Tag Archives: Pulitzer Prize

Who Really Lost In The 2024 Election?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Federalist posted an article about the losers in the 2024 election. Obviously, Vice-President Kamala Harris lost, but there was another bigger loser.

The article reports:

In the early hours of Wednesday morning, legacy news networks were already sliding toward 2016 levels of melting down about the increasingly definite prospect of a presidential victory by Donald J. Trump. For them, Harris’ stinging defeat is personal — because it’s just as much a defeat for them as it is for her.

The corporate media industrial complex has spent Donald Trump’s entire political career trying to destroy him. Hand-in-hand with triple-letter government agencies and Democrats, they ran a hoax painting Trump as a Russian stooge based on ridiculous rumors commissioned by his opponent’s campaign in 2016. They continued to spread the lie for the duration of his presidency, awarding each other Pulitzers for it. And they’ve only ramped up their efforts since then.

The problem they’re reckoning with tonight is this: those efforts didn’t work. They’re no longer able to control Americans by controlling their information intake, because their credibility is farther deep-sixed than the Clinton family’s enemies list.

It is a sad day when media members who lie are awarded Pulitzer Prizes and not forced to return them when it is revealed that they lied.

The article notes:

Since the last presidential election, the media have screeched incessantly about Trump “inciting an insurrection” at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. They made documentaries comparing Trump to the Ku Klux Klan. They portrayed Trump as the ringleader of a terrorist attack and not as a president who gave a speech and urged his supporters to protest peacefully.

Tuesday night’s results are a resounding indication that Americans didn’t buy it.

With help from a debunked story planted in The Atlantic, the media made Trump out to be a “fascist” and routinely compared him to Hitler. When Trump held a gangbusters rally at Madison Square Garden, they screeched that he and his supporters were obviously Nazis because they gathered at the same venue that Nazi sympathizers once rented — along with Frank Sinatra, the Rolling Stones, Elton John, Billy Joel, Beyoncé, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter.

The article concludes:

If the past eight years — and the first few hours of cope-streaming from TV Wednesday morning — are any indication, the legacy press isn’t planning on repentance. They don’t feel obligated to represent Americans; they feel entitled to control them. The loss of that control is making them apoplectic.

Kamala Harris is only the second-biggest loser of the night. Her media shills are nursing wounds that will take far longer to recover from. After all, they were always the ones fighting the hardest to bring Trump down — and after eight years of it, they’re skulking away weaker and more humiliated than ever.

Why should anyone trust anything the mainstream media says after the way they have behaved for the past nine years?

About That Pesky First Amendment

Posted on by

The First Amendment states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Our Founding Fathers had enough faith in the American people to allow them to distinguish the fake news from the real news.  Evidently at least one of today’s newspapers does not share that view. Washington Post reporter Cleve Wootson asked an amazing question at Monday’s press conference with Karine Jean-Pierre.

On Monday, The Gateway Pundit quoted the question:

“One more, Elon Musk is slated to interview Trump tonight on X. I don’t know if the president is going to — feel free to say if he is or not — but I — I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue. It’s a — you know, it’s an America issue. What role does the White House or the President have any sort of stopping that or stopping the spread of that or sort of inter — intervening in that. Some of that was about campaign misinformation, but you know it’s a wider thing, right?” Washington Post reporter Cleve Wootson asked Karine Jean-Pierre.

Karine Jean-Pierre went along with the far-left reporter and agreed that social media companies have the responsibility to shut down so-called misinformation.

Who determines misinformation? The Washington Post shared a Pulitzer Prize for its reporting on Russiagate. All of that reporting turned out to be false. Was that misinformation?

The article notes:

It’s all hands on deck right now to silence Trump ahead of his blockbuster interview with Elon Musk.

The globalist tyrants in control of the European Union sent a letter to Elon Musk on Monday demanding the X owner censor President Donald Trump during their interview tonight.

Why is the mainstream media so afraid to let President Trump speak?

The Cover Story Never Made Sense

Posted on by

In September 2022, the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipelines were blown up. The mainstream media claimed that the Russians had blown them up. This never made any sense–it was a source of income for Russia. There was speculation in some media outlets that in fact the United States was responsible (the claim was that the United States was the only country with the technology to blow up the pipeline). Well, it looks as if the truth might have stumbled out.

On Saturday, Fox News reported:

A former senior Ukrainian official was the coordinator of the explosions that ruptured the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipelines, the Washington Post reported, citing Ukrainian officials and European sources, and in conjunction with German periodical Der Spiegel.

Roman Chervinsky, a former commander of one of the Ukrainian special forces units, was the “coordinator of the Nord Stream operation” and managed a six-person team that carried out the devastating multibillion-dollar infrastructure attack in September 2022, according to the report.

The outlet said Chervinsky and the group of six people rented a sailboat under false identities and used deep-sea diving equipment to place explosive charges on the gas pipelines. 

Chervinsky did not act alone and did not plan the operation, but was obeying the orders of high-ranking officers who ultimately answered to Ukraine’s highest-ranking military officer, Valery Zaluzhny, the Post said, citing people familiar with his role.

That makes sense. Blowing up the pipelines was one way to limit Russia’s income from fossil fuel revenue.

The article also notes:

In February, Seymour Hersh, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, alleged that U.S. Navy divers laid bombs that destroyed the Nord Stream 2 pipeline under a direct order from President Joe Biden. 

The Seymour Hersh article reminds us that even Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists don’t always get the story right. The article makes no comment on who might have encouraged Ukraine to blow up the pipelines, so it is possible that the United States bears part of the responsibility.

I Guess The Truth No Longer Matters In Reporting

Posted on by

On Monday, Breitbart reported that Pulitzer Prize Board would not be rescinding its Pulitzer Prizes given to The New York Times and The Washington Post for its reporting on the Russia hoax. Evidently the fact that the awards were given for articles that later proved to be false did not enter into the decision.

The article notes:

These inquiries prompted the Pulitzer Board to commission two independent reviews of the work submitted by those organizations to our National Reporting competition,” the board continued before announcing the establishment media outlets will keep their prizes.

“The separate reviews converged in their conclusions: that no passages or headlines, contentions or assertions in any of the winning submissions were discredited by facts that emerged subsequent to the conferral of the prizes,” the board claimed.

In total, 20 articles were challenged with formal complaints. All 20 were ruled factual by the Pulitzer Prize Board. The questioned articles include the following titles:

    • FBI was to pay author of Trump dossier (WaPo)
    • Trump reveals secret intelligence to Russians (WaPo)
    • Trump crafted son’s statement on Russian contact (WaPo)
    • Trump’s Son Heard of Link To Moscow Before Meeting  (NYT)
    • Emails Disclose Trump Son’s Glee At Russian Offer (NYT)
    • Unlikely Source Propelled Russian Meddling Inquiry (NYT)
    • Undisclosed On Forms, Kushner Met 2 Russians (NYT)

Despite claims by Democrats and establishment media reports that former President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, those claims were found to be baseless. In March of 2019, the Mueller report found no evidence Donald Trump colluded with Russia to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

So if I report that there is a tyrannosaurus rex in my backyard and it’s Trump’s fault, and I win a Pulitzer Prize for my report, I don’t have to give back the Prize when it turns out the report is false? Wow. Journalism has taken some interesting turns lately.

 

Occasionally The Fake News Gets Called Out

Posted on by

The Washington Examiner posted an article today about a recent award given to The New York Times for their podcast series “Caliphate.”

The article reports:

The paper of record announced this weekend that Caliphate, its award-winning 10-part podcast series on the Islamic State, contains “significant falsehoods and other discrepancies.”

The disclosure concludes an internal investigation launched this year after Canadian officials charged the podcast’s central narrative character with lying about his supposed involvement with the terrorist group.

Absent the testimony of the accused hoaxer, Canadian resident Shehroze Chaudhry, who spoke to the New York Times under the pseudonym “Abu Huzayfah,” there is not much left to the Caliphate podcast. Indeed, the show’s most gripping and grizzly “reporting” on ISIS’s operations in Syria relied entirely on the say-so of a supposed “executioner” who most likely has never even been to Syria.

“We fell in love with the fact that we had gotten a member of ISIS who would describe his life in the caliphate and would describe his crimes,” New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet explained this week in an interview with NPR.

The article concludes:

Caliphate won the 2018 Peabody Award. The New York Times has already returned it. The Overseas Press Club has also rescinded the podcast’s Lowell Thomas Award.

Man, what a year for the paper of record.

From publishing Chinese communist propaganda, to getting it wrong on coronavirus vaccine readiness, to losing top opinion editors following a temper tantrum thrown by newsroom staffers, to having nearly its entire bench of columnists suffer a collective nervous breakdown ahead of Election Day, to pretending still as if its fraudulent 1619 Project is not an abject embarrassment, 2020 has been as lousy a year for the New York Times as it has been for everyone else.

Actually, this was a careless, innocent mistake. I can’t say the same for much of their other reporting. They have never done a fair job of reporting on President Trump, and they did their best to convince people that Joe Biden was capable of handling the office of president. I really don’t feel sad that they had to give up their Peabody Award. They should also give up the Pulitzer Prize they won for their false reporting on the Russia hoax during and after the 2016 presidential campaign.