Paul Craig Roberts usually calls legacy media operatives “presstitutes,” but in this article he also uses “media whores.” The former is clever, but the latter has the impact of a direct hit to the jaw. Let’s take a poll among SLL readers. Which do you prefer? Leave your vote in the comments. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:
Earlier today I demonstrated the laughable and ludicrus mistakes made by a BBC “Reality Check Team” tasked with covering up the Democrat vote fraud in Michigan. See here: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2020/11/05/press-prostitutes-make-fools-of-themselves-trying-to-cover-up-vote-fraud-for-democrats/
Now the presstitutes at USA Today have come up with a totally different coverup for the same fraud.
The earlier BBC coverup reported that election officials said they had made a “data entry error.” This error, said to have been corrected, was the way the BBC explained away a sudden 138,000 votes for Biden in the early hours of the morning when no one was watching.
I blew this lie out of the water.
So the presstitutes had to find another coverup.
The new coverup lie from USA Today is that there was no “data entry error” and no election officials admitting to one: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/04/fact-check-typo-led-false-post-michigan-votes-biden/6164385002/ According to the USA Today coverup story, the added votes never happened. Instead, there was “an apparent typo on a lone national media site,” and this typo was picked up by social media and then by President Trump.
In other words, the USA Today presstitutes are saying that the BBC fact check team is incompetent and unreliable. Why prefer the USA Today’s coverup story over the BBC’s coverup story?
Which coverup story do we believe? The answer is: Neither. Both are lies.
