Tag: media

Could We Be Witnessing the End of Liberal Media?

For years, the liberal media has been a dominant force in shaping public opinion; whether parroting the Democratic Party’s talking points, attacking conservative figures, or downplaying major scandals that could harm their favored candidates, they had a virtual monopoly in the field of journalism. Things have changed. From the rise of conservative networks and independent journalists, people have more choices now, and it could spell the end of the liberal media.

It’s not just me saying it. Jim VandeHei, the co-founder of the USAID-funded Politico, also believes the heyday of left-wing media might finally be over.

And not just because they’re losing the slush fund money.

“The left right now, liberal media, has probably never been weaker in my lifetime than right now,” he said.

It’s not hard to see why. Prominent outlets like CNN, NBC News, and even The Washington Post have hemorrhaged viewers and readers amid declining trust and massive shifts in how Americans consume information. Could this be the beginning of the end for the left’s media empire? 

It’s safe to say that the collapse of left-wing media is not just anecdotal; hard numbers back the trend. CNN, for example, recently slashed approximately 6% of its workforce, eliminating roughly 200 jobs in a desperate bid to adjust to what the network called “irreversible shifts” in audience habits. Translation: fewer people are tuning in to their liberal propaganda. 

Keep reading

Unedited ‘60 Minutes’ Kamala Interview Proves Again The Democrat 2024 Campaign Was A Media-Driven Psyop

It’s been three months since the election, and there are still so many unanswered questions as to what exactly happened in the very obvious partnership that took place between the dying national news media and the Kamala Harris campaign. But a little more clarity was offered this week when Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, released the full nearly hour-long interview CBS “60 Minutes” aired with Harris several weeks before Election Day.

The disclosure of the raw footage came as CBS cooperated with a complaint to the FCC from the Center for American Rights, a right-leaning law firm that accused the network of news distortion. The allegation followed a discrepancy observers noted between the short tease that CBS released in advance of the full “60 Minutes” episode and the final cut that aired and showed Harris offering a different answer to the same question.

What we know now is that CBS’s original explanation for the issue, that it merely used a separate portion of a longer answer in the production that went to air, is true. But that doesn’t clear the network of its questionable decision to clean up not only that newsworthy portion of the interview, in which Harris’s fuller answer is hysterically confused, but in other parts, too.

Another highly suspect omission from the final cut was an extended portion in which Harris wasn’t asked some convoluted question on geopolitical matters or macro economics, but on why she wants to be president. “There are many reasons but probably, um, first and foremost, I truly believe in the promise of America,” she droned in an alarmingly slow cadence. “I do. And I love the American people. You know, we are a people who have ambition and aspirations and dreams and optimism and hope.”

Without even being able to see interviewer Bill Whitaker, you can feel his eyes mentally rolling to the back of his skull. The portion was surely nixed for its banality, but it’s a fundamental question the average voter would want an answer to, regardless of whether Harris has a deeply superficial, deeply boring answer.

In another portion, Whitaker asks another obvious one — what was Harris’s explanation for changing her position to the opposite of her previous stances on virtually every major issue.

Keep reading

The Unraveling of the Propaganda Industrial Complex

On February 5, the White House confirmed that over $8 million of taxpayer money was paid to POLITICO during the final year of the Biden administration. It has also been reported that The New York Times, Reuters, the Associated Press, and the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) received millions of U.S. taxpayers dollars.

This story is still breaking, with the scale of the scandal escalating with every new X post, especially this one by Elon Musk, reposting a WikiLeaks apparent scoop: “USAID was funding over 6,200 journalists across 707 media outlets and 279 “media” NGOs, including nine out of ten media outlets in Ukraine.” Musk, who is spearheading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has been investigating government spending, posted a one word response: “wow.”

Musk also reposted a message from President Trump, which suggests an even wider scandal.

Keep reading

The Mockingbird Media Will Never Recover From These Shocking Revelations About The Associated Press, The New York Times, And Politico

A free and independent press is absolutely essential.  In fact, Thomas Jefferson once warned that “our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”  Sadly, we have just learned that some of our most prominent media outlets have been receiving enormous amounts of money from the government.  The New York Times, Politico and the Associated Press were being absolutely showered with money during the Biden administration, and it is no coincidence that their coverage of the Biden administration was extremely favorable.  This is a scandal of epic proportions, and there is no way that these media outlets will ever recover from this because their credibility is totally gone.

What has been happening at Politico is particularly egregious.

It is supposed to be an independent media entity, but it has been receiving millions of our tax dollars.

In fact, it has received more than 8 million dollars from USAID alone.

Keep reading

Raw Footage Reveals ’60 Minutes’ Allowed Kamala Harris to Lie When Cameras Were Rolling – Then Demanded the Truth When Cameras Were Off

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on Wednesday released the raw ’60 Minutes’ interview with Kamala Harris.

Last week it was reported that the FCC is investigating CBS’s deceptively edited 60 Minutes interview with former Democrat presidential candidate Kamala Harris.

Fake news 60 Minutes was caught editing Kamala’s answers to make her sound coherent and normal.

In fact it was so bad that ’60 Minutes’ spliced her nonsensical answer and replaced it with a completely separate sentence she said earlier in the interview.

Mixing and matching questions and answers. This isn’t journalism. It’s fraud.

President Trump’s FCC Chair Brendan Carr demanded that CBS hand over the unedited transcript of the infamous ’60 Minutes’ interview with Kamala Harris.

On Wednesday, the FCC released an unedited, raw version of Harris’s ’60 Minutes’ interview.

Keep reading

Trump Takes the Gloves Off, Orders GSA to Cancel “Every Single Media Contract”

President Trump is on a roll!

Trump on Thursday ordered the General Services Administration (GSA) to cancel “every single media contract” funded by the agency.

Contracts for Politico, BBC, Bloomberg and Politico Pro were canceled. Politico Pro costs $10,000 per year!

Axios reported:

The White House has directed the General Services Administration to terminate “every single media contract” expensed by the agency, according to an email obtained by Axios.

What they’re saying: “GSA team, please do two things,” a Trump administration official wrote:

Pull all contracts for Politico, BBC, E&E (Politico sub) and Bloomberg

Pull all media contracts for just GSA – cancel every single media contract today for GSA only.

Why it matters: President Trump is targeting the federal government’s media contracts after Elon Musk and his allies discovered millions of dollars in agency subscriptions to Politico Pro, a policy tracking service widely used in Washington.

The fake news media took a hit this week.

Keep reading

Questions Swirl Over $9 Million DoD Funding For Reuters “Active Social Engineering” Program

Questions are being asked over the Department of Defense under Biden funding Reuters to the tune of $9 million to engage in “active social engineering” and “large scale deception,” with some claiming conspiracy and others asserting the funding was related to defending against cyber attacks.

Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency has been busy targeting the US Agency for International Development, revealing some absolutely ridiculous amounts of taxpayer money being spent on projects around the world.

As part of that process, it has emerged that the US Department of Defense handed $9,147,532 dollars to news agency Reuters for “ACTIVE SOCIAL ENGINEERING DEFENSE (ASED) LARGE SCALE SOCIAL DECEPTION (LSD).”

The outlay began in September 2018 and was scheduled to end in November 2022.

Some have asserted that the funds were used in the context of the COVID pandemic to ‘socially engineer’ the public to swallow government narratives about the virus and the vaccine.

Keep reading

The USAID Scandal Is Getting Worse by the Minute

The data is coming in so hot and fast today that it’s all I can do not to fall behind too much, but the numbers all tell the same story: the Mainstream Legacy Media is a bought-and-paid-for arm of the Deep State. So while I was busy researching how more than $8 million in tax money went to Politico…

…you did see that story, didn’t you?

Politico’s financials aren’t public. I found estimates today that its 2023 revenues were as high as $400-plus million and as low as $7 million. Whatever the case, nobody, and I mean nobody forgets who paid it $8 million in subscription fees. 

Anyway, a couple of hours later, Ian Miles Cheong reported, “The US Government gave the New York Times tens of millions of dollars over just the past 5 years despite paying relatively little money to the NYT in the years preceding 2021.” We know who came into power in 2021. “For instance, in August 2024, the US government awarded $4.1 million to the NYT.”

“The bulk of the funds came from the US Department of Health and Human Services at $26.90m, followed by the National Science Foundation at $19.15m.”

Interesting that it was DHHS and the NSF ponying up 50 million American taxpayer dollars to a paper owned by a Mexican billionaire at a time when Washington wanted to silence certain voices on health issues pertaining to the emergence of COVID and the ridiculous government measures taken to “combat” it. 

Keep reading

Well, What Do You Know? Even Trump-Hater Bill Kristol’s Group Was Receiving Millions From Inside the USAID Matrix

Bill Kristol is a former conservative and neocon who was the founder of the Weekly Standard, a prominent conservative magazine from 1995 to 2018 when it closed after all of its writers went Never-Trump. It was a product no one wanted.

Since President Trump came on the scene in 2015, Bill Kristol lost his mind, and this onetime prominent “conservative” did all he could to trash Donald Trump and smear his movement.

Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard were no fans of The Gateway Pundit.

Kristol is the founding director of Republican Voters Against Trump, a project of Defending Democracy Together, launched in May 2020.

On October 15, 2024, Kristol voted for the Democratic ticket.

He stated at the time on X, “Just filled out my early absentee ballot in VA for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris, Mark Warner, and Jennifer Wexton. No regrets at all about this.”

Keep reading

Why the Mainstream Media Is in Trouble

As most everyone knows, the mainstream media is hurting, big time. For many years, subscriptions and advertising revenue have been plummeting. Some of the big papers have been able to survive only by having some multimillionaire bail them out with his own money and be willing to absorb the ongoing financial losses.

Why is this? I submit that one big reason is that most Americans simply do not trust the media. They have come to see the media as just an unofficial mouthpiece for the federal government, especially the national-security branch of the government, the branch that rules the roost.

A good example of this phenomenon relates to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The official narrative is that the invasion was an unprovoked war of aggression, much like the U.S. government’s unprovoked invasion of and war of aggression against Iraq.

But the undisputed evidence establishes beyond any doubt whatsoever the contrary. The evidence establishes that after the dismantling of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO remained in existence, which was quite unusual, to say the least. That’s because the ostensible reason that NATO was brought into existence was to supposedly protect Western Europe from an attack by the Soviets.

Even worse, NATO began moving eastward, absorbing former members of the Warsaw Pact, and moving inexorably in the direction of Russia’s border. And this occurred in violation of promises made by U.S. officials to Russian officials that that would never happen.

Throughout the absorption process, Russian officials continually stated, “Stop it. Stop bringing your missiles, troops, weapons, tanks, and military bases closer to our border.” But U.S. officials, operating through NATO, refused to stop it. They just kept moving eastward until they finally threatened to absorb Ukraine.

As they proceeded with their absorption campaign, U.S. officials knew exactly what Russia’s reaction would be. It would be the same reaction that the U.S. had when the Soviets installed their nuclear weapons in Cuba. If the Soviets had refused to remove those nuclear weapons, the U.S. would have invaded Cuba, just as the Russians invaded Ukraine to prevent Ukraine from being absorbed into NATO.

How in the world can NATO’s absorption campaign not be considered a provocation? If that’s not a provocation, I don’t know what is. And let’s not forget: The U.S. government did much the same thing in 1979, when it provoked the Soviets into invading Afghanistan, with the aim of giving them “their own Vietnam.” National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski proudly confessed that they did that. Thus, when tens of thousands of Russian soldiers were dying on the Afghan battlefield, U.S. officials were exultant, just as they are exultant over the “degrading” of Russia’s army in Ukraine through the deaths of tens of thousands of Russian soldiers.

Keep reading