Tag: mainstream media

After SPLC Indictment, Democrats Scramble to Defend It as “Politically Motivated” 

MSNOW’s latest segment offered a clear example of how legacy media handles politically inconvenient stories. Instead of engaging with the substance of a federal indictment, the discussion—featuring Democrat Rep. Dan Goldman—shifted toward deflection, narrative framing, and selective omission.

The underlying story is not complicated. 

As previously covered by The Gateway Pundit, a federal grand jury has indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center on charges including wire fraud, false statements, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

According to prosecutors, the organization allegedly misled donors for nearly a decade—raising funds under the banner of combating extremism while secretly diverting millions of dollars to individuals connected to extremist groups.

The indictment outlines a detailed pattern. Between 2014 and 2023, more than $3 million in donor funds were allegedly funneled to individuals tied to organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan and Aryan Nations. 

Donors were not informed. Instead, prosecutors describe the use of fictitious entities and concealed bank accounts to obscure where the money was actually going.

On MSNOW, however, the focus shifted almost immediately. 

Rather than addressing the specifics of the indictment, Rep. Goldman emphasized the SPLC’s historical role as a “civil rights” organization and suggested that the case itself is politically motivated.

That argument sidesteps the central issue. A federal indictment is the result of a grand jury reviewing evidence presented by prosecutors.

The segment relied heavily on reputation as a substitute for analysis. The SPLC’s past work was repeatedly referenced, while the current allegations were treated as secondary or speculative. That approach creates a disconnect.

If an organization built its credibility on identifying and exposing misconduct, then allegations of internal financial misconduct should be treated as a serious institutional issue rather than dismissed as partisan noise.

There was also a noticeable effort to broaden the conversation into unrelated political territory. 

Keep reading

DEBUNKED: The Left Falsely Blames Trump for the Afghan Refugee Mess Created by Biden’s Disastrous Withdrawal

Left-wing media is once again scrambling to rewrite recent history—this time over Afghan refugees still stranded overseas after Joe Biden’s catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan.

During a recent segment, MSNOW attempted to frame President Donald Trump as “targeting” Afghan allies who assisted the United States during the war. 

The claim centers around reports that some Afghan nationals currently living in Qatar may be given relocation options outside the United States, including possible resettlement in other countries.

But the outrage narrative leaves out the most important facts.

First, these individuals were not universally promised permanent resettlement in the United States—certainly not under the Trump administration. 

The idea that every Afghan who assisted U.S. efforts was guaranteed entry into the U.S. is simply false. Immigration and refugee policy has always involved a structured vetting process, prioritization, and logistical constraints.

The current situation exists because of Biden’s 2021 withdrawal—an operation widely criticized across the political spectrum for its execution.

When the Taliban rapidly took over Afghanistan following Biden’s decision to withdraw U.S. forces, thousands of Afghan allies were left in limbo. Many were relocated to temporary holding locations, including a former U.S. military base in Qatar. 

Years later, many remain there, waiting for final decisions on resettlement.

That is the context MSNOW conveniently ignored.

Instead, the segment leaned heavily on emotional framing, highlighting interpreters, special forces affiliates, and families—including hundreds of children—while suggesting the Trump administration is abandoning them. 

The reporting relied in part on claims from outlets like The New York Times, which often shape the initial narrative before it spreads across legacy media.

What is actually being discussed is policy—not abandonment.

Any proposal to relocate individuals to third countries is part of a broader effort to manage a complex backlog created by the rushed withdrawal. 

Keep reading

They Can’t Even Flip Burgers

The Protected Class Finally Meets The Real World

The New York Times tried to write a sympathy piece for the USAID class. It accidentally wrote an indictment. The villain of the story was supposed to be DOGE, the great orange-bad-men-with-spreadsheets monster that came into Washington and started cutting through the federal fat farm. The victims were supposed to be the noble public servants, contractors, grant managers, NGO executives, and democracy-development professionals who suddenly found themselves outside the taxpayer-funded cocoon. Then the Times gave away the whole game: one former senior vice president at a USAID-funded nonprofit had been making roughly $272,000 a year, and after the gravy train jumped the tracks, she was interviewing for a $19-an-hour job at a spice store.

Normal Americans did not read that and reach for a tissue. They read it and asked the only question that matters: what in God’s name were we paying for?

That is what the coastal press still does not understand. A quarter-million-dollar salary means something in the real country. It means working years of double shifts. It means a house is paid off. It means college tuition. It means a small business surviving another year. It means a mechanic, a nurse, a trucker, a cop, a farmer, or a welder would have to grind for years to see what one USAID-world executive was pulling down annually from a system most Americans cannot even see, let alone audit. Then we are supposed to cry because the private economy looked at that résumé and said, “the best we can do is 19 bucks an hour.”

No. That is not a human-interest story. That is a flashing red light.

The entire Times frame is backward. DOGE was treated like the marauding villain because it dared to question the sacred bureaucracy. How dare anyone cut government jobs? How dare anyone interrupt the NGO pipeline? How dare anyone ask whether these programs actually work? How dare anyone touch the soft, padded, credentialed ecosystem where public money flows into nonprofit offices, consultant contracts, administrative salaries, stakeholder meetings, and reports about reports. The Times wants Americans to see cruelty. What Americans see is confirmation.

Keep reading

Conspiracies are Fact not Theory

The media often talk about “conspiracy theorists.” That, of course, is a clever piece of deceit. Conspiracies are real, and the conspiracy practitioners are close to running our world.

The conspirators’ plan has followed a simple but well-worn path. First, they revised the definition of a pandemic so that any ordinary annual flu could be described as a dangerous pandemic. Second, they created a serious problem (an allegedly deadly infection) so that they could offer their chosen solution – a toxic, experimental, inadequately tested vaccine which they tried desperately to make compulsory – with the aid of the lies told by obedient, compliant politicians, journalists, media doctors, celebrities and YouTube influencers, all of whom were taking full advantage of the fact that anyone telling the truth would be demonised, silenced and destroyed. Vaccine manufacturers and promoters joined forces with Bill Gates’s World Health Organisation to spread confusion, lies and fear, and to offer profitable, immediately accessible solutions. People were told that terrible things would happen to them if they were not vaccinated.

The human immune system (a vital protection against infections and cancer) is being deliberately targeted and destroyed by the barrage of vaccines.

When I, and other doctors, tried to suggest that people should take vitamin D supplements during the pointless lockdowns, which were an integral part of the covid-19 fraud, we were silenced. YouTube, an unforgiveably wicked promotional platform operating for the conspirators, took down videos in which I and other doctors explained why vitamin D supplements were vital. A study done in Spain in 2020 showed that for covid-19 positive patients who were admitted to hospital with pneumonia, the risk of being admitted to an intensive care unit and connected to a ventilator was reduced by a factor of 25 if their vitamin D levels were raised. (Ventilators were lethal and were wildly overused.) Many of those who were not given vitamin D simply died unnecessarily.

Doctors who failed to prescribe vitamin D in such circumstances should lose their licences, be sued for malpractice and arrested and charged with manslaughter. In reality, of course, nothing will happen to them.

Censorship and truth suppression is not new, of course. From a personal point of view, it’s difficult to know precisely when the censorship and the oppression really began, and it’s always been difficult to know who was behind it. But there has been no doubt in my mind that it has, for a long time, been very real. The story of how I have been censored, suppressed, vilified, lied about, libelled, oppressed, demonised, threatened and very nearly killed illustrates the way the truth has been suppressed.

In the 1970s and 1980s, I wrote and campaigned a good deal about animal experiments (of which I always heartily disapproved on scientific grounds as well as on humanitarian grounds) and the police in general, and special branch in particular, started taking a close interest in my work from that time on.

Whenever I went to speak at an anti-vivisection rally, I would have my own police video cameraman. He would follow me round and film me and everyone I spoke to.

Robin Webb was the Animal Liberation Front’s official press officer and he had his own police cameraman too. When we met and talked, our two devoted cameramen would stand beside us filming us both. I photographed a bunch of policemen who were following me once and wrote and illustrated (with photographs) an article about them for the Sunday People newspaper, where I was a columnist. One of the photographs was captioned ‘The Hand of Plod’.

On one occasion, I was prevented from travelling to a demonstration by a police sergeant who threatened to arrest me simply for driving on the road. I sued the Chief Constable. The judge didn’t like me suing a policeman.

The son of a dear friend of mine worked for Special Branch and told me (via his father) that although they followed all my activities closely, they did not regard me as dangerous in a physical sense. “Following my activities closely” meant that they tapped my telephone, sucked messages off my fax machine and every time I moved house, someone arranged for one or two telecom vans to sit parked outside my gate for days at a time. Whenever I asked what they were doing, the men inside the van replied that they were just making sure that my telephone line worked well. And this without my ever making a complaint about a dodgy line.

Another MI5 operative confirmed what I had been told.

Keep reading

New York Times Portrays Fired USAID Staff as Victims — Reaction Is Not What They Expected

In July 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that USAID would no longer send foreign assistance across the globe.

Rubio noted that USAID had, for decades, failed to ensure the programs it funded actually supported America’s interests.

“Beyond creating a globe-spanning NGO industrial complex at taxpayer expense, USAID has little to show since the end of the Cold War. Development objectives have rarely been met, instability has often worsened, and anti-American sentiment has only grown,” Rubio wrote in a blog post, according to Fox News.

“This era of government-sanctioned inefficiency has officially come to an end. Under the Trump Administration, we will finally have a foreign funding mission in America that prioritizes our national interests. As of July 1st, USAID will officially cease to implement foreign assistance. Foreign assistance programs that align with administration policies—and which advance American interests—will be administered by the State Department, where they will be delivered with more accountability, strategy, and efficiency,” Rubio said.

During the summer of 2025, the DOGE team announced they had eliminated another $14.3 billion in bogus contracts, including international contracts tied to USAID.

Following the funding cuts, the agency went from roughly 10,000–16,000 direct employees (plus hundreds of thousands of contractors and local staff overseas) to under 300 remaining staff. Over 90–97% of USAID’s workforce was eliminated.

Elisabeth Bumiller and Eileen Sullivan wrote A Year After U.S.A.I.D.’s Death, Fired Workers Find Few Jobs and Much Loss for The New York Times, bemoaning the struggles of the laid-off workers, something thousands of Americans face each day without fawning coverage from the outlet.

The authors share the example of a USAID-funded senior VP,making $272,000, or roughly five times more than the median income of the average American worker.

Keep reading

For US Commentators on Iran, Mass Murder Is Magic

In the wake of the temporary US/Iran ceasefire, hawkish commentary in leading American newspapers advanced the premise that the US can dictate terms to Iran in negotiations, with a faith in the power of Washington’s military might that was hard to justify by the previous course of the war.

A Washington Post editorial (4/8/26) contended:

Despite the massive damage inflicted upon the country by the US in recent weeks, the regime acts like it holds the cards. Its leaders are demanding the US pull all troops out of the Middle East and accept Iran’s right to pursue nuclear weapons. The question is why Trump would bend over backward to keep obviously unserious talks on track.

Whether the Post likes it or not, Iran has a decent hand to play. For instance, Iranian drones cost just $20,000 to produce, and the US uses missiles that cost $4 million each to try and destroy them (Bloomberg, 3/2/26). Less than three weeks into the war, the US was already estimated to have spent more than $18 billion attacking Iran (Guardian, 3/19/26). The longer Iran can hold out, the more it financially bleeds the US.

The majority of Americans already consistently oppose the war (NBC News, 4/1/26) and, as costs spiral, domestic opposition to the US’s assault is likely to grow. In this context, the paper may need to revise its definition of seriousness to include accepting that Iran has the power to resist US bullying and bluster.

Keep reading

Leftists Excited to Begin Cannibalizing the Elderly

Did you live a self-reliant, constructive life? Did you play by the rules, work hard, raise your kids to be productive members of society, save up, and arrive in seniority well-provisioned for your well-earned golden years?

Sucker!

If you simply reverse the direction of each of the Ten Commandments, you arrive at the leftist version. Among these is the Marxist tenet of weaponized envy — Thou shalt covet — and its corollary, Thou shalt steal.

Socialist-communists are always on the lookout for ways to play the many against the few so they can pillage the minority, enriching themselves while throwing crumbs to their useful-idiot foot soldiers. And right now, they are taking aim at senior citizens who saved their pennies so they might enjoy their retirements.

An opinion-setting column appeared in the New York Times on Tuesday. Entitled “Older Americans Are Hoarding America’s Potential,” it was penned by Samuel Moyn, a professor of law and history at Yale who has a book coming out called Gerontocracy in America: How the Old Are Hoarding Power and Wealth — and What to Do About It (emphasis added, because that’s the scary part).

In his column, Moyn makes perfunctory efforts to calm readers’ fears about his intentions. “‘Ageism’ identifies an enduring phenomenon: the mistreatment of older people for no reason other than being older,” he soothes. “Americans in middle age and beyond are routinely passed over for opportunities because of the irrelevant fact of a number on paper or how they act and look after getting older.”

And yet, “In today’s world, the unfair discrimination they cite coexists with a different kind of unfairness: a gerontocratic society in which the old control ever more power and wealth, leading to overrepresentation in political life and unequal power in social life.”

That’s right: It’s unfair to keep what you earned and to exercise your civic duty to vote and be engaged.

Naturally, that leads Moyn to conclude: “It is not ageist to ask whether older people should be required to give more to younger Americans and national priorities — it is critical to the future of our democracy and society. America needs to confront gerontocracy before the system collapses under the weight of its inequality and injustice.”

No, it’s not “ageist” to ask that — it’s Marxist.

“Older Americans deserve a say over the future even when they might not live to see it,” Moyn placates, before ratcheting up his rhetoric: “But they do not deserve the stranglehold over it they currently enjoy through overrepresentation in elections, which produces too many regressive policies and too many seniors in the highest offices.”

A second column, in the May 2026 issue of The Atlantic, is an even more direct attack. It’s titled “An Oligarchy of Old People.” Recall that socialist stars AOC and Bernie Sanders just completed their so-called Fighting Oligarchy Tour, and author Idrees Kahloon could not make it much clearer that “Old People” are the enemy. The opening salvo is an ugly comparison of elderly people who lived successful lives to dictators: “Gerontocracy has always thrived in undemocratic places—Communist people’s republics, Gulf monarchies—where only death could pry power from the ruling elders.” Well, then, I guess we know where Kahloon stands on the subject.

Kahloon points out that high-level politicians and the most engaged voters tend to be over 50. This seems only natural to me, and generally desirable, as leaders ought to have some life experience and wisdom.

But Moyn gives away the game when he complains that these powerful old people have the wrong political preferences:

Some of the excessive power that the aging have amassed harms society, as they enjoy advantages to the detriment of others. That power hurts a large number of elderly Americans themselves. Crucial priorities for the future, like creativity and dynamism, environmental remediation, immigration policies and tax fairness also suffer under gerontocracy. Older Americans favor restrictions on immigration most, even when they need immigrant caregivers most. Likewise, there is a correlation between age and resistance to policies to halt the overheating of the planet or raise funds for education and other civic purposes.

Both authors lay on the envy-mongering. Here’s Kahloon:

Although political gerontocracy has operated overtly, the rising economic power of the elderly has escaped much notice. Over the past 40 or so years, American wealth has grown ever more concentrated among the oldest generations. In 1989, Americans over age 55 held 56 percent of it; today they hold 74 percent. During that same period, the share of wealth held by Americans under 40 has shrunk by nearly half, from 12 to 6.6 percent. The color of money is now gray.

Both authors bemoan the fact that 55-and-up-year-olds own the most expensive real estate and hold the most powerful jobs. Except for the ones who don’t, who are thus also harmed by the greedy successful elderly hoarding their “accumulated housing, jobs and wealth,” as Moyn describes it. So much for passing down one’s legacy to one’s children or favorite charities, I suppose. Whatever — the elderly have-nots are simply more bodies to add to the push to loot the elderly haves.

Keep reading

Southern Poverty Law Center Story Sends the Legacy Media Into a Schizophrenic Fit

In today’s legacy media newsroom, there are two sides to every story: the one they want the public to see, and the one they’re trying to hide. As often as not, the one they want the public to see is untrue, and the one they are trying to hide is true.

The news coverage of the mess the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has gotten itself into this week provides a perfect opportunity to compare and contrast the way something like this manifests itself.

To set the stage, you have to know the actual facts, which are:

  • A grand jury in Montgomery, Al., indicted the SPLC with 11 counts of wire fraud, false statements to a federally insured bank, and conspiracy to commit concealment money laundering.
  • A U.S. Attorney’s Office filed two forfeiture actions to recover alleged proceeds of the organization’s fraud scheme.
  • The counts center on allegations from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that between 2014 and 2023, the SPLC secretly funneled more than $3 million in donated funds to individuals who were associated with various violent extremist groups including the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, and National Socialist Party of America.
  • The DOJ claims that the SPLC’s donors weren’t told of this, and that since the SPLC publicly said it was working to dismantle the same groups it was allegedly funding, they likely never would have donated in the first place.
  • The DOJ and multiple news reports have indicated that front groups were allegedly created to launder the payments to those whose organizations the SPLC was publicly demonizing.

Now, in terms of the battle for the truth, the reality seems to be that when the SPLC paid certain operatives in these “hate groups,” the purpose was not to pay an informant to aid the SPLC in taking the group down, even though that’s not the SPLC’s job anyway. Rather, it was to pay the operative to help advance the cause of the targeted “hate group” through certain actions, and even under certain direction from the SPLC.

The net effect of the SPLC’s support, by design was to bolster the organizations the SPLC portrayed as public enemies, thus keeping the hate alive. Millions of dollars over many years may have been involved.

Why would the SPLC do such a thing? I don’t know for sure, but according to reports, after the infamous Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally in 2017, which received funding from the SPLC, the SPLC saw an increase in its own funding to the tune of over $80 million. This is a video the SPLC produced in 2024 that sends a completely different message now that you know it allegedly funded the group behind the event.

Keep reading

ICE Arrests MS-13 Gang Member Wanted for Murder — One of the Media’s “Non-Criminal” Illegals

On April 22, U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) announced the arrest of Idalia Isabel Morales-Mejia — a criminal illegal alien wanted in El Salvador for aggravated homicide and a documented associate of the violent MS-13 gang.

In October 2013, authorities in El Salvador charged Morales-Mejia with aggravated homicide and illicit associations.

On an unknown date, she illegally entered the United States without being inspected, admitted or paroled by a U.S. immigration official.

According to ICE, in February, the Security Alliance for Fugitive Enforcement Task Force in El Salvador provided updated information regarding Morales-Mejia’s possible presence in Northern Virginia.

After receiving the information, Officers with ICE Washington, D.C., worked to locate her and, on March 12, she was arrested in Woodbridge, Virginia.

ICE Washington, D.C. Field Office Director Robert Guadian shared, “Idalia Isabel Morales-Mejia is not only a known associate of the notorious MS-13 transnational criminal organization, but she apparently attempted to flee justice in her native country by illegally residing in Virginia.“

“The media would consider her to be a ‘non-criminal’ because she has no known criminal history in the United States — despite the fact that she is facing charges for aggravated homicide in El Salvador.”

“ICE Washington, D.C. will continue to prioritize public safety by arresting and removing criminal alien offenders from our Washington, D.C. and Virginia communities.”

In January, four suspected MS-13 gang members were arrested and are facing murder charges in Maryland after killing a 14-year-old boy from Washington, DC.

The corpse of Jefferson Amaya-Ayala was discovered with multiple injuries in what the medical examiner ruled as a homicide on November 3, 2025, at Indian Creek Stream Valley Park in College Park, Maryland, months after he was last seen in Washington, DC, on August 2, 2025.

In February 2025, the Department of State (DoS) announced the designation of Tren de Aragua (TdA), Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), Cártel de Sinaloa, Cártel de Jalisco Nueva Generación (CJNG), Cártel del Noreste (CDN), La Nueva Familia Michoacana (LNFM), Cártel de Golfo (CDG), and Cárteles Unidos (CU) as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) and Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs).

According to DoS, ” MS-13 is a transnational organization that originated in Los Angeles but shifted to Central America as individuals were deported there from the United States. MS-13 actively recruits, organizes, and spreads violence in several countries, primarily in Central America and North America, including El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico, and the United States.”

“MS-13 has conducted numerous violent attacks, including assassinations and the use of IEDs and drones, against El Salvador government officials and facilities. Additionally, MS-13 uses public displays of violence to intimidate civilian populations to obtain and control territory and manipulate the electoral process in El Salvador.”

“Terrorist designations expose and isolate entities and individuals, denying them access to the U.S. financial system and the resources they need to carry out attacks.”

Keep reading

Genocide Doesn’t Happen Without Language to Incite It

How is information made legitimate, and when is it appropriate for journalists to introduce skepticism? What happens when only one side of a conflict is given the legitimate voice, always repeated and rarely questioned, even when those sources have proven many times to have promulgated lies?

Military studies scholars and analysts understand that there is always a long genesis of historical, political and economic factors that can eventually erupt into conflict. In many ways, US establishment media seemed unwilling or unable (but likely both) to narrate a more complex, historically accurate account of the war on Gaza.

The Intercept (4/15/24) reported that editorial directives at the New York Times and CNN, two of the most important news sources in the US, advised reporters to avoid certain “taboo” words, such as “genocide” and “massacre.” Yet between October 7 and November 24, 2023, the Times used the word “massacre” 53 times—referring to Israelis killed by Palestinians, but only once to refer to a Palestinian killed by Israel (Intercept, 1/9/24).

From November onward, as deaths in Gaza piled up, the Times habitually avoided using emotionally fraught terms for Palestinians. Another term, “ethnic cleansing,” was also barred from use, along with “refugee camps” and “occupied territories.”

As the Times source who leaked the directives said, “You are basically taking the occupation out of the coverage, which is the actual core of the conflict.”

US news outlets were crippled by these verbal restrictions, incapable of offering an accurate explanation of what was happening in Gaza by imposing such constraints on humanitarian language, and international principles and laws.

Keep reading