RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/04/cnn_disgraces_itself_over_mike_pompeo.html

CNN’s Christiane Amanpour asked James Comey, the disgraced head of the FBI, if his FBI should have shut down “hate speech” at Trump rallies.

Hate speech, we need to understand, is speech the left disapproves of. Amanpour has said nothing about Hillary Clinton calling Trump supporters “deplorable,” not to mention the 24/7 CNN attacks on the president, including calling him a traitor.

When a journalist asks an FBI chief to close down speech she doesn’t like is when America and its media has reached a dangerous moment. It’s when liberal progressive news channels become intolerant regressive political machines.

This wasn’t a first for Amanpour, a once-great journalist now become a well-paid media party hack.

Amanpour was active in preventing Mike Pompeo, the U.S. Secretary of State, from becoming the recipient of the James Foley Freedom Award.

To remind ourselves, James Foley was beheaded by ISIS in 2014 by what President Obama described as “the JV team,” and it was the Trump Administration, including Pompeo, that gave the command and led the total defeat of ISIS.

Part of the proud record of Mike Pompeo in rescuing hostages was outlined in his letter to Diane, James Foley’s mother on April 2, 2019, on learning he had been selected to receive the award.

http://politicalmavens.com/

Purporting to outline the current disease of hatred on both left and right “extremes,” the Times caption reads, “Surge of Anti-Semitism in Europe and U.S. as Economies Cool,” thereby solidifying one of the most heinous anti-semitic tropes – conflating Jews with money. As for the Democrat party, anti-semitism has jumped from its extremes to mainstream candidates for office and members of congress who consider it merely an example of freedom of speech.

The Times ignores completely the enormous influence of anti-semitism on campus and in leftist institutions and organizations. There is no mention of Muslim influence,, either monetary or political, in movements such as BDS (Boycott, Divest, Sanction) or Israel Apartheid Week, an annual occurrence on campuses across America since 2005. Nor is anything said about intersectionality, a concept emphasizing the commonality between oppressed brown and black groups and their mandatory identification with the plight of Palestinians. Interestingly, these groups are only concerned with Palestinians who are “controlled” by Israel – no mention is made of their abysmal treatment by other Arab countries who keep them in deplorable refugee camps, refusing to offer citizenship to their Muslim brothers. The fact that more than a million Palestinians are citizens of Israel is never divulged, nor is the fact that their standard of living and educational and professional opportunities surpass what they can expect in Arab countries.

Although the Times pretends that much of this anti-semitism is a result of Israel’s right-wing leadership, the animosity expressed by Muslim nations and immigrants throughout Europe is directed at “Jews” wherever they may live. The Koranic sources of this hatred are not mentioned in this lengthy article which also fails to mention the resurgence of respect for Louis Farrakhan by Democrat members of congress and organizers of the Women’s Marches on Washington. The Times leaves us with the assessment of a sociologist at the University of London who equates the British right and left by saying that both consider Israel to be a “belligerent country that defends itself against Muslims.” A more accurate description would be that Israel is a strong country which is constantly forced to defend itself against Muslim belligerents and terrorists who refuse to accept the existence of a Jewish state in the Middle East.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14003/pulitzer-prize-fake-news

Julie K. Brown refused to investigate and/or publish highly credible information that undercut the simplistic and largely false narrative fed her by her biased sources. I know, because I have been providing her with much of the documents and information she chose to bury rather than report.

Here is the truthful narrative Brown refused to report. Every fact can be documented…. The only problem is that Secret Service and other records conclusively proved that none of them was ever on that Island and that the Gores didn’t even know Epstein…. Yet her own employment records prove that she was well above the age of consent when she claims these liaisons occurred— in the unlikely event they ever occurred at all.

A careful review of these records led Giuffre’s own lawyer to conclude — in a lawfully recorded conversation— that it would have been impossible for me to have been where she falsely claimed to have had sex with me, and that his client’s accusations against me were “wrong,” “simply wrong.”… Even Giuffre’s best friend said that Giuffre told her she had never accused me until she was “pressured” by her lawyers to do so.

So shame on Brown. Shame on the Miami Herald. And shame on the Pulitzer Committee if it fails to investigate Brown’s reporting and encourages such fake news and shoddy journalism by rewarding it.

Among the leading candidates for a Pulitzer Prize in investigative journalism is the Miami Herald and its reporter Julie K. Brown for its series on the Jeffrey Epstein case. The series, however, was not based on rigorous and objective investigation, but rather on one sided, and largely false tips from self-interested lawyers who used the series to their financial advantage. Brown refused to investigate and/or publish highly credible information that undercut the simplistic and largely false narrative fed her by her biased sources. I know, because I have been providing her with much of the documents and information she chose to bury rather than report. Had she reported this contradictory material, she would have endangered the Pulitzer Prize she has been aiming to win. The Pulitzer Committee should not reward such biased and result oriented “reporting” by giving her the prize.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/04/02/media-failed-collusion-wanted-trump-traitor/

Attorney General William Barr’s summary of the Robert Mueller special counsel investigation findings confirmed not only the conclusions of congressional committees in the House and the Senate, but the work of left-wing and conservative writers and freelance internet sleuths.

Nonprofessionals and nonexperts unraveled the treasonous Trump-Russia collusion narrative months before their media competitors (not to mention investigators) did, in spite of their comparative lack of inside knowledge and resources. How did the doyens of media fail so spectacularly for two years on the matter of Trump-Russia collusion, while anti-establishment opinion journalists and media neophytes succeeded?

One answer: The mainstream media was never seeking the truth, while its skeptics were. Were the mainstream media honest, it would admit it graded itself not on journalistic accuracy, but on the amount of damage it inflicted on President Donald Trump—while generating ratings, and thus increasing market share in a tough environment.

https://amgreatness.com/2019/03/31/did-bruce-ohrs-testimony-defuse-a-nyt-bombshell/

As the congressional testimony of key figures in the so-called Russiagate scandal becomes public, some of it provides a basis to question the veracity of news reporting that often appeared to give cover for the same officials who participated in the scheme. For example, the recently-released testimony of Bruce Ohr does not substantiate a bombshell September 2018 New York Times story that claimed Ohr was leading a secret operation to turn Russian oligarchs connected to Vladimir Putin into FBI assets.

Ohr, a former top official at the Obama Justice Department, testified behind closed doors last August to the House Judiciary Committee. Ohr has emerged as the conduit between Democratic political operatives working on behalf of Hillary Clinton and James Comey’s FBI just before the 2016 presidential election. Ohr’s wife, Nellie, had been hired by Fusion GPS to dig up Russia-related dirt on candidate Donald Trump. Working with her on that project: Dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British agent and now London-based consultant who happened to have a decade-long friendship with Bruce Ohr.

Congressional investigators wanted to know how and why Ohr passed along political propaganda from Fusion GPS—which had been hired by both the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National committee—to the FBI in the summer of 2016. Ohr and Steele had extensive communications in 2016 and early 2017, including dozens of emails and text messages.

https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/282448/system-fail

It will take weeks for the elite pundit class to unravel all the possible implications and subtexts embedded in Robert Mueller’s final report on the charge that Donald Trump and his team colluded with Russia to fix the 2016 election. The right claims that the report exonerates Trump fully, while the left contends there are lots of nuggets in the full text of the final report that may point to obstruction of justice, if not collusion.

But here’s all you need to know about the special counsel probe:

First, after nearly two years, the special counsel found no credible evidence of collusion. It found no credible evidence of a plot to obstruct justice, to hide evidence of collusion. The entire collusion theory, which has formed the center of elite political discourse for over two years now, has been publicly and definitely proclaimed to be a hoax by the very person on whom news organizations and their chosen “experts” and “high-level sources” had so loudly and insistently pinned their daily, even hourly, hopes of redemption.

Mueller should have filed his report on May 18, 2017—the day after the special counsel started and he learned the FBI had opened an investigation on the sitting president of the United States because senior officials at the world’s premier law enforcement agency thought Trump was a Russian spy. Based on what evidence? A dossier compiled by a former British spy, relying on second- and third-hand sources, paid for by the Clinton campaign.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/273214/judge-jeanine-and-paradoxes-post-911-world-bruce-bawer

Last Saturday night, one of the guests on Greg Gutfeld’s evening show on Fox News was a former Marine staff sergeant, bomb technician Johnny “Joey” Jones, who lost his legs when he stepped on an IED in Afghanistan in 2010. He brought to mind a young Jimmy Stewart: winsome, modest, good-spirited, and even able to crack jokes about his missing limbs. Watching him, I thought: here is a young man who was handicapped for life because, in the wake of 9/11, he was one of those courageous Americans who agreed to risk their lives in foreign lands fighting their nation’s enemy.

But what is that enemy? The unofficial name given to the struggle by the White House under George W. Bush – the War on Terror – avoided answering that question. So, for that matter, did the official name, Operation Enduring Freedom. From the very beginning, in fact, the exact nature of the whole enterprise was swathed in a fog of euphemism and evasion. The men who flew those planes into the Twin Towers and Pentagon were devout Muslims, obeying their religion’s holy book by slaughtering infidels en masse. The Taliban leaders in Afghanistan were also devout Muslims, ruling that nation in strict accordance with sharia law. And yet days after 9/11, even as Bush was planning the Afghanistan campaign, he told the American people that “The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace.”

In the eighteen years since, the Western political and media establishment have continued to echo that lie. Jihadists have struck Bali, Madrid, Beslan, London, Mumbai, Fort Hood, Paris, San Bernardino, Brussels, Orlando, Nice, Manchester, Barcelona, and New York again – just to name a few of the deadlier and more high-profile incidents. Yet, perversely, the lie about Islam is stronger than ever. Throughout the West, schoolchildren and college students alike have been fed a picture of Islam that’s pure propaganda. Yes, one has the impression that many people are more aware of the reality of Islam than they used to be – but one also has the impression that they feel more cowed than ever into keeping quiet about it.