Brainless Bobbleheads Bravely Babble Bullshit
The state of the media is EWWWWWWWWWWW
The slow drip of the Twitter Files continues, and with every release the evidence mounts that nearly everything we see in the mainstream media has first been run through narrative-approving censors. (Called it!)
The most blatant First Amendment violation comes from our favorite (🤮) House member Adam Schiff, who demanded that numerous people (including journalist Paul Sperry) be removed from Twitter due to (dubious) ties with QAnon.
And while Twitter initially resisted these requests (while acknowledging they ‘deamplify’ QAnon already), Sperry was eventually suspended from the platform after posting this “unapproved” tweet regarding the raid on Mar-a-Lago:
Was Sperry on some sort of watchlist from Schiff’s request, just waiting for Twitter to grasp onto any excuse to ban him — or was the FBI just ‘requesting’ the removal of anybody who mentioned the agency’s malfeasance with regards to Crossfire Hurricane documents?
A couple days after these revelations, Alex Berenson (who still needs to figure out screenshots), provided details showing Scott Gottlieb (Former FDA head and current Pfizer board member!) attacking people who make statements that are true but might reduce vaccine uptake. (We can’t have people assessing their own risk!!!!)
Of course, this is one of the many questions that Team Reality had going back to the start of the jab rollout and the hard push for mandates — why did young, healthy nurses who had already recovered from covid need to get a vaccine for the virus they already beat?
“Shut up,” they explained.
And when the data started coming in that a large percentage (nearly 8%!!!) of those front-line workers were having serious adverse reactions to the shot, the CDC simply neglected to tell anybody about it — just like the ‘experts’ neglected to tell the public that they knew the shot wouldn’t stop transmission, but went ahead with mandates anyway.
But because the media is being controlled from the top of our power structure and are restricted from ‘inconvenient’ stories, they can’t write articles about it. They’re forced to repeat their lines like trained seals — because if they don’t, somebody else will. So we end up with embarrassing (if they could feel shame) clips like this one:
And like putting on the glasses in “They Live”, after you see through the façade once, you can never go back to the way things were before. Let’s use a recent example (thank you for this one, karma!) involving classified documents found in an ‘unused’ Joe Biden office just before midterms (but buried until now):
Inside this terrible article we find this hidden ‘gem’:
CNN manages to write almost 2,000 words about the differences between the Trump and Biden classified document stashes — and even finds an ‘expert’ — without mentioning the biggest difference between the two cases:
Trump was President and had the power to declassify documents. (And did so)
Biden was Vice-President and had no power to declassify documents.
But because the narrative is set far above the CNN Newsdesk, the company has to frame Biden in the best possible light, while also continuing to attack Trump (and ignore he could declassify files unilaterally).
And CNN is far from the only offender.
This simply doesn’t happen with an independent media. Journalists are (or were, back in my day) some of the least trusting people on the planet. (Some may even call them anti-social drunks!) The odds that these ‘reporters’ end up using the same exact phrases and covering the story in the same exact way are nil. Their purpose isn’t to get to the truth, their purpose is to repeat the lie until it becomes the truth.
In the previous CNN article, Bradley Moss claimed “if no more problematic evidence emerges”, Biden should be in the clear. Well, it turns out Biden had more classified files in his garage. Listen to his “explanation” of the situation:
What are the odds that Mr. Moss thinks this constitutes “problematic evidence”? Did you guess zero? You win!
It was simply sloppiness! That’s the ticket! In fact, Bradley found the time to write AN ENTIRE ARTICLE about why Biden’s not serious case of being sloppy was totally different than Trump’s TOTALLY SERIOUS CASE OF DANGEROUS SEDITION (often repeating the narrative of the article the day before).
Yet once again he “somehow” forgets to mention that the president can declassify information while the vice president cannot.
This obviously misleading framing is evident in story after story. That’s why January 6th remains a “deadly insurrection” even though the only people armed were the police and the only people killed were protestors. Just today, Elizabeth Nolan Brown of “Reason” (lol) wrote this article in which she STILL lies about nearly everything regarding Hunter Biden’s laptop:
This is a provable lie. And only one of many made in the article that I sadly don’t have the room to point out before the email limit. Brown also claims that Twitter suppressed the story for only 24 hours (WHAT?), and “forgets” to mention the fact that The Twitter Files prove that government was behind the censorship. No matter, the narrative must go on, so Brown and the rest of her ilk continue to tank their credibility with obvious lies. (Side note: This is what you get when you ban me from comments on your site, Reason! I just complain here instead!)
This is why, when the Democrats float a terrible trial balloon of banning gas stoves, the media response is the same: REPUBLICANS POUNCE IN THE CULTURE WAR!
Even though nobody was fighting a war about gas stoves until the balloon got sent up into the air, the contention is obviously the fault of the Republicans who are saying “no” instead of the Democrats would want to forcefully ban you from using gas to cook.
Media presstitutes aren’t the only ones who get their talking points and run with them, however. Recently, British Member of Parliament Andrew Bridgen was suspended for what Matt Hancock (yes, that one) claimed were “disgusting, anti-Semitic, anti-vax conspiracy theories.”
The offending statement?
“As one consultant cardiologist said to me,
this is the biggest crime against humanity since the holocaust.”
The media (again) has a uniform reaction: HOLY SHIT HE COMPARED THE SHOTS TO THE HOLOCAUST EVERYBODY PILE ON AND RUN HIM OUT OF TOWN!
The obvious problem with this hot (garbage) take is that Bridgen did nothing of the sort. At the very very worst, he repeated something that somebody else told him — which even then doesn’t compare the two events, only stating the vax campaign in the biggest crime SINCE the holocaust. (Thus saying the holocaust was worse)
But how many people today believe that Bridgen is an anti-Semetic grandma killer, because he dares go against the “safe and effective” narrative that’s even now starting to crumble?
In this day and age, it’s important to remember that when you read the mainstream media, you’re not really reading NBC or CBS or ABC, you’re reading FBI and CIA and DOJ.