RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/11/trump-derangement-syndrome-fatigue-impeachment-viewership-32-lower-than-comey-hearings/

Fatigue from Trump Derangement Syndrome? The first day of impeachment hearings only brought in 13.1 million viewers.

The number becomes bleaker considering how many channels carried the hearing.

The numbers for these major hearings have declined since the Comey hearings:

The 13,098,000 who tuned in on ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, CSPAN and PBS marks a 32 percent drop from the number of people who watched James Comey’s testimony to Senate Intelligence Committee in May 2017, which delivered more than 19 million viewers.

In February, former Trump personal attorney and fixer Michael Cohen’s testimony delivered 15.8 million viewers, while 13 million tuned in to see former special counsel Robert Mueller testify before the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees.

https://amgreatness.com/2019/11/12/abc-and-cbs-collusion-may-be-a-smoking-gun-with-real-victims/

Authorities have a duty to investigate whether the two networks conspired to keep from the public information that parents and authorities could have used to protect children from sexual predators.

Did ABC and CBS engage in an unlawful restraint of trade by colluding to fire a “whistleblower”? After somebody smuggled footage of a candid video of Amy Robach bitterly complaining about ABC spiking a story on Jeffery Epstein, it appears the network went on a frantic search to find and punish the whistleblower.

Based on the public information about the story, it also appears that ABC and CBS may have colluded to punish the whistleblower. If true, not only is this a violation of journalistic principles, but the companies also should face scrutiny as to whether they may have violated federal law.

According to the video recently released by Project Veritas, ABC may have a secret video of an interview with one of Jeffrey Epstein’s sex slaves. Epstein, who died in jail under suspicious circumstances in August, in is the notorious architect of a shocking operation to press children into prostitution for the gratification of degenerate rich people. Many believe that Epstein received protection by blackmailing clients.

ABC and CBS are supposed to be competitors. But when ABC thought it identified the “whistleblower” who took the footage of Robach’s shocking confession, network officials realized that its competitor, CBS, employed the person suspected of leaking the video. (It turns out ABC was incorrect about the person’s identity, but that is immaterial to this story.)

ABC couldn’t fire somebody who didn’t work for the network. Instead, executives made some sort of arrangement with CBS. When CBS agreed to fire the employee, that may have been an overt act to further a restraint of trade in the supposedly competitive news business, limiting consumer access to future stories.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/11/the-media-holds-a-massive-double-standard-about-naming-whistleblowers/

As for the media, can we attribute its devotion to respecting the privacy of the Ukraine whistleblower to anything other than politics? The evidence suggests not.

Does the public have a right to know the name of the man who commenced the current effort to impeach the president of the United States? The Trump-hating media, following the lead of Trump-hating House Democrats, seems to think not. It seems they believe he should be held to a different standard than other whistleblowers.

Indeed, many legacy media refuse to run the presumed name of the so-called Ukraine whistleblower in spite of ample evidence as to his identity. Likewise, Twitter is trying to deter users from divulging his name by punishing select accounts that have done so. YouTube has similarly banned mentions of his name across their entire site.

Such entities appear to have fallen in line with Rep. Adam Schiff, leader of the illegitimate impeachment inquiry. Schiff was prepared to give the complainant a public hearing before doing an abrupt about-face after it was revealed the congressman and his staff had coordinated with the whistleblower prior to the complaint being filed, and then lied about it.

Revelations about the ties of both the presumed whistleblower, as well as one of his lawyers, to Russiagate and the broader apparent rolling coup against the president only further undermine the credibility of the impeachment process and its underlying substance. Consequently, it is unclear whether the whistleblower will even respond to written questions from House members.

Dems Have No Good Reason to Hide the Whistleblower

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2019/11/cnn-controversially-claims-israeli-cable-cars-are-daniel-greenfield/

The media slur for anything it doesn’t like is “controversial”. This old bias technique maintains a modicum of the facade of journalism while priming its audience to view the thing that the media doesn’t like in a negative fashion.

And the media really hates Israel. So everything Israeli is “controversial”. Even its cable cars.

And thus, according to CNN, and its usual balance of correspondents with Jewish last names who hate Israel and a Muslim correspondent, “Israel approves controversial cable cars in Jerusalem”.

What’s controversial about the cable cars?

Do they run on the oil of baby seals? Do they scream obscenities at you when you get inside? Do they play FOX News all day?

The controversial CNN news network, which has been described as an “enemy of the people” by the President of the United States, controversially describes Israeli cable cars as “controversial” 4 times in its article. 

“Large infrastructure projects in Jerusalem are often controversial due to the city’s disputed status, and the cable car is no exception,” CNN controversially claims.

Are cable cars a “large infrastructure project”? 

Also this means that building roads, paving roads, providing electricity, and taking out the trash are all controversial because Israel does it.

This is the definition of bias. And that’s the kind of controversial behavior that makes CNN so controversial.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/abcs-excuse-for-failing-to-report-on-jeffrey-epstein-makes-absolutely-no-sense/

James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas, a group that has often infiltrated news organizations to uncover liberal bias, has released an explosive “hot mic” video of Good Morning America co-host Amy Robach venting about ABC’s decision to spike a story about Jeffrey Epstein’s nefarious activities three years ago.

“I had this interview with [Epstein victim] Virginia Roberts,” Robach is seen saying in the video, “we would not put it on the air. The [British royal] Palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways. We were afraid we wouldn’t be able to interview Kate and Will that we, that also quashed the story.”

Robach now claims, through a network statement, that she was caught “in a private moment” of frustration over the lack of progress on a story. “I was upset that an important interview I had conducted with Virginia Roberts didn’t air because I could not obtain sufficient corroborating evidence to meet ABC’s editorial standards about her allegations.”

Sorry, but Robach’s response to the firestorm doesn’t square with her initial comments, in which she states that “Roberts had pictures, she had everything . . . it was unbelievable what we had. [Bill] Clinton, we had everything.”

“Everything” sure sounds like sufficient corroborating evidence. Even if employing the most scrupulous journalistic standards, a giant news organization wouldn’t need three years to substantiate — or dismiss — a story with pictures, dates and a credible witness.

We certainly know that ABC didn’t need “everything” — or much of anything, for that matter – when it was running scores of pieces online and on television, highlighting every risible accusation against then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.