize with their own rhetoric anything they can to denigrate every part of Conservatism and to attack Conservatives — especially Donald Trump.

Rhetoric Weaponization Continues After Charlottesville

In the runup to the 2020 presidential race, we are not only inundated with rhetoric from Democrats who want the White House job, but they have also discovered that rhetoric can be weaponized. With that as their objective, they certainly have done a fine job! And what better term is there with which to inundate their rhetoric and weaponize than “Racism” and its derivative “Racist.”

Who better to demonstrate for us the art of Rhetoric Weaponization than 2020 Democrat presidential candidates themselves? Here they are demonstrating to the World how to maximize one’s use of rhetoric in the alliteration of the term “Racism:”

Summary

Do you know what is pivotal in this conversation? It’s not so much the actual terms that are used. It’s the context in which they are used.

Too often — especially in the media who are almost always driven by an agenda — they do NOT include an entire conversation and certainly do not give an explanation of the context in which words are used by politicians who they want to paint into a political perspective to enhance the STORY.

Donald Trump in the context of his 50+ years of which almost all were very public shows NO propensity for White Supremacy. In fact, his life illustrates the exact opposite of that. But showing that fact does not play into the narrative the Left portray of Mr. Trump. They must weaponize the term “Nationalist” to be a negative connotation and not what Mr. Trump’s use actually was for.

“Racism” is far too often used in the same way. Senator Warren in her alliteration in the previous video segment used HER weaponization of the term to demean Mr. Trump in every way she could.

Adopting this practice is unspeakably dangerous. Why? Because the constant bashing of people by the Left actually crushes Americans’ understanding and belief in the seriousness of true racism and also Nationalism. Both terms represent critically important ideas. And taking them and weaponizing them to be used to attack someone for political purposes destroys in peoples’ minds the importance of what the words really represent. Literally, calling everyone with which one disagrees a racist or White Supremacist is the political weaponization that waters down the travesties of both.

If our leaders, many of whom have already been on presidential debate stages, are so callous to the certain results of their doing so, how can Americans trust that their intentions are honest? It’s much like the child’s story of the little boy that cried, “Wolf!” When a real wolf came along and was about to attack and eat him, his cries were ignored by those around him.

God forbid that Americans would ever become numb to Racism and White Supremacy!

But that could certainly happen — and may have already. Politicians need to learn this lesson: Hold allegations against anyone and everyone unless and until all the facts are known and that those facts are real and applicable to the situation in which they are referencing.

They too need to remember: that practice cuts both ways. I would be horrified if in this election cycle the weaponization of rhetoric would occur on both sides of the political aisle. If that happens, you can be sure Americans will quickly tune out. And we know ALL Americans engaged in seeing, hearing, and processing all the facts about political candidates running for office. That cannot happen if Americans tire of back-and-forth rhetoric and simply turn a deaf ear.

Honestly, I’m pretty sure that many Americans already have. But maybe some politicians are glad that has happened!

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Nazism Attacks in U.S. Media

May 6, 2019

It seems that every time something noteworthy happens that’s good in the Trump Administration, the Mainstream Media call it White Supremacy, Racism, Xenophobia, Homophobia, Islamophobia, or Nazism. Americans have become numb to their doing so in 2.5 years. But wait: there’s far more to it all than just benign name-calling. There’s a REAL threat in this against the fiber of America: The United States Constitution. What is it?

Nazism is real…and it doesn’t come from Donald Trump!

There certainly ARE Nazi sympathizers in America. Mostly they are cloaked in secrecy or deception. Their being secret about their political perspective is one thing. But their deception has led to serious threats to America. Let me explain.

Have you ever heard of ANTIFA? The group’s name is meant to be short for “Anti-Fascism.” The 100+ year old group has become a lightning rod for dissidents on the Left looking for justifications to attack conservatism. But there’s a bit of irony there:

If the group is really against the oppression of Fascism and Nazism that historically work hand in hand, WHY WOULD THEIR RIOTING AND DEMONSTRATIONS WOULD ALL HAVE BEEN AGAINST PROPONENTS OF AND FREE SPEECH SPEAKERS AT COLLEGE UNIVERSITIES? At those events, ANTIFA members fight to STOP those supporting the First Amendment! They just like Hitler in Germany and Mussolini in Italy are actually SUPPORTING TOTALITARIANISM in which no citizen has the freedom to say or think anything THEY don’t want thought or said. That is the very definition of FASCISM AND NAZISM!

Hitler’s Control of Germany’s Media

Propaganda within Nazi Germany was taken to a new and frequently extreme level. Hitler was very aware of the value of good propaganda and he appointed Joseph Goebbels as head of propaganda.

Propaganda is the art of persuasion – persuading others that your ‘side of the story’ is correct. Propaganda might take the form of persuading others that your military might is too great to be challenged; that your political might within a nation is too great or popular too challenge, etc. In Nazi Germany, Dr. Joseph Goebbels was in charge of propaganda. Goebbel’s official title was Minister of Propaganda and National Enlightenment.

As Minister of Enlightenment, Goebbels had two main tasks:

1. To ensure nobody in Germany could read or see anything that was hostile or damaging to the Nazi Party.

2. To ensure that the views of the Nazis were put across in the most persuasive manner possible.

To ensure success, Goebbels had to work with the SS and Gestapo and Albert Speer. The former hunted out those who might produce articles defamatory to the Nazis and Hitler while Speer helped Goebbels with public displays of propaganda.

To ensure that everybody thought in the correct manner, Goebbels set up the Reich Chamber of Commerce in 1933. This organization dealt with literature, art, music, radio, film, newspapers, etc. To produce anything that was in these groups, you had to be a member of the Reich Chamber. The Nazi Party decided if you had the right credentials to be a member. Any person who was not admitted was not allowed to have any work published or performed. Disobedience brought with it severe punishments. As a result of this policy, Nazi Germany introduced a system of censorship. You could only read, see and hear what the Nazis wanted you to read, see and hear. In this way, if you believed what you were told, the Nazi leaders logically assumed that opposition to their rule would be very small and practiced only by those on the very extreme who would be easy to catch.

The same approach was used in films. The Nazis controlled film production. Films released to the public concentrated on certain issues: the Jews; the greatness of Hitler; the way of life for a true Nazi especially children, and as World War Two approached, how badly Germans who lived in countries in Eastern Europe were treated. Leni Riefenstahl was given a free hand in producing Nazi propaganda films. A young film producer, she had impressed Hitler with her ability. It was Riefenstahl who made “Triumph of Will” – considered one of the greatest of propaganda films despite its contents.

Does any of this sound eerily familiar? No, there is no dictator in power or seeking power in the U.S. today — though we often hear the Media falsely claim that Trump wants to be a dictator or a “lifetime American president.” But there certainly are censorship activities underway in the nation: Facebook, because it is a private and not a government entity, has unilateral power to regulate its content. So do Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. Those entities almost daily reveal just how far they lean left with their political ideas. They do not hesitate to pull the posts of conservatives from their sites, block conservative authors, and do so while “saying” they are “in full support of the First Amendment.” They, of course, are rubbing our faces in their claims of protecting “Free Speech” while restricting the free speech of numerous conservatives. (Actor James Woods has been banished from Twitter and Facebook.)

Hitler and Goebbels couldn’t have enacted German censorship any better than these American social networks.

In America, it all began with Donald Trump inventing and calling out “Fake News.”

The Price of “Fake News”

Donald Trump as “Candidate Trump” made famous the term “Fake News.” Of course, every American who heard him say that knew exactly what and who his references were made about. For a very long time, every major media news outlet in the nation has made it quite clear to its audience which side of the political spectrum they lean toward. And for just as long, Americans have known for certain who fits in which mold: Liberal-leaning or Conservative-leaning.

As the media heat quickly came to a boil in 2016, one could almost watch (literally) as every major news organization made it instantly clear (if they had not already) which was Conservative and which was Liberal: pro-Hillary or pro-Trump. And there weren’t many Conservative outlets — and still, aren’t.

And the “Leftist” media outlets have been (and are still) paying a deep price for their reporting — not so much for their news “content,” but rather for their “Leftist mantra.” Let’s define that — better yet, let’s use an example to identify that “mantra:”

“CNN on Friday corrected an erroneous report that Donald Trump Jr. had received advance notice from the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks about a trove of hacked documents that it planned to release during last year’s presidential campaign. In fact, the email to Mr. Trump was sent a day after the documents, stolen from the Democratic National Committee, were made available to the general public.”

One more example of Leftist “mantra:”

“The New York Times issued an embarrassing correction after a report that attacked President Donald Trump’s recently passed tax plan got the numbers about as wrong as could be.

The lengthy Feb. 23 feature, headlined, “Get to Know the New Tax Code While Filling Out This Year’s 1040,” sought to detail how Trump’s tax plan would hurt middle-class families. A hypothetical couple — christened Sam and Felicity Taxpayer — would see their tax bill rise by nearly $4,000, according to the story.

Then came the correction saying the family would actually see taxes go down.

We could spend all day looking at example after example of the thousands of attacks on conservatives from the Left by today’s media. Of course, there are conservative stories which contain inaccurate stories. Some of those are too “fake” by design. But many times more come from the Left.

The Leftist media inaccuracies are plentiful and mind-boggling — especially because many are unnecessary and so ridiculous that the only reasoning for their issuance MUST be for partisan purposes.

Journalism really IS dying. I can remember a time when a national newspaper printed a story with an error or two the nation was shocked. Of course that newspaper immediately printed a story to either retract the original or correct the record. Not so today.

Sadly though, as this practice of releasing incorrect news stories increases in number, Leftist news outlets themselves have in increasing numbers implemented attacks against — not conservative individuals or groups, but — news outlets that have adopted the practice of reporting from either the center or center-right political perspective. That’s scary! And it’s even getting scarier.

Attacks against Conservative Internet: Staggering

Poynter, the journalism institute responsible for training writers and reporters, decided to promote a left-wing smear of conservative groups online. The result was a hit job written by someone who works for the anti-conservative Southern Poverty Law Center for a journalism organization funded by prominent liberal billionaires such as George Soros and Pierre Omidyar.

Poynter, which has started the International Fact-Checking Network, shared the new report and dataset called “UnNews,” declaring at least 29 right-leaning news outlets and organizations to be “unreliable news websites.”

Report author and SPLC producer Barrett Golding combined five major lists of websites marked “unreliable.” That result, which consisted of 515 names, included many prominent conservative sites —  Breitbart, CNSNews.com, Daily Signal, Daily Wire, Drudge Report, Free Beacon, Judicial Watch, LifeNews, LifeSiteNews, LifeZette, LiveAction News, the Media Research Center, PJ Media, Project Veritas, Red State, The Blaze, Twitchy, and the Washington Examiner.

These sites stood next to conservative organizations like Alliance Defending Freedom, which represented baker Jack Phillips in the Supreme Court case Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. While the ADF is not a news site, it was likely targeted because Golding works for the SPLC. The ADF is considered a “hate group” by the SPLC and is marked on the “hate map.” The Washington Post even questioned SPLC’s “political activism” and “bias.”

SPLC has been dropped by Twitter from its Trust and Safety Council and slammed by the mainstream media after multiple scandals rocked the organization. Its hate map even helped shooter Floyd Lee Corkins find the location of the Family Research Council, where he shot and wounded one person.

Poynter is funded by Open Society Foundations, liberal billionaire George Soros’ massive foundations, as well as the Omidyar Network. The two combined for “$1.3 million in grant funding.” Funds were sent to Poynter specifically to establish the International Fact-Checking Network. The ‘UnNews’ list was started to help fact-checking organizations determine what was “unreliable.”

That anti-conservative mindset was apparent throughout the incoherent and inconsistent report. Conservative organizations were included throughout but liberal groups rarely were. The National Review and Heritage were removed from the list but Heritage’s Daily Signal was on it. That combined to create a shameless double-standard. It specifically targeted conservative media watchdog groups and didn’t include liberal ones.

The goal of the report is clear. Poynter is recommending that advertisers “who want to stop funding misinformation” should use its list. It stated that while marketers can create their own “blacklists,” those lists might be incomplete. Golding wrote that, “Advertisers don’t want to support publishers that might tar their brand with hate speech, falsehoods or some kinds of political messaging.”

Poynter has a longstanding history as an anchor in the journalism business. Its board of trustees includes  execs from The New York Times, ESPN, Harvard, Vox, CBS, ABC, and The Washington Post. Poynter is currently working with Facebook and Google for its fact-checking programs.    

Summary

It’s here, folks! Nazism is alive and thriving in the U.S. Poynter in their publishing of the “undesirable” list of news outlets is a recommendation for readers/listeners to NOT support those news outlets its managers have determined are not worthy.

Let’s assume that Facebook, Twitter, Poynter, and the home of “Fake News” — CNN — with their censorship are honestly doing so for the best interest of Americans. Censoring News, literature, books, etc. because of censoring content IS AN ATTACK ON FREE SPEECH AND IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL! And many Americans today (just like in Hitler’s Germany) are blind to it happening right in front of them.

We encourage you to speak up. There are millions of Americans who have swallowed the Leftist propaganda and really do believe these lies. The fact that Poynter would even contemplate publishing such a list proves that there are journalist and editors who either ignore what their acts are actually doing or are really Nazis trying to imitate the Third Reich in World War II.

It can’t be by chance. It’s for either of the reasons above. OR IT MAY BE BOTH! But it certainly is real….and dangerous.

 

“The Day Journalism Died:” Proof

January 3, 2019
We now know for certain, Journalism Is Dead! June 8, 2017, TruthNewsNetwork published a story here titled “The Day Journalism Died.” In that story, (feel free to go back and read it) we referenced the “markers” in the media-political stories published in print and broadcast that proved the title of that story is true.
While I along with many journalists would love for President Trump to not be quite so abrasive in his plethora of tweets, and not continuously declare that “Media is Fake News,” I concur with the thought that this president has no other way reach Americans with his message than to take the bull by the horns, bypass the media filters, and speak directly to his 100 million+ Twitter followers himself. In doing so, HIS media filter has been turned off! He speaks from his heart.
We now have professional, inside proof of the premise of our June 8, 2017, story straight from the horse’s mouth. President Trump is absolutely right, although I would still love for him to “turn down the volume” a bit. While the Media is NOT in total “Fake News” and not in total “the enemies of the American people,” almost without exception, Mainstream Media are more often than not speaking the language of enemies in their reporting of this President.
Proof of that is coming out in a book titled “Merchants of Truth” written by former New York Times editor Jill Abramson. The facts she reveals in the book are the indisputable truths of the President’s allegations against the MSM. I could summarize for you the information Abramson has included in the way of truth in her soon-to-be-released book. But I could not say it better than has Howard Kurtz — host of Media Buzz  — in an article published at FOXNews.com:

A former executive editor of the New York Times says the paper’s news pages, the home of its straight-news coverage, have become “unmistakably anti-Trump.”

Jill Abramson, the veteran journalist who led the newspaper from 2011 to 2014, says the Times has a financial incentive to bash the president and that the imbalance is helping to erode its credibility.

In a soon-to-be-published book, “Merchants of Truth,” that casts a skeptical eye on the news business, Abramson defends the Times in some ways but offers some harsh words for her successor, Dean Baquet. And Abramson, who was the paper’s only female executive editor until her firing, invoked Steve Bannon’s slam that in the Trump era the mainstream media have become the “opposition party.”

“Though Baquet said publicly he didn’t want the Times to be the opposition party, his news pages were unmistakably anti-Trump,” Abramson writes, adding that she believes the same is true of the Washington Post. “Some headlines contained raw opinion, as did some of the stories that were labeled as news analysis.”

What’s more, she says, citing legendary 20th-century publisher Adolph Ochs, “the more anti-Trump the Times was perceived to be, the more it was mistrusted for being biased. Ochs’s vow to cover the news without fear or favor sounded like an impossible promise in such a polarized environment.”

Abramson describes a generational split at the Times, with younger staffers, many of them in digital jobs, favoring an unrestrained assault on the presidency. “The more ‘woke’ staff thought that urgent times called for urgent measures; the dangers of Trump’s presidency obviated the old standards,” she writes.

Trump claims he is keeping the “failing” Times in business—an obvious exaggeration—but the former editor acknowledges a “Trump bump” that saw digital subscriptions during his first six months in office jump by 600,000, to more than 2 million.

“Given its mostly liberal audience, there was an implicit financial reward for the Times in running lots of Trump stories, almost all of them negative: they drove big traffic numbers and, despite the blip of cancellations after the election, inflated subscription orders to levels no one anticipated.”

The Times has long faced accusations of liberal bias, even before Trump got into politics and became its harshest critic. But Abramson’s words carry special weight because she is also a former Times Washington bureau chief and Wall Street Journal correspondent specializing in investigative reporting.

Baquet has said that Trump’s attacks on the press are “out of control” and that it is important to use the word “lie” when the president tells a clear untruth.

In “Merchants of Truth: The Business of News and the Fight for Facts,” Abramson praised as “brave and right” Baquet’s decision to run this headline when Trump abandoned his birtherism attacks on Barack Obama: “Trump Gives Up a Lie But Refuses to Repent.”

Abramson, who had her share of clashes with Baquet when he was her managing editor, sheds light on a 2016 episode when Baquet held off on publishing a story that would have linked the Trump campaign with Russian attempts to influence the election.

Liz Spayd, then the Times public editor, wrote that the paper, which concluded that more evidence was needed, appeared “too timid” in not running the piece, produced by a team that included reporter Eric Lichtblau.

Baquet “seethed” at this scolding, Abramson says, and emailed Lichtblau: “I hope your colleagues rip you a new a*****e.”

Baquet wrote that “the most disturbing thing” about Spayd’s column “was that there was information in it that came from very confidential, really difficult conversations we had about whether or not to publish the back channel information. I guess I’m disappointed that this ended up in print.

“It is hard for a journalist to complain when confidential information goes public. That’s what we do for a living, after all. But I’ll admit that you may find me less than open, less willing to invite debate, the next time we have a hard decision to make.”

Lichtblau soon left the Times for CNN, where he was one of three journalists fired when the network retracted and apologized for a story making uncorroborated accusations against Trump confidante Anthony Scaramucci. And the Times soon abolished the public editor’s column.

Abramson is critical of Trump as well. She calls his “fake news” attacks a “cheap way of trying to undermine the credibility of the Times’s reporting as something to be accepted as truth only by liberals in urban, cosmopolitan areas.”

The Times, which broke the story of Hillary Clinton’s private email server, also “made some bad judgment calls and blew its Clinton coverage out of proportion,” Abramson writes. She says Clinton “was wary of me,” mishandled the scandal and “was secretive to the point of being paranoid.”

Abramson is candid in acknowledging her faults. When then-publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. was considering promoting her to the top job, he told her over lunch at Le Bernadin: “Everyone knows there’s a good Jill and a bad Jill. The big question for me is which one we’ll see if you become executive editor.”

She admitted to him that “I could be self-righteous when I felt unheard, I interrupted, I didn’t listen enough.”

It was a heated battle with Baquet that led to her ouster in 2014. He was furious upon learning that she was trying to recruit another top journalist—Abramson says an executive ordered her to keep it secret—who would share the managing editor’s title.

Sulzberger called her in, fired her, and handed her a press release announcing her resignation.

Abramson says she replied: “Arthur, I’ve devoted my entire career to telling the truth, and I won’t agree to this press release. I’m going to say I’ve been fired.”

Her final judgment: “I was a less than stellar manager, but I also had been judged by an unfair double standard applied to many women leaders.”

Summary

According to Abramson’s narrative, the Times is no doubt biased against this President. Why is that? It could be for factual reasons. It could be for financial reasons. It could be for a group of heavily biased journalists to in unison attack a political opponent using the resources they have readily available: newspaper print and electronic media. Personally, I think — at least for the Times — the purposes are the last two. As Abramson indicated in her book, online subscriptions to the Times skyrocketed with the addition of Donald Trump to the political landscape in D.C. I am one American who subscribed to the Times online services just to keep up with “the other side” of Journalism. Honestly, I would NOT have done so if not for President Trump.

Don’t get me wrong: I have questioned the validity of much of what Abramson offered up in the past as editor and a contributing columnist at the Times and elsewhere. I give her kudos for this new revelation. To my knowledge, she is the first reputable journalist from a reputable news source to admit to rampant political bias in American reporting.

But there’s a bigger and more important story here. It begs for all of us to ask this question: “Where do we go to get REAL news — news that is objective, truthful, and without political perspective?” If Abramson’s revelation reveals nothing more to us than the confirmation of President Trump’s verbal attacks against the Times and other news outlets, it’s a start. But the very reason Journalism even exists is to provide people with information that is factual, accurate, and unbiased.

Other than here at www.TruthNewsNet.org, I cannot give you the name of ANY news outlet any of us can depend on for straightforward news all the time. That includes conservative like the Rush Limbaugh show, that of Sean Hannity, Breitbart News, FOX News, and others. And our resources and ability to wade through the bureaucratic layers of political narrative that heavily cloud the political landscape in America are limited to at best finding and passing along ALL the facts Americans need to know.

What do we do?

I cannot answer this question as today’s television, radio, and print editors, columnists, and reporters would, telling Americans “ignore all the others and just listen to us.” Our only alternative? “Think and research for yourself.”

Is that good enough?

“You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” John 8:32

Obviously, based on that verse from the book of John, it is critical for us each to find the truth. And the only way I know we can do that is to honestly search through all the news we see and hear, and trust our own instincts to ferret out the truth.

And we need to get started. You can bet that 2019 will shortly see the beginning of an all-out assault by media outlets like the Times and other news sources, the Democrat Party and liberal politicians against anything to do with Donald Trump. It will be quick, across the spectrum of all things dealing with national politics, and vicious. The assault will be immense and broad. It will shock most Americans to learn that so many will align themselves with the Leftists in these attacks.

Be vigilant. Be thorough. Be honest and committed to finding the truth. It’s there.

We will continue to share what we know mixed with our opinions on many of these matters. Remember this: when we share facts it will be prefaced as “factual.” When we share an opinion, it will be labeled as “opinion,” so that you will know the difference. And we know this: “Just because one thinks something is right doesn’t mean it is right.” And, “Just because one thinks something is wrong doesn’t mean it is wrong.”

Here’s to a rewarding and informative year ahead for you and TruthNewsNet.org!

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

America’s Most Trusted News Source: The New York Times

October 26, 2018

I am a New York Times subscriber. Before you X-out of TruthNewsNet.org, please understand why I subscribe: the New York Times is the epitome of the mainstream media “Fake News” sources. I, therefore, am required to daily stay on top of the latest chapter of “Fake News.” So, every morning I choke down a cup of coffee and the latest drivel from the Times. It is ALWAYS entertaining while at the same time ALWAYS nauseating.

We could daily chronicle the latest examples of New York Times “Fake News” for our thousands of TNN partners — there are a plethora of samples every day. We don’t want to waste your time — so we don’t do that. But occasionally there are examples that cry for exposure. Today is one of those days with a couple of those “Fake News” stories in The Times that begs for exposure and discussion. Let’s get to it.

The NY Times Today

The Times broke an explosive expose’ of President Trump’s usage of cell phones for official telephone communications. A president doing so is not unusual nor unexpected. But The Times claims the Chinese and Russians are listening to each of those conversations:

WASHINGTON — When President Trump calls old friends on one of his iPhones to gossip, gripe or solicit their latest take on how he is doing, American intelligence reports indicate that Chinese spies are often listening — and putting to use invaluable insights into how to best work the president and affect administration policy, current and former American officials said.

Mr. Trump’s use of his iPhones was detailed by several current and former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so they could discuss classified intelligence and sensitive security arrangements. The officials said they were doing so not to undermine Mr. Trump, but out of frustration with what they considered the president’s casual approach to electronic security.

American spy agencies, the officials said, had learned that China and Russia were eavesdropping on the president’s cell phone calls from human sources inside foreign governments and intercepting communications between foreign officials.

(The underlined text is the subject of this segment)

The Times is very obviously — and even now with impunity — relying almost totally on “anonymous” sources, allegedly members of the Trump Administration for their “big news” stories about President Trump. In doing so, they apparently use as the default for the assumptions of their readers that everything their reporters say is believed. Therefore, truth in reporting is no longer necessary. Let’s break that down:

The phone usage details were allegedly “detailed by several current and former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity so they could discuss classified intelligence and sensitive security.” In other words, current and former Trump staffers are voluntarily divulging classified information — at least according to the New York Times.

The Times wants you to believe that simply (in order to throw the President under the bus) they are embracing the real possibility of being jailed for committing multiple felonies in having these discussions with reporters. What benefit could there possibly be to take this risk?

Certainly, there are people who do not like President Trump. Certainly, it is probable that not all who now work or did so previously in the White House are supportive of President Trump, his methodology of governing, his messaging, and some of his policies. But I find it ludicrous that any staffer would roll the dice on federal jail time to talk with reporters about the President’s conversations that are monitored by foreign governments. Their risking their personal freedom was not about the President giving the Chinese top secret military or intelligence secrets. In fact, they risked jail to simply tell Times reporters that Mr. Trump talked on iPhones!

And the New York Times expects YOU to believe that, too.

Real or Fake

It is extremely difficult to accept anonymous sources any longer. Multiple anonymously sourced stories in many Mainstream Media (MSM) reports have never been factually verified. Many have been proven incorrect. MSM editors have very obviously assumed that Americans are oblivious to the obvious: MSM who use anonymous sources do so to simply paint THEIR political narrative pertaining to Donald Trump. And they are now certain that Americans are either too busy, too distracted, or too stupid to pick up on their intentions.

The MSM excuses and justification for the continued use of anonymous sources is this: “If we are forced to publish news sources, much of what the First Amendment guarantees in Free Speech will be lost. Sources who fear retribution for telling the truth will no longer step forward. Media outlets will then be unable to — on behalf of all Americans — hold brutal and unethical governments accountable for their wrongdoing.”

Poppycock! There is a Whistleblower law put in place by the federal government that protects any of those “anonymous sources” from retribution of any kind IF they step forward. That law is to accomplish what MSM claims THEY must do: protect those who have real stories of real wrongdoing to report.

MORE New York Times Madness

The Times has taken this entire craziness in reporting to a new and vitriolic level. October 25th, they released an article in which the writer fantasizes about the President being gunned down by a Russian spy in cahoots with a Secret Service officer.

In an article published in the New York Times‘ Book Review, five writers conjured up fantasy scenarios about President Trump’s future with the Russia investigation.

One writer, Zoe Sharp, took liberal fantasizing to the next level and wrote a story that ends with President Trump being assassinated by a Russian agent. The Times’ editors illustrate the piece, titled “How It Ends,” with a Russian flag sticking out of a pistol barrel.

In the story, the Russian attempts to shoot the president, but his gun misfires. A Secret Service agent then offers his own pistol to the Russian:

The Russian waited until they were a few steps past before he drew the gun. He sighted on the center of the president’s back, and squeezed the trigger.

The Makarov misfired.

The Secret Service agent at the president’s shoulder heard the click, spun into a crouch. He registered the scene instantly, drawing his own weapon with razor-edge reflexes.

The Russian tasted failure. He closed his eyes and waited to pay the cost.

It did not come.

He opened his eyes. The Secret Service agent stood before him, presenting his Glock, butt first.

“Here,” the agent said politely. “Use mine. …” 

This assassination fantasy was published just one day before the media exploded with criticism for President Trump’s rhetoric after a series of apparent mail bombs sent to many Democrat political figures Wednesday, including one sent to CNN’s New York office.

It’s unbelievable that the newspaper formerly known as the premier newspaper in the Nation has resorted to whipping up soap opera stories to attract a crowd. And it is reprehensible they would do so in the caustic political environment in the U.S. Just imagine if Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or Bill O’Reilly released a book during the Obama presidency that contained the Obama murder at the hands of a member of his Secret Service contingency. Americans would go nuts! And the MSM outrage would have been off the charts.

Summary

Here’s the sad proof of what’s going on, not just at the New York Times, but throughout Mainstream Media: readership is plummeting. Americans have steadily moved to instant 24/7 news through “quick” news stories, ditching the traditional methods of getting news: from newspapers. MSM outlets are fighting to survive as they watch their readership, ratings, and advertising revenue tank as their markets shrink.

So what do they do? They find ways to whip-up readers by finding the juiciest stories about the most controversial people and occurrences to keep those in front of sensationalist hungry Americans. And when there are not enough factual incidents to satisfy those American appetites for juicy news, THEY MAKE IT UP! Here’s how they do it:

Instead of a group of reporters with an editor sitting around a conference table at the paper and looking at the potential stories to go in the “next edition,” they sit around the conference table bemoaning there are not enough salacious happenings at the White House to entice their audience to wait breathlessly to grab that paper from the newsstand. They only have one option: create the story.

So, they come up with topics that will surely hook their audience members who are looking for ugly stuff about well-known people. The President is a crass, New York “bully” who is constantly taking shots at all those who disagree with him. He’s a perfect story subject!

“Hey, Billy. How about ‘investigating’ the rumor that Trump is using unsecured cell phones to hold conversations with foreign leaders. Certainly, the Russians and the Chinese are accessing those conversations to get dirt on the Administration so they can blackmail,” said Jim, the Editor-in-Chief.

Billy replied, “OK, Jim. I’m on it. When’s my deadline?”

“5:00 PM tomorrow. Don’t be late,” quipped Jim. Billy was Jim’s best political reporter and ALWAYS came up with some real dirt on politicians. “Get a good source or two on the cell phone stuff and let’s run with it.”

Billy calls everyone he can that currently works at the White House or the few that have left. None know anything about the Trump cell phone usage talking to foreign leaders. But Billy has a substitute plan: ANONYMOUS SOURCES! No one will know that if he writes a juicy story that makes the President look dumb or uncaring or simply as a buffoon too stupid to know the danger of doing something like that, he can credit his source as “anonymous,” and he’ll get a green light.

Having real sources at the New York Times — and probably many other MSM outlets — seems to no longer be necessary. That old journalistic adage that journalists formerly scoffed at: “Never let the truth get in the way of a good story,” appears to be the fundamental marching order of the Mainstream Media. Anonymous sources save the day.

With the two atrocious examples detailed above, unbiased Americans who are willing to accept the truth can at least accept the “possibility” above as more than just a fairy tale. In this crazy news environment in which 90% of all news stories about all things Trump are negative, keeping fresh “garbage” about Trump gets harder and harder. This necessitates the use of “anonymous sources” that probably are really “no sources at all” — just made-up to give reporters and editors security to get their payroll check deposit.

Is it any wonder that the New York Times is dying? Every day more and more Americans wake up and go “Hmmmm…..that’s just too hard for me to believe!”

More and more it’s hard to believe because more and more what they are seeing is NOT TRUE!

 

 

 

Play

Podcast: Play in new window | Download