You know what you don't see in those headlines? Any mention of God. On the contrary, if the words "pope" and "Church" weren't included, one could assume a CEO or politician had passed.

What does that tell you? It tells you exactly how the press views Christians and what their hopes for Francis were. The proliferation of the Gospel, you know, the entire purpose of Christianity as a religion, doesn't even register with these people. Instead, the Church only exists to serve left-wing secular wants. In that context, "reform" is simply code for secularization.

The press truly wanted Francis to use his role to change church doctrine on things like homosexuality, gay marriage, and sin as a whole. It never crossed the average journalist's mind what the Bible says about those things, nor why Church doctrine is what it is. Everything is a political game to them, and if that meant perverting an institution like the Catholic Church to achieve their ends, that was just fine with them.

That's not how any of this is supposed to work. Christians are not supposed to bend their viewpoints to the world's hedonistic views, and though I disagreed with Francis on several issues, I likewise disagreed with those who saw him as a vehicle for their political wants. The Church, no matter what denomination, is not supposed to be a plaything for left-wingers. It's not supposed to "reform" so that people can feel better about their sin. It is supposed to preach the unvarnished, unchanging Gospel of Jesus Christ.

What do you do most mornings at 2:17 a.m.?

Safe to say, I am almost always sound asleep in deep darkness and brisk mountain air.

But nights are quite a bit different for the current commander in chief and leader of the free world. //

Four to five hours of sleep a night is said to be the norm for the 78-year-old Trump. And his doctor says Trump handles such little sleep quite well.

This is ridiculous.

The non-stop No. 47 president has now been caught doing game-film study in the wee hours of the morning. He was watching reruns of the day's political events on C-SPAN. In the middle of the night. It's true.

The world discovered this by accident.

During last week's Cabinet meeting in the White House, Trump was overheard telling U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer that he had watched his testimony to Congress. And that he had come across it two nights in a row.

Well, actually, two very early mornings in a row.

"You were on every night, at 3 o’clock in the morning!” the president said, sounding impressed. //

For a very long time, almost from its beginning 46 years ago last month, I have regarded nonprofit C-SPAN as a national treasure, especially since I am an admitted political junkie. And someone who was often writing for work about events that the network carried without advertising or pontificating.

It's as if the network thinks that, given access to events and facts free of shading, Americans can think for themselves. //

C-SPAN's video archives and transcripts now contain almost 300,000 hours of its event coverage from today, yesterday, last weekend, and all the way back comprehensively to 1987.

The archives are even searchable.

The New York Times continues to cover up government corruption, on April 11 hitting FBI Director Kash Patel for suspending analyst Brian Auten nearly a decade after Auten helped Democrats frame Donald Trump as a Russian asset. The NYT headline reads, “F.B.I. Suspends Employee on Patel’s So-Called Enemies List,” not something accurate such as “FBI Suspends Employee Who Illegally Abused Government Power To Protect Democrat Presidential Candidates.”

This is a prime example of the press exposing its activist nature. When these select judges ruled on Trump’s activities, it was hyperactive coverage and banner headlines. Judge James Boasberg has become something of a media darling for imposing injunctions and TROs on deportation efforts. Yet when these cases rise to the Supreme Court and get reversed, you might see some pat reporting and solitary articles.

Logic would dictate that if these were in fact serious cases, the coverage would match on either side of a ruling. But as we have become conditioned to for some time, the press is largely dictated by emotion and partisanship. When these judges came out with rulings opposing Trump’s policies, it was blaring headlines, round-the-clock coverage, and every exploration made into how the president was defying the Constitution and burning down our democracy.

Now we get solitary news items and a calming of the waters. Primetime pundits are not delving into the prospect of rogue judges threatening our democracy by attempting to override the president. No “experts” are brought on camera to criticize courts trying to step in and wrest Executive Branch control from the Chief Executive. Outlets are not sharing op-eds about the meaning of it all concerning SCOTUS.

This is a clear sign of an activist media complex. The coverage of the initial judgements were not merely sober presentations of the facts; they were promoting an agenda and encouraging these actions by the judges. Once the rulings come in, then the media makes proclamations and charges Trump with “defying the courts” accusations and interpreting worst-case scenarios.

This is a major advance in the moves by the partisan press. This is not merely farming a narrative anymore; this is a blatant attempt to influence governance. There is a clear anti-administration agenda and they're not even attempting to hide it. They begin from the standpoint that Trump is wrong, regardless of the issue, and then strain to manipulate details to suit that accusation.

Look at one of the impotent arguments made about the use of the Alien Enemies Act when it was said to be invalid because it is an old law from the 1700s. Somehow, this was supposed to suggest that the AEA no longer counts. But for this logic to stand, then you have to question the legitimacy of the very Constitution itself, given that the document predates the law they do not like.

BILL MAHER: "Why do we need to subsidize? We're so polarized. These outlets became popular at a time when Republicans and Democrats didn't hate each other and weren't at each other's throats and didn't think each other was an existential threat. In that world, you can't have places like this, I think, anymore. They have to be private.". //

COUltraMAGA
6 hours ago
I hate that equivocation of Maher’s. “We all hate each other”.

It’s like the Paly’s and Israelis. If the Paly’s let down their arms, there would be peace. If the Israelis did, they would cease to exist.

If the Dems stopped being insane and terrorist sympathizers…we could have a great country. If the Republicans stopped trying to g to fight their insanity, we would cease to be a country.

Our fight matters, and it’s not because we ”hate each other”, Maher.

The question is, why can't it? Why is it continuing to fail at every turn? Moreover, why aren't leftist influencers online like Hasan Piker or Sam Cedar not able to keep up with people like Joe Rogan or even Ben Shapiro?

It's actually pretty easy to answer.

As many of my readers know, the legacy media was in power for a very long time. Decades, in fact. It was the chief narrative creator in the Western world due to it owning the major news platforms.

But as it did all this, it became an exclusive club. Only those with the right beliefs and values could be in it. This power, plus this exclusivity, created an ideological bubble that would never pop thanks to the legacy media's information supremacy. //

Where Limbaugh and Fox News could be framed as outliers from which lies and hate flow, Twitter (now X) opened the door for everyone to speak up, creating millions and millions of problems that the legacy media couldn't compete against. It was no longer a single man or business, it was the very people they were trying to mislead. Attacking X as a platform of hate didn't work because it was the people taking part, and they knew they weren't hateful.

And this created a massive problem for the legacy media, because without its hold on the narrative and censorship to keep that illusion going, the media was revealed for what it is really was: a cabal of elitist liars with little interest in reality.

The shift from being the power in the room to being obsolete happened almost overnight. The media lost its hold on the minds of the populace at large. What's worse, the online influencers of the left couldn't keep up, as they were effectively parroting talking points made by the legacy media. Not that they don't have their followings. As I pointed out in a video, Hasan Piker's audience is large, but rabid, radicalized, and diminishing. //

You could point to a variety of reasons the right is thriving.

For one, we're far happier warriors. We stick to the facts, but we're prone to joke just as much as we are to debate. Moreover, with the censorship lifted thanks to Musk's X, the right's take is far more novel and refreshing than the left's.

But, ultimately, even if it was none of that, the leftwing media would still be in a heap of trouble because what it's delivering isn't news, it's just flat-out propaganda. A lot of the pushback on it isn't even coming from the right. Internet meme-lords who would just as easily mock the right as they do the left are probably doing more damage to the legacy media than one might actually believe.

justpaul
3 hours ago
Taken as a whole, Behar's commentary is that she lied, she knew was lying, then she tried to deny that she was lying before addmitting that she was lying and asking that she not be held accountable for doing so.

Musk needs to sue not Behar, but ABC, who know full well what kind of person it is that they have employed to tell lies on air. And when they have to pay out $100,000,000 for the malicious libel and slander their employee peddles on their behalf, maybe then Joy will find that she has all the time in the world to work on that important memoir of hers.

Political-Paige
2 hours ago
So anyone born in Germany is a Nazi. And anyone born in Columbia is a cartel thug. And anyone born in Borneo is a cannibal.
That's how unregenerate racists see the world.
And she is a racist.

And as each one of these details emerges it's only drawing more attention to the network, to the documentary, and to the problems behind BBC’s stance on the war.

With all of these controversies emerging, Israel is getting involved and has called for action. All of these developments have the network completely off balance now and internal reviews are taking place. This becomes a very interesting aspect because the BBC has a history of proclaiming how much editorial rigor they possess at the network. Questions are emerging now on whether or not this documentary passed through the proper editorial channels and legal assessments seen in the past at the BBC. //

What is fairly apparent is that this is a fiasco that has been generated from the network’s longstanding position of backing for Palestine and, by extension, Hamas. The BBC has held the approach towards this conflict of not labeling Hamas as a terrorist outfit, nor willing to call its violent actions acts of terrorism. The BBC has shown to be more than willing to run with claims and outright propaganda from Hamas with little journalistic skepticism.

When the group turned over the bodies of some of the murdered hostages, the BBC was sure to include the statement from Hamas that they did everything in their power to save their lives. It has been shown the family had been murdered by their captors. Over the weekend one of BBC’s prominent voices commented (in a now-deleted post) that Hamas celebrating over the bodies of hostages and Israeli emotional reactions to getting its people back were equally nauseating displays.

MSNBC is set to write a large check after the network chose to settle a $30 million defamation lawsuit. Multiple hosts were caught up in the scandal, including Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, and Nicolle Wallace, all of which repeated the lie that a doctor was performing "mass hysterectomies" at an ICE facility under the Trump administration.

Karoline Leavitt @PressSec
·
More fake news from the @AP

1. DOGE doesn’t even have a Facebook page

2. No air traffic controllers nor any professionals who perform safety critical functions were terminated

Tara Copp @TaraCopp
.@FAANews: FAA staff fired over the weekend included personnel that worked radar, landing and navigational aid maintenance, among others. Hundreds were fired, just weeks after a fatal mid-air collision in DC killed 67. One employee said they were harassed on Facebook by @DOGE…
10:21 PM · Feb 17, 2025. //

Chuck Todd @chucktodd
·
Replying to @PressSec @GNHarben and @AP
The report never says DOGE had a facebook page nor does the report say there were air traffic controllers fired. So you are denying facts or accusations that were not reported or made.

Sister Toldjah 💙 @sistertoldjah
·
Classic "our sources told us" trick. But the report never noted that DOGE doesn't have a Facebook group, which is kinda critical information to put in a story where a source is alleging DOGE's Facebook group (which doesn't exist) targeted him. #Journalism
11:43 PM · Feb 17, 2025

By spotlighting AP, Trump is amplifying Republican and conservative criticisms that the AP Stylebook, a first reference for most U.S. news organizations, shapes political dialogue by favoring liberal words and phrases concerning gender, immigration, race and law enforcement.

Taylor Budowich, Deputy White House Chief of Staff, elaborated on their position:

"This isn't just about the Gulf of America," White House deputy chief of staff Taylor Budowich told Axios. "This is about AP weaponizing language through their stylebook to push a partisan worldview in contrast with the traditional and deeply held beliefs of many Americans and many people around the world."

Scott Morefield
@SKMorefield
·
Follow
Secretary of State Marco Rubio defends @JDVance's "historic" speech last week in Munich, leaves ABC's Margaret Brennan speechless after she tries to claim that free speech was "weaponized" by the Nazis. Incredible exchange: 👇

3:56 PM · Feb 16, 2025. //

To start, the "investigative news program" did an entire segment on why free speech is bad, fawning over German laws that throw people in jail for posting "disinformation," and be sure to stick around because that comes back into play later in the episode. Here's the CEO of an NGO called "HateAid," an ironic name if I've ever seen one, explaining how free speech must have "boundaries" lest people rely on it to "say anything they want.". //

I wonder why half of Germans might be scared to post their political opinions online. What could possibly cause so many people to live in fear of what they say? Could it be because Germany throws people in jail for speech its officials deem to be "disinformation?". //

In broad terms, I don't think trying to make overpaid government bureaucrats who spent their time dolling out taxpayer money to foreign entities into victims is going to be very effective. Did "60 Minutes" run segments shedding tears for the people who lost their jobs when the same bureaucratic state pushed for the shutting down of the country for COVID-19? Or what about the workers who were left hanging when former President Joe Biden canceled the Keystone XL pipeline? I could spend all day listing examples.

Now, are you ready for the big twist? In the same episode "60 Minutes" lauded anti-free speech laws in Germany under the guise of policing "disinformation," it turns out they lied about who Drye and Dubard were. It turns out both were not actual USAID employees by contracted consultants, with one being a speechwriter for Samantha Power, the politically appointed head of the agency during the Biden administration. //

So a major news outlet promoted laws that punish the spreading of "disinformation" and then proceeded to spread disinformation for partisan gain. You can't make this stuff up. Truly, CBS News is on another level right now.

But if you were hoping to listen to it, and you were watching MSNBC as the swearing-in happened, you would have been out of luck. Here's host Katy Tur saying they're going to be listening to the event and what Trump has to say, and then cut to an "expert" for commentary about the event. But then, suddenly, she shifts and essentially says, "Oops, we're not going to be listening. Sorry, folks! We're just going to 'watch'" — without letting the people hear the ceremony or any of the important things they might have to say.

"In other words, as the President asserts, ‘[t]he Russia Collusion Hoax was dead, at least until Defendants [as members of the Pulitzer Prize board] attempted to resurrect it’ by conspiring to publish a defamatory statement falsely implying that the President colluded with the Russians."

In their motion to dismiss, the Board had asserted that their statement defending the awards was purely opinion and not actionable. Artau, however, points out that they injected claims of fact.

"The board members vouched for the truth of reporting that had been debunked by all credible sources charged with investigating the false claim that the President colluded with the Russians to win the 2016 presidential election," he wrote.

Artau states that President Trump met the burden of establishing jurisdiction for the trial court and can therefore "proceed with his asserted claims that the non-resident defendants acted with actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth." //

Trump's lawsuit countered that assertion, noting explicitly how the Washington Post had “retracted statements from several articles from 2017 relating to the Steele Dossier and other alleged connections between the Trump campaign and Russia.”

Indeed, the Post quietly edited two major articles that relied on the discredited Steele dossier and added editor’s notes to at least 14 other reports.

No matter the intent, it is an unassailable fact that in these three instances involving Politico, the New York Times, and the AP, the massive increase in their subscription business with the US government coincides with Joe Biden's election and is really obvious by February 2021, Biden's first full month in office. There is no such volume of subscriptions in either the Obama or Trump administrations. //

Trump needs to order an investigation into this unseemly financial connection between the Biden administration and the media that covered it and give America a full accounting of what they find. //

anon-mdjj
2 days ago
Since the subscriptions were purchased with my tax money, I demand complete and total access to all the politico pro and NYT subscription services.

Aesthetica @Anc_Aesthetics
·
This is the doxxer at the WSJ who doxxed the DOGE team member and got him fired. She worked at Business Insider who have a history of doxxing people and she was funded by USAID. It looks like she was hired solely to go after the DOGE team.
9:34 PM · Feb 6, 2025

Aesthetica @Anc_Aesthetics
·
Replying to @Anc_Aesthetics
Also worked as a USAID contractor, how did she get access to tweets from a deleted X account? We know USAID is just an offshoot of the CIA. This needs to be investigated.
10:01 PM · Feb 6, 2025

Aesthetica @Anc_Aesthetics
·
Replying to @Anc_Aesthetics
Very silly of her to post her email and signal like that when people can just flood her inbox with msgs that prevent her from doxxing anyone else
10:02 PM · Feb 6, 2025.

Mike Benz @MikeBenzCyber
·
That’s incredible. The journo who doxxed the DOGE staffer worked at 3 of the Top 4 Blobcraft Agencies I stress in lectures do organized political warfare as intelligence work: USAID, State, and DOD’s Political-Military branch. Literally the only resume point missing is CIA 😂

Sam Spade @MusicalPurist
This is the reporter who doxxed and got Marko Elez fired. Note her background:
1:50 AM · Feb 7, 2025. //

anon-BHS
40 minutes ago edited
Question....Who at the WSJ leadership level was the person who just hired K Long , "solely to go after the DOGE team"?
Next question....So, does this reveal to us that the WSJ is another one of the media publications (like Politico) who was receiving USAID funding??? (a discreet attempt to ruin DOGE before it uncovers/exposes their own involvement?)

The looks on their faces. The chyron boldly reading, "DOGE Teen, Known Online As "Big Balls," Now an "Expert." It's simply a piece of art. If the "Newseum" still existed in Washington (it went out of business because no one cares about the supposed heroics of the legacy press) that screenshot would warrant its own exhibit. Everything about it is absurd, including the insinuation that what somebody called themselves online when they were a kid is a scandal.

What makes this so perfect is just how deeply concerned these press apparatchiks pretend to be. These are the same people who have never spent an ounce of energy worrying about the waste and corruption within the federal government when Democrats are in charge. Let Trump appoint a few people to root out that waste and corruption, though, and suddenly it's a national emergency for CNN and the rest of the legacy media.

No one believes any of this is sincere. It's all partisan politics, and if the press thinks they can scare DOGE off the trail by doxxing its members, they are sorely mistaken. //

Short-haired Red
12 minutes ago
Mark Zuckerberg founded Facebook when he was 19. Bill Gates founded Microsoft with Paul Allen when he was 19. Steve Jobs founded Apple with Steve Wozniak when he was 21. Scott Jennings needs to bring these truths onto CNN this morning. //

anon-g58b
34 minutes ago
Mozart wrote a symphony at 5. Mendelsohn was about 17 when he wrote Midsummer's Night Dream music (which includes the wedding march that almost everyone plays when the ceremony is over) Obama was in high school when he started toking.

Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) cut down USAID, which will effectively be shut down today. The entire operation will be absorbed into the State Department, keeping fewer than 300 out of a 10,000-person staff. The waste was unreal, and while the Left can only say this is a small budget item, that doesn’t negate the premise of DOGE, which is operating at the direction of President Donald J. Trump.

Also, isn’t that the most DC rebuke ever: well, it’s a little fraud. No, we’re done with that nonsense. And the only people who are furious are worthless federal workers and their Democrat allies who can no longer use USAID to subsidize their wasteful and arguably fraudulent pet projects on the taxpayers’ dime.

So, with Politico embarrassed and exposed by the reported USAID payola-rama, it’s hilarious that two anti-Elon Musk stories get published a day after the agency’s alleged subsidizing of the Democrat-media complex is exposed.

What you see in the above clip is how the sausage is made for these left-wing legacy media outlets. They were all in for Harris, and what "60 Minutes" did here proves that. CBS News has a lot of explaining to do, and no one should ever trust anything they produce again.

Things are about to get much worse, though, so buckle up. According to recently revealed records, left-leaning news outlet Politico received over thirty-four million dollars from USAID and other government agencies. That money went to pay for "subscriptions" for various bureaucratic officials, including "pro" subscriptions that add up to over $10,000 a pop. //

Stephen L. Miller @redsteeze
·
Guess which outlet the Biden campaign and intel officials solicited the laptop letter story to?

Sunny @sunnyright
We do indeed appear to be funneling large sums of tax money to @politico so that some bureaucrats can read left-wing journalists complain about Republicans
9:02 AM · Feb 5, 2025. //

There's more, though, and while it's speculative, it's certainly a pretty big coincidence. After all the funding from USAID to Politico got shut down in late January, they suddenly missed their next pay period, claiming "technical difficulties.". //

If you've ever wondered how some of these left-wing news outlets stay afloat financially, what has been revealed about Politico is one big reason. Democrats use federal agencies to funnel money for the express purpose of influencing elections and pushing left-wing ideology. It's been out in the open with organizations like NPR and PBS, but the level of corruption we are going to find out about will be mind-blowing. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

Politico should not survive this. To take millions of dollars from the entity you are covering and not let your readers know about it is a huge breach of journalistic ethics. Hopefully, this leads to major investigations because does anyone actually believe it costs $447,998 for 37 subscriptions to a news site? If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.