I got a couple emails this weekend regarding the supposed “BIG REVEAL” about allegations against Democratic VP candidate Tim Walz. By nature I’m skeptical of anybody who says “I HAVE REALLY HUGE NEWS I WILL ANNOUCE LATER”, and the poster in question was the same one who promised (and failed to provide) proof that Kamala got questions before the presidential debate. So going in I was already skeptical, but when the ‘receipts’ finally started dropping, my BS meter went off immediately. (The thread in question in case you don’t follow the online drama.)
Although there were some interesting nuggets buried in the thread, they were already ‘public’ ahead of the thread (and therefore the perfect nugget of truth to bury in the BS). When confronted with inconsistencies in his documents, the poster simply blocked questioners.
Obviously this is not how journalism is done.
For my healthy skepticism, I was called all manner of names and accused of being a bot. “The left doesn’t care if allegations are true!” they yelled at me — and I agree with that.
It’s one of the reasons I left the left to begin with — and I’m not interested in replacing left-leaning reality deniers with right-wing reality deniers.
Yet people were EXTREMELY upset with this fairly standard level of skepticism. “YOU’RE GOING TO FEEL STUPID WHEN THE PROOF DROPS!” they shrieked. But….no I won’t because actual proof would change the equation — and I can’t imagine a single subscriber caring what I thought about the story BEFORE the proof dropped.
And now a couple days later — predictably, some might say — the ‘proof’ is nowhere to be found and the original poster has gone completely silent.
So what are we left with? A thread full of incredibly disgusting, vile accusations of child molestation against a Democratic VP candidate — with no actual proof — that (mainly because of how it was broken down and dripped out) has tens of millions of views. And thanks to the law of really large numbers, when you tens of millions of eyeballs on a topic, some of them are going to be crazy. Some of them are going to full-throatedly admit they 100% believe the accusations. And many of them probably do.
But that’s not how the censors are going to spin it. They’re already looking for any excuse to clamp down on ‘harmful’ speech — ESPECIALLY if that speech is related to the election. Sharing and believing the story gives the censors MORE ammunition.
Just something to think about as we navigate the last few weeks before the election.
Speaking of navigating the last few weeks before the election, the Kamala Harris doom loop has progressed to the point that she agreed to be interviewed by FOX’s Bret Baier.
The conversation predictably started with immigration — and from the answers Harris gave, you might think SHE was the border hawk. (Bonus points for ‘transnational gangs trafficking in drugs, guns, and human beings!)
Kamala Harris is very, very concerned about the possibility that Donald Trump would lock up his political opponents. Steve Bannon unavailable for comment.
Bret finally got around to asking the question on everybody’s mind — when did Kamala Harris know that Joe Biden was unfit to be president? (Even I did not expect this answer.)
The full interview is below:
Overall I was mostly impressed with Baier — he was certainly prepared, but he talked over Harris too much. I remain unimpressed with Harris. In fact, this interview was so bad that she might actually be forced to appear on Joe Rogan’s podcast.
Anybody want to guess the end result of that appearance?
Finally, it turns out that Liz Cheney was secretly communicating with witnesses set to appear before the January 6th Committee.
Gee, I wonder why she would be so worried about a Trump presidency that she’d endorse Kamala. This goes for every single person involved in covering up what actually happened on January 6th. (Julie Kelly just released the most comprehensive timeline yet of January 6th National Guard requests. It does not look good for the people who have been shrieking about insurrection for the last 3 1/2 years.)
Like what you read? Buy me a coffee on Ko-fi — no subscription required!
Gbill7 brought my attention to this Walz accusation video. What do we think, Screamers? (I suggest slowing it down.)
The good news for you -- I didn't have time to type out my price gouging rant.
The bad news for you -- I eventually WILL have time to type out my price gouging rant.
So.. it’s okay for her to interrupt and talk over Brett and say “ let me finish”.. but it’s not okay for him to cut off her logorrhea…. If he had not stopped her, she would have spent 20 minutes on the first question!!