Media/Journalism Cringe Megathread - Hot off the Presses

[Cherico]

They are really angry Rogan blew up their narrative about the Wu Flu, theraputics, and the 'need' for the Wu Flu vax's. The mass media know he reaches more people than they do these days, and are now doing everything possible to try to discredit him.

When the wests civil wars end historians will most likely blame an out of control monopolistic media for the tragic events.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

Okay guys, keep in mind this thread is about cringe news media and we are getting quiet far from any news article here. Stop this derailment!

 

[Husky_Khan]

Speaking of mislabeling people, look what CNN did to Democratic Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.

Looks like the Republicans won't have to wait until the 2022 MidTerms to take the Senate. CNN already revealed one of the Democrats switched parties! 😁

CNN labels Kyrsten Sinema a Republican in on-air graphic

The Arizona Democrat is often attacked by liberal critics as being a Republican.

www.foxnews.com

 

[LTR]

Okay guys, keep in mind this thread is about cringe news media and we are getting quiet far from any news article here. Stop this derailment!

Splintered the discussion into a new thread in the Community Forum.

https://www.the-sietch.com/index.php?threads/the-pan-gender-pansexuality-mega-pan-thread-can-you-name-all-150-gendermon.7069/

Now to do one for the PEDOS!

https://www.the-sietch.com/index.php?threads/pedophilia-a-legitimate-thought-crime.7070/

 

[Bacle]

Tim Pool got SWATTED again.

 

[Cherico]

Tim Pool got SWATTED again.

This is political terrorism and should be treated as such.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

Tim Pool got SWATTED again.

How hard is it for the cops to keep a memo on their desk?

"Hey this guy has been swatted before! Call 'X' number to verify if there is a crisis on this residence to ensure authenticity."

I mean really!

 

[Zachowon]

How hard is it for the cops to keep a memo on their desk that says.

"Hey this guy has been swatted before! Call 'X' number to verify if their is a call on this residence to ensure authenticity."

I mean really!

Because you never actually know.

 

[LordsFire]

How hard is it for the cops to keep a memo on their desk that says.

"Hey this guy has been swatted before! Call 'X' number to verify if their is a call on this residence to ensure authenticity."

I mean really!

After it happens twice, that should certainly be a standing policy. There's no real ambiguity about whether or not it's malicious at that point.

 

[Cherico]

After it happens twice, that should certainly be a standing policy. There's no real ambiguity about whether or not it's malicious at that point.

at that point you start tracing calls and doing arrests when it turns out to be another swatting incident.

This is strait up attempted murder for political purposes and should be treated as such.

 

[LordsFire]

at that point you start tracing calls and doing arrests when it turns out to be another swatting incident.

This is strait up attempted murder for political purposes and should be treated as such.

You start tracing calls and arresting people after the first instance, because it is a crime. Last I checked, it's a felony.

 

[bintananth]

You start tracing calls and arresting people after the first instance, because it is a crime. Last I checked, it's a felony.

A federal felony to boot. There is no parole once the Feds decide to come and get you. When they do the people they're after almost never get a "not guilty" verdict when politics isn't in play.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

This shit is why we should punch back and close ranks whenever they attack one of ours. They hate us. Any tool is justified in its use, no matter how vile. Well, they started it, they will eat MAD.

 

[LordsFire]

This shit is why we should punch back and close ranks whenever they attack one of ours. They hate us. Any tool is justified in its use, no matter how vile. Well, they started it, they will eat MAD.

Spit that black pill out, and take a chill-pill instead.

No, some tools are not justified, and some are never justified.

Throwing the book at people for repeatedly committing offenses like this is justified though.

 

[Cherico]

Spit that black pill out, and take a chill-pill instead.

No, some tools are not justified, and some are never justified.

Throwing the book at people for repeatedly committing offenses like this is justified though.

I'm a fan of tracking these people down and treating swatting like attempted murder.

 

[bintananth]

Spit that black pill out, and take a chill-pill instead.

No, some tools are not justified, and some are never justified.

Throwing the book at people for repeatedly committing offenses like this is justified though.

Plus, the authorities are the ones who should be throwing the book instead of you, or I, or someone else out for vigilante justice.

Inform them and let them deal with it because dealing with trouble is what our taxes pay them to do.

 

[Bacle]

Now seeing "The 'Great Reset' is the World Economic Forum's for post-Covid economic recovery, Rueters and the BBC report." as a forced trend on Twitter.

This is what the 'Fact Checkers' put out:


First the media and elite denied the 'Great Reset' was even a thing, now they are trying to pretend it is just a 'post Covid' recovery plan.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

First the media and elite denied the 'Great Reset' was even a thing, now they are trying to pretend it is just a 'post Covid' recovery plan.

He's making a list, he's checking it twice, the populist's coming to town.

 

[Husky_Khan]

The New Yorker, a fancy magazine, basically lied about Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife. "Journalist" Jane Meyer first constructed a narrative that implied that Clarence Thomas had a duty to recuse himself from cases where his spouse voiced an opinion, which legally, has no precedent.

“My wife and I share many fundamental interests by virtue of our marriage, but her views regarding issues of public significance are her own, and cannot be imputed to me, no matter how prominently she expresses them. It is her view, and I agree, that she has the right to perform her professional duties without regard to whatever my views may be, and that I should do the same without regard to hers,” Reinhardt wrote in Perry v. Schwarzenegger (2011).

Reinhardt also properly rejected the claim that his wife had an “interest” under section 455 (b), even though the organization had filed an amicus brief in the district court for the case now on appeal before him. Thus, Judge Reinhardt demolished every argument from Mayer and her so-called judicial ethics experts that Ginni Thomas’ activities or views require Justice Thomas to recuse.

In fact, Stephen Gillers, whom Mayer cites as the gold standard for judicial ethics experts and who rips Ginni Thomas for “behaving horribly and hurt[ing] the Supreme Court and the administration of Justice,” filed a brief vigorously defending Reinhardt for not recusing:

Gilllers’ unprincipled and hypocritical attack on Ginni Thomas’ permissible conduct and speech is despicable.
Judge Reinhardt also said it is important that “judges not recuse themselves unless required to do so, or it would be too easy for those who seek judges favorable to their case to disqualify those that they perceive to be unsympathetic merely by questioning their impartiality.” To succumb to Mayer’s argument would be to institutionalize judge shopping.

As the late Justice Antonin Scalia observed, overbroad recusal standards “would also encourage so-called investigative journalists to suggest improprieties, and demand recusals, for other inappropriate (and increasingly silly) reasons.” Mayer’s smear piece is the embodiment of these concerns.

But more specifically, the "journalist" just flat out lied about Clarence Thomas and his wife to construct the above flawed narrative.

In every example Mayer cites in her article where Ginni Thomas is involved with a group advocating a public policy position or making a filing in the Supreme Court, Ginni Thomas is not a “party” nor has an “interest” that would be substantially affected by the outcome of a Supreme Court decision.

In one example, Mayer even falsely claims that Justice Thomas attended a luncheon, Impact Awards. Ginni Thomas emceed the event where awards were given to conservative leaders. Mayer writes that a guest at the luncheon, Jerry Johnson, who was then the president of the National Religious Broadcasters, “later recalled that the Justice sat in front of him and was a ‘happy warrior,’ pleased to be watching his wife ‘running the show.’”

Mayer’s claim is 100 percent false. Justice Thomas was not at this Impact Award ceremony. In fact, he has never attended an Impact Award luncheon ceremony. I spoke with Johnson, and he told me Justice Thomas was not at this luncheon. Moreover, Johnson told me that neither Mayer nor anyone from the magazine ever attempted to contact him to ask him if he saw Justice Thomas at this event or made these statements.

The New Yorker Lies Again About Clarence Thomas And His Wife

Jane Mayer’s article is full of falsehoods consistent with the malicious and error-filled book she co-authored about Clarence Thomas in 1994.

thefederalist.com

 

[Bacle]

They are already prepping for a 2024 'loss' due to Trump 'subverting' the election, and talking about how Kamala will have prepare to 'Stop the Steal' on Jan 6th, 2025.