Tag: media

Forbes Fires Journalist Who Revealed Fauci’s Finances

Dr. Anthony Fauci is the most highly compensated federal employee and the most visible. So, it’s incumbent upon all of us to give him oversight.

In 2011, I founded a national transparency organization called OpenTheBooks.com. Last year, we filed 47,000 Freedom of Information Act requests, the most in American history. We successfully captured and displayed online $12 trillion of federal, state, and local spending.

Over the past 14 months – since January 2021 – we investigated Dr. Fauci’s financials by filing FOIA requests. When I published our original reporting at Forbes, here is what happened.

The National Institutes of Health, Fauci’s employer, loaded an artillery shell in their big gun and fired it at the C-suite at Forbes. Quickly, Forbes folded and my column was terminated.

Keep reading

“Collusion against Trump” Timeline — New Evidence has Emerged

It’s easy to find timelines that detail Trump-Russia collusion developments. Here are links to two of them I recommend:

Politifact Russia-Trump timeline

Washington Post Russia-Trump timeline

On the other side, evidence has emerged that makes it clear there were organized efforts to collude against candidate Donald Trump–and then President Trump. For example:

  • Anti-Russian Ukrainians allegedly helped coordinate and execute a campaign against Trump in partnership with the Democratic National Committee and news reporters.
  • A Yemen-born ex-British spy reportedly delivered political opposition research against Trump to reporters, Sen. John McCain, and the FBI; the latter of which used the material–in part–to obtain wiretaps against one or more Trump-related associates.
  • There were orchestrated leaks of anti-Trump information and allegations to the press, including by ex-FBI Director James Comey.
  • The U.S. intel community allegedly engaged in questionable surveillance practices and politially-motivated “unmaskings” of U.S. citizens, including Trump officials.
  • Alleged conflicts of interests have surfaced regarding FBI officials who cleared Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information and who investigated Trump’s alleged Russia ties.

But it’s not so easy to find a timeline pertinent to the investigations into these events.

Keep reading

The Press Has Lied To Drag The United States Into War Before. Don’t Think They Won’t Again

The night of Feb. 15, 1898, the U.S. battleship Maine sat at anchor in Havana, Cuba. A few minutes after 9 p.m., the nightly ritual of “Taps” from Fifer C. H. Newton’s bugle descended over the ship. Some half an hour later, the forward end of the ship rose suddenly above the water.

“Along the pier, passersby could hear a rumbling explosion,” detailed author Tom Miller. “Within seconds, another eruption — this one deafening and massive — splintered the bow, sending anything that wasn’t battened down, and most that was, flying more than 200 feet into the air.”

The explosion, which killed more than 250 men on board, was quickly memorialized with cries of “Remember the Maine!” Without directly accusing Spain, which controlled Cuba at the time, a U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry decided a month later that the explosion was from a mine. (A U.S. Navy investigation decades later found it was likely an accidental coal bunker fire.)

Shortly afterward, the United States declared war on Spain, starting the Spanish-American War. One of the biggest warmongering forces in America, capitalizing on the Maine‘s explosion, was the press — a position American media pundits continue to hold as they work overtime to drag Americans into a war with Russia over Ukraine.

When you see talking heads uncritically parroting propagandist stories about Ukraine that turn out to be false, from the “Ghost of Kyiv” to that Snake Island story to old photos taken years ago, you should be asking why the corporate media is so willing to spread such fake news (while it censors conservatives for factual critiques of disproven Covid narratives, no less). It wouldn’t be the first time the press lied to pull Americans into war.

Keep reading

How Truth was Destroyed So Americans Would Crave Propaganda

One of the most vital fundamentals in understanding how the ruling elite / predator class facilitate their agendas is the role of controlled media to create perception. Perception is, in essence, reality. What is perceived is usually widely believed.

For example, the notion that the sky is blue. Scientifically speaking it actually is not, we only perceive it as blue due to the refraction of light waves through earth’s atmosphere and into the retina of the eye. Ask anyone without an understanding of this scientifically fundamental fact and they will undoubtedly espouse that the sky is indeed blue — as that is the “reality” created by their perception. This is a harmless false perception, but others are not so.

The same is true for the illusionary reality versus objective reality. An empirical observation of how the world really works as opposed to a manufactured perception based on incomplete or inaccurate information represented as authoritative and propagated in repetition.

Unfortunately however in our ever increasingly polarized society it is the manufactured perception that is espoused most fervently. In some cases those who choose to ignore facts in favor of narrative, echo chambers, and tribalism, live in a somewhat alternate reality, albeit a willfully ignorant one.

A control paradigm plays a crucial part in this. And as this report will demonstrate, the current incarnation of US news media, by way of deliberate obfuscation facilitates this paradigm by default.

One stark example of this would be manufactured outrage. Manufactured outrage is a term to describe the intentional misrepresentation of events with the aim of invoking a furious reaction from one or more groups of people. Intentionally praying on the emotional vulnerability of the human condition, typically in the form of gaslighting. Done so in a way that those galvanizing the reaction would find beneficial to their own aims.

Manufactured outrage is a tactic used frequently by the media, typically as a tool of controlled opposition used within identity politics to maintain division.

As this article exemplifies the multiple facets in which the media has been co-opted for use towards these manipulative agendas, the context for the use of manufactured outrage will become clear.

Keep reading

The NYT Now Admits the Biden Laptop — Falsely Called “Russian Disinformation” — is Authentic

One of the most successful disinformation campaigns in modern American electoral history occurred in the weeks prior to the 2020 presidential election. On October 14, 2020 — less than three weeks before Americans were set to vote — the nation’s oldest newspaper, The New York Post, began publishing a series of reports about the business dealings of the Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, in countries in which Biden, as Vice President, wielded considerable influence (including Ukraine and China) and would again if elected president.

The backlash against this reporting was immediate and intense, leading to suppression of the story by U.S. corporate media outlets and censorship of the story by leading Silicon Valley monopolies. The disinformation campaign against this reporting was led by the CIA’s all-but-official spokesperson Natasha Bertrand (then of Politico, now with CNN), whose article on October 19 appeared under this headline: “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.”

These “former intel officials” did not actually say that the “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo.” Indeed, they stressed in their letter the opposite: namely, that they had no evidence to suggest the emails were falsified or that Russia had anything to do them, but, instead, they had merely intuited this “suspicion” based on their experience:

We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement — just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.

But a media that was overwhelmingly desperate to ensure Trump’s defeat had no time for facts or annoying details such as what these former officials actually said or whether it was in fact true. They had an election to manipulate. As a result, that these emails were “Russian disinformation” — meaning that they were fake and that Russia manufactured them — became an article of faith among the U.S.’s justifiably despised class of media employees.

Keep reading

NY Times reporter admits a “ton” of federal informants were in the crowd during Jan. 6 Capitol “riot,” says “ridiculous pee tape” of Trump does not exist

A veteran reporter for The New York Times has made several stunning admissions and statements that were captured on undercover video by Project Veritas, including verification that the FBI had scores of informants in the crowd during the Jan. 6 false flag incident at the U.S. Capitol Building.

In a two-part series, the investigative journalism organization recorded statements by Times reporter Matthew Rosenberg, who at one point was talking about his sources including one for “that ridiculous, like pee tape” — a false claim made in a fake ‘dossier’ assembled ahead of the 2016 election by former British spy Christopher Steele on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign that also accused then-GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump of being a dupe for Vladimir Putin.

Specifically, the claim was that Trump hired hookers to pee on a bed in a Moscow hotel where President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama reportedly stayed.

Rosenberg also talked about what happens in the newsroom at The New York Times, explaining that there is “a real internal tug of war between, like, the reasonable people and some of the crazier leftist sh*t that’s worked it’s way in there.”

“They’re not the majority, but they’re very vocal, loud minority that dominate social media and, therefore, has just hugely outsized influence,” he continued, adding that he believes it is “alienating” Times subscribers whom he describes as “prosperous.”

The 11-year veteran reporter also said that many of his colleagues at the paper are “bullies” and “not the clearest thinkers, some of them,” before going on to describe those who end up at the Times as “very neurotic people.”

Keep reading

Russia says it will not strand American astronaut in space despite media reports

Last week, a flurry of news reports worryingly claimed that Russia was threatening to strand an American astronaut on the International Space Station in direct response to sanctions placed on the country as it continues to invade neighboring Ukraine. But Russia’s state space corporation Roscosmos is trying to put those fears to rest, saying that it will bring home the astronaut as planned.

The NASA astronaut in question is Mark Vande Hei, who has been living on the International Space Station since April 2021. Vande Hei launched to the ISS on a Russian Soyuz rocket from Kazakhstan, along with two cosmonauts. While living on the ISS, his stay was extended to a full year, and he is slated to return home in another Soyuz capsule on March 30th. When he returns home, he’ll have the record for longest continuous spaceflight by an American astronaut, at around 353 days.

Keep reading

George Orwell on the media…

“Early in life I had noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie. I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories, and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines’.”

George Orwell