Left-Wing Journalists Are Truly Some of the Worst People on the Planet
There is a great line in the great movie “Chasing Amy,” where one character tells another (who happens to be gay), “I feel a hate crime coming on” after they have an amusing back and forth. While writer/director Kevin Smith would likely hate my use of that line and everything about my politics, I don’t really give a damn because it’s funny and it fits how I feel when I watch leftist journalists operate in a post-Trump world (and I’m still a fan of Smith’s work anyway).
Think what you will of Donald Trump – personally, I could use a break from hearing about and from him – no one did more to expose the hypocrisy of the left than he did, and he didn’t actually do anything to cause it except to exist. Hillary Clinton was supposed to win in 2016, breaking the “glass ceiling” and ushering in an era of GOP destruction. Instead, she lost to this “monster,” setting off Democrats, both with and without press passes, into a rage-spiral that not only hasn’t stopped, but has only sped up. That included “conservatives” who seem to resent political victories they claimed they always wanted simply because they were done on his watch.
Donald Trump didn’t make them insane, his existence simply sped up the process – pulling back the curtain, or actually pulling the curtain and the rod off the wall completely. I truly despise them.
The reason for the title is watching these people “cover” the revelations of Twitter’s internal deliberations and actions on the Hunter Biden story before the 2020 election is something to behold that should make everyone sick, I know it does me. I won’t go so far as to say it would have changed the outcome of the election, but to pretend it couldn’t have is asinine. And the people pretending otherwise deserve a swift smack across the face with the cold, dead fish of reality, if only metaphorically.
But viewers and readers of the leftist media wouldn’t have any idea of the story at all. CBS News didn’t bother covering it at all. The Washington Post and New York Times burned their calories downplaying collusion between government and soon to be government officials and the silencing of a media outlet’s major story because they’re on the other team.
The Times downplayed the whole affair, writing, “Mr. Musk and Mr. Taibbi framed the exchanges as evidence of rank censorship and pernicious influence by liberals. Many others — even some ardent Twitter critics — were less impressed, saying the exchanges merely showed a group of executives earnestly debating how to deal with an unconfirmed news report that was based on information from a stolen laptop.” (Emphasis added)
This is telling that it’s a rehash of an old line of attack on the story – that it’s “hacked” info from a “stolen laptop.” When not pretending it was the most elaborate Russian spy game ever, leftists insisted the material was “stolen” and, therefore, shouldn’t be reported on because “standards of professionalism” or something. This is an industry that dines out on leaked information, classified/personal/whatever. If it’s useful to the left’s narrative they are all over it like a rash.
Speaking of rashes, the Hunter Biden story was of no interest, so it was dismissed as “stolen,” even though the chain of custody of the laptop was never in doubt or the legality of the repair shop’s ownership after it was abandoned was irrefutable. Hunter was a junkie/drunk/prostitute frequenter, the only people who didn’t know this were people who didn’t want to know it. That a junkie wouldn’t be mindful of where their stuff is or concerned with forfeiting ownership of that property, especially when they have plenty of money and don’t need that property to sell to buy more drugs, surprises no one. Still, leftists pretended the idea that it was abandoned was insane.
The evidence of the Biden family’s involvement and benefitting from Hunter’s businesses was unhelpful and needed to be buried. When CBS News finally got around to “verifying” the laptop was real, their 5-minute story explaining how they contacted computer experts who (pretty easily) verified it’s real involved no mentions of any of the content on the laptop and no follow up reporting on it either. It’s gross.
Worse was the way MSNBC treated it. Watch this segment on the Symone Sanders show (I don’t know what it’s called, nor do I care) with Michael Steele, MSNBC’s token “Republican” (challenge: find one issue on which Steele is still conservative on. I’ll wait.) It is clear from watching it that neither host nor guest know anything about the story as neither remotely address details. What they do have is talking points, likely fed to them by producers via the DNC. I’m embarrassed for them.
If NBC News had standards everyone involved in this segment would be fired. It is in no way designed to inform an audience, it is designed to discourage the audience from consuming anything related to the story – meant to prevent curiosity or investigation and perpetuate ignorance. You can disagree with the conclusions of what the story means, but to be as stupid and lazy as Steele is (to say nothing of his wholesale sell-out of everything he once professed to believe) would embarrass a kindergartener. But Mike is just happy to hammer his easy money checks. Gross.
There isn’t a single left-wing outlet that did any honest reporting on the story. Armies of flying monkeys – Ben Collins, Brandy Zadrozny, etc. – were dispatched to make sure their audiences stayed, unquestioningly, on the Democrat thought plantation. Like the entirely to of the Biden family business scandals (how did a family with no skills or abilities make so many millions in industries they had no knowledge of, but political influence over?), no efforts were spent trying to refute the facts, only to discourage anyone from learning about them. It’s not “I read these documents so you don’t have to,” it’s “You don’t need to read these documents at all, nor do you need to investigate anything related to this story. Trust me, there’s nothing there.” If journalism had an opposite, that would be it.
If “journalism” were a protected class (not just a favored one by the left), the thoughts I have toward the people earning large sums of money allegedly practicing it would be a hate crime, were they acted on. As it stands, they aren’t practicing journalism, they engage in protection. They are engaged in actively keeping their audiences ignorant out of fear they might, with access to unapproved information, draw conclusions inconvenient to the power establishment. They’ve gone from “We speak truth to power” to “We protect the powerful from the truth.” It’s a hell of thing to watch and absolutely justifies my contempt for all of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment