Category Archives: Media

Holding the “Scandal-Free” Obama Administration Accountable, by Jon Hall

Here is a helpful compendium of the Obama scandals, and it’s extensive. From Jon Hall at fmshooter.com:

Throughout Obama’s two terms, the subservient and corporate Mainstream Media voraciously praised the “transparent” and “scandal-free” administration at every turn they could muster. CNN, MSNBC, and the usual ilk of cable news mocked and belittled conservative personalities and opinion; shaming Republicans and any right-leaning citizens into a corner. Don’t believe me? In 2010, The Telegraph called Obama out for labeling voters on the other side of the aisle – conservatives – as stupid:

Boiled down, the new Obama message to Americans is: you’re too stupid to overcome your fears… This year, Democrats have embraced with gusto the notion that Republicans, and by extension anyone thinking of voting for them, are dimwits.

For Obama’s eight years, the American public was misled and distracted from a sprawling, historic saga of corruption streaming from the White House.

Is it any wonder the entirely bought-out Mainstream Media attempted to tout the Obama admin as pristine and accountable when Obama’s own efforts to control the media were the “most aggressive” since Richard Nixon? Exposed during the 2016 elections, a number of mainstream journalists were found to have colluded with the Clinton campaign; a morally-devoid action that originated and was made the norm under Obama. Now that the dust has settled and President Trump is whittling away at erasing Obama’s legacy from history, it’s easy to take an impartial and fact-based look at the “scandal-free” Obama administration…

Let’s begin with the better, well-known ones, shall we?


Benghazi

With how absurdly negligent (or willfully malicious) the Obama admin’s actions during the immediate aftermath of Benghazi was, it’s hard to believe this scandal was allowed to quietly fade away.

In spite of eyewitness accounts, Obama’s State Department – run by none other than Hillary Clinton – blamed the infamous Benghazi attack against two U.S. government facilities on an anti-Muslim video… but Clinton said differently in private to the Egyptian prime minister in a phone call:

We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack — not a protest.

No matter how badly the Mainstream Media and Obama administration tried to craft the narrative; years later, only the facts remain. The administration told a different story publicly than they did privately; Clinton’s State Department even ignored pleas for additional security in Benghazi. Four Americans died in “a planned attack” and the response of the administration was to cover it up and lie to save face during election season.

Being among the biggest scandal of the Obama administration, the lives lost in Benghazi vividly showcases the careless and reprehensible behavior top Democrats Obama and Clinton had in regard to human life in order to win the Presidency.

To continue reading: Holding the “Scandal-Free” Obama Administration Accountable 


Advertisements

Germany: Full Censorship Now Official Courts Rewrite History, by Judith Bergman

Facespook! Social Media Giant Becomes Arm of US intel, by Finian Cunningham

Social media is becoming as corrupt and coopted by the government as mainstream media. From Finian Cunningham at RT News via lewrockwell.com:

Facebook, the world’s top social media platform, is reportedly seeking to hire hundreds of employees with US national security clearance licenses.

Purportedly with the aim of weeding out “fake news” and “foreign meddling” in elections.

If that plan, reported by Bloomberg, sounds sinister, that’s because it is. For what it means is that people who share the same worldview as US intelligence agencies, the agencies who formulate classified information, will have a direct bearing on what millions of consumers on Facebook are permitted to access.

It’s as close to outright US government censorship on the internet as one can dare to imagine, and this on a nominally independent global communication network. Your fun-loving place “where friends meet.”

Welcome to Facespook!

As Bloomberg reports: “Workers with such [national security] clearances can access information classified by the US government. Facebook plans to use these people – and their ability to receive government information about potential threats – in the company’s attempt to search more proactively for questionable social media campaigns ahead of elections.”

A Facebook spokesman declined to comment, but the report sounds credible, especially given the context of anti-Russia hysteria.

Over the past year, since the election of Donald Trump as US president, the political discourse has been dominated by “Russia-gate” – the notion that somehow Kremlin-controlled hackers and news media meddled in the election. The media angst in the US is comparable to the Red Scare paranoia of the 1950s during the Cold War.

Facebook and other US internet companies have been hauled in front of Congressional committees to declare what they know about alleged “Russian influence campaigns.” Chief executives of Facebook, Google, and Twitter, are due to be questioned again next month by the same panels.

To continue reading; Facespook! Social Media Giant Becomes Arm of US intel

A CNN Smear, by John Stossel

In case there was any doubt, more proof that CNN is one scuzzball of a TV network. From John Stossel at theburningplatform.com:

Did you happen to catch CNN’s latest smear?

Anderson Cooper’s show recently featured a “two-part exclusive” that claims Donald Trump’s EPA director had conspired with the CEO of a mining company to “withdraw environmental restrictions” so the company could dig “the largest open pit mine in the world in an extremely sensitive watershed in wild Alaska.”

The report was enough to horrify any caring person. CNN showed beautiful pictures of colorful salmon swimming in Bristol Bay, and the reporter intoned dramatically, “EPA staffers were shocked to receive this email obtained exclusively by CNN which says ‘we have been directed by the administrator to withdraw restrictions’ … (P)rotection of that pristine area was being removed.”

No! A “pristine” area and gorgeous salmon were about to be obliterated by a mine!

I would have believed it, except I happened to report on that mine a couple of years ago.

I knew that the real scandal was not EPA director Scott Pruitt’s decision to “withdraw the restrictions”; it was what President Obama’s EPA did to the company’s mining proposal in the first place.

Zealots at the EPA had conspired with rich environmental activists to kill the mine before its environmental impact statement could even be submitted. This was unprecedented.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform later concluded: “EPA employees had inappropriate contact with outside groups and failed to conduct an impartial, fact-based review.”

Now, appropriately, Pruitt undid that censorship of science.

But CNN, implying devious secrecy said, “according to multiple sources, he made that decision without a briefing from any of EPA’s scientists.”

Shocking!

But Pruitt didn’t require opinions from scientists. He didn’t approve the mine. He didn’t make a science decision. He simply followed the law and allowed a company to submit a proposal.

Also, despite CNN’s repeated depictions of salmon on Bristol Bay, it turns out that the proposed mine would not even be on the Bay. It would not even be 10 miles away, or 20 miles away, or even 50 miles. The proposed mine would be about 100 miles away.

Did CNN mention that? No. Never. We asked CNN why. And why not point out that the mining company is just being allowed to start the EPA’s long and arduous environmental review? They didn’t get back to us.

To continue reading: A CNN Smear

Is it Wrong to Question the Official Story When Tragedy Strikes? by Joe Jarvis

A refusal to ask questions is a refusal to think. From Joe Jarvis at thedailybell.com:

The media says, “Jump.” And the public responds in unison, “How high?”

“As high as you ever have jumped before, except maybe after 9/11, or the Kennedy assassination.”

Of course, when there is news, it should be reported. Today it is reported sensationally, as entertainment. Is it meant to inform, or induce?

Which came first, the media’s obsession with violence, or the public demand for violence? In the 1990’s as violent crime in America dropped, the media filled more and more time slots with stories about violence.

By the end of the 90’s the public was clamoring for the government to do somethingabout what they assumed was a rising trend in violent crime.

Was that orchestrated? The government certainly benefits from a hysterical public begging them to help. It certainly gives the government an important role in the daily life of an average citizen. But this alone doesn’t mean that it was a conspiracy. Acknowledging that the government benefitted from the media’s overreporting of crime is not the same as suggesting the government actively pushed the media to do so.

But why not wonder? Exercise those thought processes.

It is a known fact that thousands of journalists were at one time on the payroll of the CIA. It was called Operation Mockingbird, and agents would place false stories in publications like the New York Times, and Time.

So when it comes to the case of the fake 90’s crime wave, it makes sense to wonder if a similar program still exists. The courts have ruled that FBI agents can legally impersonate journalists in the course of an investigation.

To continue reading: Is it Wrong to Question the Official Story When Tragedy Strikes?

This Is How Tyranny Rises and Freedom Falls: The Experiment in Freedom Is Failing, by John W. Whitehead

US government tyranny is staging an upside breakout. From John W. Whitehead at rutherford.org:

It is easy to be distracted right now by the circus politics that have dominated the news headlines for the past year, but don’t be distracted.

Don’t be fooled, not even a little.

We’re being subjected to the oldest con game in the books, the magician’s sleight of hand that keeps you focused on the shell game in front of you while your wallet is being picked clean by ruffians in your midst.

This is how tyranny rises and freedom falls.

What characterizes American government today is not so much dysfunctional politics as it is ruthlessly contrived governance carried out behind the entertaining, distracting and disingenuous curtain of political theater. And what political theater it is, diabolically Shakespearean at times, full of sound and fury, yet in the end, signifying nothing.

We are being ruled by a government of scoundrels, spies, thugs, thieves, gangsters, ruffians, rapists, extortionists, bounty hunters, battle-ready warriors and cold-blooded killers who communicate using a language of force and oppression.

The U.S. government now poses the greatest threat to our freedoms.

More than terrorism, more than domestic extremism, more than gun violence and organized crime, even more than the perceived threat posed by any single politician, the U.S. government remains a greater menace to the life, liberty and property of its citizens than any of the so-called dangers from which the government claims to protect us.

This has been true of virtually every occupant of the White House in recent years.

Unfortunately, nothing has changed for the better since Donald Trump ascended to the Oval Office.

Indeed, Trump may be the smartest move yet by the powers-that-be to keep the citizenry divided and at each other’s throats, because as long as we’re busy fighting each other, we’ll never manage to present a unified front against tyranny in any form.

The facts speak for themselves.

We’re being robbed blind by a government of thieves. Americans no longer have any real protection against government agents empowered to seize private property at will. For instance, police agencies under the guise of asset forfeiture laws are taking Americans’ personal property based on little more than a suspicion of criminal activity and keeping it for their own profit and gain.

To continue reading: This Is How Tyranny Rises and Freedom Falls: The Experiment in Freedom Is Failing

Why Have Investigations of Wall Street Disappeared from Corporate Media? by Pam Martens and Russ Martens

The corporate media, most notably the Wall Street Journal, has no interest in investigating Wall Street. From Pam Martens and Russ Martens at wallstreetonparade.com:

Hurricanes, wildfires, the multiple investigations of Russia’s involvement in the 2016 presidential election and the calamity-du-jour in the Trump White House are gobbling up an outsized share of digital and print news pages at corporate media. What’s gone missing is intrepid, in-depth investigations of Wall Street’s latest scam against the public – even at corporate media outlets purporting to focus on Wall Street.

Consider today’s front page of the Wall Street Journal: there’s an article on health care; central banks and stimulus; Iraqi forces and Kurdish fighters; how Blackstone Group is on the prowl for retail investors; and a curious report on long-haul truckers cooking up jambalaya and Thai peanut pork (you can’t make this stuff up). There is nothing about an investigation of a mega Wall Street bank; the dangers these behemoths continue to pose to taxpayers and the U.S. economy; nothing about Wall Street’s return to its jaded ways that led to the epic financial crash of 2008 – despite the fact that all of this is happening and timely and the public has a right to be reading about it in a paper whose beat is ostensibly Wall Street.

Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. bought Dow Jones & Company in late 2007 after a century of ownership by the Bancroft family. The purchase just happened to come at a time when the Federal Reserve had secretly begun to funnel what would end up totaling $16 trillionin cumulative low-cost loans to bail out the Wall Street mega banks and their foreign counterparts.

In 2011, the Pew Research Center released a study on how front page coverage had changed since the News Corp. purchase of the Wall Street Journal. Pew found that “coverage has clearly moved away from what had been the paper’s core mission under previous ownership—covering business and corporate America.  In the past three and a half years, front-page coverage of business is down about one-third from what it had been in 2007, the last year of the old ownership regime.”

What is not down but “up” at the Wall Street Journal is its defense of the Wall Street banking giants’ indefensible practices on its editorial and opinion pages.

To continue reading: Why Have Investigations of Wall Street Disappeared from Corporate Media?