Connect with us

Democrats

How we can make MSM report on the Obama-Hezbollah scandal

Published

on

How we can make MSM report on the Obama-Hezbollah scandal

Leftist mainstream media has a tactic it loves to use. It’s so widespread across nearly every news outlet that one might believe it’s coordinated. Conspiracy theorists say it is, but I tend to believe it’s more likely they’re just so like-minded in their ideology they don’t need to coordinate to know when to bury a story. They just keep refreshing their feeds from other mainstream media sources to make sure nobody’s breaking ranks.

The story in question is the bombshell piece from Politico that was echoed profusely by conservative media for several days. In it are details of a treasonous action by the Obama administration: covering up for a terrorist organization engaged in criminal activities that generated a billion dollars a year through the sale of drugs and weapons. Under normal circumstances, a law enforcement agency such as the DEA would do everything it could to stop these crimes. These weren’t normal circumstances. The President wanted a deal with Iran and Hezbollah is their proxy. Therefore, for the sake of a worthless agreement the Iranians were bound to break in order to cement his foreign policy legacy, President Obama betrayed America.

This is big news, at least it should be. Unfortunately, it’s big news that paints mainstream media’s messiah in a negative light. To them, this is no news at all. It’s something that must be buried, which is exactly what they did.

Over a week ago, David Harsanyi noted the media’s silence:

A deafening media silence on the Obama-Hezbollah scandal

https://nypost.com/2017/12/21/a-deafening-media-silence-on-the-obama-hezbollah-scandal/Politico published a jaw-dropping, meticulously sourced investigative piece this week detailing how the Obama administration had secretly undermined US law enforcement agency efforts to shut down an international drug-trafficking ring run by the terror group Hezbollah. The effort was part of a wider push by the administration to placate Iran and ensure the signing of the nuclear deal.

Now swap out “Trump” for “Obama” and “Russia” for “Iran” and imagine the eruption these revelations would generate. Because, by any conceivable journalistic standard, this scandal should’ve triggered widespread coverage and been plastered on front pages across the country. By any historic standard, the scandal should elicit outrage regarding the corrosion of governing norms from pundits and editorial boards.

Today, they’re still silent. They’ve won. The story has come and gone. Nobody’s asking questions about it anymore. They weathered the storm that came from people like Harsanyi and others who called on mainstream media to do their job. In reality, they did exactly what they believe their job requires: covering for liberals while attacking conservatives.

How many Americans know about this story? Not nearly enough. We live in a world where headlines and sound bites rule the collective understanding of the news. When something doesn’t get enough attention, it doesn’t really exist. Nothing we do can make the media report it unless we can get someone on Capitol Hill to start asking questions. Technically, someone did start asking questions: Representative Ron DeSantis:

Lawmakers to investigate Obama efforts to derail campaign targeting Hezbollah to secure Iran nuclear deal

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/lawmakers-to-investigate-obama-efforts-to-derail-campaign-targeting-hezbollah-to-secure-iran-nuclear-deal/article/2644074“Congress will be investigating this thoroughly and my National Security subcommittee will be particularly interested in how such a decision came about and whether it was driven by key Iran deal architects such as Ben Rhodes,” DeSantis said, referring to the Obama national security adviser behind the Iran deal.

Sources told the Free Beacon congressional investigators are preparing letters to U.S. government agencies asking for more information on the scheme.

“It was potentially criminal,” a senior congressional source told the Free Beacon. “Congress absolutely has a responsibility to get to the bottom of this.”

That’s big news, right? Well, no. I like DeSantis, but he should be hammering away at this on the airwaves instead of basking in the glow of recent praise by President Trump. He should also be getting more on Capitol Hill to be blasting this out to the public. Considering what the Obama administration did is a total betrayal against Americans who are now less safe as a result, it should be a top priority of the GOP to make this prominent in the news. It behooves them to do so at a time when President Trump is still under scrutiny over alleged Russian election hacking.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is looking into it, but even that isn’t enough to make many waves in mainstream media:

Under investigation: Obama’s favors for Hezbollah

http://www.wnd.com/2017/12/under-investigation-obamas-favors-for-hezbollah/Attorney General Jeff Sessions is reviewing Project Cassandra, a highly classified law enforcement program by the Drug Enforcement Administration during the Obama administration, because of claims the drug-smuggling activities of the terrorist group Hezbollah got a pass from the president, according to reports.

The Jerusalem Post reported Sessions is looking into Project Cassandra after Politico reported the Obama administration “derailed” the law enforcement efforts “in its determination to secure a nuclear deal with Iran.”

Notice the start of the second paragraph in the story above. “The Jerusalem Post reported…” Why are we hearing about this from the Jerusalem Post? Granted, it’s a quality news outlet, but the fact WND had to pull from a foreign source to get this news is telling.

If we let this pass, it will pass. If we demand from our representatives a bullhorn response that puts a spotlight on an administration that derailed an investigation into drugs, weapons, and terrorism, then maybe the media will be forced to cover it. Otherwise, this will be a footnote from a bygone news cycle.

Facebook Comments
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Democrats

Pelosi’s endgame strategy: Impeach Trump during general election season

Published

on

Pelosis endgame strategy Impeach Trump during general election season

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has been playing a balancing act for the past few months. On one hand, she has to stop her caucus from becoming too zealous about impeaching President Trump, fearing the same public backlash the GOP received in 1998 during impeachment proceedings against President Clinton. On the other hand, she needs to keep the specter of impeachment alive so she doesn’t start getting attacked by the radical Democratic base who want the President out immediately.

But lost in the mix is the speculation that Pelosi is fully prepared to impeach the President, just not yet. She wants to bring impeachment and all the mud that will be flung at the President as a result during the heart of general election season.

Evidence of this is all circumstantial but compelling. In a closed-door meeting with committee heads yesterday, she instructed her team to keep up the pressure through investigation after investigation. This would normally not be enough to appease impeachment hawks like Maxine Waters and others, but their clear support for the strategy is an indicator that they’ve been promised vindication at a better time than now. Otherwise, there’s enough support for impeachment among the base for them to continue beating the drum louder and possibly even call for Pelosi’s ouster.

It’s also conspicuous that lower members of the Democratic totem pole haven’t gone after Pelosi, including known antagonists like Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar.

Pelosi knows her time is short if things don’t go her way quickly. She was able to gather support from opposition within her caucus by promising to only serve as Speaker for two years. But she has no intention of stepping down if Democrats retain control of the House of Representatives through the 2020 election. Instead, she intends to build her credentials by strategically beating the President, not only on the political arena but in the 2020 election itself. No, she’s not running, but if she launches her impeachment hearings in a way that can earn her credit for the Democratic nominee to win, she will have solidified her seat as Speaker for as long as she wants to stay there.

It’s a huge gamble. Depending on how the impeachment proceedings go in the eyes of the public, she could do enough damage to help kick the President out of the Oval Office. On the other hand, she could seal her own fate if the President wins as a result of sympathy he’s able to garner from the political move of a well-timed impeachment proceeding. It has the potential to backfire spectacularly if the public sees it as a dirty trick, one that could even cost the Democrats control of the House.

But in reality she doesn’t have much to lose. If she impeaches now when it won’t affect the election or if she chooses not to impeach at all, there’s a very good chance she’ll be held to her word to step down as Speaker in 2021. If she delivers the White House to the Democrats, she’ll be locked in her Speaker seat indefinitely.

This should infuriate Democrats more than Republicans, especially the growing radical wing of the party. Their goal, as stated by the Justice Democrats, is to take over the party from within. But Pelosi’s moves are not only meant to harm Republicans but also increase the power over the Democratic Party held by the establishment.

We may be witnessing the swampiest tactics every put on display from Capitol Hill as Speaker Pelosi plots the takedown of a sitting President. Some say she’s impotent, but clearly she’s a viper with plenty of bite left.

Facebook Comments
Continue Reading

Democrats

AOC says 2/3rds of Democrats have ‘social intelligence of a sea sponge’ for believing her 12-year apocalyptic claims

Published

on

AOC says 23rds of Democrats have social intelligence of a sea sponge for believing her 12-year apoca

On May 12, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said anyone who took her literally about the world ending in 12 years over climate change would “have to have the social intelligence of a sea sponge.” A new survey by Rasmussen indicates most Democrats have such social intelligence. They took her literally, and therefore they all possess sea-sponge-intellects, according to their young cult leader.

67% of Democrats believe the United States has only 12 years to aggressively fight climate change or else there will be disastrous and irreparable damage to the country and the world.

This is the problem with radical progressive politicians like AOC. She mixes hyperbole with her actual feelings and doesn’t give indications as to when she’s being literal and when she’s using “dry humor + sarcasm.” But if you listen to one of the many instances where she makes the claim about 12-years-until-apocalypse, she seems deadly serious.

She’s not the biggest problem, though. The real problems are the millions of sheep who follow here without question, who believe everything she says and support everything she does. The left often argues that President Trump’s most passionate followers are like a cult, but even the President’s supporters aren’t as dedicated when it comes to taking him literally as AOC’s cult following is with her claims. The response to Trump’s actions and statements are supported but measured. Moreover, I’ve seen (and participated in) plenty of pushback against some of his policies from tariffs to firearm restrictions to dealing with North Korea.

We hear fairly regularly about pushback from prominent conservatives, and oftentimes the President takes this pushback into account when making decisions. But with AOC, the only occasional pushback comes from the Democratic establishment as Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi or other old school Democrats jab at AOC a bit. Otherwise, she’s unabated in her rhetoric and unchecked in her actions.

Here’s the sad part. If you were to tell AOC’s followers they were sea sponges for taking her literally, they’d scream at you. But if you showed them that SHE called them sea sponges, they’d nod and say, “Oh, if AOC said it, I must be a sea sponge.”

Facebook Comments
Continue Reading

Democrats

Lindsey Graham makes two great points about the Democrats’ impeachment hysteria

Published

on

Lindsey Graham makes two great points about the Democrats impeachment hysteria

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) went on Fox News with Sean Hannity today to discuss how many Democratic lawmakers and candidates for president have gone into full-blown impeachment hysteria. He made a pair of excellent points.

First, he noted that the Democrats are doing so at their own peril. It’s difficult for them to justify pushing forward following failed investigations and realizations that their narrative about President Trump colluding with the Russians was patently false. The American people have and well continue to see through their attacks as nothing more than unhinged anti-Trump rhetoric designed to distract voters from their own shortcomings. Nevertheless, they’re forced into this line of thinking by the hyper-leftist base that is essentially telling them to take the impeachment way or the highway.

But he noted something else equally important. He said, “The public’s going to kick the Democrats out of power and they’re going to reelect the President if he stays focused on doing the job for the American people.” [emphasis mine]

This is extremely important to understand because the President is known as a fighter. Ever since Attorney General William Barr released his summary of the Mueller Report, the President has Tweeted and talked about it almost non-stop. As recently as this morning, he focused again on the Democrats coming after him.

Graham is correct. If the President keeps doing what he’s been doing in the Oval Office and refrains from being drawn into the Democrats’ petty battles with him, the people will appreciate it. If he goes low with them, there could be challenges.

Facebook Comments
Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending