53percenter's Blog

Echoing media outlets covering President Trump’s controversial July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and the resulting impeachment inquiry by Congressional Democrats, the intro to Wikipedia’s article on the controversy focuses solely on Trump supposedly demanding an “investigation” into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son. Both the media and Wikipedia have ignored or minimized that President Trump’s biggest concern was Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election helping spark the discredited “Russiagate” investigation.

Wikipedia editors have also refused to mention in the intro that the Department of Justice concluded Trump committed no criminal wrongdoing and characterized mentions of liberal donor George Soros being involved in the controversy as “conspiracy theories” despite the proven role of organizations funded by Soros.

As media began reporting on the “whistleblower” complaint about Donald Trump’s call with Zelenskiy and other interactions with Ukraine, editors on Wikipedia began constructing an article on the topic as well. The article has seen heavy contributions from the site’s left-wing anti-Trump editors who constitute nearly all of the top ten contributors to the page. Wikipedia’s page on the “Trump-Ukraine controversy” authored by these editors presently states in the intro that the controversy is “Trump used a phone call on July 25, 2019, to repeatedly pressure Zelensky to investigate business dealings of Joe Biden . . . and his son Hunter.”

The latest season of Netflix’s Border Security: America’s Front Line has received a big thumbs down from a radical immigration and refugee activist group, which has called the show “propaganda” for border security.

Raices Texas recently tweeted its displeasure over the reality series that portrays the hard work performed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers and agents.

“@netflix propping up Border Patrol propaganda is not a good omen for our $12.99 a month subscription,” the activist organization tweeted.

Dan Bongino

(Screenshot)

Pres. Donald Trump

(Screenshot)

(Johannes Eisele/AFP/Getty Images)

Apparently, it’s not just enough to attack President Trump any more.

The mainstream media is doing its level best to attack anyone defending Trump, too. They’ve got venom to burn and nowhere was it more obvious than on the Sunday talk shows.

As leftists and anti-Trumpsters glide right through interviews with zero probing, Trump defenders, in contrast, are getting the third degree.

Just look at how bad it was over the weekend – here’s a list.

• Start with 60 Minutes, which featured two anti-Trump Democrats and one pro-Trump Republican, stacking the airtime for the left. “I always said, we will follow the facts where they take us,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed, in dramatic, grave, rehearsed, tones to 60 Minutes’ Scott Pelley, claiming she wanted the whole impeachment show to be “a unifying experience” despite doing the exact opposite. Video here. Pelley didn’t do any probing on that colossal phoniness, despite House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy pointing out very accurately later (around the 6:16 point in the video) that Pelosi started her impeachment inquiry well before she had President Trump’s transcript in her hands. Nor was Pelosi (nor was House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff who also got interviewed) asked about the weird little rules change about whistleblowers not needing any firsthand knowledge to file politically motivated complaints, which occurred just days before the whistleblower report came out (almost as if the rules change were planned that way) and whether that might mean a setup. She also wasn’t asked about the problem of Joe Biden’s sale of public office in the $50,000 a month payout from a foreign energy company for the ‘services’ of his drug-addled and otherwise unemployable son. “No evidence Hunter did anything illegal,” Pelley noted, delicately explaining it as a mere “appearance of conflict of interest” if that. Nor was Pelosi asked about what Trump really meant in attempting to get to the bottom of Biden’s own collusion with foreigners which was tied to the 2016 Russia collusion investigation. Pelosi also should have been asked about House Democrats’ letters asking the Ukrainians investigate Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and how that might be any different from Trump asking the Ukrainians to throw some sunlight on Biden’s dealings. Softball? Off easy? Double standard? You decide.
• By contrast, McCarthy got the third degree from Pelley, and to be fair, McCarthy did seem to keep begging Pelley’s questions and he made a minor error on the transcript, which didn’t help his case. However, the interview was choppy. That suggests there may have been some editing done, big editing, taking out all the parts where McCarthy could have been effectively defending Trump. Bottom line: He got mauled.
• That wasn’t the only instance of bias in the press. 
• CBS’s Face the Nation host Margaret Brennan gave Sen. Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, about the same treatment in this video here, starting with the ‘debunked server’ issue. Graham argues well that people need to vote Trump out if they think Trump did something wrong, something Brennan knew wasn’t part of the narrative so she changed the subject. “Do you think it’s ethical to bring up Joe Biden?” she asked. Graham answered a fierce yes, saying there was a corruption scandal that needed to get the bottom of. “It smells to high heaven,” said Graham, calling the whole thing “a political setup” and a “sham,” wanting to know about the whistleblower’s bias, the sudden rules change on whistleblowers, and other problems. Brennan changed the subject and said the transcript and whistleblower complaint “matched” and added ”I think this thing stinks.” Graham was very effective, and every time he made a good point, the subject got changed.  
• Meanwhile, NeverTrump Fox News host Chris Wallace mauled White House senior advisor Stephen Miller in savage beast mode. Video here and here. Miller tried to point out the backstory of Joe Biden’s underlying corruption — using public office to line his son’s pockets and doing some real quid pro quo of politically muscling Ukraine to fire its investigator of the Biden sweetheart deal as reason for Trump attempting to get the Ukrainians to investigate the matter. Instead of listen to that, Wallace got hostile, wanting to know about the utterly irrelevant Rudy Giuliani angle from Miller, saying: “I asked you a specific question and want a specific answer,” and as Miller tried to answer, Wallace interrupted, sharply shouting ‘answer my question!’ while poor low-key Miller couldn’t get a word in edgewise. A particularly nasty mauling. So much for ‘civility.’
• Then there was CNN’s Jake Tapper and GOP House ranking member of the Oversight Committee, Jim Jordan. (Video here). Tapper spent time arguing with Jordan about whether the whistleblower was partisan, a fact that was pretty well right there in the Attorney General’s report. Tapper wanted to fight about that instead of learn anything new. Jordan did manage to smack Tapper back pretty well, and Tapper tried to point out that Republicans were hypocrites about this, changing the subject. He pleaded for Tapper to look at the transcript, but to no avail. Tapper then wanted to argue about the rules change on firsthand knowledge from the whistleblower. Jordan tried to also argue that the firsthand sources contradicted the whistleblower’s report, including statements from the president of Ukraine. Jordan also talked of leaks of presidential conversations as reason for placing the transcripts on the secure server “I recognize you don’t want the facts coming out” Tapper replied. Jordan got ignored – and mauled. 
• Lastly, there was Rudy Giuliani. He made a string of interviews and complained about the double standards of pro- and anti-Trump guests to George Stephanopoulos. He also complained about interruptions, which have been pretty pervasive across the scale. Much ink has been spilled on how Giuliani’s wild Trumpian-style defenses of President Trump (must be a New York thang) wasn’t helping Trump’s case, and he ought to be off the air. The Joe Biden team, however, is now lobbying the press to keep Giuliani off the air, which rather suggests he thinks Giuliani is helping Trump. Guess who the media intends to listen to?

What are we looking at with this mass media effort to silence not just Trump but Trump’s defenders? It’s astonishing how strong the double standards are, and some of the maulings were quite egregious. 

In short, a ‘narrative’ is being created, with conservatives silenced and muzzled, and leftists skating. This is how we get ‘narratives,’ and it’s pretty clear the classic Obama-era narrative-making is now in action. Any questions as to why at least half the public despises the mainstream media? Democratic operatives with bylines means pro-Trump Republicans have almost as many obstacles to being heard as President Trump does. To repeat what Graham says: ‘It stinks.’

Image credit: CNN / Twitter screen shot

Apparently, it’s not just enough to attack President Trump any more.

The mainstream media is doing its level best to attack anyone defending Trump, too. They’ve got venom to burn and nowhere was it more obvious than on the Sunday talk shows.

As leftists and anti-Trumpsters glide right through interviews with zero probing, Trump defenders, in contrast, are getting the third degree.

Just look at how bad it was over the weekend – here’s a list.

• Start with 60 Minutes, which featured two anti-Trump Democrats and one pro-Trump Republican, stacking the airtime for the left. “I always said, we will follow the facts where they take us,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed, in dramatic, grave, rehearsed, tones to 60 Minutes’ Scott Pelley, claiming she wanted the whole impeachment show to be “a unifying experience” despite doing the exact opposite. Video here. Pelley didn’t do any probing on that colossal phoniness, despite House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy pointing out very accurately later (around the 6:16 point in the video) that Pelosi started her impeachment inquiry well before she had President Trump’s transcript in her hands. Nor was Pelosi (nor was House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff who also got interviewed) asked about the weird little rules change about whistleblowers not needing any firsthand knowledge to file politically motivated complaints, which occurred just days before the whistleblower report came out (almost as if the rules change were planned that way) and whether that might mean a setup. She also wasn’t asked about the problem of Joe Biden’s sale of public office in the $50,000 a month payout from a foreign energy company for the ‘services’ of his drug-addled and otherwise unemployable son. “No evidence Hunter did anything illegal,” Pelley noted, delicately explaining it as a mere “appearance of conflict of interest” if that. Nor was Pelosi asked about what Trump really meant in attempting to get to the bottom of Biden’s own collusion with foreigners which was tied to the 2016 Russia collusion investigation. Pelosi also should have been asked about House Democrats’ letters asking the Ukrainians investigate Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and how that might be any different from Trump asking the Ukrainians to throw some sunlight on Biden’s dealings. Softball? Off easy? Double standard? You decide.
• By contrast, McCarthy got the third degree from Pelley, and to be fair, McCarthy did seem to keep begging Pelley’s questions and he made a minor error on the transcript, which didn’t help his case. However, the interview was choppy. That suggests there may have been some editing done, big editing, taking out all the parts where McCarthy could have been effectively defending Trump. Bottom line: He got mauled.
• That wasn’t the only instance of bias in the press. 
• CBS’s Face the Nation host Margaret Brennan gave Sen. Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, about the same treatment in this video here, starting with the ‘debunked server’ issue. Graham argues well that people need to vote Trump out if they think Trump did something wrong, something Brennan knew wasn’t part of the narrative so she changed the subject. “Do you think it’s ethical to bring up Joe Biden?” she asked. Graham answered a fierce yes, saying there was a corruption scandal that needed to get the bottom of. “It smells to high heaven,” said Graham, calling the whole thing “a political setup” and a “sham,” wanting to know about the whistleblower’s bias, the sudden rules change on whistleblowers, and other problems. Brennan changed the subject and said the transcript and whistleblower complaint “matched” and added ”I think this thing stinks.” Graham was very effective, and every time he made a good point, the subject got changed.  
• Meanwhile, NeverTrump Fox News host Chris Wallace mauled White House senior advisor Stephen Miller in savage beast mode. Video here and here. Miller tried to point out the backstory of Joe Biden’s underlying corruption — using public office to line his son’s pockets and doing some real quid pro quo of politically muscling Ukraine to fire its investigator of the Biden sweetheart deal as reason for Trump attempting to get the Ukrainians to investigate the matter. Instead of listen to that, Wallace got hostile, wanting to know about the utterly irrelevant Rudy Giuliani angle from Miller, saying: “I asked you a specific question and want a specific answer,” and as Miller tried to answer, Wallace interrupted, sharply shouting ‘answer my question!’ while poor low-key Miller couldn’t get a word in edgewise. A particularly nasty mauling. So much for ‘civility.’
• Then there was CNN’s Jake Tapper and GOP House ranking member of the Oversight Committee, Jim Jordan. (Video here). Tapper spent time arguing with Jordan about whether the whistleblower was partisan, a fact that was pretty well right there in the Attorney General’s report. Tapper wanted to fight about that instead of learn anything new. Jordan did manage to smack Tapper back pretty well, and Tapper tried to point out that Republicans were hypocrites about this, changing the subject. He pleaded for Tapper to look at the transcript, but to no avail. Tapper then wanted to argue about the rules change on firsthand knowledge from the whistleblower. Jordan tried to also argue that the firsthand sources contradicted the whistleblower’s report, including statements from the president of Ukraine. Jordan also talked of leaks of presidential conversations as reason for placing the transcripts on the secure server “I recognize you don’t want the facts coming out” Tapper replied. Jordan got ignored – and mauled. 
• Lastly, there was Rudy Giuliani. He made a string of interviews and complained about the double standards of pro- and anti-Trump guests to George Stephanopoulos. He also complained about interruptions, which have been pretty pervasive across the scale. Much ink has been spilled on how Giuliani’s wild Trumpian-style defenses of President Trump (must be a New York thang) wasn’t helping Trump’s case, and he ought to be off the air. The Joe Biden team, however, is now lobbying the press to keep Giuliani off the air, which rather suggests he thinks Giuliani is helping Trump. Guess who the media intends to listen to?

What are we looking at with this mass media effort to silence not just Trump but Trump’s defenders? It’s astonishing how strong the double standards are, and some of the maulings were quite egregious. 

In short, a ‘narrative’ is being created, with conservatives silenced and muzzled, and leftists skating. This is how we get ‘narratives,’ and it’s pretty clear the classic Obama-era narrative-making is now in action. Any questions as to why at least half the public despises the mainstream media? Democratic operatives with bylines means pro-Trump Republicans have almost as many obstacles to being heard as President Trump does. To repeat what Graham says: ‘It stinks.’

Image credit: CNN / Twitter screen shot