Chinks in the MSM armor: i.e., Trump is beating them: two examples
After the MSM made their pre-election pivot from Trump's mega-free airtime, to HRC's mega-free airtime (which grip to this day has not been diminished).
Apologia: which in the old days meant explanation, rather request for forgiveness. I am analyzing politics, essentially an on-going coup d'etat.
There are so many issues of governmental corruption, that each single member of this community could concentrate on one single issue and have enough material for years of research, continuing to the future. Yet such a disseminated list of topics, would even then be impossible to ingest--i.e., understand.
There are phenomenal writers on this channel, who of course are capable of thoroughly following more than a single topic. I'm not including myself, often having top retreat back into the swamp to avoid some self-created tempests. By the way, the water at the bottom of the swamp the water is very peaceful. It's why so many corruptocrats come join me.
Some studies have shown that Trump gets only 17% non-negative MSM coverage. Note, then, that mentions would at best be neutral, when non-negative. The MSM wants war. Trump is installing his own villains, thank you very much, HRC.
Because there are oodles* of instances, I will pick just two such instances, citing two reports of each.
*oodles = more than a tad, and even more than a bunch.
1. Domestic issue:
NBC, unwillingly had to admit, very reluctantly that the Senate Intelligence Committee (oxymoron alert) would admit to no direct evidence of Russiagate.
WASHINGTON — After two years and 200 interviews, the Senate Intelligence Committee is approaching the end of its investigation into the 2016 election, having uncovered no direct evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, according to both Democrats and Republicans on the committee.
But investigators disagree along party lines when it comes to the implications of a pattern of contacts they have documented between Trump associates and Russians — contacts that occurred before, during and after Russian intelligence operatives were seeking to help Donald Trump by leaking hacked Democratic emails and attacking his opponent, Hillary Clinton, on social media.
"If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don't have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia," said Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, in an interview with CBS News last week.
The rest of the article is very anti-Trump, in the vein of "we couldn't find it yet, but your gonna screw up".
Second example of "No Collusion" admission, from the NY Times:
Much of the articles parrots the NBC article above.
A Democratic Senate investigator told NBC that Donald Trump Jr. admitted in messages that he would accept help from the Russians.
“Trump publicly urged the Russians to find Clinton’s missing emails,” the person said.
The House Intelligence Committee, then under Republican control, said last year it did not find evidence of collusion, but Democrats dismissed the findings as highly partisan.
Since Democrats are now the majority in the House, the committee under the leadership of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) has launched a new round of probes into Trump, including into his personal finances.
The Empire is preparing to strike back.
2. Foreign Misadventures
The propensity of the MSM to endorse war is appalling. What would those SOBs say if it were their turn in the barrel? Ah, well, such is not to be.
Rembember what Hussein said was his only regret about his two terms, was involvement in Syria. Of course, his entire administration was a clusterfuck of corruption and double-dealing. And Hussein begat Trump, who will serve eight years (with definite reservations about that prediction).
So there are arguably two false flag attacks of chemicals being dumped on his own innocent civilians, just as Assad was about to wipe ISIS off the earth. Of course he would want to do that, right? Assad is a sociopathic Arabic-speaking Stalin. Right?
Most of those on this channel immediately recognized the first false flag for what it was, though MSM hushed all that. So almost one year to the day, Douma gets "gassed" by crazy Assad, just as like a year earlier he was again in a situation to subdue ISIS, with Vlad's help. Trump may have been fooled by the first false flag. I think not. He just wanted to cover some of his own business under the guise of harming Assad.
In an extraordinary turn of events, corporate media appears to have been exposed again as an extension of state foreign policy, by a member of the establishment media cabal, manufacturing consent for regime change in Syria.
Riam Dalati is on the BBC production team based in Beirut and describes himself, on his Twitter page, as an “esteemed colleague” of Quentin Sommerville, the BBC’s Middle East correspondent. Dalati broke ranks with his UK Government-aligned media, on Twitter, to announce that “after almost 6 months of investigation,
The scenes in question are those manufactured by the White Helmet pseudo-humanitarian group and activists affiliated to Jaish al-Islam, the extremist armed group in charge of Douma at the time of the alleged chemical weapon attack on April 7, 2018. The scenes of children being hosed down, following a “chemical attack” were immediately accepted as credible and appeared alongside sensationalist headlines in most Western media outlets, including the BBC, CNN and Channel 4. Simon Tisdall of the Guardian wrote an opinion piece, with the headline ‘After Douma the West’s response to Syria regime must be military’ – only two days after Douma, effectively calling for all out war.
A well-considered analysis of this BBC unintended admission can be found on one of my favorite channels for well-considered analysis. The site is anti-Democrat, anti-Neoliberal, anti-Neocon.
So, why are these articles of interest? 87% of MSM Trump coverage after their pivot to HRC was negative. Of the non-negative coverage, most was neutral. So why now is the first evidence of a weakening offensive showing up now? I do not know the exact cause or causes for this erosion of a heretofore solid wall.
Comment: the prior sentence was an unintended pun.