31 thoughts on “News/Politics 2-9-23

  1. Of course they don’t, because they’re clowns pushing a false narrative, not facts.

    “Biden’s Economics Advisor: Job Creation Is “Not The Standard For How We Measure Jobs Created”

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Trash media strikes again.

    “13-Year-Old Palestinian Allegedly Shoots Jews. Reuters Laments He ‘Dreamt Of Being A Chef’”


    “After a 13-year-old Palestinian boy hiding behind parked cars allegedly opened fire on Jews in Jerusalem, shooting a father and son in their upper bodies before he himself was shot and wounded in return gunfire, the Reuters News agency wrote a sympathetic story about the boy, lamenting that he had dreams of “being a chef.”

    Reuters has gained a reputation for its anti-Israel reporting, not unlike other major news outlets such as The New York Times. In November, despite clear historical evidence that the Biblical Temples stood on the Temple Mount, Reuters initially reported of the Temple Mount, the holiest place in Judaism, “The site, said to have once housed two ancient Jewish temples . . . ” Last month Reuters identified the ship Mavi Marmara, which had tried to circumvent Israel’s legal blockade of Gaza, as an “aid ship.” “The Mavi Marmara’s passengers were armed with weapons — which they turned against IDF soldiers — not aid,” CAMERA noted.

    In the face of the surveillance video that allegedly showed Muhammad Aleiwat, 13, shooting at the Jews, Reuters titled their article “Palestinian Teenager Dreamt of Being A Chef Before Attack, Teachers Say.”


    Sure, rather than point out that the kid is a victim of his own people’s hate and stupidity, just blame the Jews again.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. They just lie under oath now, and no one bats an eye.


  4. I’m not a doctor, but I play one on Twitter.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Lies, and damned lies.

    I’m starting to see why these folks were so cozy with Democrats.

    And there’s tons more lies, all under oath. Click one and keep reading.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Gosh if only we had known he was medically unfit before the election…..

    Oh wait…. we did know that.

    And of course he did.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Disband these partisan frauds in FBI “leadership”.

    And a hats off to some agents for trying to do the right and legal thing.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Actual reporter does actual reporting, Twitter suspends him.

    Musk still has work to do.


  9. I believe the word is “escalation”…..

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Yes Tychicus, it was bad.

    I saw it on Twitter the night it happened.

    They’re openly worshipping Satan while millions cheer it on. Between that and the golden idol to abortion now on a NYC courthouse, and baby killing worshippers in Congress, their intent is clear, as is the side they’ve chosen.


    This is the enemy folks.


  11. Totally innocent and unrelated coincidences I’m sure….. 🙄


  12. Like I keep saying, compromised, and broken.


  13. And this is the enemy within, in both cases.


  14. Call them what they are, political prisoners held by a corrupt, activist judge.


  15. They’re true believers that Orange Man Bad, so this was always gonna be the obvious outcome.

    And they’re still in denial and refusing to retract their lies.

    “How the press fell for the Russiagate conspiracy theory

    The media’s anti-Trump bias led them to abandon basic journalistic principles.”


    “It seems the Columbia Journalism Review has irked the Washington media elite with its painstaking reconstruction of the press’s coverage of Donald Trump’s presidency. The CJR certainly paints a damning picture of the press’s behaviour.

    ‘The Press versus the president’, a four-part study by former New York Times journalist Jeff Gerth, shows how journalists’ antagonism towards Trump, and their obsession with the baseless ‘Russiagate’ conspiracy theory, resulted in warped, deeply partisan coverage.

    The media’s widespread anti-Trump bias was evident even before he became president. Throughout the 2016 election and during his presidency, the media characterised Trump as a ‘de facto agent’ of Russian leader Vladimir Putin (Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg) and the ‘Siberian candidate’ (New York Times columnist Paul Krugman – referencing The Manchurian Candidate).

    According to Gerth, the media attack lines against Trump were provided by the Democratic Party leadership. During the 2016 elections, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) commissioned and circulated a preposterous dossier from British spy Christopher Steele. It made several outrageous claims, including that Trump had been caught by the Russian secret services in a ‘kompromat’ trap with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel (because ‘compromised’ sounds even worse in Russian). According to the dossier, Trump had paid the prostitutes to urinate on a bed. The details of the allegations were circulated among journalists, but not initially published. The story captivated insiders, who were so childishly thrilled at the prospect of bringing down Trump with this obscene story that they did not stop to ask whether they were being played.

    Later, Steele and his main source admitted under questioning that the details were uncorroborated. Most intelligence analysts thought that the claims were junk. But the damage was done. The perception that Trump was in Putin’s pocket was fixed in the imaginations of Democratic Party supporters. Even if Democrats did not believe the letter of the allegations, they willed themselves to believe that there must be some truth to them.

    The claim of Russian collusion originated in July 2016, when the internet pirates at Wikileaks uploaded hundreds of thousands of emails stolen by alleged Russian hackers. These emails had been sent between members of the DNC in the run-up to the Democratic National Convention, which would decide the Democratic presidential candidate. These revelations were particularly damaging for the winner of the nomination, former first lady and secretary of state Hillary Clinton. The leaked emails revealed that the DNC had favoured Clinton over left-wing challenger Bernie Sanders, and had attempted to undermine the Sanders campaign. In October 2016, further leaks of campaign chair John Podesta’s emails painted Hillary in an unpleasant light. She was portrayed as a friend of big business, who was paid millions in speakers’ fees to talk at meetings for Goldman Sachs and BlackRock.

    The email leaks were devastating for the Democrats. They were doubly angered when Trump, in an interview in July 2016, said that if Putin was hacking computers, he could help everyone out by dropping the 30,000 missing emails deleted from Hillary Clinton’s personal server. To Democrat insiders, this was the smoking gun of Republican Party collusion, a direct sign that Trump was asking for Russian help. To most other people, it was a joke.

    As Gerth explains, with Trump cast as a puppet of Putin, the mainstream media chose to view the Republican victory over Hillary Clinton as the Democrats being robbed.

    This is particularly evident in the way the press covered successive official investigations into Russian interference after Trump was elected – especially the investigation undertaken by special counsel Robert Mueller for the Department of Justice. The mainstream media covered the Mueller investigation as if it would inevitably find that Trump had colluded with the Russian secret service. But instead it found no evidence to support the collusion allegations.

    Gerth points out that a number of radical journalists of the Obama and Bush eras – notably Matt Taibbi (of Rolling Stone, Aaron Maté (the Nation) and Glenn Greenwald (the Intercept) – were all so shocked at the way that the mainstream media repeated the Russiagate claims that they broke ranks, and consequently fell out with their publishers.

    Most poignantly, Gerth argues that the partisan and otherworldly claims made against Trump backfired on the media as a whole. The baseless allegations undermined public trust in the press to the point where in 2021, 83 per cent of Americans thought that ‘fake news’ was a problem. And as of last year, the US media had a trust rating of only 26 per cent.”


  16. Yet another example….

    “Media Coverage of Biden’s Documents”


    “In the past six months, documents with classified markings have been discovered at residences and offices associated with both President Biden and former President Trump, along with former Vice President Pence. How have the media covered these stories?

    The timeline below shows total mentions of the word “classified” across CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News, from Jan. 1, 2022 through Feb. 5, 2023, using data from the Internet archive’s TV News Archive.”

    Immediately clear is just how differently the stories were told. Coverage of Trump’s document handling begins largely in January and February 2022, peaking on Feb. 10, then quickly fading away until the FBI’s Aug. 8 Mar-a-Lago raid. From that point, it remained in the news until late October, with at least a few mentions a day through the end of 2022.

    In contrast, coverage of Biden’s document handling began Jan. 9, 2023, peaked on the 12th, declined through the 21st, then rebounded with the discovery of a second cache of documents and reporting on the Pence discovery. Coverage surged again on Feb. 1 with additional Biden discoveries and has largely faded since.”

    “In the end, the two stories received very different media coverage, with Fox News being an outlier in its much greater focus on the Biden document story than the Trump story. The story of Trump’s classified documents discovery lingered in the news for far longer than the media’s quick pivot away from the Biden story – but in the end, the public appears to have been far more interested in Biden’s story.”


  17. Drag these degenerates and their mutilation of children out into the light. Expose them.

    “Former gender-transition manager: Pediatric transition “morally and medically appalling”; Update: Hawley to open probe of MO clinic”


    “Has modern medicine deliberately decided to abandon its pledge to “first do no harm” when it comes to children and gender transitions? According to this self-described “queer woman” and Bernie Sanders supporter, the answer is yes. And Jamie Reed should know; she worked as a case manager for a pediatric gender clinic for “almost four years,” handling intake and care decisions for children confused about their bodies and identity.

    She started out as a believer in gender transitions for minors. Now Reed declares in The Free Press that it’s time to bring it to a halt immediately, and end the deliberate damage that the medical industry is doing to this generation of children before it’s too late:

    During the four years I worked at the clinic as a case manager—I was responsible for patient intake and oversight—around a thousand distressed young people came through our doors. The majority of them received hormone prescriptions that can have life-altering consequences—including sterility.

    I left the clinic in November of last year because I could no longer participate in what was happening there. By the time I departed, I was certain that the way the American medical system is treating these patients is the opposite of the promise we make to “do no harm.” Instead, we are permanently harming the vulnerable patients in our care.

    Today I am speaking out. I am doing so knowing how toxic the public conversation is around this highly contentious issue—and the ways that my testimony might be misused. I am doing so knowing that I am putting myself at serious personal and professional risk.

    Almost everyone in my life advised me to keep my head down. But I cannot in good conscience do so. Because what is happening to scores of children is far more important than my comfort. And what is happening to them is morally and medically appalling.”


    Note the “social contagion” part….

    It’s important to read all of the Free Press essay written by the former intake manager of a pediatric gender clinic. To attempt to excerpt this beyond her statement of principles would be to essentially reprint the entire testimony. However, we can highlight some critical revelations within it as a roadmap to its importance:

    “Reed started with the assumption that this was a medically sound practice backed by research, which turned out to be false

    Anyone who raised questions ran the risk of being branded a “transphobe”

    Patients frequently self-reported problems they didn’t have, including
    Tourette’s and multiple-personality illnesses, which clinic doctors recognized as the effects of “social contagion”

    When Reed raised that as an issue for gender dysphoria as well, the same doctors rejected it

    The clinic “downplayed” the clear and unavoidable side effects of transition therapy”


    Read the whole thing.



  18. This seems newsworthy.



    “Joe Biden just did an interview with PBS’s Judy Woodruff after not having done an interview in quite some time.

    But this came after he received a lot of criticism over his handling in the past week of a Chinese spy balloon that he allowed to traverse the country and after his classified document scandal exploded over the past month. Now I wouldn’t say that Woodruff was a tough questioner, but she did ask questions about both topics.

    Joe being Joe, he tried to blame other people for his classified document scandal. He claimed to Woodruff that the documents were there because the people who cleaned up his offices when he left didn’t thoroughly examine every piece of paper. He claimed he voluntarily let the FBI search his homes and offices.”


    Of course they did.


  19. Weird, right?


  20. Yep.

    Crazy like this guy, who still sees Russians everywhere.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.