Posts

The Media Knew Hillary’s Server Was Hacked Months Ago yet Remained Deafeningly Silent

/0 Comments/in , /by

Hillary’s server being hacked is old news. The story you’re not hearing about is the media’s willful blindness.

The next president of the United States could be an individual — Hillary Clinton — who allowed classified information to fall into the hands of not one, not two, but as many as five foreign intelligence agencies due to her negligence and illegal use of an unsecured private email server.

And the mainstream media’s malfeasance is helping her get elected commander in chief.

Fox News’ Bret Baier rocked the political world Wednesday with an explosive report, as he cited FBI sources indicating the following:

That the investigation into the Clinton Foundation for pay-to-play schemes was more in depth than anyone previously thought.

That an indictment is “likely.”

And, most shockingly, that the FBI believes with “99 percent” certainty that Hillary Clinton’s private server had been hacked by at least five foreign intelligence agencies, and that information was stolen from the former secretary of state.

Again, to recap: As secretary of state for the United States of America, the Democratic nominee allowed classified information to be placed on a private email server — built at her request — and then failed to make sure that server was secure. As a result, foreign intelligence agencies were able to steal information from that Secretary of State.

This virtually never came up during the Democratic primary; Clinton was never really pressed about her email server’s potential threat to national security. But the media cannot pretend they had no reason to suspect that the security of Clinton’s server was compromised.

Why?

Because Conservative Review’s Dan Bongino broke that story in January — definitively stating that Hillary Clinton’s server was hacked, and that Clinton’s team knew about it.

As Bongino, a former Secret Service agent, wrote (emphasis mine):

The growing divide between government rules that are good for the ruling-goose and government rules that are good for the citizen-gander is a source of friction for Americans tired of being dumped on by the DC ruling class. One of the most disturbing examples of this is the growing scandal surrounding Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email system to share U.S. national security secrets, a potential crime which would have, unquestionably, sent me to prison had I done it as a Secret Service agent on assignment to protect her. And as I state in my book, and as was relayed to me by an unimpeachable source, Mrs. Clinton’s private server WAS HACKED, and Mrs. Clinton’s team knew about it. Combine this with recent revelations that Mrs. Clinton ordered subordinates to remove classified markings from emails before sending them to her over her private, non-government server, and more salt has been poured in this gaping wound.

As Bongino exlplained in the most recent episode of his “Renegade Republican” podcast, “I don’t do tinfoil-cap stuff. I found out from an … as I said in the piece … unimpeachable source who was there!”

Listen:

“I put this stuff out there … media people ignored the story,” Bongino said.

Why didn’t the mainstream media run with the story at any point dating back to January? Why didn’t they press candidate Clinton in the midst of the Democratic primary?

For two reasons. First, Dan Bongino is a conservative, a member of the alternative media liberals scoff at. Therefore, anything he says is null and void.

Secondly, because the liberal media is and always has been in the tank for Hillary Clinton. And everybody knows it. (For more from the author of “The Media Knew Hillary’s Server Was Hacked Months Ago yet Remained Deafeningly Silent” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Undeniable, Glaring Bias of the Mainstream Media

/0 Comments/in , /by

On March 30, 2016, the National Enquirer released a bombshell report, accusing Sen. Ted Cruz of having 5 mistresses, and the mainstream media was all over it, pressing him on the accuracy of the charges, reading between the lines if he didn’t explicitly deny every detail of the report, and talking about it incessantly for days.

Yet all of this was based on one single report from a notorious tabloid, and without any substantiated claims at that.

More recently, after the 2005 video surfaced of Donald Trump’s infamous conversation with Billy Bush, a number of women came forward accusing Trump of inappropriate sexual behavior (serious charges to be sure), and he too was dogged with this incessantly by the mainstream media, who now had even more salacious material to report.

The women were interviewed on TV, and their accusations dominated the headlines day after day. This — in contrast with the flood of stunning, Clinton-hurting, WikiLeaks revelations — was big news. This was what really mattered to the American people. This is what they needed to hear in the closing weeks before the elections.

Hillary Exposed, the Media Ignores

And then yesterday, October 18, lightning struck again, but this time, it was Hillary Clinton being accused of sexual scandals (with both men and women), and the accuser was actually someone who allegedly worked closely with the Clintons for years.

The bombshell was reported once more by the National Enquirer, and it was given immediate, massive exposure by being featured as the lead story on the Drudge Report, read by millions of people each day.

You might say, “That’s odd. I didn’t hear anything about that.”

But of course. The mainstream media doesn’t think you should hear about it, just like they don’t think you should hear about the WikiLeaks revelations or other stories that could help Donald Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton.

Yet it was nothing more than an Enquirer story that launched the non-stop attacks on Ted Cruz, and from the initial reports, it appears that the witness indicting the Clintons is far more credible than those attacking Cruz. Yet thus far, the mainstream media is largely silent on the matter.

As I scanned the online news sites of ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, along with the New York Times, the Washington Post, Time, and Newsweek, not one of them had one syllable about these charges against Hillary Clinton — and I searched these sites 8 hours after the Drudge headline went live.

At the same time, almost all of them had one or more article about Trump’s alleged sexual sins. (But wait. I stand corrected. The Washington Post website really did have much more important news to cover, giving pride of place to this story: First lady shimmers in Versace at the Obamas’ final state dinner. Yes, this is far more important than the other national news.)

Why the Double Standard?

Why the ridiculously obvious double standard? Why the frenzied reporting of a National Enquirer report accusing Cruz of sexual infidelities but such studious silence when the same publication accuses Hillary? Did this notorious tabloid suddenly become reputable when it targeted the staunchly conservative Cruz but again became disreputable when it targeted Hillary?

Worse still, as others have pointed out, the mainstream media has all but ignored the WikiLeaks email dumps, although the information contained in them so far would be enough to sink most campaigns. The coverage has been minimal, at best, and quite understated at that, giving the viewer the feeling that the news is marginal, while what really matters is whether Trump touched a woman on a plane 30 years ago (or, more recently, in other settings).

To further underscore this glaring double standard, if the current batch of WikiLeaks emails had come from the Trump campaign rather than the Clinton campaign, with his people insulting Catholics and with his right-hand man expressing disappointment that it was a Muslim, not a white American, who was one of the San Bernardino murderers, the media would virtually crucify Trump, with shrill calls across the nation demanding that he step down and that he fire his campaign manager immediately.

But when it is Hillary Clinton and John Podesta at the center of the firestorm, the email scandals take a very distant back seat to the sex charges against Trump. (Which, to repeat, I absolutely do not minimize, if true.)

And what if Trump had been guilty of using a private email server for classified government correspondence, as Hillary was? What if his staff had destroyed his laptops and cellphones, refused to answer more than 100 incriminating questions from Congress, pleading the Fifth Amendment, and then were granted immunity? The media would be shouting hysterically, “Cover up! Expose the dirty rascals!”

Instead, when it is Hillary at the center of these very serious charges, they join in the cover-up.

But should this surprise when recently released reports indicate that political donations from the media are 27-1 in favor of Hillary over Trump? And should it surprise us when off-the-record meetings are set up with media elites and the Clinton campaign?

As if further evidence of the media’s extreme bias was needed, just look at the mainstream media’s virtual blackout of two damning videos produced by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas, apparently documenting serious campaign abuses by operatives allegedly working directly with the Clinton campaign. You didn’t hear about those either? No surprise. The media doesn’t seem to think you should.

Recently, conservative pundits Pat Buchanan and George Will have agreed with Trump that, on some level, “the system” is rigged, with Buchanan claiming that, “Big Media is the power that sustains the forces of globalism.”

It’s No Surprise

But again, none of this should surprise us.

As I noted in Outlasting the Gay Revolution:

[Liberal media bias] has been documented for several decades, beginning in 1981, when professors S. Robert Lichter and Stanley Rothman “released a groundbreaking survey of 240 journalists at the most influential national media outlets — including the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Time, Newsweek, U.S. News & World Report, ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS — on their political attitudes and voting patterns.” The survey found these “media elites” to be shockingly liberal, to the point that “54 percent did not regard adultery as wrong, compared to only 15 percent [of the general public] who regarded it as wrong,” while, “Ninety percent agree that a woman has the right to decide for herself whether to have an abortion; 79 percent agree strongly with this pro-choice position.”

I say it’s high time for a media revolution and a listener-viewer-reader revolt, which would mean that the media leaders report the news in an unbiased way, and if that is not possible, they then clearly declare their biases.

And if they won’t do either (or if their biases are too offensive), we take our business elsewhere.

Are you with me? (For more from the author of “The Undeniable, Glaring Bias of the Mainstream Media” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This One Tweet Shows Why You Can’t Trust Media ‘Fact Checkers’

/0 Comments/in , , /by

In the wake of another debate, the self-appointed media fact checkers are at it again. Instead of fact checking, they often dispense opinions packaged as facts, and in some cases outright obfuscate on behalf of Democrats. NBC gave America a textbook case of the latter last night.

During the second presidential debate, Trump explained how, after a congressional subpoena, Clinton’s team had her server deleted of emails. During the exchange Trump made a metaphorical reference to Clinton wiping the server clean. NBC News, hilariously tried to fact check that.

The Claim

Trump says Clinton ‘acid washed’ her email server.

The Truth

Clinton’s team used an app called BleachBit; she did not use a corrosive chemical.

NBC rated the claim a “NOPE.”

This was not satire; they actually did this. What makes it more outrageous is Trump, in the same sentence, used the prhase “Bleach them.” Here’s the exchange as transcribed by the Washington Post.

When I speak, I go out and speak, the people of this country are furious. In my opinion, the people that have been long-term workers at the FBI are furious. There has never been anything like this, where e-mails — and you get a subpoena, you get a subpoena, and after getting the subpoena, you delete 33,000 e-mails, and then you acid wash them or bleach them, as you would say, very expensive process.

Two words after ‘acid wash’ Trump said ‘bleach them,’ which was an obvious reference to the computer program (not an app but that’s an aside) BleachBit.

It is noteworthy that NBC News did not try to fact check whether or not the underlying premise —that Hillary Clinton deleted emails after getting a subpoena — is true. Because it is. Morther Jones, not exactly a member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, reported what the FBI report had to say about the emails (emphasis mine).

Pages 18-19: According to Mills, in December 2014, Clinton decided she no longer needed access to any of her e-mails older than 60 days. […] On March 2, 2015, The New York Times (NYT) published an article titled “Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email Account at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules.” […] In his interviews with the FBI, REDACTED [a PRN techie] indicated that sometime between March 25-31, 2015, he realized he did not make the e-mail retention policy changes to Clinton’s clintonemail.com e-mail account that Mills had requested in December 2014. […] He believed he had an “oh shit” moment and sometime between March 25-31, 2015 deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton’s e-mails.

This explains why data was removed from the PRN server after the New York Times article and after the Benghazi committee had subpoenaed Hillary’s emails. It had nothing to do with anyone around Hillary Clinton. An IT guy at PRN realized one day that he’d forgotten about the retention order and went ahead and implemented it.

The report makes clear that Cheryl Mills sent an email, which the PRN techie received, telling PRN about the preservation request from the Benghazi committee. The techie said he knew it meant he shouldn’t disturb the Clinton server but apparently got confused and didn’t realize this meant he shouldn’t touch the old archives or the backups.

What is not being questioned is whether or Clinton’s team deleted the emails after the subpoena. It is established fact. By rating Trump as false — or in this case ‘NOPE’ – NBC News is intentionally misleading the public.

Remember when you read a “fact check” do some digging on your own, no matter who is providing the “facts.” (For more from the author of “This One Tweet Shows Why You Can’t Trust Media ‘Fact Checkers'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama: Media Makes You Think ‘World is Falling Apart’

/5 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: Getty Images

Photo Credit: Getty Images

President Obama on Friday said social media and the nightly news are partly to blame for the sense that “the world is falling apart.”

“I can see why a lot of folks are troubled,” Obama told a group of donors gathered at a Democratic National Committee barbecue in Purchase, N.Y.

But the president said that current foreign policy crises across the world are not comparable to the challenges the U.S. faced during the Cold War.

Acknowledging “the barbarity” of Islamist militants and Russia “reasserting the notion that might means right,” Obama, though, dismissed the notion that he was facing unprecedented challenges.

Read more from this story HERE.

Nixon Is Gone, but His Media Strategy Lives On

/1 Comment/in /by

Photo Credit: Charles Tasnadi / AP

Photo Credit: Charles Tasnadi / AP

Richard Nixon left the White House in disgrace 40 years ago this month, but the war he launched against journalists has continued under Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and other recent presidents.

Nixon’s resignation is remembered as a great victory for the media. Investigations by Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein, and other reporters helped expose the White House crime spree that caused the president’s downfall. Even though he lost his battle to remain in power, Nixon’s way of handling the press has prevailed in American politics. Intimidating journalists, avoiding White House reporters, staging events for television—now common presidential practices—were all originally Nixonian tactics.

Nixon would enjoy the frustration many reporters feel toward the Obama White House. This summer 38 news organizations sent Obama a letter protesting his administration’s obstruction of journalists. The news groups complained of officials blackballing reporters, delaying interviews until after deadlines had passed, and preventing staff experts from talking with journalists. For example, they said the Environmental Protection Agency refused to answer questions about the mishandling of hazardous waste despite repeated requests from reporters.

Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush, repeated many of Nixon’s arguments—protecting national security and executive privilege—to keep information about his administration secret. Bush bluntly told reporters he did not think they represented the public, echoing the adversarial relationship cultivated by Nixon.

Read more from this story HERE.

Censorship: 38 Journalism Groups Slam Obama's 'Politically-Driven Suppression of News'

/8 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: APIn unprecedented criticism of the White House, 38 journalism groups have assailed the president’s team for censoring media coverage, limiting access to top officials and overall “politically-driven suppression of the news.”

In a letter to President Obama, the 38, led by the Society of Professional Journalists, said efforts by government officials to stifle or block coverage has grown for years and reached a high-point under his administration despite Obama’s 2008 campaign promise to provide transparency.

Worse, they said: As access for reporters has been cut off, the administration has opened the door to lobbyists, special interests and “people with money.”

And as a result, they wrote, Obama only has himself to blame for the current cynicism of his administration. “You need look no further than your own administration for a major source of that frustration – politically driven suppression of news and information about federal agencies. We call on you to take a stand to stop the spin and let the sunshine in,” wrote David Cuillier, president of SPJ.

The administration has dismissed similar charges from other journalism groups, notably the White House Correspondents’ Association, but the new letter sent Tuesday provided several examples of censorship and efforts to block reporter access. Among them:

Read more from this story HERE.

Primary Season 2014: Grassroots America is Here to Stay

/1 Comment/in , /by

Photo Credit: APBy Matt Kibbe.

Politics is a lagging indicator of real social change. To understand what is really going on, you have to take a step back to see the trend line.

So I’m not that surprised that so many political reporters got last night’s results so wrong. Too many analysts don’t understand what’s really happening; others aren’t even willing to try, settling for the easy and simplistic “Establishment Wins, Tea Party Loses” narrative instead. But that narrative misses what actually happened.

I would like to win every political battle we engage in, even as we try to topple well-funded establishment Goliaths. We always fight to win, but we won’t win them all.

We saw some real wins for the freedom movement last night. In Georgia’s 11th District, Barry Loudermilk came in first in his primary with 39 percent of the vote, and is headed to the July 22 runoff. Loudermilk is a true champion of limited government, and will advocate for freedom in health care and education in Congress. Also, Dr. Bob Johnson made his way to the July runoff in his primary in Georgia’s 1st District.

In addition to expanding the Freedom Caucus, we also saw the return of some old favorites from our previous electoral battles.

Read more from this story HERE.
________________________________________________________________________________________________

Photo Credit: Fox NewsHow Conservatives Can Defeat the Media

By J.R. Dunn.

One unavoidable truth that must be faced regarding the media and 2014 is this: the American media has the conservatives’ number. They know exactly where the blind spots are, which are the most sensitive points, and how to do the most damage. And they have absolutely no compunction about taking advantage of it.

The relationship between conservatives and the media recalls the old skit by Monty Python concerning “the advantages of not being seen.” A plummy voice calls out, “Will Christine please stand up?” Christine rises from behind a bush, there’s an explosion, and down again she goes. “Will Todd stand up?” Here’s Todd, here’s the explosion, no more Todd. “Cliven, please…”

A simple formula, and one that always seems to work, no matter how often it’s attempted. Christine, after all, was blown up repeatedly by Bill Maher throughout the late 1990s before she even ran for office. Todd was vaporized in 2012, and Cliven, well, that was only last month. A movement made up of people who simply will not learn from experience would appear to be uneducable. But we’re going to try anyway.

Sensing easy prey in people who so avidly cooperate in their own destruction, the media has relentlessly expanded its strategy for portraying conservatives as gibbering idiots for whom no sane voter would press the lever. For decades the media has collaborated with Democrats and the liberal elites in creating a superstructure that exists for the sole purpose of humiliating conservative candidates and spokesmen. It is proactive, universal, and often quite successful. It has also been virtually ignored by the conservative establishment, which consistently behaves as if American politics is a gentleman’s pastime operating by the same rules that it did in the late 19th century.

It can be said without exaggeration that the major public uproars of the 2012 campaign were either media-generated or immediately exploited by the media/liberal superstructure.

Read more from this story HERE.

FEC Chairman’s Chilling Warning About ‘Disparate Treatment of Conservative Media and Agency’s ‘Impulse to Regulate’ Press

/1 Comment/in , /by

Photo Credit: C-SPAN

Photo Credit: C-SPAN

Federal Election Commission Chairman Lee E. Goodman warned Wednesday that the “impulse to regulate the media” among officials at the agency is “alive and well.” Though the FEC is tasked with regulating money in federal elections, it sometimes attempts to interfere with press issues, he said.

In an interview with the Washington Examiner, Goodman specifically addressed concerns he has about the “disparate treatment of conservative media.” The warning comes as the “right has begun to break the left’s media monopoly.”

“Truth be told, I want conservative media to have the same exemption as all other media,” he added.

In another interview with FoxNews.com, Goodman brought up a 2013 case involving WCBV-TV in Boston in which the station was accused of illegally excluding a third-party candidate in a debate-style program. The FEC analyzed the case and mulled taking action. The case was eventually dismissed.

However, the mere fact that the FEC even looked at the case shows “that there are people in the FEC who believe we have the power to regulate the media,” Goodman said.

Read more from this story HERE.

John Cornyn Rips Chuck Schumer’s Media ‘Shield Law’

/1 Comment/in /by

Photo Credit: Reutets

Photo Credit: Reutets

The number two Republican in the Senate is lambasting a media “shield law” proposed by New York Democrat Sen. Chuck Schumer, potentially imperiling its shot at passage.

“This is a bad idea and one whose time has not come,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), the Senate minority whip, told Breitbart News in an exclusive interview. “Believe me, we will not be rolled over.”

Schumer’s “Free Flow of Information Act” passed the Senate Judiciary Committee in September, and he recently said he already has the 60 votes needed to pass the bill on the floor. “We’ll get a few more Republicans, not many more, but we have the 60 votes,” Schumer told reporters in New York last week.
He’s bluffing, Cornyn retorts.

“If he had the votes to pass it, it already would have been passed,” Cornyn says, adding, “This isn’t about passing legislation, this is about distracting the public’s attention and changing the subject from the failed policies of this administration. I think you could put this in that same category.”

Schumer’s proposal would exempt a “covered journalist” from subpoenas and other legal requirements to expose their confidential sources in leak investigations and other areas. Other lawmakers have proposed similar ideas in the past, but the effort gained new momentum after a series of revelations about controversial tactics the Justice Department was using to target journalists.

Read more from this story HERE. But to find out more about Cornyn, read these stories HERE and HERE.

Media Expert Tim Graham: Fallon Biased for Obama (+video)

/4 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: APNew “Tonight” show host Jimmy Fallon is a “complete tool” for President Barack Obama and the Democrats, says Tim Graham, director of media analysis for the Media Research Center.

Fallon took over from former “Tonight” host Jay Leno, and former “Saturday Night Live” star Seth Meyers has now replaced Fallon as the “Late Night” host. Fallon’s and Meyers’ political leanings have been evident right from the start, Graham said on “The Steve Malzberg Show” on Newsmax TV.

Noting that Fallon is a big gain for Democrats, Graham said, “He’s a funny guy, people love him, but he is a complete tool for the Obamas. Obama can invite himself onto the Jimmy Fallon show and, of course, the Seth Meyers show starts tonight. One of his first guests, Joe Biden. Jimmy Fallon gets Michelle Obama, but Seth Meyers can only get Joe Biden,” Graham said Monday.

Read more this story HERE.