Tag: media

White House Indefinitely Bans AP News From Oval Office And Air Force One, Citing ‘Irresponsible, Dishonest Reporting’

Following earlier reports this week regarding the Associated Press being temporarily banned from the White House Oval Office, Trump’s deputy chief of staff announced on Friday that the outlet is now indefinitely barred from entering both the Oval Office and Air Force One.

The announcement follows the left-leaning outlet’s refusal to comply with President Donald Trump’s executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich continued to blast the outlet’s decision to ignore the executive order in an X post on Friday.

“The Associated Press continues to ignore the lawful geographic name change of the Gulf of America. This decision is not just devise, but it also exposes the Associated Press’ commitment to misinformation. While their right to irresponsible and dishonest reporting is protected by the First Amendment, it does not ensure their privilege of unfettered access to limited spaces, like the Oval Office and Air Force One,” Budowich wrote.

Keep reading

Thomson Reuters, a Far-Left Propaganda Arm, Receives Funding from the U.S. Department of Defense for ‘Active Social Engineering Defense Large-Scale Social Deception’ — Elon Musk Responds

Thomson Reuters Corporation, the parent company that both owns Thomson Reuters Special Services LLC (TRSS) and the far-left propaganda arm Reuters News, has been funded by none other than the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD).

Recent investigations have revealed that Thomson Reuters Special Services LLC was awarded a contract by the Department of Defense titled “Active Social Engineering Defense (ASED) Large Scale Social Deception (LSD).”

Thomson Reuters Special Services LLC (TRSS) is a U.S.-based subsidiary of Thomson Reuters that provides software and information services to U.S. government agencies.

TRSS reports to an independent Board of Directors and operates under the oversight of the U.S. Department of Defense to offer classified and sensitive services to the U.S. Government.

The contract, identified as FA865018C7886, was awarded in 2018 with a value of approximately $9.1 million. You can view the contract details at USASpending.gov.

Keep reading

CNN’s Anderson Cooper Claims There is No ‘Actual Evidence’ of Government Fraud — Then Calls Chris Sununu a ‘D*ck’ Live on Air 

CNN host Anderson Cooper let his emotions get the better of him when discussing the findings of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficency (DOGE).

The primetime anchor hosted a discussion with former New Hampshire governor Chris Sununu and several other panellists following Donald Trump’s decision to hold a joint presser with Elon Musk in the Oval Office on Tuesday.

Here went the exchange:

SUNUNU: I know what you’re not showing here but Musk gave seven specific examples off the top of his head of where the corruption and fraud were.

He was talking about a contractor that had a three-month contract. He was paid for 20 years.

He was talking about welfare benefits that were being paid to someone that was technically 150 years old.”

COOPER: But we didn’t see any of that. He doesn’t present any actual evidence.

SUNUNU: He’s standing there in the Oval Office. Do you expect him to come in with 10,000 pages?

And I have to be clear. To complain about this administration, about transparency when this president takes open questions on a daily basis, yet Joe Biden didn’t show up for a press conference in six months is insane.

These guys are being extremely transparent. They don’t have to sit there and take the questions, but they do. It’s all on the website. It’s all out there.

Later on, the two men got in a heated discussion about FEMA spending millions of dollars on luxury hotels for migrants.

As the debate escalated, Cooper accused Sununu over putting words in his mouth.

“Don’t be a dick,” he remarked.

Cooper eventually apologized for his outburst.

“Before we go, I wanna apologize,” he said. “I was mean, I was rude to you.”

“Are you kidding?” Sununu responded. “I grew up with seven brothers and sisters, and I’m a Sununu.”

Keep reading

‘The View’ Co-Host Ana Navarro Says Trump Will ‘Ban Black People’ From Performing at Future Super Bowls 

The View co-host Ana Navarro has suggested Trump will ban black people from performing at the Super Bowl.

Her comments came after Kendrick Lamar’s half-time show bombed during Sunday’s final between the Kansas City Chiefs and Philadelphia Eagles in New Orleans.

During Monday’s edition of The View, Navarro said that Trump would sign an executive order banning black people from ever doing the half-time show again.

She explained:

You know I don’t do sports, you know I don’t do football, so I wasn’t watching the game. But listen, I think today Donald Trump is going to sign an executive order banning black people from halftime.

Because you remember last week we were talking about whether the NFL was capitulating to Trump by removing the term’ End Racism’ from the end zone? Boy, did they not capitulate to Trump.

When I saw Samuel L. Jackson dressed as a black Uncle Sam, introducing Kendrick Lamar, who then had like an entire formation of all black people making a U.S. flag-, listen!

This much I know, all the black people on my feed were like, ‘Oooo, this is blackity, black, black!’ And all the racists who somehow get in? Man, where they hopping mad.

So if the racists are mad, I am happy as a clam.

Keep reading

FCC Considers Revoking CBS License Over Kamala Harris’ ’60 Minutes’ Interview Controversy

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is reportedly considering revoking CBS’s broadcast license after the network aired a controversial interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris on “60 Minutes.” The interview sparked widespread outrage and calls for accountability after the network aired a misleading version, including highly distorted answers from Harris’ responses. According to a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump, CBS violated state law by demonstrating deceptive acts in business conduct and “doctored” a “word salad” response from the failed Democrat presidential candidate about the Biden administration’s involvement in the Israel-Hamas war. The FCC’s review stems from concerns that the interview may have violated broadcasting standards, prompting scrutiny over whether CBS acted in the public interest. 

In the past two weeks, FCC Chair Brendan Carr launched investigations into three news outlets and reinstated complaints against three others, including NBC and ABC. The complaint against ABC received a “news distortion” complaint over its fact-checking by the moderators in the presidential debate between Harris and Trump that heavily favored Harris. Meanwhile, the complaint against NBC claimed that Harris’s appearance on “Saturday Night Live,” which aired just weeks before the election, violated “equal time” rules governing political programming.

Former FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat, dismissed any probe into the interview, saying the complaints “seek to weaponize the licensing authority of the FCC in a way that is fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment.”

However, Carr said he doesn’t “see how the FCC can reasonably adjudicate this claim of news distortion without seeing what was actually said.” 

Keep reading

Corrupt media firm that cited corruption?

Matt Taibi and Walter Kirn just came out with an entertaining video talking about the $10,000 “subscriptions” that Politico was selling to the U.S. government by way of USAID. As high as the price of a used car, after selling gobs and gobs of them, they raked in $8 million from USAID. But Politico often reports on corruption.

When the people reporting on the corruption are taking Big Money from the people that they are supposed to be watching the most, then you get a moral dilemma stemming from a conflict of interest.

Keep reading

Wikileaks: USAID Spent Half-Billion Influencing Journalism through Shady NGO “Internews Network”

The fallout and aftermath of Elon Musk’s investigation into USAID as part of President Trump’s radical revolution in his second-term in office, has revealed stunning reports of government funding for far-left efforts and wasteful efforts. Musk has said that Trump has authorized him to look into the Department of Education, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and explosively, the Pentagon.

Wikileaks is now claiming that another part of the far-left USAID funding has been influencing foreign and domestic media with nearly half-a-billion dollars in U.S. taxpayer funding for the “Internews Network”, a non-profit funded primarily by the government that trained journalists, pushed certain news and agenda that fit the government’s desires, and also that the network developed “exclusion lists” that were meant to pressure advertisers to bankrupt other media outlets that did not serve the government’s agenda.

The U.S. government was also pushing such ‘exclusion lists’ through a variety of other state-supported organizations and entities, such as the Stanford Internet Observatory, the University of Washington, Yale, Newsguard, and by coercing big tech companies like Facebook, Amazon, and Google. This was all part of the left’s Censorship Industrial Complex.

The Gateway Pundit is litigating against the government at the moment in Missouri v. Biden on related issues about censorship, deplatforming, and demonetization.

Internews supported and funded those censorship efforts.

Keep reading

WSJ Reporter Who Doxxed, Tried to Cancel, Musk DOGE Team Member was Former State Dept, USAID, Worker

Marko Elez is a 25 year old who has the trust and support of the world’s richest man, Elon Musk to help root out problems as part of the Department of Government Efficiency, aka “DOGE.”

He and others of the DOGE team were doxxed several days ago in an article in Wired, along with other articles and posts on X.

Elez was assisting Musk in his Trump-led efforts to root out fraud, waste and abuse from America’s government, starting with the United States Agency for International Development “USAID”, The State Department, Treasury Department, and other agencies.

And then the mainstream media today, led by reporter Katherine Long at the Wall Street Journal, decided to try and ‘cancel’ Elez by digging up controversial tweets made a few years ago in this article, titled “DOGE Staffer Resigns Over Racist Posts.”

Keep reading

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