patrick.net

Besides, even Nicolle Wallace knows by now that the rhetoric from MSNBC and CNN led to real-world violence against Trump supporters. Chased, kicked, spit on, beaten, egged, and even shot, all because MSNBC has demonized them and convicted them as racists in the court of public opinion.

And we can’t forget the casual murder of Trump supporter Aaron "Jay" Danielson...

This level of dehumanization would ordinarily be shamed and criticized by a journalist class that still had an ounce of integrity. But they couldn’t say a thing after Trump actually won, lest they be accused of “normalizing” Hitler.

That’s why they needed a January 6th. Trump supporters just don’t do this. They don’t rage as a mob. They don’t smash windows or break down doors. They don’t storm buildings. But they needed the image of MAGA to be violent; that day had to end that badly; otherwise, nothing else they’ve done since would have gone over so easily.

The media has sold a lie about that day and has remained incurious as to how any of it could have happened, even if they’ve officially lost count of just how many paid informants by the FBI were there that day, not to mention why it took hours to call in the National Guard even after what their informants told them was about to take place way beforehand.

No psy-ops necesary where the Left is concerned. Their violence is allowable and if it borders on the really dangerous, it’s easily covered up. Don’t look over here. Look over there. How can they live with the hypocrisy of the Summer of 2020 and January 6th? Well, it’s easy. One was “mostly peaceful,” and the other was a violent insurrection. ...

Rupert Murdoch, of all people, nailed it when he stepped down as Chairman at Fox:

“Self-serving bureaucracies are seeking to silence those who would question their provenance and purpose. Elites have open contempt for those who are not members of their rarefied class. Most of the media is in cahoots with those elites, peddling political narratives rather than pursuing the truth.”

Besides, even Nicolle Wallace

This is a NEW dog - a dog named “Commander” - that was born in 2021. This is the Eleventh biting incident that we KNOW of from this young dog. In the four month period from October 2022 to January 2023, there were TEN biting “incidents” - sending one person to the hospital. They went to the hospital, AFTER medical treatment was performed at the White House. We only know this because Judicial Watch did a FOIA for that time period to discover if bites had occurred. These bites were from a one year old dog.

It is probably safe to assume that if there were TEN incidents in that four month period, there are other bites that we don’t know about.

THIS IS THE BIDEN’S SECOND DOG THAT WE KNOW OF THAT HAS TURNED EXTREMELY AGGRESSIVE.

This is not normal.

Dogs that bite without warning is usually because fear aggression.

Unlike most other types of dog aggression, fear aggression in dogs has no warning signs. Because they will react only when they think that there is no other option but to defend themselves, these dogs won’t growl, bare their teeth, or snarl before they nip at their source of fear. In most cases, this behavior is caused by a trauma in the dog’s past.

Fear aggression is often caused by abuse (for instance, a dog getting physically punished or mistreated).

The fact that this is at least the SECOND dog that has developed aggression is not a good look for the Biden family.

No one should have to work in an environment where there is a large, aggressive dog that is biting lots of people so hard that it is sending people to the hospital.

In a normal situation (err.. that means you or I or anyone else), a police report would have been filed about an aggressive dog that drew blood long ago -particularly if someone ended up in the hospital. There would have been a hearing or a court case. A county official or judge would order such a dog euthanized as soon as a history of multiple bites was documented.

Heck, such a story would have made the local newspapers. Ten dog bites in a four month period!

What is wrong with these people? Responsible pet owners do not allow their dogs to bite at least eleven people! Seriously - I hope a presidential nominee takes this up as campaign issue.

🔥 And speaking of woke Representatives, in a CNN interview this week Ayanna Pressley insisted to an increasingly incredulous Jake Tapper that the U.S. “border is secure.” Pressley is more concerned about paying illegal migrants to cross the border.




Here’s how the interview went:

PRESLEY: No doubt about it, our border is secure. And we are in the midst of a humanitarian crisis. And we have to fix a broken system, and …

TAPPER: But if you have millions of undocumented migrants coming into the country, how is the border secure?

PRESLEY: Jake, this is not a new crisis. It does require, uh, more political will and, uh, commitment, and it is a humanitarian crisis and we should treat it as such…

TAPPER: I’m not disagreeing with anything you’re saying except for the idea that the border is secure. I mean, if you have people crossing the border, it is by definition not secure. An argument worth considering is that because our border is so porous, millions of people make this unsafe journey … because the border is not secure. It just seems like such a refusal to acknowledge reality to say the border is secure when we know that millions of people are crossing the border every year.

PRESLEY: (Word salad) climate crisis. Asylum is a human right. We must do more and better. (Word salad) Republican government shutdown…

TAPPER: But would you grant me the point that the border is not secure?

PRESLEY: Jake, that is a conversation for another day.

https://themessenger.com/opinion/accessory-reporters-media-biden-allegations-hunter-biden-laptop

For some in the media, no allegation that might link President Joe Biden to unethical or even criminal behavior seems to be considered credible or worth investigating. Times have certainly changed. I remember when any hint of impropriety involving the White House administrations of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and, most especially, Donald Trump would catapult journalists into action, seeking to discover whether any of the suggested improprieties could be connected to those presidents.

I had no problem with that. In fact, I strongly support the practice because that is the role of journalists, especially investigative reporters: follow the facts to the truth, no matter the reporter’s personal feelings or biases they may harbor toward an individual or entity under investigation.

Many people believe that the ethical and professional conduct of some journalists and news organizations went out the window with the dawning of the Age of Trump. Soon after the New York City businessman declared his intention to seek the presidency in June 2015, many journalists began to openly declare their disdain, even hatred, for him. ...

Now, we have another story involving Hunter Biden — that he allegedly received $260,000 from Chinese business interests during his father’s presidential campaign, with Joe Biden’s address on the wire transfer.

Is that a “bombshell” finding, as some believe? Shouldn’t Joe Biden’s address on a wire transfer catapult journalists into action to try to connect, refute or explain any dots related to this allegation? Apparently not, for far too many journalists.

As reported by several media outlets, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) revealed that Hunter Biden received two wire transfers from Chinese nationals, worth a combined $260,000, just months after his father began his 2020 presidential campaign — and with the elder Biden’s Delaware home listed as the beneficiary address.

“Joe Biden’s abuse of public office for his family’s financial gain threatens our national security. What did the Bidens do with this money from Beijing?” Comer said. “Americans demand and deserve accountability for President Biden and the First Family’s corruption.”

Hunter Biden’s attorney says the bank transfers were loans from a private individual, and that Joe Biden’s address was used because it was on Hunter’s driver’s license at the time. He accused House Republicans of “twist(ing) the truth to mislead people to promote their fantasy political agenda.”

Comer posted on X (formerly Twitter): “The first payment of $10,000 came from a person identified as Ms. Wang Xin on July 26, 2019. The second took place about a week later on Aug. 2, 2019 for $250,000 from Li Xiang Sheng, who goes by Jonathan Li.”

Comer further noted: “When Joe Biden was vice president, he spoke on the phone and had coffee with Jonathan Li in Beijing, and later wrote a college letter of recommendation for his children.”

The Biden White House responded by attacking House Republicans. “Extreme House Republicans are pushing out half-baked innuendo and conspiracy theories that yet again show no evidence of wrongdoing by President Biden,” White House spokesman Ian Sams said in a statement provided to The Messenger, “just more discredited personal attacks on him and his family, in a sad effort to distract from their chaotic inability to govern that is leading us to the brink of a dangerous government shutdown.”

So that’s it. Like the original Hunter Laptop story, first reported by the New York Post in 2020, will much of the mainstream media take the White House at its word, or will they do their jobs for a change and investigate these latest allegations?

Comer is correct when he states that Hunter Biden's business dealings, if proven to be true, could negatively impact U.S. national security. It’s a possibility that journalists should acknowledge. And they should be willing (if not eager) to investigate, to find the truth and reveal it to the American people — whether it proves the truth of President Biden’s denials or of the Republicans’ accusations. Protecting or harming either political side should not be part of the equation.

But by seemingly turning a deaf ear and a blind eye to allegations of potential wrongdoing involving some members of the Biden family, could some members of the media be seen as figurative accessories-after-the-fact? Findlaw defines an accessory as: “The accused assisted that person with the specific purpose or design to hinder or prevent that person’s apprehension, trial, or punishment.”

Rather than doing their jobs, are some journalists choosing to hinder news investigations out of an allegiance to Biden, the Democratic Party, or their personal biases? Perhaps — but one thing surely is certain: Journalism in the Age of Trump has changed for the worse.

CBS hid the identity of a murdering thug who knifed a leftist activist on camera, even though his face was seen clearly by said camera and he is not a minor.

Why is that? After all, the SAME New York CBS station didn't have any problem identifying Marine Daniel Penny, the man who stepped in to protect NYC subway riders, properly executed a chokehold, ensured the man was on his side in the recovery position and breathing, contacted police, then was arrested and painted as a vile racist when the violent man later died.

Dr. Pierre Kory Lets Loose on Cowardly Journalists
Jan. 15th, 2023

https://twitter.com/dchomecoming/status/1611475274876571662

A Message To Captured And/Or Cowardly Journalists From Dr. Pierre Kory: "You Are Complicit!"

https://rumble.com/v248cl0-a-message-to-captured-andor-cowardly-journalists-from-dr.-pierre-kory-you-a.html

DR. PIERRE KORY: This mass delusion that we're all under through unrelenting propaganda and censorship, they're censoring all these things. If I have to read one more article of a young person dying where the word vaccine isn't even mentioned as a possibility, it's absolutely disgusting.

And, and call out all the producers, everyone who runs these media things, every journalist who goes to work and writes that article and refuses to talk about what's in everyone's mind, you know you, you are complicit. You are complicit! And you want to keep your job because you can't write the article that you know you're supposed to, and morally and ethically know you're supposed to write, which is the the truth, the facts. You give all of the information that's available. You can talk about possibilities, you can write an article where it doesn't say it is the vaccine, but you could maybe, if you had ethics or morals or honesty or integrity, or courage or conviction, you might want to write that, hey, maybe it's the vaccine.

Sixteen year-olds, it's extremely rare to die. How many have we seen die? 16, 18, 20, 22. And by the way, a 32 year-old athlete or a marathoner going out for a job shouldn't be dropping dead either. A 42 year-old is distinctly rare. Yet now it's so common we're used to it.

WTF?

Forbes Posts About ‘Unprompted Attacks On Gaza’ Then Deletes After Backlash
By Katie Jerkovich

Oct 9, 2023

https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/israeli-conflict-takes-eschatological

So, in case you missed the story the first time, Langford joined the sorority as a "trans" woman, but he's 1) a man, and 2) attracted to women.

You can read the absolutely disgusting and graphic details about Langford in our previous coverage...

Langford arguably used this loophole so he could get access to women. The women said he was a voyeur who was physically aroused around them.

...21-year-old Artemis Langford, has been "watching" the female members of the sorority house. It alleged that during one of these peeping incidents, Langford had a visible "erection."

Oh, and get this:

The judge in the case forced all the girls in the suit to go public with their complaints and reveal their identities, only to then rule against them and publicly shame them for their trouble.

And here's how WaPo covered this guy:

It wasn't what she [sic] imagined last year when she [sic] joined Kappa Kappa Gamma at the University of Wyoming, becoming the first transgender woman [sic] in the state to be inducted into a sorority. She [sic] thought she [sic] had finally found sisterhood and a place to belongafter years of shame and loneliness.

Instead, she [sic] became a target.

Yes, this piece is all about how Langford became a "target" for hate because he... checks notes ... joined a sorority as a male to get his sexual kicks in private spaces under the guise of "transgenderism."

This story is all about how "right-wing" haters (like yours truly) noticed the large man was a man and that he didn't belong in the girls' rooms, and how evil those seven women were for filing a lawsuit against the "first transgender" sorority member in Wyoming.

Keep clowning yourself, WaPo. Keep letting people know what you truly are!

NEW YORK, NY — The staff of the New York Times spent the morning patiently waiting by the computer, waiting for the call from Hamas to see what the terrorists would like to have printed on the front page today.

"No fingers on the keyboard until Hamas calls!" declared Chief Editor Joe Khan. "We don't post a single word unless we've sourced it directly from the terrorists on the ground - understood?"

At long last, the Zoom app began ringing with a phone call from a Hamas spokesman. "Hello! Allahu Ackbar! Okay, what message do you guys want out there?" asked reporter Gene Okerlund. "Yes, yes, I know you want it to say ‘Death to Israel,' but is there anything more specific you want? Any horrific atrocities you guys perpetrated by accident but want to pin on the Jews? Great! Oh yeah, we can inflate those death tolls. We'll have the whole Middle East rioting in no time!"

Sources with the newspaper confirmed this has been a longstanding arrangement between the publication and horribly evil terrorist organizations. "We have the highest standards of integrity here at the New York Times," said Mr. Khan. "If you're a terrorist, you can rest assured that we will print exactly what you tell us, word for word. No matter how absurd the lie is, no matter if the lie could literally lead to wider war and death - you can count on us to print what you say."

At publishing time, The New York Times editorial staff was preparing to go with a new front-page story titled "Israel Uses Giant Zionist Space Laser To Kill Eleventy-Billion Palestinian Orphans And Puppies."

The Wall Street Journal ran a followup to the Hamas General Hospital story yesterday headlined “U.S., Experts Say Evidence Suggests Palestinian Militants’ Rocket Hit Gaza Hospital..” After all that hoopla, it was just a friendly-fire casualty, with some cheap European cars hardest hit.




As the Hamas Hospital story continued cratering yesterday, two facts emerged from the acrid fog of war. One: surprise! The hospital was not, in fact, destroyed. Photos showed the parking lot was pretty torn up, and the hospital may have some blown-out windows. Fact Number Two: credulous Western media accepted as 100% true all the fake photos and propaganda that Hamas pumped out in the minutes and hours after the unfortunate friendly-fire accident.

The rush to believe Hamas suggested the fake war propaganda fit some kind of predetermined media narrative or something.

Maybe this kind of thing has been going on for a long time, but ever since covid, media’s constant lying has become especially obvious and irritating. Remember all the Italian covid hospital pictures with the hallways clogged by bloody gurneys that turned out to be from a 2006 soap opera or something? Corporate Media is so unreliable it’s truly a miracle — mirabilia dei — that anyone still believes anything corporate media says.

For exhibit A, as if you needed any more evidence, behold the original breathless New York Times front-page story about the allegedly-bombed Hamas General Hospital (which is still standing, see WSJ photo, above) and the evil IDF that couldn’t wait to genocide babies and dialysis patients instead of actual terrorists, who are much slipperier and harder to catch.

Look carefully at the Times’ front-page photo. Pretty impressive-looking destruction! But the problem was: that’s not the hospital. It’s not even a building resembling the hospital. It’s some other random building in southern Gaza where Hamas terrorists were hiding out, and not containing any babies or dialysis patients at all. Not even a band-aid.




The Times’ sneaky little disclaimer in the fine print did NOT make it better. It made it worse. They knew exactly what they were doing. What liars.