Tag: 2024 elections

CBS Hit With FCC Complaint Charging “Significant And Intentional News Distortion” Over Edited Kamala Interview 

CBS News has been formally issued with an FCC complaint regarding its surreptitious editing of Kamala Harris’ 60 Minutes interview.

The complaint charges that the network engaged in “significant and intentional news distortion.”

Edited and unedited portions of the interview were shared side by side as it became clear CBS was attempting to make Harris appear less incompetent.

Fox News reports that The Center for American Rights argues that the discrepancies “amount to deliberate news distortion — a violation of FCC rules governing broadcasters’ public interest obligations.”

The complaint seeks to force CBS to release an unedited transcript of the interview to set the record straight.

Keep reading

Federal Judge Sides with Biden-Harris DOJ, Blocks Attempt to Remove Ineligible Voters from Rolls Ahead of Election

A federal judge on Wednesday halted an Alabama effort to purge voter registration rolls of people who should not be able to vote in the state.

The Justice Department sued Alabama to stop Secretary of State Wes Allen from what he said were “strategic efforts” to “remove noncitizens registered to vote,” according to NBC.

Under the program, Allen sought to remove 3,251 voters and said they would be referred to the state attorney general’s office for possible prosecution.

U.S. District Court Judge Anna Manasco, who had been nominated by former President Donald Trump in 2020, said the program had to stop due to the timing.

“For decades, federal law has given states a hard deadline to complete systematic purges of ineligible persons from voter rolls: no later than ninety days before a federal election,” Manasco wrote. NBC referred to the rule as a “quiet period.”

“This year, Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen (1) blew the deadline when he announced a purge program to begin eighty-four days before the 2024 General Election, (2) later admitted that his purge list included thousands of United States citizens (in addition to far fewer noncitizens, who are ineligible to vote), and (3) in any event, referred everyone on the purge list to the Alabama Attorney General for criminal investigation,” Manasco wrote.

Manasco ordered the state to contact those who were targeted by the program to let them know they are able to vote this year.

The order said that Allen is not barred from removing voters who would be ineligble for other reasons — such as criminal offenses or death.

If Allen learns an individual on the rolls is not an American citizen by means other than the program to remove them en masse, he can remove such a person, the order said.

The injunction to stop Allen from removing voters only lasts until the day after the Nov. 5 election.

“Because this litigation is still ongoing, I am limited in my ability to comment,” Allen said in a statement, according to The Washington Post.

“Earlier today, the federal court issued a preliminary injunction order. I will comply with the order of the federal court.

Keep reading

The International Censorship Regime Goes on the Offensive Ahead of 2024 U.S. Election

Online censorship, which tends to rank among my three main beats, is a subject I haven’t touched on in a while but has predictably become more relevant as we draw closer to November 5th. The focus of late has naturally been on an election year brimming with many whimsical happenings, from Trump narrowly avoiding the mass trauma of having his brains blown out in front of thousands of onlookers in Butler Pa., to the anointing of Kamala Harris as the democrat party’s heir apparent, to the escalations in both the Middle East and the ongoing U.S./Russia proxy war in Ukraine.

Despite the obvious importance of these issues, I truly believe the most pressing concern facing the Western world is the multifaceted attack on free expression, particularly in the digital realm.

We’ve all probably heard the idiom that “Freedom of Speech is the First Amendment because it’s the most important”. I never fully appreciated this sentiment, but in the past eight years—after being de-platformed and demonetized on several occasions—I’ve learned the hard way how truly accurate that statement is.

Keep reading

Kamala Harris and Her Socialism with 1930s-German Characteristics

Presidential candidate, Kamala Harris, responding to accusations that she is a Marxist and has been concealing much of her economic agenda from the public, gave a speech at the Economic Club of Pittsburgh on September 25 attempting to reassure voters that her earlier proposals for price controls, debt cancellations, and consumer subsidies, as well as her new proposals are not a Bolshevik assault on capitalism, but are intended to create an “opportunity economy” for the benefit of the American middle class. She affirmed “Look, I’m a capitalist, I believe in a free and fair market” and went on to specify three “pillars” of how she intends to confer the blessings of “opportunity” on market actors. 

Harris spelled out a basic principle underlying her proposals as:

I believe an active partnership between government and the private sector is one of the most effective ways to fully unlock economic opportunity. And that is what I will do when I am president, I will target the major barriers to opportunity and remove them. We will identify common sense solutions to help Americans buy a home, start a business and build wealth, and we will adopt them.

In other words, she is promising that a Harris regime would not overtly seize the means of production from their current owners as Communist revolutionaries would, but instead would force those owners to accept the Harris administration as their active “partner” in making decisions about production. Evidently, she conceives of “opportunity,” not as something that capitalists are naturally incentivized to pursue by seeking profits and avoiding losses in the context of peacefully-acquired ownership rights and voluntary market exchanges, but rather as something that has to be incentivized by compulsory obedience to bureaucratic orders emanating from a central planning office under her allegedly beneficent leadership.

Keep reading

The Media Shouldn’t Overlook Kamala Harris’ Plagiarism

In 2009, Kamala Harris co-authored a book called Smart on Crime: A Career Prosecutor’s Plan to Make Us Safer. Its purpose was to outline her criminal justice policies in advance of her campaign for California attorney general.

The book has attracted the attention of conservative writer and activist Christopher Rufo, who contends that Harris and co-author Joan O’C. Hamilton plagiarized several passages. Rufo’s analysis—which relies on the work of Stefan Weber, a noted exposer of plagiarism—finds that there are at least 12 sections of the book in which sentences or entire paragraphs were copied from another source without proper attribution.

“Taken in total, there is certainly a breach of standards here,” writes Rufo. “Harris and her co-author duplicated long passages nearly verbatim without proper citation and without quotation marks, which is the textbook definition of plagiarism. They not only lifted material from sources without proper attribution, but in at least one case, relied on a low-quality source, which potentially undermined the accuracy of their conclusion.”

Readers may disagree about the severity of some aspects of the plagiarism: Harris borrowing from her own work or not paraphrasing sufficiently. But there are more striking examples of entire passages being lifted from other sources without citation. This is definitely a no-no, and meets the standard definition of plagiarism.

Keep reading

FBI Fudges Violent Crime Stats To Hide 55 Percent Rise Under Biden-Harris Administration

When the FBI originally released the “final” crime data for 2022 in September 2023, it reported that the nation’s violent crime rate fell by 2.1 percent. This quickly became, and remains, a Democratic Party talking point to counter Donald Trump’s claims of soaring crime.

But the FBI has quietly revised those numbers, releasing new data that shows violent crime increased in 2022 by 4.5 percent. The new data includes thousands more murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults.

The Bureau — which has been at the center of partisan storms — made no mention of these revisions in its September 2024 press release. 

RCI discovered the change through a cryptic reference on the FBI website that states: “The 2022 violent crime rate has been updated for inclusion in CIUS, 2023.” But there is no mention that the numbers increased. One only sees the change by downloading the FBI’s new crime data and comparing it to the file released last year.

After the FBI released its new crime data in September, a USA Today headline read: “Violent crime dropped for third straight year in 2023, including murder and rape.” 

It’s been over three weeks since the FBI released the revised data. The Bureau’s lack of acknowledgment or explanation about the significant change concerns researchers.

“I have checked the data on total violent crime from 2004 to 2022,” Carl Moody, a professor at the College of William and Mary who specializes in studying crime, told RealClearInvestigations. “There were no revisions from 2004 to 2015, and from 2016 to 2020, there were small changes of less than one percentage point. The huge changes in 2021 and 2022, especially without an explanation, make it difficult to trust the FBI data.”

“It is up to the FBI to explain what they have done, and they haven’t explained these large changes,” Dr. Thomas Marvell, the president of Justec Research, a criminal justice statistical research organization, told RCI.

The FBI did not respond to RCI’s repeated requests for comment.

Keep reading

Kamala Harris Can’t Answer The Question “Why Is It Important To Vote For You?”

During an interview with BET, Kamala Harris struggled to provide an answer when asked why people should vote for her.

“Let us know why it’s so important to vote for you?” the host asked.

Instead of giving a coherent answer to perhaps the most basic question possible, Harris delivered another word salad garble.

“There’s a lot of misinformation out there that would suggest to people that their vote doesn’t matter,” Harris said.

Ok, but why should anyone vote for you?

“When you vote, you actually have the ability to determine the future,” she then stated.

Keep reading

CBS Faces ‘News Distortion’ Complaint Amid ’60 Minutes’ Harris Interview Edit Scandal

The “disinformation” police are the real criminals this election, guilty of massaging, distorting, and mangling facts to fit their true agenda — stopping Donald Trump and electing Kamala Harris. 

As Election Day looms, more and more Americans understand that the media outlets once trusted as objective news sources have fractured that faith with routine acts of journalistic malpractice. 

Case in point, the slick editing work CBS News did in a “60 Minutes” interview earlier this month with the vice president, the Democratic Party’s replacement presidential nominee.  

The Oct. 6 episode of the network’s “Face the Nation” used a clip to promote that evening’s “60 Minutes” interview with Harris in which the vice president offered her standard word salad answer to correspondent Bill Whitaker’s question about U.S. policy on Israel and the war in Gaza.  

“We supply Israel with billions of dollars in military aid and yet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seems to be charting his own course,” Whitaker said. “The Biden-Harris administration has pressed him to agree to a ceasefire; he’s resisted. You urged him not to go into Lebanon; he went in anyway. He has promised to make Iran pay for the missile attack, and that has the potential of expanding the war. Does the U.S. have no sway over Prime Minister Netanyahu?”

“Well, Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by, or a result of, many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region,” the Democrats’ presidential candidate responded in classic Kamala nonsense.

But that butchered bit of syntax didn’t show up in the “60 Minutes” interview that night. Instead, the segment featured a much clearer, coherent answer to the same question — what appeared to be a refined edit of a longer, meandering  response.

Keep reading

Bret Baier Reveals Chaos Behind Kamala’s Trainwreck Interview: ‘Four Handlers’ Desperately Signal to Cut It Short — ‘I Had to Dismount There at the End’

In what can only be described as a complete disaster, Kamala Harris faced one of her toughest interviews yet during a recent appearance on Fox News with Bret Baier.

What was supposed to be a controlled media moment quickly spiraled into chaos, leaving even Kamala’s most loyal aides scrambling to cut the interview short.

Kamala, tasked by Biden as “Border Czar” in 2021, seemed visibly unprepared when Baier raised the record-breaking influx of illegal immigration.

Rather than addressing the crisis head-on, Harris tried to blame former President Trump, asserting he had obstructed her proposed immigration solutions.

Baier quickly countered, noting that six Democrats also opposed the immigration bill, leaving Harris scrambling for words.

Baier’s line of questioning didn’t waver, pressing her on the staggering 1.8 million immigrants potentially allowed into the U.S. annually under her proposal.

Keep reading

Kamala Harris Dodges Tough Questions on Biden’s Mental Decline: ‘Joe Biden is Not on the Ballot… and Donald Trump is’

Kamala Harris faced a barrage of tough questions during a rare, combative interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier on Wednesday, where she was pressed on President Joe Biden’s mental fitness and her role in covering up his declining health.

During the interview, Kamala Harris threw shade at former President Trump, labeling him “unstable” with an air of confidence.

But when Bret Baier flipped the script, asking her to explain her previous claims about President Biden’s mental sharpness, Harris appeared caught off guard.

“You told many interviewers that Joe Biden was on his game, that he ran circles around his staff. When did you first notice that President Biden’s mental faculties appeared diminished?” Baier asked.

Harris froze, visibly scanning her mind for the right words. After a pause that felt eternal, she stumbled into a non-answer, praising Biden’s “judgment and experience” instead of directly responding.

“Joe Biden, I have watched from the Oval Office to the Situation Room, and he has the judgment and the experience to do exactly what he has done in making very important decisions on behalf of the American people,” Harris said.

Baier pressed further, asking if any concerns about Biden’s mental fitness had ever been raised, but Harris once again deflected.

“Bret, Joe Biden is not on the ballot… and Donald Trump is,” she said.

Baier, not satisfied, pressed further, referencing a New York Times op-ed by actor George Clooney, which noted a perceivable change in Biden’s demeanor.

Keep reading