The quiet over the Durham filings continues with the MSM seeing nothing to report. Now maybe there is nothing there more than speculation, but isn’t the media about investigating and reporting?
Then again, if it were all nothing more than a right wing conspiracy would they be silent?
And isn’t it odd the players being accused are so silent?
The most silent of all is the Durham Team. Notice how there are no leaks from them? Isn’t that a far cry from Schiff and his fellow cohorts?
Silence, too, from the media on two New York stories they are reporting.
You see they usually begin coverage with “more gun violence” as if the guns were the issue. Well, the two stories front and center involve a knife killing of a woman followed into her home, and a subway beat down with fists and kicking.
You see it’s not the guns, it’s the criminal with them. In places like NYC, Chicago and LA you have some of the strictest gun laws in the nation. Yet crime is rising and the media reports “gun violence.” No, it’s the criminal.
Yesterday John Catsimatidis, the owner of Gristles in NYC, said there are 3,000 criminals in NY committing the crimes. (There are almost 9 million people in the area.) “Get those 3,000 off the street” he said, and you will solve the problem.
Yet “woke” DA’s refuse to do so. One of those, as noted yesterday, who committed a crime above was arrested 44 times before his latest act.
Not much coverage, but there is a recall vote for three San Francisco Board of Education members today. San Francisco.
Now what is interesting is this.
All three board members named in the recall petitions were first elected to the board in Nov. 2018. They actually received the most votes in an at-large election, defeating 16 other candidates. They called that Woke San Francisco.
Why do they want them recalled now?
Recall supporters said they were frustrated that schools in the district remained closed for nearly a year in reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic. They also said they were upset that the board had spent time voting to rename 44 buildings in the district (No Washington, Lincoln, etc.) rather than focusing on opening schools.
Let’s see the vote, but interesting when San Francisco says you are “too woke.”
Yesterday we wrote asking if all the noise with Ukraine could be an administration ploy to make the President look strong. Yesterday the administration also reaffirmed that Wednesday was the most likely day, but this week was the time that Russia would attack.
Now the Ukrainian President when asked mocked the Wednesday date, he said he “was told” that day but continued to believe there would be no attack.
This morning we have a report that some Russian troops are pulling back.
Wait, how can that be, we’re just moving our embassy out of Kyiv today. Was Putin saying we were just making noise and inflaming the situation, or did our noise scare him?
Let’s keep watch, but keep in mind what we said yesterday.
Wholesale prices were reported this AM to be up 9.7%. That is the highest rate in 50 years. Now the administration has blamed the oil and meat companies for price gauging. It’s those bad companies doing this to you.
Take a look at your energy polices for the former, and spending and work polices for the second.
You see, Mr President, our economy is about supply and demand. Your actions are causing the problem.
The Sarah Palin suit against the NYT was dismissed by the judge while the jury is still in deliberations. He actually said no matter what the jury comes back with he will dismiss the suit.
Now, if you followed the trial at all you heard the NYT editors actually say they messed up and were sloppy in their reporting.
What they did was tie a Palin campaign ad to the shooter in Arizona and say her ad encouraged him. There was no evidence that it did, and later no connection was ever established for that charge. Yet the story ran and was covered by many outlets as fact, after all, the NYT reported it.
Palin sued, the Times admitted they didn’t check correctly and should not have run the story. They actually called it “wrong and sloppy.”
So why the dismissal?
Because the law to sue the media says you must show they had malice in their reporting. So bias, failure to check, sloppy and wrong does not qualify, says the judge. “I think this [was] an example of very unfortunate editorializing on the part of the Times. The law here sets a very high standard [for actual malice]. The court finds that that standard has not been met.”
And thus the media goes forward with biased and unfair reporting protected by a law that needs changing.