Category Archives: Media Corruption

The Greatest Diversion Ever!

Published / by Lee Kessler / 1 Comment on The Greatest Diversion Ever!

Hey, Director John Brennan, the “Bloodhound” is closing in now. The world may have been distracted by the China virus–a very real-world, real-threat situation. It may have been distracted by America burning, and the seemingly relentless nights of anarchy and violence in the name of social justice.

People are struggling to wrap their wits around something that is supposed to be peaceful, righteous, and motivated toward an end of equal justice, when their cities and streets explode with Molotov cocktails, broken glass, shattered statues, vandalism, theft, physical assault, and even murder. Unless one is brain dead or a sociopath, the words “social justice” and this mayhem don’t jive.

But, it sure has created a diversion for you and your cohorts to elude a true American “equal justice under the law.” Media eyes are on explosions and blood. America’s eyes are on the same. That is a great military strategy to provide cover, and potential escape.

“The Bloodhound,” however, has never taken his eyes off from you.

My friends, daily now for some time, declassified material–actual documents, notes, sworn testimony, government files–have been released to the public for you to read and understand the reality of an attempted coup. Yes, that is what it will likely be called. A conspiracy to overthrow a duly elected President of the United States. You were more than misled, my fellow Americans. You were outright lied to and deceived.

Now, that is a scandal. That is a crisis. These other “distractions”–albeit mighty ones–will pass. And if you truly love your country and freedom, you should be more than just dismissive or disdainful of this, more than just mildly interested in it. You should feel your hair stand up on end, and you should have trouble sleeping at night.

Because, while we all have sacrificed for our fellow countrymen in order to save lives, while we all have maintained extraordinary restraint in the face of nightly bullying by rampaging mobs, a group of men and women tried to steal your government.

They are still trying. Their names are all known now. I have been writing about them for two years to get you prepared for the reality of what you are about to have to face. The Media may not want to cover it. They long ago ceased to be News, and have turned into social activists and political activists. One established and renowned journalistic empire will likely be listed among the people who advanced the coup. You may want to deny it, and drive yourself batty in doing so. But, when these documents start showing up in a court of law–criminal and civil– as evidence, and juries are being selected, and the prosecutors or plaintiffs open their case, it is going to become staggeringly real to you.

No longer a parlor game, or material for Twitter wars, and the rantings of uninformed celebrities and politicians as they dismiss facts and embrace “anonymous” gossip, this is going to be VERY REAL.

‘The Bloodhound”, as I like to refer to him, has likely found evidence and connected dots in the UK, Canada, Australia, Italy, the Ukraine, possibly Russia, and sadly the good ol’ USA–in the Media, Government Agencies like the State Department, the Justice Department, possibly the Defense Department, and the Treasury Department, and in the halls of Congress.

We’ve stood up to Covid-19. We are standing up to anarchists masquerading as saints. We will stand up to this.

Once, more than two years ago, you, Mr. Brennan, looked straight into the camera and threatened the President of the United States. Well, it’s your turn now, sir. Truth has a way of surfacing. And traitors have a way of turning on each other. Your words, “Stay tuned…” have boomeranged on you. These diversions will no longer divert the eyes of justice. They will no longer provide you “cover.” Stay tuned…

How Did CNN & MSNBC Miss This?

Published / by Lee Kessler / Leave a Comment

Yesterday, a bombshell dropped that rocked the Fourth Estate that seems to feel they are our guardians and masters. Many news agencies did cover this, because to fail to cover it would be dereliction of duty. Yet CNN and MSNBC avoided it. And in doing so, misled all of their viewers by withholding something of significance, and worthy of thought.

Bari Weiss, the Opinion Editor for the New York Times, resigned yesterday. Below is the letter she sent to the head of the Times, explaining her decision to leave. Any fair-minded person will want to read this. You CNN fans and MSNBC fans should ask them why this story just didn’t warrant their attention.


Dear A.G.,

It is with sadness that I write to tell you that I am resigning from The New York Times. 

I joined the paper with gratitude and optimism three years ago. I was hired with the goal of bringing in voices that would not otherwise appear in your pages: first-time writers, centrists, conservatives and others who would not naturally think of The Times as their home. The reason for this effort was clear: The paper’s failure to anticipate the outcome of the 2016 election meant that it didn’t have a firm grasp of the country it covers. Dean Baquet and others have admitted as much on various occasions. The priority in Opinion was to help redress that critical shortcoming.

I was honored to be part of that effort, led by James Bennet. I am proud of my work as a writer and as an editor. Among those I helped bring to our pages: the Venezuelan dissident Wuilly Arteaga; the Iranian chess champion Dorsa Derakhshani; and the Hong Kong Christian democrat Derek Lam. Also: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Masih Alinejad, Zaina Arafat, Elna Baker, Rachael Denhollander, Matti Friedman, Nick Gillespie, Heather Heying, Randall Kennedy, Julius Krein, Monica Lewinsky, Glenn Loury, Jesse Singal, Ali Soufan, Chloe Valdary, Thomas Chatterton Williams, Wesley Yang, and many others.

But the lessons that ought to have followed the election—lessons about the importance of understanding other Americans, the necessity of resisting tribalism, and the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society—have not been learned. Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else.

Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions.I was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history. Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative.

My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m “writing about the Jews again.” Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead editors regularly weigh in. There, some coworkers insist I need to be rooted out if this company is to be a truly “inclusive” one, while others post ax emojis next to my name. Still other New York Times employees publicly smear me as a liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met with appropriate action. They never are.

There are terms for all of this: unlawful discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. I’m no legal expert. But I know that this is wrong. 

I do not understand how you have allowed this kind of behavior to go on inside your company in full view of the paper’s entire staff and the public. And I certainly can’t square how you and other Times leaders have stood by while simultaneously praising me in private for my courage. Showing up for work as a centrist at an American newspaper should not require bravery.

Part of me wishes I could say that my experience was unique. But the truth is that intellectual curiosity—let alone risk-taking—is now a liability at The Times. Why edit something challenging to our readers, or write something bold only to go through the numbing process of making it ideologically kosher, when we can assure ourselves of job security (and clicks) by publishing our 4000th op-ed arguing that Donald Trump is a unique danger to the country and the world? And so self-censorship has become the norm.

What rules that remain at The Times are applied with extreme selectivity. If a person’s ideology is in keeping with the new orthodoxy, they and their work remain unscrutinized. Everyone else lives in fear of the digital thunderdome. Online venom is excused so long as it is directed at the proper targets. 

Op-eds that would have easily been published just two years ago would now get an editor or a writer in serious trouble, if not fired. If a piece is perceived as likely to inspire backlash internally or on social media, the editor or writer avoids pitching it. If she feels strongly enough to suggest it, she is quickly steered to safer ground. And if, every now and then, she succeeds in getting a piece published that does not explicitly promote progressive causes, it happens only after every line is carefully massaged, negotiated and caveated.

It took the paper two days and two jobs to say that the Tom Cotton op-ed “fell short of our standards.” We attached an editor’s note on a travel story about Jaffa shortly after it was published because it “failed to touch on important aspects of Jaffa’s makeup and its history.” But there is still none appended to Cheryl Strayed’s fawning interview with the writer Alice Walker, a proud anti-Semite who believes in lizard Illuminati. 

The paper of record is, more and more, the record of those living in a distant galaxy, one whose concerns are profoundly removed from the lives of most people. This is a galaxy in which, to choose just a few recent examples, the Soviet space program is lauded for its “diversity”; the doxxing of teenagers in the name of justice is condoned; and the worst caste systems in human history includes the United States alongside Nazi Germany.

Even now, I am confident that most people at The Times do not hold these views. Yet they are cowed by those who do. Why? Perhaps because they believe the ultimate goal is righteous. Perhaps because they believe that they will be granted protection if they nod along as the coin of our realm—language—is degraded in service to an ever-shifting laundry list of right causes. Perhaps because there are millions of unemployed people in this country and they feel lucky to have a job in a contracting industry. 

Or perhaps it is because they know that, nowadays, standing up for principle at the paper does not win plaudits. It puts a target on your back. Too wise to post on Slack, they write to me privately about the “new McCarthyism” that has taken root at the paper of record.

All this bodes ill, especially for independent-minded young writers and editors paying close attention to what they’ll have to do to advance in their careers. Rule One: Speak your mind at your own peril. Rule Two: Never risk commissioning a story that goes against the narrative. Rule Three: Never believe an editor or publisher who urges you to go against the grain. Eventually, the publisher will cave to the mob, the editor will get fired or reassigned, and you’ll be hung out to dry.

For these young writers and editors, there is one consolation. As places like The Times and other once-great journalistic institutions betray their standards and lose sight of their principles, Americans still hunger for news that is accurate, opinions that are vital, and debate that is sincere. I hear from these people every day. “An independent press is not a liberal ideal or a progressive ideal or a democratic ideal. It’s an American ideal,” you said a few years ago. I couldn’t agree more. America is a great country that deserves a great newspaper. 

None of this means that some of the most talented journalists in the world don’t still labor for this newspaper. They do, which is what makes the illiberal environment especially heartbreaking. I will be, as ever, a dedicated reader of their work. But I can no longer do the work that you brought me here to do—the work that Adolph Ochs described in that famous 1896 statement: “to make of the columns of The New York Times a forum for the consideration of all questions of public importance, and to that end to invite intelligent discussion from all shades of opinion.”

Ochs’s idea is one of the best I’ve encountered. And I’ve always comforted myself with the notion that the best ideas win out. But ideas cannot win on their own. They need a voice. They need a hearing. Above all, they must be backed by people willing to live by them. 

Sincerely,

Bari

A Tale of Two Riots

Published / by Lee Kessler / Leave a Comment

Having lived on the most violent campus in America in 1969–University of Wisconsin, Madison campus–I had the “opportunity” to watch up close and all-too-personal the tactics of two domestic terror groups–the SDS and the Weather Underground. Another Blog will address them. Suffice it to say, I know what “outside agitators” look, act, and sound like. I know planned, repeated vandalism. I recognize carefully orchestrated and perfectly executed fire bombings. And I know mob mentality and hysteria.

In the early 1990s, Los Angeles was besieged with the riots following the Rodney King verdict. With that as the justification, we endured days of rioting, vandalism, violence, looting, and assaults. Though the Media only wanted to focus on the mobs of then African-Americans looting and destroying their own neighborhood businesses, my attention was on something far more sinister–the perfectly time-released fire-bombings. The cameras loved the visual images of buildings in flames, and the looting below, but they ignored the plight of LA Fire Department as they valiantly tried to put out fires. Ultimately, it was hopeless because the bombs were torching buildings a few blocks away from each other, and a precise number of minutes apart. No sooner would one fire crew arrive than they would get another call, and another, and another.

Then, “it” leapt to another segment of the city, quite remote from the first. Always the same pattern. First the fires, then the looting mobs. But, the most interesting part of the story is something I heard anecdotally. The Media never covered what I am about to tell you. But, all you need to do is query some ministers in the areas effected, and you will likely hear the tale. I must have picked it up from some newspaper, or local TV show. The national news had their story. They had accomplished their purpose of fear and chaos. They would not want to cover this.

To calm the streets down, the moms, and ministers in the areas where the rioters were raging went out on the street at night, and patrolled the streets themselves–knowing that their sons would not attack them. It worked.

They further understood, the ministers did, that after a few days, the mind that has been roiled and driven to mindless, insane acts, settles down. And when the individual “comes back to himself” if you will, he has terrible remorse. They knew that would happen here. Soon, the rioters and looters would realize they had destroyed their own neighborhoods, and the businesses of their own friends.

So, the ministers put the word out that if someone felt remorse, they could bring what they had stolen to the churches. They announced an amnesty and said it would be safe. People could simply come and anonymously drop off what they had taken. The ministers informed them to put a note on the item if they remembered where they had stolen it, and if they did not remember, they said, bring it back anyway. We will let the merchants come and figure it out.

Did it work? You skeptics probably think “no way!” If my memory serves me well, approximately 90% of what was stolen was returned. NOW THAT IS A STORY. Likely one you never heard.

Now, contrast that to the riots of this past week. It is almost as if Los Angeles had been a dress rehearsal from 25 years ago. This time, instead of the violence and madness leaping from one neighborhood to another a great distance away, the rage leaped from one major city to another. Then from one state to another. Almost like a diabolical wac-a-mole game, the countries’ law enforcement agencies and fire departments were overwhelmed. Just when they thought they had it quelled, an eruption in another city would ensue.

We are still in the dying throes of the violence, but only after Federal tools became engaged, or were offered. My message though has to do with the fact the Media has had no shortage of “hot spots” to train their cameras on in order to demonstrate to a horrified America the degree of rage, insanity, and hatred that ran our streets. The legal and peaceful protests for the death of George Floyd were disrupted by the violence of another group with another intention. As always, the provocateur will seize upon a legitimate grievance, and use it to ignite the sensational, destructive images we have had to watch.

This time, however, it was so vast in scope, so rapid in its incendiary emotions, so removed from the “neighborhood” that it not only overwhelmed law enforcement and fire departments, I doubt any moms or ministers were able to walk the streets.

That is the tale of the George Floyd riots. In days, minds will calm down, people will restore their emotional stability. Remorse will set in on a national scale, with national proportions.

Alike in tactics, similar in types of devastation, these are the tales of two riots. Do you think you should perhaps speak to every minister in every neighborhood effected, from every religion, and tell them the ending of the first story?

They may have already begun. They may have thought of it, or spoken to counterparts in Los Angeles at that time who may be guiding them on how to restore calm and decency. On the other hand, they may not have thought of it. They, too, may be overwhelmed and afraid. After all, images of churches firebombed and now boarded up are daunting–for all of us to look at. Perhaps the clergy are still in “lockdown.”

I hope not. I am an eternal optimist. What do you say we get 90% of what was stolen returned? What do you say we encourage the looters to begin to make amends? No matter how justified that seemed to them in the heat of “other-generated, destructive passions,” in the end, no one was benefited–except the anarchist. Least of all, the peaceful protesters who wanted to make George Floyd’s death count for something, who wanted to insure accountability, not vengeance for his death.

What do you say? Will you get this to your clergy? I am sure they are creative enough to write their own ending to this tale.

Words that Haunt

Published / by Lee Kessler / Leave a Comment

Sir John Dalberg-Acton was a 19th Century English-Catholic historian. He is perhaps best known for the remark, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely…”

That is one of the greatest arguments for limited government, and governmental powers. Throughout time, Dalberg-Acton’s observations have proven true. No matter how well-intentioned men may be when they seek power, and especially political power, when that power has been given to them, it corrupts them in some way.

There must be something so insidiously delicious and seductive about power that men and women will forfeit honor and integrity once power has been vested in them. They will deny all manner of previous viewpoints they held and statements they have made. And, in the last four years, I have watched the DC Swamp jump through hoops to try to justify their apparent forfeiture of the beliefs that got them elected or appointed.

Therein lies the greatest danger to our Republic. The power in this country–by design, and after great sacrifice–was vested in the people of the United States. We are the source of power, and those who serve us are intended to answer to us.

At times we the people have vested greater power in the hands of Washington politicians and civil servants because of some catastrophe globally where we felt we needed to give them more authority, and to do it quickly.

That, in and of itself, is not an issue. Certainly, we would likely agree that after Pearl Harbor, the powers given to Congress and the President etc. were a necessary evil. 9/11 is another case where we empowered our President to wage war. That attack and threat was apparent to all of us.

What we did not really think through, however, was the fact we also gave our government the power to set up secret courts in order to obtain warrants to electronically spy on our countrymen. If each of those warrants had been properly sought, and no one’s rights had been violated, we the people would not be in turmoil over the last four years about what is now emerging factually as an abuse of power by the outgoing administration against the incoming administration.

Cover-ups and abuses abound. People will yell, they will shrilly deny, they will justify in the coming weeks in the Senate Hearings, and in the actions forthcoming related to the Durham criminal investigation. That’s natural. After all, we gave some very brazen and arrogant men and women power over us. They corrupted it, became corrupt–and now refuse to give the power back. The nectar of power and control over their fellow countrymen seems to have addicted them.

Sadly, something far more ominous is hanging over us relevant to Dalberg-Acton’s observation. During this pandemic, we–in order to save ourselves and others–gave almost complete authority to our state and federal governments. We felt we needed them to take control, and order us into actions that would be good for all. Hopefully history will record that our cessation of almost all of our First Amendment rights was warranted–that we did the right thing. We harmed the many to save the few.

What history will not record kindly is if our governments never give that power back. Even when the crisis abates, or disappears altogether, we are discovering that some state leaders and federal leaders are loath to relinquish the control they have over our entire future and security. Frankly, we are going to have to pry that power out of their tightly clenched fists. (Electorally)

You may be in a quandary about how this beneficent leader of your city or your state could turn into a dictatorial tyrant, hell-bent on forcing you to bend to their agenda and will–even if it destroys your life and livelihood. You may agree with them. I am aware of that.

Regrettably though, someone like me is going to eventually have to come to rescue you and our countrymen from the clutches of the new tyrant. You thought Covid-19 was a menace?! You thought it threatened your life?! It did.

But, my friends, we all had better wake up. Because in order to handle that biological menace, we created a new one: politicians with more power than they have EVER had over you. I am by nature an eternal optimist. In this matter though, I know history, and I know men. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Put every single one of those 5 freedoms I wrote about a few weeks ago back in place, before you no longer can. Ask the people of Venezuela if they expected what they got when Chavez died and the new elected fool took office. Ask the people of Hong Kong if they expected what happened to them yesterday.

The power rests with “we the people” and spread out through our whole society no one man or group can gain the monopoly on it. Hard to corrupt 350 million Americans of diverse background, races, ethnicities, education, careers, religions etc.

An unwieldy bunch, we Americans. Perhaps that is key as to why this nation has prospered for so long, and helped so many other nations to prosper.

Pry their little fingers loose–one control at a time, one day at a time, one week at a time until your freedoms are fully restored. You can do it. I may not have faith in bureaucrats, but I have always had faith in the American people.

The Judge who Skipped Civics Class

Published / by Lee Kessler / 2 Comments on The Judge who Skipped Civics Class

If you have been scratching your head–no matter your politics, and assuming that not every decision you make is based upon personal bias–you may still be aghast at Judge Emmett Sullivan’s refusal to grant the prosecution’s motion to drop the case against Gen. Michael Flynn.

The motion was unopposed, since his defense also had a motion to withdraw his guilty plea. That motion too was obviously unopposed since the prosecutors wanted to drop the whole case. You don’t plead to a charge that doesn’t exist.

But, instead, Judge Sullivan appears to have decided to “leap across the bench” and become a prosecutor himself. He intends to see if there are charges he can file against Flynn, and is bringing prosecutors in from a time gone by, and a retired judge to show him how to still prosecute the man for something.

For all Americans, we have a right to a fair and impartial trial, whether criminal or civil. Under the Constitution, there are three branches of government–separate but equal. And there is a separation of powers between the branches. Each is to wear their own “hat” if you will. They are to do what their branch of government has jurisdiction over, and not breach that separation of the branches of government.

Prosecutors (of all titles) are in the Executive Branch, and are part of the Justice Department. (state and federal) Judges are part of the Judicial Branch, and their purview is to mediate, and make rulings that insure a fair and impartial trial. That presupposes there is an actual case at hand, and not one that has been withdrawn.

It is so fundamentally unfair, you almost can’t get your wits around it. A man is sentenced for a crime he is not charged with. That sounds like an old “Gunsmoke” plot, a story from the Wild West. Certainly it does not represent Rule of Law and Due Process.

Not only does Sullivan appear to have skipped his Civics Class when he was young, where he would have learned about the separation of powers and the role of the three branches, but it appears he also skipped his Constitutional Law Class. That, I believe, is the first class in first year law school.

Either way, Due Process is granted to all of us, under the Constitution, as it is written. If any of you even consider right now inserting “politics” into this, and attempt to avert your eyes because you hold opinions about the defendant, the prosecutors, the Justice Department or anyone else, I want you to stop. If our Judicial Branch turns into a prosecutorial arm, God helps us all.

Take a deep breath, and know that I am grateful you would never be sitting on a jury deciding my fate. The issue would be guilt or innocence on the charges, based on the facts at hand. It would not be on whether or not you like me, my husband, my boss, or my voting habits.

The issues are only: Was there a crime? Did I commit it? Beyond a reasonable doubt? If so, what should my penalty be? And if I were charged with something–and later evidence showed that not only did I not do it, but that in fact no crime occurred, but prosecutorial misconduct may have occurred–and the prosecutors drop the case to avoid turning into “persecutors,” I would expect you to grant their request, no matter your fermenting biases.

I was just funnin’ with you a few paragraphs back. I don’t think Judge Emmett Sullivan did skip his Civics Class. I don’t think he skipped his Constitutional Law class. I think he knows exactly what he is doing. And that, my friends, should scare the living daylights out of you.

Every single American should protest this outrageous behavior. And know that the next time you are in trouble, or on trial, and the Judge gets mad at you and says to the Prosecutors, “do you want to also charge this person with Treason?” and no one does anything about it, I won’t be there to defend you.

Not true. Funning with you again. I WOULD BE THERE TO DEFEND YOU, because I believe in civil liberties and I do not believe they extend only to members of one political party, or one race, or one religion.

I owe a dream debt–as I have written about before–to my ancestor who fought with George Washington, to make it possible for this nation to be free, and for our Constitution to be written and followed. I might not believe in you; I might not even like you. But I believe in the Rule of Law. Without it, we sink back into the age of the Spanish Inquisition.