In yet another example of the broadcast networks covering up the degree of corruption in the Russia investigation, neither ABC, CBS, nor NBC saw fit to cover the Wednesday testimony of former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates before the Senate Judiciary Committee. In her tele-hearing, Yates admitted to Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) that disgraced and fired FBI Director James Comey went “rogue” in the investigation of former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn. Instead of reporting on Yates’s shocking testimony, all three networks boasted how former Vice President Joe Biden decided to give his convention speech from the safety of his basement in Delaware. In stark contrast, Fox News Channel’s The Story and correspondent Gillian Turner weren’t afraid to inform viewers of what Yates said. “Chairman Lindsey Graham dove in headfirst, grilling Sally Yates about that now-infamous Oval Office meeting with President Obama and FBI Director James Comey on January 5, 2017,” Turner noted before playing this soundbite of Graham getting Yates to spill about Comey: GRAHAM: Did Comey go rogue? YATES: You could use that term, yes. GRAHAM: Finally. “That wasn't the only criticism Yates had for Comey,” Turner added. “She claims he blindsided her by failing to share information about Michael Flynn, a key figure in Crossfire Hurricane and his conversations with the Russian ambassador.” And according to Yates, “This was the first I had heard of the calls between Flynn and Kislyak. I was really surprised....I was frankly irritated with Director Comey.” The former Deputy AG also argued that they had a legitimate reason to investigate Flynn, because he was allegedly undermining President Obama. “In a boost for committee Republicans, Yates confirmed the Steele dossier, a key piece of evidence used to approve a 2016 FISA warrant for Carter Page was deeply flawed,” Turner reported. And again, the “W” went to Graham: YATES: If I had known it contained incorrect information I certainly wouldn’t have signed. GRAHAM: And do you agree with me it did contain incorrect information? YATES: I know that now based on the Horowitz report. This was a repeat of what happened late last year when these same networks blacked out how Comey conceded the FBI had deceived the FISA courts with their warrant applications. In wrapping up her report, Turner hinted that viewers should look forward to more such hearings because, “Chairman Graham has the authority to summon dozens more witnesses over the coming weeks and months.” This network suppression of the Yates hearing occurred the same evening as their cover-up of Biden’s latest racist comments. These two examples were the prefect evidence to prove that the media were protecting Biden’s candidacy while making sure President Trump received no benefit from the truth. This suppression of the truth was made possible because of lucrative sponsorships from Fisher Investments on ABC, HomeAdviser on CBS, and Allstate on NBC. Their contact information is linked if you want to tell them about what they’re funding. CBS Evening News has also asked that people text anchor Norah O’Donnell at this number: (202) 217-1107. The transcript is below, click "expand" to read: Fox News Channel’s The Story August 5, 2020 7:30:11 p.m. Eastern SANDRA SMITH: Former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates facing a grilling today from the Republican-led Senate Judiciary Committee trying to get to the bottom of the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation. Yates was pressed over her time in the Obama administration, FISA warrants, the interview of Michael Flynn, and even her opinion of President Trump. [Cuts to video] SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): You don't like Donald Trump, do you? SALLY YATES: I don't like – I don’t respect the manner in which he has carried out the presidency. KENNEDY: Okay. You despise Donald Trump, don't you? YATES: No, I don't despise anyone, Senator. [Cuts back to live] SMITH: For his part, the President weighing in earlier, tweeting in part, quote, "Sally Yates has zero credibility." Fox News correspondent Gillian Turner has this story, from Washington. [Cuts to video] GILLIAN TURNER: Chairman Lindsey Graham dove in headfirst, grilling Sally Yates about that now-infamous Oval Office meeting with President Obama and FBI Director James Comey on January 5, 2017. SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Did Comey go rogue? YATES: You could use that term, yes. GRAHAM: Finally. TURNER: That wasn't the only criticism Yates had for Comey. She claims he blindsided her by failing to share information about Michael Flynn, a key figure in Crossfire Hurricane and his conversations with the Russian ambassador. YATES: This was the first I had heard of the calls between Flynn and Kislyak. I was really surprised. [Transition] I was frankly irritated with Director Comey. TURNER: Yates claim Comey never offered a full explanation and she saved her harshest criticism for Flynn himself, accusing him of neutering President Obama's foreign policy towards Russia, and insisting that the FBI was right to interrogate him. YATES: What we were about was that he was undercutting Obama policy and then he was covering it up. TURNER: But it was the tale of two hearings. Democrats and Republicans failing to agree even on what they were supposed to be investigating. SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D-CA): The Mueller investigation uncovered more than 120 contacts between the Trump campaign and individuals linked to Russia. Revealing that the Trump campaign knew about, welcomed, and expected it would benefit electorally from Russia's interference. TURNER: In a boost for committee Republicans, Yates confirmed the Steele dossier, a key piece of evidence used to approve a 2016 FISA warrant for Carter Page was deeply flawed. YATES: If I had known it contained incorrect information I certainly wouldn’t have signed. GRAHAM: And do you agree with me it did contain incorrect information? YATES: I know that now based on the Horowitz report. [Cuts back to live] TURNER: Looking ahead, sources here on Capitol Hill say to expect more Crossfire Hurricane hearings. Chairman Graham has the authority to summon dozens more witnesses over the coming weeks and months. Sandra. SMITH: Gillian, thank you.
On Wednesday, New York Times White House correspondent and MSNBC contributor Annie Karni sounded the alarm, expressing dismay about the state of press freedoms because....The Daily Signal served as the pool outlet for Vice President Mike Pence’s visit to Tampa? And that’s not a typo. Karni actually wrote a 705-word meltdown about how Daily Signal executive editor, Heritage Foundation VP of communications, and CNS News alum Rob Bluey flew on Air Force Two. But wait, there’s more! Karni admitted that Bluey’s reports contained “nothing openly partisan,” he only went because no one else had taken the spot, and it “was not the first time someone representing Daily Signal served as a pool reporter” for the President or Vice President. Not surprisingly, liberal journalists threw fits when Bluey’s colleague Fred Lucas (another CNS News alum) filled in. Nonetheless, “Member of Conservative Think Tank Takes On Reporter Duties on Air Force Two” took readers into this supposedly awful, new world (click “expand”): WASHINGTON — When Vice President Mike Pence traveled to an event in Florida on Wednesday, he was not accompanied on his plane by a member of the White House press corps, as is typically the case. Instead, seated on Air Force Two in a space normally reserved for a White House reporter was the vice president for communications at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that has helped the Trump administration fill jobs throughout the government and influenced policy decisions. The foundation official, Robert B. Bluey, is also the executive editor of The Daily Signal, a news site run by the foundation to offer conservative commentary and analysis. On Wednesday, he joined Mr. Pence, who spoke at a “Faith in America” event in Clearwater. Mr. Bluey filled the role of the pool reporter, one of the journalists who travel with the president or the vice president, filing reports on their movements and activities throughout the day, and providing the rest of the White House press corps with a first cut of any news of the day. The White House has increasingly nurtured relationships with conservative news outlets, including One America News Network, an organization that has been granted special permission to send a reporter to the briefing room despite restrictions put in effect by the White House Correspondents’ Association to keep reporters safe during the coronavirus pandemic. And the administration has long elevated niche outlets that cover it more favorably, while the president has systematically cast doubt on mainstream news organizations by referring to them as “fake news” and the “enemy of the people.” The horror! Between Karni, her colleagues, and liberal media defenders like Brian Stelter, chances are slim to none that they would see any issue if this were a reporter for outlets like the Daily Kos, Huffington Post, The Nation, The Root, or the Washington Blade (an LGBTQ paper). And in that last graph of the excerpt, Karni spilled 88 words talking about completely unrelated topics to the Daily Signal: One America News Network, OANN’s seating at White House briefings, and Trump’s use of the phrase “enemy of the people.” Furthermore, the two outlets are different on the basis of the Daily Signal being connected to the Heritage Foundation whereas OANN is its own entity. Talk about a lack of focus, Annie! Karni griped that Bluey doesn’t “cover the White House” even though he’s “been part of the White House Correspondents’ Association since 2016” and, by his own admission, Daily Signal reporters “maintain strong editorial standards and practices to ensure our credibility as a news outlet.” After noting that “[t]here was nothing openly partisan about Mr. Bluey’s pool reports,” Karni ominously declared that Bluey’s work of journalism was “as much a story about covering the Trump administration during the pandemic as it is about partisanship in the news media.” Oh, why would that be, Annie? Thankfully, she gave away the game in the next few sentences (click “expand”): There is often a clamor to cover the Trump show and travel aboard Air Force One, where the president often walks to the back of the plane and sometimes breaks news to the small group of reporters traveling with him. Filling seats to cover Mr. Pence, who does not make news by design, is often a tougher sell. And it has only become more difficult to find reporters willing to travel with him when it also means taking on a greater risk of contracting the coronavirus. Multiple members of the White House press corps who have been reporting from the White House or traveling with the president have tested positive for the virus. The White House Correspondents’ Association put out a call for reporters earlier in the week seeking a volunteer to cover Mr. Pence’s day trip to Florida as part of the pool. When the organization was unable to fill the slot, Mr. Pence’s office chose the print pooler instead, according to someone familiar with the process. And when she asked Pence’s office for comment, communications director Katie Miller spit fire, telling the liberal hack that her team “has been working with local reporters and specialty outlets to ensure that all outlets have the ability and access to cover the vice president’s events...Are you worried about conservative bias in the media?” Predictably, a number of liberal journalists commented on, liked, quote-tweeted, retweeted, or tweeted Karni’s story to petulantly kvetch and moan like Mean Girls. They included: Kevin Baron (Defense One), John Harwood (CNN), Joshua Holland (The Nation), Andrew Howard (Arizona State’s State Press), Ben Jacobs (New York Magazine), Josh Mankiewicz (NBC), Meridith McGraw (Politico), Brian Rhoads (South China Morning Post), Nick Riccardi (AP), Debra Saunders (Las Vegas Review-Journal), Stelter, Dan Sweeney (South Florida Sun Sentinel), Neil Vigdor (New York Times), Tom Weber (Time magazine), Adam Weinstein (New Republic), and Adam Wren (Politico Magazine).
Both Twitter and Facebook acted quickly Wednesday night to remove a video of President Trump speaking on Fox News about the coronavirus’ effects on children. The social media sites said the content violated their policies on COVID-19 misinformation. On Wednesday morning, President Trump called into Fox & Friends and said “schools should open” because children are “almost” or “virtually” immune to the coronavirus. A clip of the segment was later posted to President Trump's personal Facebook page and to @TeamTrump, the official Twitter account for the Trump campaign, which the president retweeted from his personal account @realDonaldTrump. Then the two social media giants took action censoring the video, with a Twitter spokeswoman citing a “violation of the Twitter Rules on COVID-19 misinformation,” while a Facebook spokesman specified, “This video includes false claims that a group of people is immune from COVID-19 which is a violation of our policies around harmful COVID misinformation.” According to The Washington Post, the tweet was hidden from view and @TeamTrump will not be allowed to tweet again until it deletes the offending tweet. The Post originally reported that it was the President's account they had taken action against, but it was quickly refuted by Twitter spokesman Nick Pacilio, who previously worked for Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA). Talk about a revolving door with former Harris staffer telling the public what is and isn't disinformation. Meanwhile, Twitter allows Iran's Supreme Leader Imam Sayyid Ali Khamenei to call for Israel’s violent destruction and keeps allowing noted anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan back on the platform. For more context, here’s what Trump said in full during the Fox & Friends clip, as reported by Variety: “My view is the schools should open. This thing’s going away. It will go away like things go away. And my view is that schools should be open. If you look at children, children are almost — and I would almost say, definitely — but almost immune from this disease. So few, they’ve got stronger, hard to believe, I don’t know how you feel about it, but they have much stronger immune systems than we do somehow for this… They don’t have a problem. They just don’t have a problem… They are virtually immune from this problem.” The Trump campaign defended the President’s comments and the video. “The President was stating a fact that children are less susceptible to the coronavirus. Another day, another display of Silicon Valley’s flagrant bias against this President, where the rules are only enforced in one direction," Courtney Parella, deputy national press secretary for Trump's reelection campaign, said in a statement to USA Today. "Social media companies are not the arbiters of truth.” And yet the Big Tech companies have taken it upon themselves to arbitrate the truth during this heated election season and it's clear which side they're on. Just a few weeks ago, Facebook censored a Trump post about mail-in voting and Twitter likely won't censor a deceptively edited Joe Biden ad.
In an attempt on Wednesday to again protect their presidential candidate from himself, ABC’s World News Tonight and NBC Nightly News spiked an interview Joe Biden did the National Association for Black and Hispanic Journalists. In the controversial video, Biden snapped at black CBS correspondent Errol Barnett (who asked about Biden’s mental fitness) and demanded to know, “Are you a junkie?!” Biden’s racist comment was played unedited earlier in the day during CBS This Morning. But as the controversy grew, political correspondent Ed O’Keefe continued his weeks-long efforts to protect and promote Biden by suggesting the junkie comment was directed at President Trump during the CBS Evening News. In that effort, O’Keefe edited out their own reporter’s question. According to O’Keefe, Biden was supposedly “brush[ing] off questions raised by Mr. Trump about his mental fitness, telling black and Latino journalists, including CBS' Errol Barnett, that he's never taken a cognitive.” But back in reality, Biden was snapping at Barnett. Here’s what O’Keefe didn’t want Evening News viewers to witness and judge Biden on: BARNETT: President Trump has made his mental ability and agility a campaign topic. And Vice President Biden previously said in June he's always confidently tested on the campaign trail. But I had a more specific question. Here's the exchange: Please clarify specifically, have you taken a cognitive test? BIDEN: No, I haven't taken a test. Why the hell would I take a test? Come on, man. That's like saying, before you got in this program you take a test where you're taking cocaine or not. What do you think? Huh? Are you a junkie? As for ABC, senior congressional correspondent Mary Bruce boosted another Biden conspiracy theory. “Hitting back today, Joe Biden said, the only things that can stop the Democratic Party now are ‘Trump defunding the post office and interfering with the election,’” she said. She then boasted: “Biden today reveals he won't travel to Milwaukee to accept the nomination, saying he wants to do it in his home state of Delaware, calling it the right thing to do.” Meanwhile on NBC, White House correspondent Geoff Bennett also commended Biden on staying home in his basement instead of attending the Democratic convention in. “Joe Biden will no longer travel to Milwaukee later this month to accept the Democratic nomination for president due to coronavirus concerns. Convention organizers announced today he will now deliver that speech from his home state of Delaware,” he reported. Leading into Bennett’s report, anchor Lester Holt didn’t hide how one-sided the segment would be: With the COVID pandemic still raging, it was announced today that Joe Biden will not travel to this month's Democratic convention. His rival, President Trump, meantime is sending more mixed messages about mail-in voting. This new protection of Biden came after ABC and CBS had ignored his previous answer to a question about his slipping cognitive faculties, and NBC touted it. They also covered up Biden’s lie that 120 million Americans had died from COVID-19. The networks’ protection for their presidential candidate was made possible because of lucrative sponsorships from Fisher Investments on ABC, HomeAdviser on CBS, and Allstate on NBC. Their contact information is linked if you want to tell them about what they’re funding. CBS Evening News has also asked that people text anchor Norah O’Donnell at this number: (202) 217-1107. The transcripts are below, click "expand" to read: ABC’s World News Tonight August 5, 2020 6:38:52 p.m. Eastern (…) MARY BRUCE: Hitting back today, Joe Biden said, the only things that can stop the Democratic Party now are “Trump defunding the post office and interfering with the election." Biden today reveals he won't travel to Milwaukee to accept the nomination, saying he wants to do it in his home state of Delaware, calling it the right thing to do. (…) CBS Evening News August 5, 2020 6:41:16 p.m. Eastern (…) ED O’KEEFE: Biden today also brushed off questions raised by Mr. Trump about his mental fitness, telling black and Latino journalists, including CBS' Errol Barnett, that he's never taken a cognitive. JOE BIDEN: No, I haven't taken a test. Why the hell would I take a test? Come on, man! That's like saying, you, before you got in this program, did you take a test whether you're taking cocaine or not? What do you think? Huh? Are you a junkie? (…) NBC Nightly News August 5, 2020 7:07:37 p.m. Eastern LESTER HOLT: With the COVID pandemic still raging, it was announced today that Joe Biden will not travel to this month's Democratic convention. His rival, President Trump, meantime is sending more mixed messages about mail-in voting. Geoff Bennett is at the White House. [Cuts to video] GEOFF BENNETT: Tonight, Republicans and Democrats scrambling to make final arrangements for their convention upended by the pandemic. Joe Biden will no longer travel to Milwaukee later this month to accept the Democratic nomination for president due to coronavirus concerns. Convention organizers announced today he will now deliver that speech from his home state of Delaware. (…)
Traditionally, funerals are supposed to serve at least three purposes: honor the life of the deceased, comfort those who mourn his passing and preach a message about eternity and the brevity of life. Tradition was discarded during John Lewis' funeral last week in Atlanta. Like the memorial service of the late Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-MN) in 2002, the Lewis service was a political event that included veiled denunciations of President Trump. There were allegations of voter suppression by Republicans and a comparison of Trump by former President Obama to the late Alabama governor and segregationist, George Wallace. On that last point, it was Wallace who stood in a schoolhouse door 1963 in an effort to stop African Americans from entering the University of Alabama. Today's Democrats have it reversed. They are blocking poor kids from escaping failed public schools, bowing to the desires of teachers' unions that support and contribute campaign money to Democratic politicians. Obama also criticized President Trump for sending federal agents to Portland, Oregon, to help quell violence that had gone on for more than 60 days. Presumably, President Obama would not have been opposed to President Eisenhower's decision in 1957 to send the 101st Airborne Division to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect nine black students entering Central High School. Someone should ask the former president if he approved of President John F. Kennedy's decision on May 21, 1961 to send 300 federal marshals to Montgomery, Alabama, to keep order after race riots broke out when then-governor John Patterson said he could not guarantee the peace. President Obama apparently ignored another historical event in which federal forces were used to achieve a civil rights goal. On September 20, 1962, James Meredith attempted to register as a student at the University of Mississippi. The entrance was blocked and rioting erupted. Attorney General Robert Kennedy sent 500 U.S. Marshals to the school. President Kennedy sent military police, troops from the Mississippi National Guard and even U.S. Border Patrol officials. Is President Obama OK with President Kennedy's decision on June 11, 1963 to federalize Alabama National Guard troops to end then-governor George Wallace's blockade of African Americans attempting to enter the University of Alabama? On March 20, 1965, President Lyndon Johnson federalized the Alabama National Guard to protect the civil rights March from Selma to Montgomery of which John Lewis was a notable part. President Obama probably favors that decision. A reporter should ask him. Alabama, Mississippi and Arkansas all had governors at the time who were Democrats and segregationists and yet today's Democrats claim Trump is a racist. In his “eulogy,” Barack Obama also mentioned mail-in ballots, the latest effort by Democrats (early voting and no required identification are other efforts) that many believe could open the door to voter fraud. One pastor at the Lewis funeral even reached back to the Reagan administration and erroneously blamed the 40th president for the poor housing conditions endured by some African Americans. Democrats and their media allies consistently ignore the fact that Jim Crow Laws, the Ku Klux Klan and other immoralities were all led by Southern Democrats. John Lewis' legacy and his brave fight for civil rights will always remain untarnished. But Lewis was also a partisan Democrat, who refused to attend President Trump's inauguration in 2017 and believed to the end that the Russians helped Trump beat Hillary Clinton, though that would likely have required the infiltration of every precinct and voting machine in America, something not even Lewis claims was possible. What was even sadder than the politicized funeral service was the applause from attendees, who apparently believe every word that comes from President Obama's mouth, though none of this kind of talk improves a single life. It makes one wonder why so many African Americans continue to be loyal to the Democratic Party.
Jason Whitlock, the courageous African American commentator bucking the liberal media from his new post at Outkick The Coverage sports blog, has dared to challenge the here-to-fore unquestioned racist cop narrative of George Floyd's death. With civil unrest raging and media and athletes screaming about systemic racism and defunding police departments, Whitlock says newly released video undermines the raging storm. After the London Daily Mail released Minneapolis police body cam video of Floyd's interaction with police, Whitlock predicted that because Floyd's behavior escalated a routine arrest into a possible abuse of force, it's not a race crime and it will be impossible to convict former officers Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao of any crime. From their "little communist country" in Orlando, NBA players, coaches and NBA Commissioner Adam Silver "elected themselves the National Internal Affairs Department (NIAD) for American police," Whitlock asserted. He also asked if anyone will ask LeBron James, Steve Kerr, Gregg Popovich and Silver for their thoughts on the leaked Floyd footage? Will the media there in the bubble be allowed to ask questions about the video? Whitlock recounted the video showing police struggling to get Floyd to comply with their orders. Early on, Floyd is in the driver's seat of a car when told by police to show his hands. When he finally does this, a police officer holsters his gun. Floyd appears to be disoriented, desperate and non-compliant, and he complained that he couldn’t breathe while standing upright. He stated that his mother just died and he can’t sit in the back of the police car because he’s claustrophobic. "He repeatedly begs the officers not to shoot him. He worms the upper part of his body out of the police car and asks to lay on the ground," Whitlock wrote. To Whitlock, the behavior of police officers "seems appropriate and restrained given Floyd’s level of resistance and bizarre conduct. The footage reasonably explains how and why Floyd wound up on the ground with multiple officers restraining him." The video in no way justifies Officer Chauvin kneeling on Floyd’s neck for nearly nine minutes. Yet, "Nearly every word out of Floyd’s mouth was a desperate lie." Since the tragic death of Floyd, America has wildly swung out of control with arson, looting and protests. The vitriol coming from sports has not helped the situation, either. Whitlock describes the present situation as the NBA, NFL and MLB draping themselves in Black Lives Matter symbols and viewing all negative encounters between black people and white people as examples of white supremacy: "Life is far more complicated than the race-baiting that gets re-tweeted and liked over Twitter. What happened to George Floyd is more complicated than the substance-less assertion that Derek Chauvin acted out of racial animus. Chauvin abused his power. His defense lawyers will argue he was baited into abusing his power by Floyd. "It’s the same excuse pro sports’ Three Stooges — Adam Silver, Roger Goodell and Rob Manfred — will make years from now when the mainstream media finally objectively evaluates this era of sports." Whitlock stated: "The subversion of sports culture is directly tied to the subversion of American culture. Sports culture proved the strength of our melting pot, the power of a diverse meritocracy. Live sporting events shaped popular culture." There is no adequate replacement for the lost sports culture -- certainly not from academia, Hollywood or the smutty music industry. Whitlock predicted that a second wave of Floyd-related riots will be more deadly and destructive than the first wave, which will ensue if Lane, Kueng, Thao and Chauvin are acquitted of all serious charges. "When those riots happen, the Three Stooges, LeBron James, Colin Kaepernick and all the other entitled millionaires will be locked in their gated bubbles watching poor people’s lives destroyed on CNN," Whitlock says. "No one will ever question them about the roles they played in stirring the racial outrage."
During a ridiculous softball interview with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday, MSNBC Democratic Party puppet Andrea Mitchell was horrified at the possibility of President Trump accepting the Republican nomination at the White House, in lieu of a party convention, due to coronavirus concerns. The partisan anchor even argued there ought to be a “law against” the President holding such an event. Not even trying to hide her disdain, Mitchell fretted that Trump “has floated the idea today of doing it on the South Lawn of the White House.” Turning to Pelosi, the host suggested the move might be illegal: “I’m not sure if there’s a law against it, but there certainly is a tradition, you don’t use the White House as the backdrop for any politics....But the acceptance for the Republican nomination coming with the White House as the backdrop, does that strike you as wrong?” Unsurprisingly, the far-left Democratic congressional leader joined Mitchell in condemning the President: Yeah, it’s very wrong. Again, when we’re in the Capitol of the United States, under the dome, we have a very limited opportunity to reference anything political. And for the President of the United States to degrade, once again, the White House, as he has done over and over again, by saying he’s going to completely politicize it, is something that should be rejected right out of hand. It’s again notion-mongering, not serious thinking. And that’s – well, it won’t happen, let’s put it that way. Whether it’s legally wrong or ethically out of the question, it shouldn’t have even been something that was expressed. Revealing her role as a leftist loyalist, Mitchell pleaded: “Can you stop him?” Pelosi wailed: “He can’t do that. You can’t do that.” She then absurdly insisted: “...you don’t talk politics in the White House. And you don’t talk politics under the dome of the Capitol....You don’t have political events in the Capitol. You don’t have political events in the White House. Despite that assertion, just seconds earlier, Pelosi was engaging in partisan campaign politics while speaking to Mitchell from Capitol Hill. After Mitchell worried about the canceled in-person Democratic convention causing “damage” to Biden’s “campaign,” Pelosi assured her “we can all make our plans from around the country for a great American victory for Joe Biden, as he is nominated for president.” Well, that certainly sounds like she was talking “politics under the dome of the Capitol.” Minutes later, when Mitchell eagerly asked who Biden should pick as a vice presidential running mate, Pelosi wasn’t shy about talking campaign politics yet again: I don’t think that who the vice president is makes that much difference in the election. It’s about Joe Biden versus Donald Trump, and that’s what the election is about....But I think he has a remarkable field to choose from. Any one of them would be great. We’re ready to embrace whoever it is. Mitchell of course ignored the Democratic lawmaker’s stunning hypocrisy. Instead, during a follow-up segment, the host reiterated: “I don’t know if there’s a law that prohibits it, not that I’ve been able to find, because the Hatch Act does not cover the president. Certainly by tradition, accepting the nomination from the White House would be completely out of bounds.” White House correspondent Kristen Welker chimed in to tout how her and her fellow hack “journalists” were “scrambling to figure out whether he can actually do that and what type of backlash he might get if, in fact, he does move forward with that type of an acceptance speech from the White House, which would be unprecedented.” Previously, the Democratic propagandists in the press were outraged that Trump would try to hold a convention in the midst of the pandemic, now they’re outraged that he may accept his party’s nomination from the White House. Maybe the President should just go to Joe Biden’s basement to officially be nominated, surely reporters couldn’t object to that. Mitchell’s conspiring with Pelosi was brought to viewers by Safelite and ADT Security Services. You can fight back by letting these advertisers know what you think of them sponsoring such content. Here is a transcript of Mitchell’s friendly August 5 chat with Pelosi: 12:03 PM ET ANDREA MITCHELL: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi joining me now. Madam Speaker, thank you very much for being with us. REP. NANCY PELOSI [D-CA]: Always a pleasure. MITCHELL: It’s always a pleasure. And this is a big day. Well, first of all, the breaking news. Wisconsin, battleground state, the convention, an enormous opportunity for Democrats, virtually if not in person, and now Joe Biden is not going to Milwaukee. How much does this damage the campaign? PELOSI: Oh, I think that we’re all learning this at the same time now, that he won’t be there, but I think it’s an indication of the seriousness with which he judges the situation. This pandemic is dangerous and the increase in numbers just demands that we keep our distances. I commend him for doing that. It’s going to be a great convention. People will see it virtually and we’re very proud of him. I think it’s a great thing that he’s doing this early enough so the rest of us now are told that we’re not coming either, I guess, and we can all make our plans from around the country for a great American victory for Joe Biden, as he is nominated for president. ANDREA MITCHELL: I also wanted to ask you about our reporting that the Republicans are also planning not to have the President leave Washington for his acceptance speech. But most interestingly, he has floated the idea today of doing it on the South Lawn of the White House. Our reporting is also that he has suggested monuments as a backdrop, like the Lincoln Memorial. Is that appropriate? I’m not sure if there’s a law against it, but there certainly is a tradition, you don’t use the White House as the backdrop for any politics. He has broken that with the Rose Garden and other events before. But the acceptance for the Republican nomination coming with the White House as the backdrop, does that strike you as wrong? PELOSI: Yeah, it’s very wrong. Again, when we’re in the Capitol of the United States, under the dome, we have a very limited opportunity to reference anything political. And for the President of the United States to degrade, once again, the White House, as he has done over and over again, by saying he’s going to completely politicize it, is something that should be rejected right out of hand. It’s again notion-mongering, not serious thinking. And that’s – well, it won’t happen, let’s put it that way. Whether it’s legally wrong or ethically out of the question, it shouldn’t have even been something that was expressed. MITCHELL: Can you stop him? PELOSI: He can’t do that. You can’t do that. I mean, you would be very surprised, I think, at the fact that when you’re at the White House, you’re talking about policy, you’re not talking politics. We never did – you would have a limited reference as it applied to our civic life, in terms of politics, but you don’t talk politics in the White House. And you don’t talk politics under the dome of the Capitol, except perhaps a reference to it, but not an event. You don’t have political events in the Capitol. You don’t have political events in the White House. MITCHELL: Well, I know that you and other members, senators, you leave the building to do any fundraising, you have your own offices offsite. PELOSI: Of course. MITCHELL: But that said, if he’s exempt from the Hatch Act, which is why some of his aides have been... PELOSI: He can’t do it. MITCHELL: ...cited for unethical activity, you don’t think he can get away with it? PELOSI: Andrea, my friend, once again he is diverting attention from the fact that people are dying in our country. Children are hungry. Families are fearing eviction. Workers are concerned about getting money into their pockets. The state and local governments are suffering from the virus and the rest. And we’re talking about whether he can have a political event at the White House. He can’t. (...) 12:14 PM ET MITCHELL: Briefly on the vice presidential announcement that we expect soon from Joe Biden, two members of your caucus are in the group that are being considered and some of your other friends and colleagues. What are the most important qualities that you think Joe Biden needs? Jim Clyburn said passion, to fill the gap, he has compassion but not passion, not electricity. What do you think is the most important quality? PELOSI: Well, the most important is that Joe Biden has trust in the person, that they have shared values and that he knows. First of all, the three things I would say if I were asked, and you’re asking me, is I don’t think that who the vice president is makes that much difference in the election. It’s about Joe Biden versus Donald Trump, and that’s what the election is about. Since Lyndon Johnson, I don’t think any vice president has ever made a positive difference, except from a negative standpoint, perhaps, Sarah Palin. But in terms of significance, Lyndon Johnson. Otherwise, it’s nice to see who can do no harm in the campaign, that the president will trust, and that could be a good president should that need arise, God willing it wouldn’t. But I think he has a remarkable field to choose from. Any one of them would be great. We’re ready to embrace whoever it is. (...) 12:23 PM ET (...) ANDREA MITCHELL: And Kristen, you just saw with Nancy Pelosi, talking about – her saying he just can’t do that. I don’t know if there’s a law that prohibits it, not that I’ve been able to find, because the Hatch Act does not cover the president. Certainly by tradition, accepting the nomination from the White House would be completely out of bounds. But he could also choose from monuments in Washington. But now he’s staying in Washington. KRISTEN WELKER: It would be completely untraditional for him to give his acceptance speech from the White House, Andrea, there is no doubt about that. But I think you hit the nail on the head, which is that this has really been a process that has brought about some whiplash as President Trump has sort of gone back and forth in terms of where he’s going to accept his party’s nomination, would it be North Carolina, would it be Florida? And then, of course, cancelling his plans to be in Florida as cases there have continued to spike. And I really think it speaks to this challenge for the President, which is that this is shining a very bright light on his leadership at this critical moment and his decision-making process, Andrea. So President Trump today signaling that he is looking very seriously at delivering that speech from the White House grounds. But of course we’re scrambling to figure out whether he can actually do that and what type of backlash he might get if, in fact, he does move forward with that type of an acceptance speech from the White House, which would be unprecedented, Andrea. (...)
On Monday evening, CNN host Wolf Blitzer gave an unchallenged forum to New York Times columnist Tom Friedman as he vowed to do whatever it took to get to the polls and vote against President Donald Trump and install Democrat Joe Biden in office: "I will crawl, I will slither, I will bike, I will hike!" Friedman blamed the President for the severity of the pandemic, asserted that, if Trump were in charge during World War II, Nazi Germany would have defeated the U.S., and predicted that the severity will end as soon as Trump is voted out in November. (Certainly, the media would have an entirely different spin.) After complaining about masks being a political issue, he then suggested that President Trump has been derelict in handling the war against COVID-19 as he added: FRIEDMAN: You know, the President has told us we're at war. "We're at war, but I'm going golfing. We're at war, but don't listen to the generals like Brix [sic] and Fauci. We're at war, but don't wear a helmet" -- the equivalent of a helmet, a mask. "We're at war, but don't trouble yourself if you want to go to a restaurant or go to church -- no problem." Thank God -- if he had been in charge at V-Day, we'd all be speaking German right now. After Blitzer asked if he could "see an end in sight" to the pandemic, Friedman urged the ouster of Trump from office: Oh, I do see an end in sight. It's in November, Wolf. And let me be very clear about this with all this business about, you know, voting and mail-in voting. Wolf, I will walk -- I will crawl -- I will slither -- I will bike -- I will hike -- but I will be going to the polls to vote for Joe Biden because until and unless we replace this President and this administration, we're going to be having the same conversation every day, all right, that that is what this is about. He further trashed the President as he continued: This is about power -- it's about removing this man who has no business being President who is incapable of navigating us out of this crisis. And there is only one thing to do -- and that is vote for Joe Biden -- drive someone to the polls to vote for Joe Biden -- raise money for Joe Biden -- do a call for Joe Biden -- but unless we change this administration, Wolf, we're going to be having this same conversation every night. And I repeat: I will walk -- I will slither -- I will hike -- I will bike -- I will do whatever I can to change this administration. This episode of The Situation Room was sponsored by Pedialyte and Bombas. Their contact information is provided. Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Monday, August 3, The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer on CNN: 6:36 p.m. Eastern TOM FRIEDMAN, NEW YORK TIMES: When you politicize masks, you can politicize anything. You can politicize physics -- you can politicize gravity -- you can politicize rainfall, When everything becomes politics and there's no reference point to anything, you're in a really, really bad place. You know, the President has told us we're at war. "We're at war, but I'm going golfing. We're at war, but don't listen to the generals like Brix and Fauci. We're at war, but don't wear a helmet" -- the equivalent of a helmet, a mask. "We're at war, but don't trouble yourself if you want to go to a restaurant or go to church -- no problem." Thank God -- if he had been in charge at V-Day, we'd all be speaking German right now. WOLF BLITZER: I mean, it's a sad situation what's going on right now, and I don't see any end in sight. Hopefully, there will be a therapeutic that comes out that could prevent people from getting really sick and dying. Hopefully, there will be a vaccine at some point that will ease this, but, right now, there doesn't seem to be any end in sight. Do you see an end in sight right now? FRIEDMAN: Oh, I do see an end in sight. It's in November, Wolf. And let me be very clear about this with all this business about, you know, voting and mail-in voting. Wolf, I will walk -- I will crawl -- I will slither -- I will bike -- I will hike -- but I will be going to the polls to vote for Joe Biden because until and unless we replace this President and this administration, we're going to be having the same conversation every day, all right, that that is what this is about. This is about power -- it's about removing this man who has no business being President who is incapable of navigating us out of this crisis. And there is only one thing to do -- and that is vote for Joe Biden -- drive someone to the polls to vote for Joe Biden -- raise money for Joe Biden -- do a call for Joe Biden -- but unless we change this administration, Wolf, we're going to be having this same conversation every night. And I repeat: I will walk -- I will slither -- I will hike -- I will bike -- I will do whatever I can to change this administration.
If there ever was a reporter who didn't need an ego boost, it would be CNN’s Jim Acosta. Yet his media colleagues rushed to defend his honor after President Trump called him a "fake reporter" in a Wednesday morning tweet. So what prompted the tweet from Trump? Well, as CNN often does, they spent Wednesday morning hyping an anonymous source who was trashing the President as incompetent on the coronavirus pandemic. According to Acosta’s report, this source who was “familiar with Trump’s meeting with his coronavirus task force” said, “He still doesn’t get it.” That quote made its way into several CNN reports on Wednesday. After Acosta breathlessly shared this tidbit, Trump immediately shot back at Acosta with this tweet questioning his credibility: .@CNN has no sources on the Task Force. Their “sources” are made up, pure fiction! Jim Acosta is a Fake reporter! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 5, 2020 Of course, Acosta’s equally anti-Trump journalist colleagues covering the White House were eager to defend the CNN hack. CBS’s Weijia Jiang was effusive in her admiration for Acosta: On top of being a real reporter, @acosta is a gracious colleague. Both at home and on foreign trips with the President, he has stood up for me even though we are technically competitors. https://t.co/EXhBNVCSg3 — Weijia Jiang (@weijia) August 5, 2020 Her CBS colleague Paula Reid agreed: I can tell you @Acosta definitely has sources on the task force, he has broken stories I have matched and matched stories I have broken from inside that group. No way to do that without real sources. https://t.co/3gR9bSwlKG — Paula Reid (@PaulaReidCBS) August 5, 2020 Playboy White House Correspondent Brian Karem reacted as you would expect: Lies. @realDonaldTrump lies. @Acosta gets under Trump’s skin with solid reporting POTUS can’t handle because it doesn’t fit the president’s lying narrative. https://t.co/hnd3m3YTRu — Brian J. Karem (@BrianKarem) August 5, 2020 Despite slamming Acosta as a “rude” opportunist in his latest book, ABC Chief White House correspondent Jonathan Karl also felt the need to defend Acosta’s reputation: This is goofy. As @realDonaldTrump knows, @Acosta is a real reporter with real sources. https://t.co/kiwEn6Dng1 — jonkarl (@jonkarl) August 5, 2020 But CNN’s own PR team went over the top with this really unprofessional and petty comeback: False. @Acosta is a Real reporter with Real sources who talks to members of your Task Force much more often than you do. — CNN Communications (@CNNPR) August 5, 2020
President Donald Trump joined Fox Business host Lou Dobbs to slap back at the suggestion by some that the economy should be shut down again over the coronavirus. The Lou Dobbs Tonight host told Trump via phone call Tuesday that “we have seen — now — new voices arise, saying to you that, ‘Mr. President, you should shut down the economy again.’” Dobbs then nuked Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank President Neel Kashkari for recently suggesting on CBS’s Face the Nation that the economy should go under a national lockdown for four to six weeks. “I don’t know where the Federal Reserve gets these people,” Dobbs said. To the question of an economic lockdown, Trump swatted that idea down: “We're not shutting down.” Trump was sure to say that “we did the right thing” in closing down initially, following the Chinese government’s failure to stop the virus “from coming in.” However, the president expressed optimism on a V-shaped recovery as states begin to open up their economies: So, we closed [the economy] down, and we're now opening it up. And it looks like it's a ‘V.’ It's absolutely a ‘V.’ But we're not going back to shutdowns now. We understand the disease. We understand the problems with elderly, especially elderly with heart or diabetes, or other problems. And we're able to take care of them. We understand it now. But we're not shutting down. Watch the segment below: Dobbs proceeded to hammer the point about the need to reopen the economy. According to Dobbs, “Anthony Fauci, your, one of your doctors on the task force, saying that — finally acknowledging very clearly and somewhat loudly that you saved lives and a great number of American lives by shutting down travel from China.” Dobbs continued: “But speaking of Fauci, he is also acknowledging that schools — not all of them, but most schools — need to reopen. The economy needs to be reopened.” Dobbs even said that “the secretary general of the United Nations is joining in to say, ‘Absolutely. Open up the economy, put the kids in schools.’” Trump responded by saying that “We are opening the economy very rapidly. And frankly, some of the blue states — we wish they’d do it, and do it fast— we’re asking them to do it. But they like to keep it closed.” Trump then joked that the blue states will only open up after the November 3, elections: It’ll probably open up on November 4th. You understand that. They’ll announce that they’re opening on November 4th. There’s a lot of politics involved in some of these states that are closed. In May, economist Stephen Moore said that “Keeping our economy locked down is destroying our businesses, impoverishing our citizens and doing great damage to the health of the American people.” He continued: “We need to immediately find a way to open the economy safely and smartly. Not in the months to come. Not next week. We need to do so immediately.” CBS Face the Nation recently failed to probe Minneapolis Federal Reserve President Neel Kashkari over his ridiculous proposal for a six-week national economic shutdown. Contact CBS’s Face the Nation at 202-457-4481 and demand they question Kashkari and provide pushback on his authoritarian policy proposal!
An engineer may have revealed a Twitter tool that would allow moderators to debate over what is, or isn’t misinformation. Jane Manchun Wong has posted a screenshot of what appears to be an unreleased Twitter tool that allows moderators to flag tweets that reportedly contain “misinformation,” and then vote on whether they are “misleading.” She claimed in an August 4 tweet: “Twitter is working on a moderation tool to monitor misinformations on Twitter[.] “Moderators can flag tweets, vote on whether it is misleading, and add a note about it[.] “(I made up my own note to show what it currently looks like)[.]” This is not the first time that screenshots have emerged that claim to expose Twitter’s inner workings. Twitter was rocked by a massive “security incident” in mid-July, and in its wake, purported blacklisting tools may have been exposed. Thanks to Vice Motherboard’s reporting, screenshots revealed various buttons Twitter moderators appear to have access to, including: “Trends Blacklist” and “Search Blacklist.” Critics have asked if this is proof Twitter indeed has the capability to shadowban users. Twitter has been very public in recent months about how it reserves the right to delete content from the platform. Twitter’s latest Terms of Service indeed state that “We may also remove or refuse to distribute any Content on the Services, limit distribution or visibility of any Content on the service, suspend or terminate users, and reclaim usernames without liability to you.” Jane Manchun Wong has made headlines before as a reverse engineer who exposes the inner workings of various Big Tech companies. Conservatives are under attack. Contact Twitter's leadership by tweeting at the official @Twitter account and demand that the platform mirror the First Amendment: Tech giants should afford their users nothing less than the free speech embodied in the First Amendment as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.
It’s not just conservatives who are hammering Hollywood’s love affair with Communist China. By reporting on an anti-Trump free speech non-profit group’s study, The Hollywood Reporter acknowledged that the apple of its journalistic eye has been in bed with Chinese government censors. According to THR and PEN America, Hollywood studios “self-censor” their films for the Chinese government in order to get major money at the Chinese box office. Perhaps there’s some growing worry about this on the left as well. Hey, The Hollywood Reporter could have taken the Washington Post route and called the Chinese Communist Party “a ticket to a better future.” THR waved around what they called an “explosive report” by PEN America about Chinese censorship’s influence on the American film industry, that the group published on Wednesday, August 5. The outlet admitted that it is damning enough to “put Hollywood on the defensive.” The non-profit group, dedicated to protecting freedom of expression in American media, detailed “how the major studios and A-list directors increasingly are making decisions — including cast, plot, dialogue and settings — ‘based on an effort to avoid antagonizing Chinese officials.’” The study cited classic examples of this occurring, whereby a classic Top Gun flight patch on Tom Cruise’s jacket had Taiwanese symbols removed from it in the film’s upcoming sequel to appease the Chinese government, or when Disney Studios remained silent on their Mulan remake actress’ social media support for authoritarian Chinese government in their standoff with Hong Kong freedom fighters. Oh yes, we wouldn’t want the CCP feeling guilty about any of that, would we? PEN America cited several reasons why Hollywood studios prostrate so heavily before Chinese censors, with the main one being money, obviously. The Chinese box office is the second biggest in the world, so Hollywood makes billions of dollars with movies like Avengers: Endgame debuting in China. The study wrote “appeasement means profits. American movies earned $2.6 billion in China in 2019, with Disney's Avengers: Endgame pulling in $614 million there alone.” This “growing phenomenon of self-censorship among the studios” also helps them acquire extra perks such as “better release dates, preferential advertising arrangements and a more friendly relationship with Chinese investors and regulators.” It’s starting to seem like our first place box office is playing second fiddle to the real market dominator. PEN America deputy director of free expression policy and research, James Tager, the report's author, stated, “Our biggest concern is that Hollywood is increasingly normalizing preemptive self-censorship in anticipation of what the Beijing censor is looking for.” At some point, Hollywood’s values might mirror those of the world’s largest Communist regime. It’s hard for lefties to commend Disney for being “woke,” when a lesbian scene from the latest Star Wars movie was shot in such a way that allowed it to be pulled for Chinese screenings, for example. THR also clarified that it just so happens to be coincidental that PEN America is taking a hard stance on Chinese propaganda in Hollywood like the Trump administration, saying that PEN America is “no friend of the Trump administration.” The outlet mentioned a 2018 lawsuit from the non-profit against “President Trump in federal court in an effort to prevent him from using the machinery of the government to retaliate or threaten reprisals against journalists and media outlets for coverage he dislikes.” Perhaps more and more anti-Trump groups are waking up to the dangers China poses throughout the world. THR mentioned USC Professor Stan Rosen’s warning to Hollywood that this “perfect storm” of censorship criticism will continue to get louder. “It's going to get harder and harder for Hollywood to not respond,” he told the outlet.
CBS This Morning has been covering for Andrew Cuomo for months, desperately hiding news about New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s disastrous policy of forcing nursing homes to take corona patients. On Wednesday, the program covered the story, but only as a way of bashing red state Florida for the system it set up. Reporter David Begnaud explained, “I don't know if you know this, but here in the U.S. more than 40,000 nursing home residents are believed to have died from the coronavirus and 6,500 deaths happened in the state of New York. There are hearings being held in New York to address those deaths and the policies that may have led to some of them.” No, Mr. Begnaud. Viewers might not know. Because on May 18, CBS This Morning did a story on the “devastating toll” of COVID and never mentioned the decision by Cuomo. On June 25, the show did another story about nursing homes and corona. Again, no mention of the Democratic governor. . Begnaud reported on Wednesday: “Governor Andrew Cuomo and the Department of Health have been criticized for directing those facilities back in March to take in coronavirus patients to relieve stress on the hospitals. After backlash they added a requirement, that was in may, that hospitals could not discharge patients unless they tested negative.” He told viewers: “In New York, around 6,500 people are briefed to have died of the coronavirus in nursing homes and long-term care facilities.” All of this, however, seemed to be a way of criticizing Florida for what seems like a similarly questionable decision: But after seeing what happened in New York, you have families now who have relatives here in Florida who are worried with the fact that the state of Florida is allowing nursing homes to accept COVID-positive patients. So now that Florida has problems, it’s okay to talk about New York’s disaster? In late July, ABC devoted 16 minutes to COVID, but had nothing on New York and Cuomo. CBS’s attempt at misdirection on the nursing home story was sponsored by Chase. Click on the link to let them know how you feel. A transcript of the segment is below. Click “expand” to read more. CBS This Morning 8/5/2020 7:30 TONY DOKOUPIL: Welcome back to CBS This Morning. There is growing concern about a spike in coronavirus cases at long-term care facilities like nursing homes where vulnerable elderly people are at a higher risk of death. In Florida, more than 5,800 people currently in long-term care facilities are COVID positive. Around 2,500 people have died. Last month, Florida's Governor declared 23 long-term care facilities as COVID-19 isolation centers where patients are sent to recover. Our lead national correspondent David Begnaud is following this from Key Biscayne. Good morning. DAVID BEGNAUD: Good morning. I don't know if you know this, but here in the U.S. more than 40,000 nursing home residents are believed to have died from the coronavirus, and 6,500 deaths happened in the state of New York. There are hearings being held in New York to address those deaths and the policies that may have led to some of them. But after seeing what happened in New York, you have families now who have relatives here in Florida who are worried with the fact that the state of Florida is allowing nursing homes to accept COVID-positive patients. DANIELLE COHEN (grandfather in FL nursing home): This is reckless. It is potentially lethal. BEGNAUD: Danielle Cohen is on a self-described crusade in the state of Florida to end a practice that she says is putting the state's elderly, who live in nursing homes, in potential danger. COHEN: I don't think that there should be a conscious decision to bring COVID into the building. BEGNAUD: : Cohen's 98-year-old grandfather lives at the TARMAC rehabilitation and health center in Broward county, that's in southern Florida. It is one of 23 COVID isolation centers that have entered an arrangement with the state to house and treat patients. Four of those facilities are dedicated to only covid patients, while in the other 19, patients are supposed to be secluded from current residents. MARY MAYHEW (FL Agency for Health care Administration Secretary): I certainly understand the concern that any family member would have, but I am equally committed to ensuring the safety of our residents in these facilities. BEGNAUD: Mary Mayhew leads Florida’s Agency for Health Care Administration. They oversee all of the isolation centers in the state. How much do these facilities receive money-wise from the state to take in these patients? MAYHEW: We are paying a rate for their vacant beds to make sure that those beds are available. And then we are paying them for anyone who is on medicaid, we are paying them a higher medicaid reimbursement rate. Otherwise, most of these individuals are Medicare. BEGNAUD: According to state data, the isolation centers receive around $325 a day per COVID patient. At Cohen's grandfather's facility, 21 COVID patients currently reside there. In a statent, TAMARAC said “it is providing excellent care,” adding that it follows all CDC guidelines and has a separate entrance and air flow and a designated team. COHEN: We all know what went down in New York just a few months before. Why are we tempting fate? BEGNAUD: In New York, around 6,500 people are briefed to have died of the coronavirus in nursing homes and long-term care facilities. ANDREW CUOMO: They have to readmit COVID-positive residents, but only if they have the ability to provide the adequate level of care. BEGNAUD: Governor Andrew Cuomo and the department of health have been criticized for directing those facilities back in March to take in coronavirus patients to relieve stress on the hospitals. After backlash they added a requirement, that was in may, that hospitals could not discharge patients unless they tested negative. COHEN: My mission is to get justice for the seniors that died. BEGNAUD: Back in January, Vivian Zayas' 78-year-old mother Anna began temporarily living at New York's Our Lady of Consolation Nursing and Rehabilitative Care Center on Rhode Island. A former employee who asked to remain anonymous alleges that the facility took in COVID-positive patients in March and April. And in some cases, residents were allegedly exposed by being put in rooms with COVID-positive patients or through staff treating both. Anna died April 1st, just hours after being diagnosed with the virus. Zayas believes her mother was infect the by someone who brought the virus into the facility. She is suing the nursing home. For everyone who will watch this story, what's the takeaway? VIVIAN ZAYAS: If you can care for your parents at home, do so. BEGNAUD: At least 39 residents at Our Lady of Consolation have died since March 1st. In a statement, the facility strongly denied any improper treatment and told us that it cannot comment on pending litigation or the care provided to any individual. But said it is dedicated to delivering high quality, compassionate care. New York's Department of Public Health tells that based on the anonymous claim we told you about a moment ago from that former employee, they will be launching an investigation into the facility. They say any facility that does not isolate COVID patients from residents would be in violation of public health law. An adviser with the governor's COVID task force also told us that based on self-reported data, the virus was already at that facility well before the March policy that required nursing homes to accept COVID patients. What's your message to the people of Florida? Vivian ZAYAS: Don't put COVID-19-positive patients in nursing homes. BEGNAUD: In Florida, Cohen's grandfather, a World War II veteran, is now fighting coronavirus along with 43 other residents. He was diagnosed before the facility started accepting coronavirus patients. COHEN: I feel like there still are thousands of Floridians who are at risk from this policy, and someone needs to stand up for them.
Whether it's the response to COVID-19 or the consulate in Houston being ordered closed, whenever a China-related controversy is the news, MSNBC wonders if President Trump is just looking for a distraction. MSNBC Live host Katy Tur wondered Tuesday if Trump's announcement that the U.S. might ban the TikTok app and later consideration of a possible buyout by Microsoft was "because he needed a distraction." To the media, a "distraction" is any event or policy suggestion that they don't want to define as "news." Russian collusion allegations were never a "distraction," and Russian interference in our elections was always a "national security issue," but not Chinese interference. Tur asked "So what exactly is behind President Trump's threat to ban the video app TikTok? Critics including lawmakers have claimed that TikTok is a national security threat because the parent company ByteDance is based in China and required to turn over user data to Beijing. No definitive proof yet of a threat to national security, so why is the president pushing this issue now?" To answer her question, Tur welcomed NYU professor and Big Tech-buster Scott Galloway, but initially Galloway criticized the means more than the end. SCOTT GALLOWAY: This is highly unusual for a president to step in and decide a firm should be sold, and even go as far as to say this is the firm that firm should be sold ... But, again, this just seems like terrible execution around what has become just a series of kind of unpredictable steps. I don't think anyone could have imagined this scenario. Galloway made it seem as if Trump appointed Microsoft to buy TikTok when in reality Microsoft was already in negotiations to acquire the app. Tur followed up with critics. "There were lawmakers who were saying they didn't like it. There were concerns floated, I don't have it on my phone for a reason," but still suspected some ulterior motive, "Did this come out of nowhere? Did it get to the president's desk through a pipeline, or just something he used because he needed a distraction?" Galloway wrapped up his part of the segment by wondering if American companies will now be treated the same way as Chinese companies in foreign countries: GALLOWAY: But, you can see where this might play out should Indonesia, which is Facebook’s second biggest market by users all of a sudden decided to turn around to Facebook and say, we're going to ban you or you have to sell to an Indonesian company, so this could a lead of bad places and it’s just weird to think within a matter of seven days, overnight it looks like the president has decided that Microsoft should acquire TikTok. Tur agreed that "it is weird," but is it really that weird when the Republican president, Democratic nominee for president, and the U.S. government, including all branches of the military agree that TikTok presents a national security problem? This segment was brought to you in part by Verizon. Here is a transcript for the August 4 show: MSNBC MSNBC Live 2:53 PM ET KATY TUR: So what exactly is behind President Trump's threat to ban the video app TikTok. Critics including lawmakers have claimed that TikTok is a national security threat because the parent company ByteDance is based in China and required to turn over user data to Beijing, no definitive proof yet of a threat to national security so why is the president pushing this issue now? With me now is Scott Galloway, he’s the co-host of The Pivot podcast and a professor at the NYU School of Business. Scott, always great to have you. Thanks for being here. Help make sense of this, why does the president suddenly not like TikTok? SCOTT GALLOWAY: Well, that's a tall order. I think this is a governance -- it reminds me of my school has this auction trying to raise money and you can be principal for the day, the president deciding he wants to be a CEO for a day with bigger assets. This is highly unusual for a president to step in and decide a firm should be sold and even go as far as to say this is the firm that firm should be sold and then on top of it they're going to demand some sort of -- so it's -- the script is that any Chinese company has a direct pipeline of data into the Chinese government, which, and this deserves scrutiny, can use that data or weaponize that data and sees us as an adversary. There’s huge amount of intellectual property theft, there's enormous controversy around companies that go into China, our tech companies just long enough for the Chinese to steal their IP and then kick them out. But, again, this just seems like terrible execution around what has become just a series of kind of unpredictable steps. I don't think anyone could have imagined this scenario. TUR: There were lawmakers who were saying they didn't like it. There were concerns floated, I don't have it on my phone for a reason. Did this come out of nowhere? Did it get to the president's desk through a pipeline or just something he used because he needed a distraction? GALLOWAY: Possibly. So, the president has made clear that he thinks TikTok is a security threat and he's threatening to ban it by September 15th, but to suggest it should be sold to an American company and to be on the phone with that CEO, that's just highly unusual and there are probably other ways around it, okay the company could go public on a U.S. exchange, have U.S. governance, have security measures put in place such as no data flowed back to China. But, you can see where this might play out should Indonesia, which is Facebook’s second biggest market by users all of a sudden decided to turn around to Facebook and say, we're going to ban you or you have to sell to an Indonesian company, so this could a lead of bad places and it’s just weird to think within a matter of seven days, overnight it looks like the president has decided that Microsoft should acquire TikTok. TUR: Yeah, it is weird. Also weird that he's saying now he's created so much controversy around banning it that they're making all sort of money and that the United States should get a cut of that money. Scott, thanks so much for joining us. We really appreciate your time.
It’s time to play “Hollywood Swears,” the game where we tell you dumb things celebrities say and you determine if they’re lying or just stupid. Today we have big star Ryan Reynolds swearing he and and actress wife Blake Lively really, really, really, super regret something. It’s up to you to say whether he's full of it or has it for brains! Recently, Fast Company asked Reynolds about his 2012 wedding to Lively. That was back in the dark days before Black Lives Matter emerged to purge our privilege and nuke our nuclear families. The venue the couple selected was Boone Hall near Charleston, S.C., a big old southern plantation house. We can assume it was a nice event. But in our woke present day, Reynolds is contrite (the word "grovelling" also comes to mind.) The death of George Floyd has, as Fast Company put it, forced him “to grapple with his own complicated personal history.” Yes, his complicated history amounts to choosing the wrong place to get hitched. Now, Reynolds vomits social justice platitudes all over the article, to the point where he’s caricature of lefty guilt. Apparently all he reads these days are NAACP pamphlets, because can’t seem to stop saying things like “We want to educate ourselves about other people’s experiences and talk to our kids about everything, all of it ... especially our own complicity.” (He and Blake are raising their kids “so they never grow up feeding this insane pattern and so they'll do their best to never inflict pain on another being consciously or unconsciously." Hey Ryan, if you do anything less, you’re a sociopath.) But for the purposes of Hollywood Swears, here’s important paragraph: The actor is still clearly pained by the hurt the wedding caused, as well as by his own lack of judgment. “It’s something we’ll always be deeply and unreservedly sorry for,” he says. “It’s impossible to reconcile. What we saw at the time was a wedding venue on Pinterest. What we saw after was a place built upon devastating tragedy. Years ago we got married again at home—but shame works in weird ways. A giant fucking mistake like that can either cause you to shut down or it can reframe things and move you into action. It doesn’t mean you won’t fuck up again. But repatterning and challenging lifelong social conditioning is a job that doesn’t end.” Okay, contestants, your choice is clear: Is he full of it ...? Apparently nobody cared about the wedding venue until 2018 when he was prostrating himself before the racial comic book flick Black Panther and a Twitter mob came for him. Sure, the guilt may have been eating him alive, right now he’s wearing that guilt on his very expensive sleeve and using it as a springboard to launch himself into the middle of a fashionable social trend. Also, what the hell kind of marriage do you have when all you can do is look back on the nuptials and moan about shame? … Or does he have it for brains? Given the state of our education system, and the intellectual firepower of most modern celebrities, it’s entirely possible that two big Hollywood stars were ignorant of what might have gone on at an antebellum South Carolina plantation home. Or maybe they lacked the moral imagination to understand the implications. Or both. The zeal with which he now says all the correct things may indicate a sincere conversion to the secular religion of “anti-racism,” and the easy grace it offers. (He even bought an indulgence with a $250K donation to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.) Bonus for “Full of It” voters! Did Reynolds (or his publicist) ask Fast Company to ask him about the wedding?
A campaign ad for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden took a snippet from President Donald Trump wildly out of context. The Biden campaign released an August 4 ad featuring a deceptively edited clip of President Trump’s sober commentary about the COVID-19 pandemic during an interview with national political reporter Jonathan Swan of Axios and wrote: “Thousands of Americans are dying every week. The President's response? “‘It is what it is.’” Turning Point USA Chief Creative Officer Benny Johnson responded that same afternoon by calling out the ad for being “deceptively edited to leave out important context intentionally.” He followed up explaining that, “In the next sentence he [Trump] says: ‘But that doesn’t mean we aren’t doing everything we can.’” Johnson then asked if Twitter will “mark this as manipulated media like they did for Trump’s ad?” In a following tweet, Johnson elaborated by reminding followers that Twitter had flagged a tweet of Joe Biden babbling from White House social media director Dan Scavino: “REMEMBER: This @DanScavino Tweet was marked as ‘Manipulated Media’ because the full context of the clip wasn’t included. “Will Twitter be consistent here or continue to let their bias show?” The video in question featured former Vice President Biden caught on video seemingly endorsing his rival, President Donald Trump, for re-election. Liberal media outlets condemned the video as deceptively edited misinformation in order to cover for the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. Twitter followed up by labeling the video as “manipulated media.” When reached for comment, Twitter staff replied that “this Tweet was labeled based on our Synthetic and Manipulated Media policy.” Twitter’s actual crackdowns on misinformation appear inconsistent at best. In late March, Twitter refused to label a video as misinformation that even the Washington Post and The Hill found to be in bad faith. Former New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg’s former senior adviser Tim O’Brien tweeted a video splicing audio clips of Trump’s words together and taken out of context, set to a rising graph showing “Confirmed Coronavirus Cases in US.” The video was edited as if to say that Trump was referring to the “Coronavirus,” claiming “this is their new hoax,” as if Trump were denying the existence of the disease altogether. Biden shared a video featuring similar language, which was also allowed to remain without a misinformation interstitial, or filter under the clip. On the other hand, when Twitter is not functionally “protecting” the Biden campaign, it has punished some misinfo about Trump in the past. Anti-Trump group, The Lincoln Project was fact-checked by Twitter for sharing a video clip of Trump’s Independence Day speech, which was taken completely out of context. The video, which Twitter claimed had been “edited in a way that makes it appear as though the president says Operation Desert Storm took place in Vietnam,” was tweeted by The Lincoln Project. Twitter also said liberal talk show host Jimmy Kimmel shared a video claiming that Pence had been caught on a hot mic delivering empty boxes of personal protective equipment (PPE) for a hospital. Twitter responded by labelling the video as “manipulated media” on May 8. Conservatives are under attack. Contact Twitter's leadership by tweeting at the official @Twitter account and demand that Twitter not bow to liberal media pressure. Instead, Big Tech should be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form to be included in our database, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.
Filling in on Monday’s Last Word, MSNBC host and Canadian immigrant Ali Velshi lobbied viewers to watch the new far-left Netflix documentary, Immigration Nation, in an effort to slam President Trump and his "racist and inhumane immigration agenda." His interview with the filmmakers began with anguished lecturing: ALI VELSHI: Time after time the Trump administration has tried to silence insider accounts that show how dangerous it is to have Donald Trump in the White House surrounded by enablers… Two daring filmmakers who were granted unbelievable access to follow I.C.E agents in early 2017. I'm fascinated by how they got this access. Donald Trump was just beginning to implement his racist and inhumane immigration agenda. Over three years, Shaul Schwartz and Cristina Clusiau captured the unconscionable and unbounded cruelty of Donald Trump's immigration policies. Velshi clearly wanted to make Trump, I.C.E., and anyone who has backed policies enforcing borders as racist and evil. In doing so, Velshi demonized an entire federal agency and the President of the United States. In this softball review, Velshi continued to attack Trump and demean I.C.E., as way of calling for its eradication: This all exposes how the Trump administration seeks to inflict maximum pain on immigrants through a bureaucratic system filled with falsehoods. The documentary shows that the administration’s policy of deterrence is a political lie used to validate violence against immigrants. Amusingly, Velshi was in shock when the filmmakers disclosed that the Obama-era Department of Homeland Security would not let them film: CRISTINA CLUSIAU (FILMMAKER): And we asked I.C.E. If they wanted to do something under the Obama administration, and they said no. And so when Trump got elected, we decided to go back to them and ask them again if they'd be interested, and this time they said yes. SHAUL SCHWARTZ (FILMMAKER): Yeah, it was a -- VELSHI: So they thought it was a better idea to do this after Trump was elected? SCHWARTZ: Yeah, I think the agency was coming under a lot of heat. Maybe, the Obama administration did not want to have their I.C.E. agents filmed, because they were responsible for hundreds of thousands of deportations a year. On average, Trump’s I.C.E. has deported less illegal immigrants per year than Obama’s I.C.E., something the left would rather forget. The leftist host wanted the filmmakers to have no empathy for I.C.E. Agents, and to directly call them racists, but that’s not the answer he received: VELSHI: Was there at any point empathy that you had for the job that they had to do, or did they come across as the instruments of a racist government policy? CLUSIAU: You know, I have a lot of empathy for the I.C.E. Officers. MSNBC’s agenda has been to demonize I.C.E. so that viewers believe that it’s a malicious and racist organization. While, the filmmakers were not that hostile towards I.C.E., it was left to Velshi to perpetrate the hostility. This pro-open borders segment was sponsored by Allstate and Volvo. To fight back against MSNBC, go here to contact their advertisers. Read the full transcript below: MSNBC’s The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell 08/03/2020 10:41:57: PM ALI VELSHI (MSNBC HOST): Time after time the Trump administration has tried to silence insider accounts that show how dangerous it is to have Donald Trump in the White House surrounded by enablers. Donald Trump didn't want you to read the damning tell-all books by his niece Mary Trump or former National Security Adviser John Bolton, or by the renowned journalist Michael Wolfe, or by Pulitzer Prize winning Bob Woodward. And now the latest work that Donald Trump does not want you to see is here. It is a documentary. “Immigration Nation” was released today on Netflix. The Week calls it, quote, “the moment damning inside portrait of the Trump administration yet.” We now have this important account of history thanks to our next guests. Two daring filmmakers who were granted unbelievable access to follow I.C.E agents in early 2017. I'm fascinated by how they got this access. Donald Trump was just beginning to implement his racist and inhumane immigration agenda. Over three years, Saul Schwartz and Cristina Clusiau captured the unconscionable and unbounded cruelty of Donald Trump's immigration policies. The New York Times reports quote, “as the documentary neared completion in recent months, the administration fought mightily to keep it released until after the 2020 election. The film makers said they were told that the administration's anger over the project came from all the way to the top,” end quote. Here’s some of the real stories Donald Trump does not want you to see, I.C.E officers lying to immigrants to gain access to their homes, mocking them after taking them into custody. (…) 10:45:56 PM VELSHI: All right. This all exposes how the Trump administration seeks to inflict maximum pain on immigrants through a bureaucratic system filled with falsehoods. The documentary shows that the administration’s policy of deterrence is a political lie used to validate violence against immigrants. After the break, the two film makers who is captured all of this suffering will join us to talk about what has become one of the darkest chapters in American history. (…) 10:50:52 PM VELSHI: Joining us now, the directors of "Immigration Nation" released on Netflix today, Saul Schwartz and Cristina Clusiau. Thank you for being with us today. We appreciate this. I am fascinated by how you got the access you got. Did they not know that you were there with cameras and mics and recording what they were saying because in just the few clips we've played, Christina, I'm fascinated that they let you tape that. CRISTINA CLUSIAU (FILMMAKER): Yeah. You know, we had about two and a half years of access within I.C.E., and it started back we previously from an acquaintance that we had. And we asked I.C.E. If they wanted to do something under the Obama administration, and they said no. And so when Trump got elected, we decided to go back to them and ask them again if they'd be interested, and this time they said yes. SHAUL SCHWARTZ (FILMMAKER): Yeah, it was a -- VELSHI: So they thought it was a better idea to do this after Trump was elected? SCHWARTZ: Yeah, I think the agency was coming under a lot of heat. They understood that the rhetoric from the campaign would bring heat to the agency. You know, keep in mind that I.C.E. is a very special law enforcement agency. It changes quite quickly under political shifts, and I thought they felt that they would come under pressure and wanted someone to come in and document and, you know, we were obviously thrilled to do the story. VELSHI: Christina, talk to me about your impressions of the people who work for I.C.E. Was there at any point empathy that you had for the job that they had to do, or did they come across as the instruments of a racist government policy? CLUSIAU: You know, I have a lot of empathy for the I.C.E. Officers. After you spend a lot of time with them through the couple of years, you start to -- you find common ground, and I think that was one thing to recognize. And so, the common ground also led to conversations and so on and so forth. But you understand that in a culture of policies that are enacted under immigration, when you see from the top down that they're meant to install fear, it sometimes trickles down into the culture. (…) 10:57:37 PM VELSHI: What about the degree to which the mission of I.C.E. has been expanded under this administration? We have heard of missions that I.C.E. Has undertaken, places that they are going to, things that they are doing that are not what Americans understood that I.C.E. was meant for. In fact, some people started calling for the abolition of I.C.E. as a result. How do the I.C.E. Officers feel about that? SCHWARTZ: Again, I think they're in a very difficult position. I think that when, you know, they are very angered by the abolish I.C.E. movement, which obviously really took off after the zero tolerance policy. But this is some of this administration's goals. They as a tactic, political tactic, decided that they would install fear under this thought, under this idea that, you know, if we make your life hard enough, you're probably just going to leave. Now, that's where it’s not been successful. What it has done is put people more in the shadows, and I think that's unfortunate. But I think the I.C.E. Agents -- again, it's a big agency. Some people are going to be tougher. Some people are going to be emboldened to kind of be more bullies. Others are just placed in a very hard position to do their jobs. They're not used to be hated daily. Some of the men and women of I.C.E. Do important stuff like I think most countries need an immigration police so when there is a criminal immigrant that needs to be removed, I think it's okay that there is a unit that does that. The question is under the rhetoric where it goes and what that does to us as a nation. VELSHI: Is it going to be clear from your documentary, though, that maybe there are men and women in I.C.E. who are empathetic, good beings and that this is a government policy problem, or can you make that distinction when you're watching some of these people? SCHWARTZ I think -- I think that's a little bit in the eye of the beholder. I think the viewer -- we -- you know, it breaks your heart to sometimes see the toll. It really does. And I think to some degree there is a toll on the I.C.E. Agents themselves. But mostly, of course, the toll is on the immigrants. I think we've seen not only undocumented immigrants, but people who try to follow the law get hurt and that’s when we’re really turning our back.
New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters has developed a beat of targeting conservative media. On Tuesday, he went after The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway, as well as personalities Ben Shapiro and Allie Beth Stuckey, in “An Outlet for the Outrage Against Trump’s Enemies.” Peters focused predominantly on The Federalist, whose influential commentary has angered liberals since 2013. Ms. Hemingway is part of a group of conservative commentators -- who have large social media followings, successful podcasts and daily Fox News appearances -- that has helped insulate the president and preserve his popularity with his base, even as many Americans say they are likely to vote against him in November. What these writers and pundits don’t tend to do is make the doggedly pro-Trump defenses that appear on Breitbart and erupt from the mouth of Sean Hannity. Often, they don’t bother at all with the awkward business of trying to explain away Mr. Trump’s latest folly. Instead, they offer an outlet for outrage against those the president has declared his enemies, often by reducing them to a culture war caricature of liberalism. ….This almost entirely white cohort of conservative commentators can spend ample time mocking the mainstream and liberal media for focusing on Mr. Trump’s racist and divisive messaging without giving nearly as much consideration to the harm caused, for instance, when he promotes a video of someone shouting “white power.” Through this lens, Mr. Trump’s transgressions seem irrelevant compared with the manifold misdeeds of everyone from the Clintons to CNN….. For a "culture war caricature of liberalism," just consult the internal PC squad in the Times newsroom. Peters sketched in profiles of two other conservative personalities, Ben Shapiro and Allie Beth Stuckey, then hurled this charge. Some media scholars see the desire to pick apart Mr. Trump’s critics as a form of entertainment disinformation. “They try to get you not to believe other kinds of information that you might hear in the larger media sphere, and it’s just fun,” said Khadijah White, a professor at Rutgers University who studies race, gender and the media…. …. [The Federalist’s] sweet spot is with stories that feature conservatives battling liberal politicians and journalists in a clash where questions of privilege, gender and race reveal starkly different worldviews, like Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s confirmation. (Ms. Hemingway, who wrote extensively about the Kavanaugh confirmation and co-authored a best-selling book on the hearings, did not respond to multiple requests for comment.) Naturally, Peters managed to skip Hemingway’s Kavanaugh-related triumph for truth over the Times. Two Times reporters, Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, co-wrote a hit piece of a book about the Kavanaugh nomination, declaring Brett Kavanaugh unfit for the Supreme Court for not admitting he’d been drunk all the way through school. Hemingway secured an advance copy of their book and found that a piece from the book, adapted for the newspaper, deleted a vital piece of exculpatory evidence that reduced the piece’s major charge to third-hand hearsay. Hemingway’s evidence of the paper’s lack of integrity troubled even the mainstream press. Deborah Ramirez’s uncorroborated sexual allegation against Kavanaugh (from a dormitory party at Yale) were part of the frenzy of the Kavanaugh hearings. But under pressure, the Times was forced to update the story with facts from the book: “…the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the episode.” Peters piled on the unflattering adjectives (“fuming commentariat, “aggrieved opposition party”) and threw in one last laugh line: All those protests, some featuring fires set in courthouses and police stations, weren’t just “mostly peaceful,” but “overwhelmingly peaceful”! Forget all the people who have died since the violent Floyd protests began. Republicans and the Trump campaign are pushing those themes again today, focusing on images of unrest from protests in Portland, Ore., and Seattle. But there are signs that this messaging is out of step with the majority of Americans who support the overwhelmingly peaceful demonstrations nationwide against racism that followed the killing of George Floyd.
So much for taking the red pill. The Matrix is firmly in far left, blue pill territory. The Wachowski Sisters are now regarding their Matrix trilogy is an allegory about coming to terms with being transgender. The creators of The Matrix have officially added a new dimension of interpretation to their landmark action trilogy as a “trans allegory.” According to Lilly Wachowski, Neo’s struggle with the human enslaving machines wasn’t just a straight forward action movie about kicking robot ass in the future, it was about the struggles and joys of accepting yourself as a “trans person.” If finding this out is supposed to be us unplugging from The Matrix, well then Morpheus, please plug us back in. Lilly Wachowski, one of the two former Wachowski brothers, (they’re trans women now) talked to Netflix Film Club on Tuesday, August 4 and acknowledged a deeper meaning and interpretation behind her Matrix movies. She stated, “I’m glad that people are talking about the movies – The Matrix movies – with a trans narrative. I love how meaningful those films are to trans people.” See, according to Wachowski and the trans community, it’s all about “transformation.” In the same way Neo comes to accept the hard truth that his life is a simulated reality manipulated by machines meant to siphon his life force, trans people come to accept that hard truth that they were actually a man in a woman’s body all along, or vice versa, while the evil patriarchy would deny them reassignment surgery to keep them slaves to the nuclear family-driven capitalist system. It’s all so on the nose, right? Perhaps we weren’t ready to see in 1999. We were “still part of the system.” Anyways, Wachowski explained, “when you talk about transformation, specifically in the world of science fiction, which is just about imagination and worldbuilding and the idea of like the seemingly impossible becoming possible, that’s why it speaks to [trans people].” “I’m grateful that I can be a part of throwing them a rope on their journey,” Wachowski added. Though it at this point seemed as though Wachowski had been leaving the film open to trans interpretation, she did confirm that it was her “original intention” for the film to be a “trans allegory.” “I’m glad that it has gotten out that that was the original intention.” She claimed that they couldn’t make it more obvious back when the film’s came out because “the world wasn’t quite ready… the corporate world wasn’t ready for it.” Well now that the culture has been completely inundated with LGBTQ everything and people fetishizing any sort of sexual or gender “transformation” they can have, it’s the perfect time for this reveal. Perhaps it injects some new relevance into a 20 year-old franchise, just as a 4th entry in the saga is being produced. Got to get that new pro-Black Trans Lives Matter audience into those theater seats.
Journalists and media outlets have been bolstering Joe Biden’s basement strategy, allowing the Democrat to largely avoid tough questions. Well, he got one on Wednesday as CBS This Morning reporter Errol Barnett pressed him on cognitive decline. The presumptive Democratic nominee offered a bizarre response, talking about cocaine and then asking Barnett, “Are you a junkie?” Will ABC, NBC and other outlets do their jobs and follow-up on this bewildering comment? CBS This Morning’s hosts clearly knew they had a scoop. Vlad Duthiers told Barnett, “The former Vice President seemed to bristle at the question.” Here’s the question in full: “Vice President Biden previously said in June he's always cognitively tested on the campaign trail. But I had a more specific question [for him.]... Please clarify, specifically, have you taken a cognitive test?” And here is Biden’s unnerving response: No, I haven't taken a test. Why the hell would I take a test? Come on, man. That's like saying, before you got in this program, you take a test where you're taking cocaine or not. What do you think? Huh? Are you a junkie? [Starts to laugh.] “Are you a junkie?” Imagine if Trump had said that to an African American journalist. Where's the press outrage on Biden doing it? Also, the question must now be asked by reporters: Did Biden lie when he suggested in June that he regularly takes cognitive tests? Or is he lying now? Both can’t be true. Not rattled at all, Barnett followed-up: “What do you say to President Trump who brags about his tests and makes your mental state an issue for voters?” An annoyed Biden insisted, “Come on, man! I know you're trying to goad me.” Barnett tried to get more on the cocaine insinuation, but so far with no luck: “Now we asked the Biden campaign this morning if they wanted to add any additional context to those remarks, specifically comparing a mental test to being tested for cocaine. The campaign has not yet responded.” Considering that journalists jump on every Trump gaffe or bizarre statement, journalists have a responsibility to follow up on this and ask more questions about Biden and cognitive decline. A transcript of the segment is below. Click expand to read the full transcript. CBS This Morning 8/5/2020 8:08 AM ET VLAD DUTHIERS: In a presidential election where both candidates are well over 70, each has questioned the other's mental agility. Our own Errol Barnett asked the presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden, about that. Errol, good morning again. So the former vice president seemed to bristle at that question. ERROL BARNETT: That's right. Good morning. You know, we had an opportunity to speak to the vice president as part of the convention for National Association for Black and Hispanic Journalists which is kicking off today. We covered a wide range of topics. But as you know, President Trump has made his mental ability and agility a campaign topic. And Vice President Biden previously said in June he's always confidently tested on the campaign trail. But I had a more specific question. Here's the exchange: Please clarify specifically, have you taken a cognitive test? JOE BIDEN: No, I haven't taken a test. Why the hell would I take a test? Come on, man. That's like saying, before you got in this program you take a test where you're taking cocaine or not. What do you think? Huh? Are you a junkie? [Starts to laugh.] BARNETT: What do you say to President Trump who brags about his tests and makes your mental state an issue for voters? BIDEN: Well, if he can't figure out the difference between an elephant and a lion, I don't know what the hell he's talking about. Did you watch that happen — come on, man. I know you're trying to goad me. But I mean, I'm so forward looking to have an opportunity to sit with the President or stand with the President in the debates. BARNETT: Now we asked the Biden campaign this morning if they wanted to add any additional context to those remarks, specifically comparing a mental test to being tested for cocaine. The campaign has not yet responded. The vice president will hold a number of virtual events this afternoon, including one with Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, one of his potential VP picks. And we expect an announcement on that front in the coming days. Vlad? DUTHIERS: Yeah, Errol, I think one of the important points that he made in your interview with him is he said that he's looking forward to debating the president of the United States. Something that some of his supporters have said probably would not happen, that he wasn't interested in doing that. Errol Barnett, good to see you, my friend. Thank you very much for that.