“Fake News”: The Fake News Story
In stunning projection, mainstream media, has obsessed over the dissemination of “fake news” for weeks now. During a tribute to Senator Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton gave a speech where she claimed, “Fake news has real-world consequences.” She then announced that bipartisan legislation was making its way through Congress to stop fake news.
Fake news is MSNBC, FOX, CNN, ABC, The NY Times, The Washington Post, and any other corporate-owned information channel that focused on stories that lacked substantial analysis of every candidate’s policies. Info Wars, Breitbart, The Daily Mail, and The Blaze do absolutely air fake news, too. However, the worst offenders are the corporate-owned cable stations, which are the most easily accessible to the average American. Clinton and most of the Democratic cronies in Washington DC are so upset that they’re so painfully out-of-touch with the public that it’s come down to State-sponsored censorship.
To be fair, the mainstream news currently operates in collusion with the US Government. Often times, stations like CNN will interview politicians so long as they aren’t asked hard questions. This ensures CNN has access to politicians in the future and the politician isn’t subjected to “watchdog” style news. This is an insidious game that spreads misinformation to the public. However, the legislation Clinton addressed is a draconian and oppressive measure rooted in fuedal England. This new legislation could impact independent news outlets and work to quash governmental dissent. Scary times.
But isn’t the very existence of “fake news” an indictment of the mainstream media that left the public reaching for other news sources?
The First Amendment allows the press to be free from governmental interference. It’s okay for Washington DC to be upset that Trump voters weren’t educated enough to see through Trump’s promises. The solution is more education and tuition-free colleges and universities to ensure that next election there’s an informed voter base. Clinton begrudgingly endorsed an affordable college plan that was rejected in the marketplace of ideas during the primaries. Voters overwhelmingly liked Bernie Sanders’ plan better.
To add fuel to the fire, The Washington Post published an article claiming that a secret CIA assessment found that Russia helped Trump win the White House. The sources were anonymous and the claims were essentially baseless. The majority of the article centered around finding the source of leaked Democratic National Committee emails.
Exceptional journalist, author, and former constitutional lawyer, Glenn Greenwald, provided some clarity on the matter. He wrote a response to the Washington Post’s shoddy article. Greenwald reminds us that anonymous accusations that perpetuate the US Government’s narrative about Trump’s victory do not amount to credible evidence.
He also points out that two of the most powerful executive agencies, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) are at odds about the election. The FBI is still upset over Clinton’s mishandling of classified information. The CIA is likely still salty about the head of the FBI, James Comey’s announcement to “reopen” a Clinton email investigation days before the election. In the CIA’s eyes, perhaps Comey’s announcement swayed the election in Trump’s favor. Greenwald makes an excellent point about the feud between the two agencies, which have a history of lying to the public for political expediency.
The most important point Greenwald makes in his response is this: Contrary to the declarations of self-vindication by supremely smug Democrats, none of this even relates to, let alone negates, the concerns over their election-year McCarthyite behavior and tactics.
The Blame Game Continues as the Democrats Attempt to Rewrite History
The Democrats and the DNC have failed to take any responsibility for losing. Instead, they’ve blamed everyone else. That is what this all boils down to. Russia is easier to blame than bad Democratic presidential nominees.
To be very clear, if Russia, did actually meddle in the election, then action must be taken. Obama finally ordered a recount but until the evidence comes in and a full investigation has been completed, why is the Washington Post publishing articles like this? Why is there bipartisan legislation aimed at curbing “fake news”?
The investigation must determine whether Russia hacked voting machines. A recount must be completed. This could serve to silence Trump supporters who echoed Trump’s assertion that the election was rigged. Most importantly, it would silence Clinton’s echo chamber who continues to blame Russia for Trump’s win.
But a recount is likely to prove futile. The investigation is unlikely to prove that Russians had any significant impact on the election. In fact, it’s unlikely that Comey, 3rd party voters, Facebook, or anyone else had a more significant impact on the election than the DNC, itself.
Look, the bottom line is that the DNC had the perfect candidate to put up against Trump, which was Bernie Sanders. He trounced Trump in nearly all general election matchup polls, and despite receiving just minutes of cable airtime, he still managed to get about 45% of the Democratic primary vote. The DNC messed up, royally, and the Democrats will stop at nothing to avoid taking responsibility for their failure — even if it means destroying the fundamental right to a free press. To quote Trump, himself – “Sad!” “Babies!”
The First Amendment guarantees a right of the press to be free from governmental intrusion. The founding fathers created the First Amendment as a clear reaction to the suppression of speech and press in England, especially before 1694. Before this time, England had a system of prior restraints, where the press had to obtain licenses or permission before publication. The English law of seditious libel made criticising the government a crime.
Forget, for the moment, the worry that Republicans want to take us back 50 years: the Democrats want to take us back a few hundred years because their precious candidate lost! The Establishment’s beloved mainstream media will not go quietly.
Now, if a thorough investigation proves Russia did substantially interfere in the election, then public discourse can reroute and adjust to figure out the next steps. But until then, the Washington and Mainstream Media must open their eyes! A sizeable, albeit, minority, of the US, supports Donald Trump.
Trump has millions of supporters. Yes, his voters got conned. Yes, his voters were lied to but most of them voted for him because he promised them change. It hurts that he received so many votes despite his blatant racism, sexism, hate, and bigotry. It hurts that his obvious hate wasn’t disqualifying. It hurts like hell.
Clinton didn’t excite voters. Her absence from precincts where flipping votes could have won her the election, make it very clear that she felt she would win without working for votes. The point of running for office is to get as many people to vote for a candidate as possible. In the midst of excitement about possibly shattering that “glass ceiling,” Clinton forgot that she needed policies that convinced average Americans she would fight for them.
Sure, the electoral college can be up for discussion as being the antithesis of democratic, but the bottom line is that Clinton has more general election campaign experience than probably anyone else alive. She knew the process. She knew the precincts she had to win and she neglected them. She failed. She lost. That is nobody’s fault but her own: not Russia, not fake news, not Comey, not Wikileaks, not Millennials, not 3rd party voters, not anybody.
This is not a democracy. This is what oligarchy looks like. You’d better hope this legislation doesn’t leave the House. You’d better hope Obama doesn’t sign it into law. You’d better hope that President Trump won’t have to make the final decision on this one. For him, it’d be a no-brainer. Trump would love to stifle dissent – one of the very things that make the US a land of the free.
How long will it be before Trump imprisons members of the watchdog press? It could be sooner than we ever imagined if this legislation somehow manages to be passed into law.
Scary times, indeed.