Tag: media

There Are ‘Questions’ About Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’—But Don’t Expect AP to Answer Them

It’s not a failsafe test, but it can be a tip off that a journalistic outlet is off its feet when its language falls apart. I give you the Associated Press (2/19/26), describing the actions of a person who rarely strings a coherent sentence together, to hand over billions of US taxpayer dollars to create a global entity. This is the “Board of Peace,” of which Trump has declared himself “Chairman for Life“—because that’s a normal thing—and which Google’s AI describes as “potentially replac[ing] existing international institutions”:

Trump’s vision for the board has morphed since he initiated the group as part of his 20-point peace plan to end the conflict in Gaza. Since the October ceasefire, Trump wants it to have an even more ambitious remit—one that will not only complete the Herculean task of bringing lasting peace between Israel and Hamas but will also help resolve conflicts around the globe.

If you aren’t staggered by the notion of Donald Trump “resolving conflicts around the globe,” every other word still deserves interrogation: Are completing the genocide and mass dislocation of Palestinian people, and violently converting their historic homeland to a playground resort for wealthy internationals, going to now be labeled by the press as “bringing lasting peace,” and “ending the conflict” in Gaza?

But worry not: AP tells us in bold letters, “There are many questions about how the board will work.” That implies that AP will be asking them, or care about the answers. But given no one who had a real problem with the creation of the board itself is cited in the article on its launch, why would we look to AP for critical eyes going forward?

Keep reading

CNN Contributor Shows Our Media Has Nothing but Contempt for Angel Families

One of the recurring themes of President Trump’s Angel Families remembrance ceremony yesterday was how the Democrats and their media allies have ignored Angel Families and their plight for years. 

White House Director of Communications and Assistant to the President Steven Cheung blasted the media yesterday for not covering the heartbreaking statements of the Americans who lost loved ones to criminal illegal aliens, calling it “sickening and horrific.”

Cheung specifically called out CNN and MS NOW for refusing to broadcast the ceremony.

But CNN took it a step further and treated these Angel Families with pure, unadulterated contempt.

“I think what…we’re actually getting a little preview of kind of the theme of his address later today at the White House when he hosts the so-called Angel Moms, so really focusing on immigration as he kicks off his big State of the Union week,” said Seung Ming Kim on CNN.

Keep reading

Judge Rejects DOJ’s Request to Search Washington Post Reporter’s Electronic Devices in Leak Investigation

A judge on Tuesday denied the Justice Department’s request to search a Washington Post reporter’s electronics for sensitive documents as part of its investigation into national security leaks.

As previously reported, the FBI raided the home of a Washington Post reporter who obtained classified and illegally leaked information from a Pentagon contractor.

Feds executed a search warrant at the Alexandria, Virginia, home of WaPo reporter Hannah Natanson last month as part of an investigation into a Maryland system administrator who has a top security clearance.

The contractor who stashed the classified documents at his home, Aurelio Perez-Lugones, is currently in jail.

FBI agents reportedly found classified intelligence reports in Perez-Lugones’ lunchbox and basement.

Rubio said the Pentagon contractor leaked the Maduro capture plans.

The US Army’s Delta Force captured Maduro last month. The leaked plans could have put the special operators in harm’s way.

On Tuesday, a federal magistrate judge rejected the Justice Department’s request to search Natanson’s electronics.

“Accordingly, the Court rejects the government’s request to conduct an unsupervised, wholesale search of all Movants’ seized data using a government filter team. To gather the information the government needs to prosecute its criminal case without authorizing an unrestrained search and violating Movants’ First Amendment and attorney-client privileges, the Court will conduct the review itself,” judge William Porter wrote.

“No easy remedy exists here. Movants’ First Amendment rights have been restrained. The government seized all of Ms. Natanson’s work product, documentary material, and devices, terminating her access to the confidential sources she developed and to all the tools she needs as a working journalist. The government’s proposed remedy—that she simply buy a new phone and laptop, set up new accounts, and start from scratch—is unjust and unreasonable,” the judge wrote.

Keep reading

The Graveyard of Destructive Ideas

How do destructive ideas and bouts of collective madness so quickly become policy, law, and the status quo? After all, most have little public support—and are not Western nations supposedly rationally governed?

There is usually a multi-step process on the road to these self-destructive fits of society-wide insanity.

The suicidal impulse so often begins with left-leaning researchers in elite universities (i.e., the tenured in search of a novel, grant-getting theory). They begin insisting that a new existential threat requires immediate government intervention, novel legislation, ample funding, and public awareness of the impending danger.

So out of nowhere, the public is warned that the scorching planet will be inundated by rising seas in a mere decade. Or that millions of transgender youth are our next civil rights frontier, given that they suffer in silence without political advocacy, new laws, programs, and the chance for “life-saving,” powerful hormonal treatments and radical sex-reassignment surgeries. Indeed, the travel time from an outlandish idea by the faculty lounge to liberal status quo is a mere few years.

Next, the media, hand-in-glove with academia, springs into action to persuade the skeptical public to “follow the science” and “trust the experts.” It castigates any doubters as cranks or “conspiracy theorists” who spread “disinformation” and “misinformation”; or as racists, nativists, sexists, homophobes, and transphobes who must be silenced.

Hollywood and sports celebrities often piggyback on the frenzy, hijacking awards ceremonies and pre-game national anthems to out-virtue-signal each other, warning the public that they must adapt and change—or else!

Almost overnight—to take just one example—going to an isolated beach without a mask during the COVID pandemic, showing skepticism about the efficacy or safety of experimental mRNA COVID vaccines, or daring to believe that the Wuhan gain-of-function virology lab (in part aided and abetted by grants and support from Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases and the National Institutes of Health) was the source of a manufactured COVID pathogen became heresies. And the perpetrators, as always, had to be punished either legally or through social ostracism and cancel culture.

Third, liberal foundations begin funding more “research” to “prove” that partisan “experts” should not be ignored. They also fund activist groups that hit the street to gin up popular support, which often results in the required tumult and occasional violence. They embrace the theory that any disruption will so bother the public that it will support almost anything if it just makes the bedlam go away.

New victims and their oppressors are created ex nihilo.

Keep reading

CNN Finally Admits the Truth About Democrat-Run Cities

CNN’s Fareed Zakaria went off-script this week — at least by his network’s standards — and said the quiet part out loud: Democrat-run cities are a mess, and the politicians in charge either can’t or won’t do anything about it.

Of course, this isn’t news to you, but for a CNN host to admit this is a big deal.

Zakaria opened with Zohran Mamdani’s New York, calling it “a prime example of a problem Democrats seem unwilling to confront.” That’s a pretty remarkable admission from a CNN host, but I assure you, he was just getting started.

“Blue cities are out of control,” he said, “promising more, spending more, delivering less, and pushing off the fiscal problems to some future day.”

He then turned to Los Angeles, and the numbers he cited are staggering. Zakaria noted that the city’s homelessness budget for fiscal year 2025-2026 alone totals roughly $950 million. Not the cumulative total over several years. One year. And what has all that money bought? He explained that the LA Homelessness Services Authority reported that homelessness increased by 9% countywide and 10% within the city in 2023. A 2024 AP account found that homelessness had surged by 70% countywide since 2015 and by 80% within the city.

“All this amid public frustration, despite billions spent,” Zakaria said.

Then came perhaps the most damning detail. An audit reviewed $2.4 billion in city homelessness funding and found that “officials could not reliably track where it went or what it achieved.” That’s right. $2.4 billion has just disappeared into the bureaucratic ether. 

To make matters worse, not only are there never results, but there’s never any accountability either, at least not for the people running the city.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Orders CNN to Respond

We have a MAJOR DEVELOPMENT in our landmark case against CNN at the United States Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court has just ordered CNN to file a formal response to our petition – the petition we filed to hold CNN and the mainstream media accountable for spreading falsehoods during President Donald Trump’s Senate impeachment trial, when they twisted and manipulated what a member of the president’s legal team actually argued. I know because I was there on the floor of the Senate when it happened.

When we filed our petition for writ of certiorari in this critical defamation case, CNN appeared to think it could simply ignore it. That’s a common tactic. If a party believes the Court isn’t likely to take a case, they can waive their response and hope the Justices quietly deny review.

That’s exactly what CNN tried to do.

Their strategy seemed simple: Don’t engage. Don’t draw attention to it. Let it die quietly.

But the Supreme Court didn’t let that happen. Instead, the Court stepped in and ordered CNN to respond – in writing.

That matters.

It doesn’t guarantee the Court will ultimately take the case. But it does signal that at least some of the Justices believe this issue deserves serious consideration.

And it should.

Keep reading

DoJ Released Much More on Epstein’s Israel Ties—But Media Still Aren’t Much Interested

Late last month, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) published 3.5 million pages about convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein.

On top of the grotesque and horrifying photos and emails that appear to offer more evidence of systemic and widespread child abuse, the Epstein files revealed further allegations of his ties to Israel and its intelligence agency Mossad.

The Epstein/Israel revelations have been covered at length by independent and overseas media outlets:

  • “The Israeli government installed security equipment and controlled access to a Manhattan apartment building” that Epstein managed (Drop Site News, 2/18/26). Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Israeli spy Yoni Koren were frequent guests at the apartment, and Rafi Shlomo, then–director of protective service at the Israeli mission to the United Nations, “controlled access to the apartment for guests, and even conducted background checks on cleaners and Epstein’s employees.”
  • An informant told the FBI he “became convinced that Epstein was a co-opted Mossad agent” (Middle East Monitor, 2/8/26).
  • Epstein emailed Barak in December 2018: “You should make clear that I don’t work for Mossad :)” (Dissident, 2/2/26). Barak responded, “You or I?” Epstein replied, “That I don’t :).”
  • Epstein emailed Barak twice in November 2017 (London Times, 2/8/26): “Did Boies ask you to help obtain former Mossad agents to do dirty investigations?” and “Boies said he got to the Mossad guys through you? True? This is getting a lot of press.” Barak responded, “Call me. [Redacted] in Paris.” (Epstein was likely referring to attorney David Boies, who was facing scrutiny at the time for hiring a private firm, run largely by former Mossad officers, to investigate women who accused his client Harvey Weinstein of rape, and journalists trying to expose the allegations—New Yorker, 11/6/17.)
  • Epstein’s foundation backed pro-Israel projects like Friends of Israel Defense Forces and the Jewish National Fund, which buys land in Palestine to build settlements (Middle East Eye, 2/7/26).

Keep reading

WHOOPS! Whoopi Goldberg Breaks Silence After Her Name Surfaces in Epstein Files — Claims Being Listed “Does Not Mean Guilt”

Far-left Whoopi Goldberg was finally forced this week to address the growing controversy surrounding her name appearing in newly released DOJ documents tied to disgraced child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.

Before her name surfaced, The View hosts were loudly demanding the full release of the Epstein Files, now they’re suddenly suggesting that maybe not everyone named in those documents is actually guilty.

The latest batch of Epstein documents, unsealed by the Department of Justice, includes a May 8, 2013, email from a redacted sender to Epstein.

The message details arrangements for Goldberg to attend a charity event hosted by Julian Lennon’s White Feather Foundation in Monaco.

It reads: “Whoopi needs a plane to get to Monaco. John Lennon’s charity is paying for it… They don’t want to charter, so they are looking for private owners.” Epstein’s curt reply was “no thnaks,” indicating he passed on offering his Gulfstream II jet.

On Tuesday’s broadcast, a visibly defensive Goldberg attempted to get ahead of the brewing storm.

“In the name of transparency, my name is in the files. Yes!”

But Goldberg quickly moved to contain the political fallout, insisting that simply being named in documents connected to Epstein does not equate to guilt or involvement in criminal activity.

“I wasn’t his girlfriend. I wasn’t his friend,” she said, adding, “I was not only too old, but it was at a time… you used to have to have facts before you said stuff.”

She lamented being “dragged” by online critics who assume guilt by association, claiming, “People actually believe that I was with him… no, I didn’t get on the plane.”

Keep reading

Stephen Colbert Hates Black Women and Other Universal Truths

As someone who loves comedy, what a*s-clowns like Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert havedone to the concept is like what Harvey Weinstein did to movie production or what Democrats have done to journalism, if journalism were their cellmate in Super-Max. Colbert is the Jeffrey Epstein of truth and Kimmel is the Luigi Mangione of honesty. That’s why it was not shocking to anyone with an IQ larger than their shoe size that Colbert would go on his show and lie, doing his best to help a white guy, James Talarico, beat a black woman, Jasmine Crockett, in the Democratic primary in the Texas Senate race.

First, I have to tell you about the concept of equal time. It is surprising how many “journalists” out there either do not have the mental capacity to understand this very basic concept, or simply are willing to come off as morons for the cause of their party. It’s about half and half, as I think you’d be stunned by just how many of these people have the intelligence of someone who snacked on lead paint chips.

But the concept of equal time is pretty basic: If you are going to have a candidate for office on a show that uses the public airwaves (broadcast tv and radio, not cable or streaming), other legitimate candidates (those who are on the ballot officially) can request an appearance for the same amount of time. This only applies to real candidates, not write-ins, and ONLY for 30 days before a primary and 60 days before a general election. The rest of the time, it is a free-for-all and shows can have on whoever they want.

One thing I’ve heard morons in the media claim is that the FCC is monitoring broadcasts or warning networks of the equal time obligations, but that is a lie. The FCC does not monitor any broadcasts, they respond to reports filed by viewers/listeners and anyone else, either for violation of decency rules or equal time. An audience member can’t make a claim for equal time on behalf of someone else; the candidate or politician must. The FCC decides if a claim is valid, period.

This is not rocket science, not even close, which means the people deliberately saying otherwise are lying or don’t have the mental capacity to understand this very basic concept.

Keep reading

Even CNN Can’t Ignore the Problems With Canada’s ‘Buyback’

The Liberal government in Canada is continuing its nationwide gun “buyback” of banned firearms, though we haven’t heard many Liberal politicians touting its success as of late. 

Instead, most of the recent headlines about the compensated confiscation effort have centered around localities refusing to participate. Most recently, the police department in Kingston, Ontario declared it won’t be involved in the federal effort, citing “concerns related to the program’s design, implementation, and potential impacts on local policing resources and public safety priorities,” identified by both the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police. 

The “buyback” is off to such a rough start that even CNN is reporting on the criticism, though its report studiously avoids calling the effort a failure. 

In January, Canada began implementing one of those reforms: a long-awaited, hotly debated program to compensate the country’s gun owners for their now-banned firearms. Yet the buyback program has suffered yearslong delays and pushback from police, provincial officials and gun owners.

In September, audio emerged of Canada’s Minister of Public Safety Gary Anandasangaree, the official responsible for implementing the legislation, questioning the ability of police departments to enforce the buyback. Anandasangaree later said the recording was made without his knowledge, and said the comments were “misguided.” 

Complicating the buyback is the fact that Canada has plenty of guns, more than the program alone can collect. The federal government estimates that it has the funds to buy 136,000 firearms, but Canada has roughly 2 million registered and 10 million unregistered guns, according to a 2017 release from the Small Arms Survey, an independent research group based in Switzerland.

Now, not all of those firearms have been banned by the Canadian government, at least not yet. But it is fair to say that the Liberals have been targeting the country’s legal gun owners, while the vast majority the country’s gun-involved crime is committed by individuals who’ve acquired their guns through illicit means. I doubt many violent offenders, gang members, and drug dealers are going to participate in the compensated confiscation efforts.

A number of provinces have declined to participate as well, though the Liberal government is still talking tough about collecting firearms in those locations. 

Keep reading