Tag: media

Media Lies About ‘Infinitesimally Rare’ Noncitizen Voting Are A Load Of Bull Hockey

The legacy press has an entire vocabulary for election fraud, and every word in it carries the same instruction: Stop looking. “U.S. News and World Report and PBS: “extremely rare.” Time magazine: “very, very rare.” NPR quoted an expert who called it “infinitesimally rare.” It has become a reflex, appended to any mention of election integrity, the way a surgeon general’s warning is appended to a pack of cigarettes, that election fraud is rare, rare, rare. The implication is that “rare” means “irrelevant.” But does it?

Since When Is Rarity the Standard?

Every ballot cast by an ineligible voter cancels out the ballot of an eligible one. A noncitizen who votes does not merely add a vote to one side of the ledger — he subtracts one from a citizen who did everything right. Every fraudulent vote cast invalidates the vote of an eligible voter, effectively disenfranchising that person.

So how many disenfranchised citizens is the acceptable number? One hundred? A thousand? We do not apply this reasoning anywhere else in election law. Nobody argues that ballot-box stuffing is tolerable at low volume, or that a poll worker who alters a few dozen returns should be waved off because the total is statistically small. We do not tell a mugging victim that street crime is rare.

More to the point: Rarity is irrelevant to the margin. Recent congressional races have been decided by a few hundred votes. Virginia’s House of Delegates control came down to a tied district settled by drawing a name from a bowl. In races like these, “infinitesimally rare” fraud is more than sufficient to determine who governs.

Is the Problem Even Being Measured?

The Heritage Foundation maintains an Election Fraud Database documenting proven instances of election fraud — cases in which a prosecutor thought the conduct serious enough to act on, and which ended in a conviction, a civil penalty, a judicial finding, or an overturned election. As of this writing, the database contains 1,619 such cases.

The database does not include potential fraud that election officials discover but that is never investigated or prosecuted — and it obviously cannot include fraud that goes undetected in the first place.

This is the circularity at the heart of the “fraud is rare” consensus. The statistic measures prosecutions. It is then offered as proof about incidence. But you cannot establish the rate of a crime by counting convictions when the relevant authorities decline to prosecute — and you certainly cannot do it when the system is designed so that the crime is rarely discovered at all.

Fairfax County Is the Proof

Consider Fairfax County, Virginia’s largest jurisdiction, in the shadow of the nation’s capital.

In September 2024, Fairfax County’s electoral board adopted a policy requiring the general registrar to refer individuals identified by the Virginia Department of Elections as potential noncitizens to the commonwealth’s attorney and the attorney general. The referrals went out month after month. In a single batch on Oct. 6, 2025, the registrar referred 71 individuals. An earlier batch that summer sent 78 names forward. Over roughly a year and a half of monthly referrals, the cumulative total ran well into the hundreds.

Yet on Feb. 19, 2026, the board voted to rescind the policy. The stated reason, according to the meeting minutes, was that the policy had not led to a single prosecution, that compliance consumed “significant” staff time at the elections office, the commonwealth’s attorney, and the attorney general’s office, and that no prosecutor would find that checking a box on a DMV form met the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard.

Read that again. Hundreds of referrals. Zero prosecutions. Policy abandoned as too burdensome.

And here is the part that matters for the statistic: Because none of those cases were prosecuted, not one of them will ever appear in the Heritage database — or in any of the academic tallies that journalists cite when they write that noncitizen voting is infinitesimally rare. The cases were found. They were referred. They were dropped. And their disappearance from the record is then cited as evidence that there was nothing there.

The context is worse than the referral numbers suggest. Fairfax County canceled 985 registrations on citizenship grounds between January 2022 and July 2024 alone; county Republicans count 1,912 cancellations over four years, including 538 in 2025 — more than one per day. Virginia removed 6,303 statewide between January 2022 and July 2024.

Crucially, Virginia does not verify citizenship at registration. It cannot; federal law forbids requiring documentary proof on the federal form. So these registrations surfaced only when the registrants disclosed their own status — typically on a jury questionnaire or a DMV transaction. Nobody went looking. The system caught only the people who raised their hands.

Keep reading

Sulzbergers Keep Secret Archives at Taxpayer Expense While Denouncing Supreme Court for Doing the Same Thing

A highly hyped New York Times investigation—touted with the unusual label “Times Exclusive”—appeared this month under the headline “How the Supreme Court Locks Away Its Own History.” It complained that “many of the justices have valued confidentiality over transparency and chosen to postpone scrutiny of their work for years to come.”

“Some scholars question why papers should be sealed long after a justice has retired,” says the Times article, by Jodi Kantor, with research and reporting contributed by Julie Tate, Ann Marimow, and Adam Liptak. It quoted a legal historian at the University of California, Davis, Mary Ziegler, accusing the justices of engaging in “reputation management,” and, as Ziegler was paraphrased in the article, “protecting themselves from examination and second-guessing.”

Not disclosed in the Times article: that the papers of former Times publishers Arthur Ochs Sulzberger and Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., donated to the New York Public Library in 2007, are closed to public access until 2035 and 2057, respectively, according to the finding aid to the collection.

Keep reading

How Big Ag Seized Control Over Media, Research, Policy and the Marketplace

Industrial agriculture is increasingly adopting the same public relations, lobbying and information tactics long used by Big Oil, investigative journalist Amy Westervelt said on the “Real Organic Podcast.” Those strategies help corporations influence research, media and policy, making it easier to “shape the information that voters are getting,” she said.

Journalist Amy Westervelt has spent years documenting how the oil industry used public relations, think tanks and university partnerships to shape public opinion and influence public policy.

But in a recent interview on the “Real Organic Podcast,” Westervelt said she increasingly sees many of those same tactics in industrial agriculture.

“I am finding so many parallels in the agriculture space,” said Westervelt, host of the investigative podcast “Drilled” and author of the forthcoming book, “Brought to You By: Inside Big Oil’s Total Information War.”

She said large agricultural companies, like their counterparts in the fossil fuel industry, have established research centers that help generate academic support for policies that benefit industry.

“It’s like they need a certain amount of … credible information from academics to be able to make the policy argument for certain things,” she said.

Throughout the interview, Westervelt suggested these efforts are part of a broader corporate strategy designed not simply to influence markets, but to shape public debate before policy decisions are ever made.

‘Corporations start to have multiple problems with democracy’

Westervelt traced the origins of modern corporate public relations to the early 20th century, arguing that growing public scrutiny prompted businesses to rethink how they protected their interests.

“Corporations start to have multiple problems with democracy” as new laws, investigative reporting and broader voting rights threatened business interests, she said. That’s when you see “the birth of corporate PR.”

Rather than simply selling products, corporations sought to mold public opinion before voters could demand greater oversight, according to Westervelt.

“These companies need a way to shape the information that voters are getting in a way that will make them more likely to vote against their own interests and in the interests of the corporations that have a lot at stake,” she said.

Over time, industries refined those tactics, using increasingly sophisticated methods “to try to shape the context that they’re operating in and to deal with … ‘creeping democracy,’” Westervelt said.

Media ‘not doing its job’ of holding powerful corporations to account

Think tanks have become one of industry’s most effective policy tools, according to Westervelt.

“They train the people who work there to go on TV shows and radio shows to get these particular talking points out,” she said.

Unlike registered lobbyists, many think tanks operate with little transparency, she added.

“These organizations have loads of money. They have a lot of influence, and they’re not really regulated in any way,” Westervelt said. “They’re pretty good at hiding who funds them.”

She said corporate influence doesn’t stop with think tanks. It also extends into universities, where industry funding can help shape the research that later informs public policy.

While much of her reporting has focused on fossil fuel companies, Westervelt said she increasingly sees similar patterns in industrial agriculture. She described the practice as a form of “pre-lobbying,” in which corporations cultivate the evidence needed to support future policy arguments.

As one example, Westervelt described speaking with a researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology after an oil company funded carbon capture research.

Researchers were invited to submit project proposals, but one scientist wanted to study “the potential health impacts” of carbon capture pipelines, including “what might happen if it leaks,” she said.

According to Westervelt, the principal investigator instead encouraged him to “look for a more positive project.”

Seemingly small decisions like these can gradually shape which questions get asked — and which never reach the public, she said.

“There’s so many little things like that happening all the time that are keeping … really important ideas just out of the … public square,” she said.

Westervelt said those information gaps are reinforced by powerful technology platforms and a media landscape that often fails to challenge corporate influence.

“You do have now tech companies working really in lock step with these big corporations, helping them to drown out everybody else,” she said. “Letting them juice the algorithm, spend a fortune on … advertising, and really drown out kind of anyone that doesn’t agree with them.”

Meanwhile, she added, “the media is not doing its job kind of holding the powerful to account. That’s just not a thing that is rewarded by newsrooms at this time.”

Keep reading

AWW! Poor CNN Contributor is ‘Exhausted’ With Hearing About Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants

CNN contributor Leigh McGowan is ‘exhausted’ with hearing stories about illegal immigrants committing crimes like killing American citizens.

She made the comment during a recent panel discussion on the network, when conservative contributor Brianna Lyman was trying to make a valid point about what the liberal media covers and chooses not to cover.

Lyman was using as an example, a woman in Massachusetts who was strangled by an illegal immigrant just last week. McGowan rolled her eyes in disgust at the mere mention of it.

FOX News has details:

A CNN panel erupted Tuesday after far-left podcast host Leigh McGowan called repeated discussions of Americans killed by illegal immigrants “exhausting” after a conservative panelist raised the strangling death of Massachusetts woman Brianna Connolly by an illegal immigrant.

The panel was discussing the death of Pierre Damas Bel, a 20-year-old Haitian-born college student in Ohio whose family said he died by suicide Monday after being required to wear an ankle monitor after losing his Temporary Protected Status. Ohio State Highway Patrol said Bel died after walking into traffic on Interstate 70 and that the incident remained under investigation.

“Well, temporary does mean temporary, so eventually this individual may have been ordered to be removed,” The Federalist reporter Brianna Lyman said on the “NewsNight” panel. “I think it’s kind of insulting that we’re talking about this immigrant instead of Brianna Connolly from Massachusetts who was strangled last week by an illegal alien. Why is the focus never…”

McGowan interrupted Lyman as she mentioned Connolly’s killing.

“Oh my God!” she said. “It’s so exhausting. Over and over again.”

Lyman immediately responded by contrasting McGowan’s frustration with the experiences of victims’ families.

Keep reading

Clyburn Calls For Packing The Court With “Baker’s Dozen” To Flip Cases

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) added his voice to expand the Supreme Court to a “baker’s dozen,” or thirteen members to allow Democrats to add justices who agree with him and Democratic members on how the law must be interpreted.

In the meantime, as discussed earlier, court packing is being pushed as the new litmus test for any Democratic candidates. Clyburn’s “baker’s dozen” is a telling description of an effort to bake in partisan views on a Court expanded to create an instant liberal majority. In defending this hostile takeover of the Court, Clyburn bizarrely insisted that the failure to do so might lead to a return to antebellum conditions when blacks were being given fewer rights than whites.

When asked by host Kristen Welker whether he supports the call of former Vice President Kamala Harris to pack the Court, Clyburn responded:

“Yes, I do. I think that we are in a position now that calls for some significant actions taken by the Congress and we ought to expand. Thirteen is a pretty good number. A baker’s dozen would be a good number to have on the court. And I would hope we would get people on the Court who will follow the constitutional underpinnings of this great nation of ours.”

Clyburn then made the sensational claim that, without taking over the Court, blacks could be returned to virtual slave conditions. He added:

“The 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments have been interpreted different ways over the years. And we had in the Warren Court an interpretation of those amendments that I thought would be set for the future of the country. We have now a Supreme Court that has decided to reverse course and take this country back, I say, to those rulings of Justice Taney that said that no black man has any rights that a white man must respect.”

So, while recognizing that interpretations have evolved, Clyburn now demands a takeover of the Court because he disagrees with the current interpretations. It was fine when interpretations aligned with his views, but opposing viewpoints are intolerable and warrant packing the Court with reliable liberal votes. Other Democrats have demanded packing the Court to reverse immigration rulings.

The unhinged rhetoric reflects the importance of taking over the Court by Democrats who view the institution as a barrier to carrying out a radical agenda, including proposals that are considered unconstitutional. Liberal professors and pundits have identified a court takeover as essential to, as one law professor put it, guaranteeing that the Democrats never lose another national election. As former Attorney General Eric Holder and Democratic strategist James Carville have made clear, it is about power and guaranteeing its retention.

Of course, these figures know that it will take a great deal to get Americans to trash core institutions and values. Polls have long shown that a majority of citizens oppose efforts to pack the Court. FDR’s infamous court-packing plan in the 1930s has been widely panned in history, but is now being used as a model by many Democrats to achieve short-term political goals.

In order to overcome this fealty to our constitutional system, citizens must be very angry or very afraid. That is why the rage rhetoric is increasing as we approach the midterm elections. In the last election, the prediction was the imminent end of democracy. Now it is the return to slavery conditions in the United States.

One can disagree with the Court without suggesting that these justices are effective racists or want to return the nation to pre-Civil War slavery conditions. The suggestion that the Court would return this country to the Dred Scott period from before the Civil War is deeply offensive to the conservative justices, including Justice Clarence Thomas, who is African American. It is an absurd suggestion and shows contempt not just for the Court but for Black voters.

Keep reading

CNN Forced to Issue ‘Clarification’ After Allowing VA Governor Abigail Spanberger to LIE About Trump

CNN recently allowed Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger to blatantly lie on the air, claiming that Trump’s executive order on mail-in ballots would negatively affect members of the U.S. Military serving overseas.

Today, Wolf Blitzer offered a ‘clarification’ on the topic, admitting that what Spanberger said was not true.

It’s too bad that they didn’t have the ability to fact-check Spanberger in real time, but you know the media. They always give Democrats the benefit of doubt.

FOX News has details:

On Friday’s installment of “The Situation Room,” Blitzer sat down with Democratic Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger to discuss the lawsuit the commonwealth filed alongside other blue states to block President Donald Trump’s executive order from March to curb mail-in voting, which was slapped with a 14-day temporary restraining order last week by a federal judge.

“The continued attacks that we’re seeing from the Trump administration is really just an effort to get people fearful, to get people to stay home, and, in many cases, to eliminate what is a valid, safe, secure way for people to be able to have their voices heard and to vote,” Spanberger said.

“And in Virginia, you have a lot of military personnel who totally rely on mail-in ballots if they want to be able to express their opinions,” Blitzer told the governor.

“That’s true,” Spanberger replied. “It’s members of the military service, of our diplomatic service, intelligence services, people serving overseas in service to our country who get their ballots mailed to them at the various postings throughout the world.”

However, Blitzer made a “quick note of clarification” at the end of Monday’s program in reference to his exchange with Spanberger.

“We discussed legal challenges to the Trump administration’s directives for the Postal Service on mail-in voting. A comment I made suggested that U.S. military and overseas voters’ ballots would be impacted by these directives. I want to be clear right now: those ballots are exempt from the Postal Service’s new rules implementing the president’s March executive order,” Blitzer told viewers.

Keep reading

Angie Nixon: Trump ‘Is Basically a Communist’

Monday on MS NOW’s “The Beat,” Florida Democratic Senate candidate Angie Nixon said President Donald Trump “is basically a communist.”

Nixon said, “Folks don’t realize, but I am not someone who just popped up overnight. I have been a union organizer and a community organizer in the state for the past nearly two decades, and so I’ve built a really unique, diverse coalition across the state, and people have been leaning in. Just this weekend alone, we had over 700 volunteers that were out on doors knocking for us across the state of Florida, and that’s only expanding.”

She continued, “Ashley Moody is so in total lockstep with Donald Trump. You just had a gentleman on who was talking about how he has taken over Venezuela. That sounds like communism to me. They’re taking over their oil reserves and wanting to sell them off. That is the epitome of what communism is.”

She added, “She is, you know, kissing up to a president that is basically a communist. He’s taking control of private industries in another country. He’s also cozying up to someone like the guy in North Korea who is a known communist. And so Ashley Moody is bad for Florida.”

Keep reading

Trump Administration To Spend $4 Million on European Rightwing Media

The US will help Europeans free themselves from the yoke of their Leftist-Globalist elites.

Euro-Globalists are in a panic over the news that the US Donald J. Trump’s administration will reportedly spend $4 million to bolster right-wing media in ‌Europe.

This is said to be part of a package of at least $25 million for civil society groups working on conservative causes in the region.

What these sons of George Soros do not seem to understand is that this is a core Trump policy: ‘Cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations.’

2025 US National Security Strategy:

“American diplomacy should continue to stand up for genuine democracy, freedom of expression, and unapologetic celebrations of European nations’ individual character and history. America encourages its political allies in Europe to promote this revival of spirit, and the growing influence of patriotic European parties indeed gives cause for great optimism.

Keep reading

Maxine Waters Claims the ‘White Media’ is Trying to Divide Democrats for Ratings

Rep. Maxine Waters recently told followers that the Democrats are doing ‘pretty good’ with regards to the midterms, before warning people that when it comes to Democrats vs. DSA leftists, that the ‘white media’ is trying to divide Democrats in a quest for ratings.

How is this woman a member of Congress? Every time she opens her mouth, something incredibly stupid and offensive comes out.

Which media outlet do you suppose she is referring to here? CNN? MSNOW? They’re talking about this subject.

From the Western Lensman:

Maxine Waters claims something called “white media” wants a Dem establishment vs Democrat Socialist fight.

“Some of the media, mostly the white media, are interested in a fight in order to get their ratings up.”

What?

This race-grifting clown just managed to concoct one of the most brain-wormed takes imaginable.

Keep reading

Michelle Obama Accused of Being a ‘Raging Narcissist’ After ‘Psychotic’ Rant About Her Own Children

Everyone is taught from a young age that there are two things we should be mindful of before we speak: What we say, and how we say it.

I think, after hearing former first lady Michelle Obama talk about the burdens of motherhood, we can decisively add a third leg to this stool: It matters when you say it, too.

For those of you who haven’t been paying attention, Michelle Obama — like every person with a modicum of fame, a microphone, and some free time — is now a podcaster. This seems more like a vanity project, since I’ve never found her “IMO” podcast with her brother Craig Robinson particularly necessary listening except when something goes very wrong. But she’s kept at it, for better or for worse.

And being a former first lady, not to mention someone who repeatedly gets mentioned in potential presidential candidate speculation, she gets big-name guests. In this case, it was Jon Stewart of “The Daily Show,” who talked, lovingly, about missing the routines of fatherhood once his children moved out of the house.

“You obviously miss, you know, the energy and excitement of the kids being around is so incredible,” he said.

Michelle’s response to that?

“I don’t. I love them. I’m going to see them tonight for dinner. I love them,” she said. “But, you know, Barack cried when they went to college. I was like, ‘Bye, goodbye.’

“Now I know Friday nights aren’t wrecked with terror and fear about, ‘Where are you? Where are you?’” she continued. “I love their emancipation and growth.”

Stewart seemed to realize that maybe this didn’t come across so well and tried to save his host: “The thing I miss, though, is the job. Like, don’t you miss—your kids are still in high school, so it’s still a job. Like, it gave a meaning and a pattern to my life.”

Nope: “I’m good,” Michelle said.

She said fathers “can be that way” because mothers — presumably including herself — have more dealings with their children at a young age.

“I mean, I’ve had so much quality time with my children,” she said.

Thus, she said, she now had relief from the drudgery having to have them to worry about.

Keep reading