patrick.net

"The information provided to my office involves concerns about the FBI's receipt and use of derogatory information relating to Hunter Biden, and the FBI's false portrayal of acquired evidence as disinformation,"

Ian Miles Cheong
@stillgray
12h
Reuters is the PR arm of the WEF, in case you didn’t already know.

College swimmer Riley Gaines has fired back at the media for claiming that she dodged a kiss from President Donald Trump after he called her onstage during his CPAC speech.

Gaines is a former college swimmer for the University of Kentucky.

She recently spoke out against rules that allow biological male transgender athletes to compete in female sports.

After she appeared onstage during Trump’s speech, the media claimed that Gaines felt “uncomfortable” in the 45th president’s company.

The swimmer has responded by shooting down those claims as “propaganda.”

In a post on Instagram, Gaines blasted the media for pushing a false narrative:

“What an honor to be called to share a stage with the 45th President of the United States, Donald Trump.

“Less than a once-in-a-lifetime experience!

“Pro-woman & pro-fairness is not anti-trans.

“I truly can’t even believe this is a topic for debate.

“It’s simple. Women should not be forced to share a changing space & compete against males with biological advantages that will never be completely diminished regardless of hormones taken.

“If you’re delusional enough to think fairness for women is considered transphobic, you’re simply misogynistic.

“Also worth noting that this is a prime example of the left media pushing propaganda to fit their narrative.

“In no way, shape, or form did I ‘dodge a kiss’ from Trump nor was I uncomfortable on that stage with him at any point in time.

“I slightly turned my head so I could hear what he was saying to me.

“Proof that not everything you read is factual.

“But keep clutching at straws, it’s almost comical,” she said.

And true to form, they did so again Wednesday, tweeting out about the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago raid but then quickly deleting it after complaints. Democracy dies without bravery or something. The original tweet contained the headline: “Garland vowed to depoliticize Justice. Then the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago.” This headline is entirely accurate. Garland did in fact vow to depoliticize the Justice Department, and the FBI did in fact raid Mar-a-Lago.

But nope. Can’t criticize the Biden Administration. Evidently, editors realized that the headline might be construed as critical so they changed it to: “FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago lands Merrick Garland in a political firestorm.”

Ex-NYT Reporter Blows Whistle: ‘Check with Senator Schumer before We Run It’

The stabbing of Sir Salman Rushdie in New York State shocked the world last Friday, with expressions of condemnation and solidarity being issued across the West. Not though, it seems, at NYT Towers where, four days on, there has not been a single opinion piece by one of its many writers decrying the attack on the British author or defending free speech.

That failure to stand up for the right to publish is shocking enough but especially when one considers that the assault occurred in New York itself. As Josh Glancy of the Sunday Times of London wrote: “You don’t have to like Rushdie or The Satanic Verses to see that this issue of free speech is — or should be — a core liberal and indeed progressive tenet. Someone trying to stab him out of existence is surely worthy of comment.”

Apparently not. Still, at least they had space for such gems as “The Joys of Swimming While Fat” and “I Still Believe in the Power of Sexual Freedom.” Talk about solidarity.

James Melville
@JamesMelville
19h
Bill Gates has enjoyed something of a free pass in corporate media. But considering the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has made over $300 million worth of donations to fund media projects, it’s easy to see why the media won’t bite the hand that feeds them

Bill Gates Pumped $319M into Media Outlets, Probe Finds

NEW YORK, NY - Amid heavy criticism of recent hire Sarah Jeong to the editorial board of The New York Times, the newspaper announced Monday morning it would be changing its name to The Double Standard in order to better reflect the two sets of standards it uses to judge whether or not an offensive statement is racist.

The change took effect this morning, with the name serving as a helpful reminder for the wildly inconsistent benchmarks used to judge people of differing worldviews and races.

"See, we aggressively attack racism in all its forms all day long, but then we went and hired a woman who tweeted extremely racist things about white people," wrote James Bennet, Editorial Page Editor, in a piece for the Standard explaining the name change. "To top it all off, we defended her and said we knew about the tweets going in, excusing her racist comments as simply satire, or just fighting fire with fire or something."

"There was a lot of confusion over that whole thing. So we decided to just come right out and identify our ever-shifting double standard for readers right in the title of our esteemed paper."

The paper will also now include a helpful tag on each article, identifying whether or not the subject of a piece is being held to the set of standards the paper uses for liberals, or the much different set of standards the paper uses for conservatives, religious people, and "really anyone not on board with a far-left agenda."

At publishing time, the newly christened Double Standard had begun considering changing its name to The Quadruple Standard.

Getting back to the core point. FearPorn is a business model. CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, NYT, Atlantic Monthly, Politico etc. all gets clicks and advertising revenue by broadcasting or printing articles that cause people to be afraid. And third party actors - large corporations including Pharma, political parties, and even transnational organizations both profit from Fear and weaponize it to advance political, financial and social agendas. Hence the classic stereotype of the AM paper and the PM broadcast news; “If it bleeds, it leads”.

The same is true with Rage. Promoting Rage is also a business model. We use phrases like “Shock Jock” to characterize those who employ this business model. Another one is “conspiracy theorists”. I am sure you are aware of others. But what it comes down to is that playing to base emotions such as Fear, Rage (and also Sex) can be very profitable business models in the media and information sector - which includes books and publishing as well as broadcast and “new” alternative (social) media. By manipulating your emotions, profit and other benefits can be squeezed out of any and all of us.

more evidence on media as an organ of "the party"




the more lights you turn on, the more cockroaches you find scurrying for cover.

but the time to be truly frightened is not when they see you and scatter. the time to be afraid is when they all turn around and hiss and tell you to get out of your own kitchen.

and at a certain point, the infestation becomes so thorough that they will and the media headlines will read “reactionary human oppressor seeks to deny cockroach reparations.”

this is pure and simple fascism. “the party” has decided what can be spoken and spoken of and is using the influence of a vast and muscular regulatory and enforcement state to not only shape but to compel corporate practice.

they seek to skirt the first amendment by outsourcing its abrogation through co-optation and intimidation and the meetings were structured and regular.

this is a full blown program, not an ad hoc happenstance.

WASHINGTON, DC — The Washington Post headquarters saw an unexpected intrusion this week after a real-live journalist became disoriented and mistakenly entered their building.

"You're looking to follow the truth wherever it takes you? Oh, you poor thing, you must be lost. We only do state-approved fake news here," said the receptionist to the confused journalist. "I'll have security help escort you to a real news organization." The normally bubbly receptionist for the building had given a wary greeting upon seeing the bright-eyed intruder, but as soon as the passionate journalist began spilling his soul's desire to seek out the truth and publish it to maintain a free and independent populace, the receptionist became condescending to the "sweet, naive simpleton."

While The Washington Post broke some of American history's most pivotal investigative stories as recently as the 1970s, it has recently become better known for publishing stories leaked to them by corrupt bureaucrats to help bring down political enemies. The confusion was cleared up when people started laughing during the lost journalist's rapturous speech about speaking truth to power and investigating corruption at the highest levels of government.

Sources confirm that a helpful staffer explained that reporters like Felicia Sonmez, Taylor Lorenz, and Amber Heard would be welcome to have their articles published without any editorial oversight, but that investigative journalists who wanted to expose lies and corruption would risk tarnishing the publication's stellar record of covering up stories critical of the powerful people paying their salaries.

At publishing time, the lost journalist started a Substack newsletter to expose government corruption to his 12 readers.

Big Tech Tries To Censor That Trump Helped Saved Lives on 9/11

https://nitter.pussthecat.org/UncleNestor22/status/1569401145071648769

https://nitter.pussthecat.org/UncleNestor22/status/1569401145071648769