Bad Week for Fake News Media

It was a rough week for the Fake News Media, and I don’t just mean having two of their top heads outed as rapists. (Only two so far, right? I haven’t checked in a few hours.)

By the way, about that term “Fake News”: the president didn’t invent that, like many people think. CNN invented it. They were pissed that a couple of stories that they wanted to bury came out through ordinary people on social media last year and may have influenced some voters. So they came up with this promotional idea where they would promote “Real News” being approved mainstream sources like themselves, and then everything else like independent researchers and bloggers would be Fake News that all decent people should avoid. Get all your news from approved sources, or you’re probably a terrorist. (Facebook and Twitter are now trying to do the same thing algortithmically.)

So some of us (nerds on the Internet) saw that and realized we could shove that term right back down their pie-holes, because they’re faker than anyone these days, so we proceeded to do that. Mr. Trump picked up on it at some point, which we loved, because the bully pulpit of the presidency is far more powerful than some nerds (we do okay).

So, bad week for them. First there was the Tillerson story. Someone picked up a supposed leak that said Tillerson was out, Pompeo over to State, etc. Within minutes, the MSM were all repeating it. Now, I read a book when I was young about a boy reporter. Don’t remember what it was called, but this boy was very serious about reporting. He always made sure to get the Who, What, When, Where, and Why, and he always checked his sources. I think journalism schools used to teach things like verifying facts with multiple sources, but they sure don’t follow that anymore. One anonymous source is enough to run with a story, and one tweet based on an anonymous source is enough for all the rest of them.

Here’s the thing: *I* could do that. You could too. Any of us could watch Twitter, grab a tweet we like the looks of, and promote it as news. Give us a CNN byline, and it would be news, and lots of people would take it seriously. That’s ridiculous.

So Tillerson wasn’t out, just another false story, no harm done, right? But there’s a purpose behind it. One goal is to sow dissension in the White House by making them worry who’s leaking things. Another is to cause trouble between Trump and Tillerson. It’s known that they don’t always get along, so maybe a story like that could make Tillerson angry and get him to do a “I quit before you can fire me,” or say something rude to Trump. Or maybe it’ll make Trump think one of them is leaking, and fire the guy. It’s not a mistake they made because they’re sloppy; it’s an attempt to turn their narrative into reality, instead of reporting on reality.

A small one was the Hillsdale story. Hillsdale is a small college that’s known for not taking any federal funds, and for teaching a conservative curriculum that’s become popular among homeschoolers as well. (Obviously bad sorts.) Something in the new tax bill apparently gives a break to them that it doesn’t give to all the regular colleges — which get federal funds from all sorts of different programs. This didn’t sit well with leftists, that this one school they don’t like would get special treatment. Senator Schumer claimed all this, and the media ran with it for a day. But it was a lie. There are at least six other colleges in the country that will qualify for the new exemption. It doesn’t matter whether Schumer knew he was lying; the reporters should have checked.

The big one was the Flynn charges. As soon as that broke, ABC ran with a claim that Flynn had agreed to testify against Trump, and that Trump had told him to talk to Russia. Again, this was based on a single tweet claiming it came from a “confidant.” It was false on both counts, and later in the day ABC apologized and ran a retraction. But again, they did it with a purpose. The false report ran around social media all day, and by the time they ran the retraction, a lot of people had disconnected from the news for the weekend. So there are millions of liberals running around smiling because they think Flynn-testify-IMPEACH! and nothing of the sort is coming. When it doesn’t happen, they’ll think he cheated his way out of it or something. That’s just cruel.

It’s gotten ridiculous, with more false reports than true at times, and even dangerous. The ABC report sent the stock market diving for a while, because something like an impeachment would naturally breed a lot of uncertainty, which the market doesn’t like. It mostly recovered later when everyone figured out it was Fake News, but maybe the next fake story will crash it good and hard. It’s also increasing the divisions in society. People are being wrapped in a bubble of disinformation and being encouraged to stay in it, nice and comfy and being told what they want to hear all the time. Stick to the approved news channels, and let Twitter and Facebook filter your feed so you don’t see any offensive ideas, everything will be fine. What happens when they step out of that bubble?

The networks should start thinking about their FCC licenses. A license isn’t the First Amendment. The First Amendment Freedom of the Press means you can start a newspaper and print whatever you like (though President Lincoln did lock up lots of them). An FCC license is a privilege that comes with responsibilities, not total freedom. It limits what they can broadcast, like nudity and bad language, and requires things like hours devoted to educational material. There used to be something called the Fairness Doctrine that said networks had to give some time to both sides. That’s why round-table talk shows always had a token conservative. I think they dropped that a few years back, but they still have limits. Sedition (trying to overthrow the government) is probably not allowed. I’m not an expert, but from what I’ve seen, some licenses could be in jeopardy if the FCC started enforcing the rules.

But like I said several months back, we don’t need them anyway. If I want to know what the White House is saying, press conferences are broadcast online every day. I don’t need the MSM to tell me anything official, and they lie constantly about everything else. I’m better off getting information by word-of-mouth from people involved in things and local reporters who are actually on the scene, the way it was done before mass communications made the MSM possible. We need to cut them out of our information loop, before they get us warring with each other any worse.

I’d go into the news about Strzok, the FBI agent having the affair and sending anti-Trump texts while investigating Trump, because it’s awesome, but this is already too long. Maybe tomorrow.


The Age of Secrets

Some of the men who were whisked out of the US after 9/11 were arrested in Saudi Arabia (SA) a couple nights ago. What they know about that day could come out after all, in their trials there or after we get a shot at them (17 new indictments were sealed in D.C. yesterday). Are Americans ready to know what happened on 9/11? What if that’s the least of it, just the tip of an iceberg of lies?

In the spirit of a friend named Q, some questions and answers:

What does the global economy run on?
Oil and debt.
But what does the economy of power run on?
Secrets. Powerful people have secrets, and if you know those secrets, their power is yours.
Which is more powerful?
Secrets. Knowing the right secrets lets you control the oil price, start wars, print money, elect governments, etc.
What has been happening in Hollywood?
Secrets being exposed.
What just happened to 60 admirals?
Secrets exposed. Fat Leonard.
What just happened to the British royals?
Secrets exposed. Paradise Papers.
What has been happening in D.C.?
Many investigations, secrets starting to slip out. Also politicians retiring.
What is one reason a politician might retire unexpectedly?
To avoid his secrets being exposed.
Are there far more secrets in all those places?
Oh yeah.
If you had known all those secrets, how powerful would you have been?
Almost limitless.
In this economy, who has the most power?
The holder of the most/biggest secrets.
Who might that be?
Those who have been collecting them the longest.
Where did the intelligence services come from?
They grew out of private security run by banking firms in the middle ages.
What are the descendants of those banking firms?
Today’s big central banks, with BIS at the top.
When secrets are exposed, what happens to the power they provided?
So whose power is dwindling as we speak?

I think we’re nearing the end of the Age of Secrets, and entering an Age of Truth, or at least an Age of Information. Maybe call it the Age of Leaks. I don’t know if we’re going to like it any more in the long run, but it’s too late to stop it now, and it should be interesting, at least.

His name was Seth Rich.

Still Just Regular 2-D Chess, Played Well

My thoughts on the DACA situation, posted on /pol/ a couple days ago, and reposted here with a little clean-up:

President Trump was in a no-win situation.  If he just canceled DACA, the media, Democrats, and GOP cucks would beat him up with the bad options of deporting “children” forever.  The courts would surely block their deportation, and he’d have to go over their heads to get it done.  He might win, but it would use up a lot of political capital and hurt him with the normies who don’t want to be “mean” to anyone.

On the other hand, if he extended DACA on his own, he’d be going back on a campaign promise (at least to some extent) and angering his base.  Either way, he loses.  And this is true regardless of what he personally wanted to do.

He found a way out by canceling it with a 6-month delay and dropping it in Congress’s lap.  Worst-case scenario, they pass something and he has to sign it, which wouldn’t be any worse than the second scenario above.  But that wasn’t likely, because they’ve shown no sign of being able to pass anything else.  And he was right.  The GOPe got hammered o nthe phones (so did he, but that’s okay because he knows what he’s doing and he’s not a scared rabbit), so they know they can’t pass something for the DACAs when they can’t pass anything for Americans, without getting killed, no matter how much they’d like to cuck on it.  That’s why they were so anxious to have him do it for them.  The Democrats are also getting killed by their own base, which is now threatening Americans and saying it will accept nothing except complete surrender to all 11 million illegal aliens (which in reality means tens of millions).

So both parties are getting killed by their bases, and now Donald Trump can go to them and say, “Gosh, I really wanted to do somthing for the DACAs (and he has the tweets to prove it), but Americans aren’t going to stand for it, are they?  I had no idea they felt so strongly about this.  What can we give them in terms of border security to make them okay with this?”  But the Democrats can’t concede anything to him because they’ve spent the last year convincing their base he’s pure evil so he can’t be dealt with, only destroyed.  The GOP cucks don’t want to give him any border security either.  So they won’t be able to pass anything, and then he can tell Americans, “Well, I thought it would be good to help the DACAs, but you have spoken through your legislators, and I as the president must enforce the laws.”

It’s not guaranteed, but it looks good so far.  If it works, it was a brilliant way to turn a no-win situation into a victory.

It’s Called Negotiation, Not Capitulation

Here’s how it’s supposed to work, how it used to work with Joe. C. Average (R):

  • Democrats meet with Joe and discuss several things, including the possibility that Joe would concede on X — something his base would consider a betrayal.
  • They pass a talking point to the media claiming that Joe agreed to X.
  • Many people buy it, and Joe takes the political hit (his polls go down, supporters declare they’re done with him, etc.) that would come from X, even though it never happened.
  • Now Joe has nothing left to lose by doing X, so he goes ahead and does it in exchange for a pittance from the Democrats.

This is what they keep trying to do with President Trump.  There’s only one problem: it doesn’t work on him.  He can tell when he’s being manipulated, and he doesn’t put chasing the polls ahead of his agenda.

Get a Grip

There’s heavy shilling from the mainstream media tonight on the topic of President Trump supposedly caving in on DACA and getting little or nothing in return.  The White House has already denied it, but the usual suspects are already crowing and/or crying betrayal, as usual.

We’ll have to wait and see what actually happened, if anything.  But when the entire MSM jumps on a talking point, the one thing you can be sure of is that it’s a lie, or at least not the whole story.  That’s why they’re the Fake News.  When they push a narrative this hard, it means one of two things: 1) They’re trying to make it happen by convincing everyone it’s already happening (this works sometimes in politics, but poorly on Trump, because he doesn’t care); or 2) They’re trying to distract from a part of the story that they don’t want people to see, by preemptively putting the focus on something else.

So in this case, it could be that Trump got the Democrats to agree to some pretty big concessions, so they sent out the bat signal to their media friends to keep the focus away from that.  Rather than admit he got a big win, they can shout and point to the one thing that looks bad for him, to distract from the good parts.  If he traded a deal on DACA for an end to chain migration, for instance, that would be a huge win, and not something the Left would want to admit at all.  I doubt he got anything that big, but there are plenty of things he could deal for.

The one thing I know is that nothing is ever what the media loudly insists it is.  While we don’t know everything, there are some things we know for sure.  One is that the president considers himself a great negotiator.  He’s not going to sit down with creeps like Pelosi and Schumer and give things away without getting value in return, if only out of pride.  That’s not even about politics; it’s about not being beat at his own game by amateurs.

Compare and Contrast Alt-Retard and Antifa

Very good analysis of the origins of Alt-Retard by a Vox Populi reader. In short: they’ve been screwed by having their history taken away from them and their culture spat on and corrupted, and they’re trying to reclaim it.  That’s hard to do, and it’s easy to get led down wrong avenues and used for the political goals of others.

The harder part is the follow-up to this article: how to reach them. Some suggest a friendly, welcoming approach. On the other hand, sometimes when a person is attached to a bad idea, whether it’s an ideology or a girl who doesn’t like him that way, it takes a slap in the face to get him to wake up and realize he’s making a fool of himself, before he can hear anything different. Since we’re talking about a mass of individuals, both are probably necessary — the slap first, then the welcoming.

A commenter there asked:

Is it reasonable to entertain the idea that the problems described in the email could also apply to SOME of the young men who are involved with Antifa?

Certainly there are similarities. Both are unhappy with the way things are and looking for a person or movement that will Do Something, so they are easily radicalized.

The differences may arise from the fact that Antifa are drawn more from the college educated upper and upper-middle classes, while as this article says, the Alt-White are more working-class. Antifa are just as uniformly white, but they’ve been more fully indoctrinated in standard leftist ideology and things like anti-racism. Their radicalism proceeds along a safer, more overtly leftist path to Communism, as their professors intended. Antifa also includes more females, though they’re masculinized feminists, so they don’t provide a feminine presence at all, just bitchiness.

One big difference is that alt-Retard is interested in history. They know they’ve been lied to, and they want to know who did it and why, and what is the truth. Hence the openness to any conspiracy theory. Because of the Hitler worship, that means they can get steered to particular readings of history that aren’t necessarily more accurate than the lies they were taught in school. But at least they <em>want</em> to learn something, so they may be reachable. The left-wing radicals are strongly anti-history; you won’t find them studying Lenin to find their roots. All they know is from the 1960s, just like the Boomers who taught them. They’re not reachable that way at all.

Another difference is that Antifa are total noobs online. I’m not sure why, since they surely all had computers and Internet growing up. But they have no memeing ability whatsoever, and no staying power in online fights.

(I’ve decided to use this blog to do longer riffs on other blogs for a while, and see how that goes.  I might end up turning comments back on, but I’ll decide that later.  In the meantime, feel free to quote and riff further on this anywhere else.)