This is grotesque.

I never imagined that I would ever see the press advocate censorship, but apparently their fear about competition and ideological meltdown has turned the former guardians of free speech into another corrupt guild bent on using government power to stifle competition.

Or could they be desperately trying to stifle a pedophile scandal from being exposed?

//White House press secretary Josh Earnest was forced to remind the press corps the federal government can’t censor news because of the First Amendment, in a bizarre exchange during a White House press briefing Monday.

“Obviously, there are some important First Amendment issues that come into play when we’re having this discussion,” Earnest said, rebuffing a call for the White House to work toward censoring “fake news” on social media. He brought up the constitutional prohibition on censorship three more times before the conversation ended.

New York Times White House correspondent Gardiner Harris had asked Earnest whether the administration treats threats based on “fake news” — such as the man who recently entered a Washington, D.C., pizza shop with a gun to investigate something he read online — the same as it treats terror threats. The implication was that the White House should get Facebook to censor “fake news” the same way it has pushed Facebook to censor these terrorists.

You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
“I’ve never heard you talk about what the administration is doing, even not just on a law enforcement basis but a policy basis, reaching out to these Silicon Valley companies,” he said to Earnest. “I mean, the President has recently been discussing the problem of fake news on Facebook. Why hasn’t there been a concern — a growing concern on the part of the administration about what seems to be a growing amount of vitriol directed at a variety of people, sometimes violent vitriol, within the United States?”//

Since this affirms the narrative that the tendrils of sexism and white power reach into the most innocuous cultural celebrations...

....this doesn't count as "fake news."

//‘Tis the season, and we all know what that means: being inundated with the unmistakable tune of “Baby It’s Cold Outside” on the daily. What is also unmistakable are the lyrics, now considered to be extremely problematic, that highlight a woman being put in a uncomfortable and coercive situation by a man. I mean c’mon one lyric is actually “Ought to say, no, no, no sir” to which the man responds “Mind if I move in closer?” It’s mindblowing that the world ignored lyrics like these for the near 60 years that this song has been out.

In 1944 when this song was written, marital rape wasn’t an idea that crossed people’s minds. Men were allowed to treat women like this and it wasn’t given a second thought. But today in 2016, more people are catching on to the issues brought up by this archaic song. One couple decided to act on it.

Lydia Liza and Josiah Lemanski of Minnesota crafted their own version of the song, titled “It’s Cold Outside”, all with lyrics highlighting consent in relationships. The lyrics highlight the importance of consent in all romantic interactions. Liza says one of her inspirations for writing this was how common interactions like the one in the song play out.

Fake hate crimes/Fake News.

Because the media knows the narrative it wants to find, it is exactly this hard to hoax them.

//After Harvard tweeted out the hoax story, the pranksters contacted her again to point out that she has no idea whether the man in the fake story is actually a Trump supporter. The email reads:

Hi Sarah,

I was talking to a friend about this incident and she brought up a good point. I don’t have any way to confirm that the guy in my story was a Trump supporter. I assume he was because he was a rude white male, but there is no way to know who he really voted for.
Despite that, and even after Christiansen himself told the journalist he faked the incident and described in detail in his podcast how he did it, Harvard still let the story and her Tweet stand without admitting any mistakes.//

The scourge of fake news.

This truly qualifies as fake news and it is the reason that Americans have such contempt for the media. Please read the article and notice that the reporters has steadfastly failed to identify the party affiliation of the "faithless electors."

//At least six electors — members of the Electoral College whose votes actually elect the President — have vowed to cast ballots that don't align with the popular vote results of their states, Politico reported Tuesday.

If they carry out their intentions — in effect, becoming "faithless electors" — they would narrow Donald Trump's margin-of-victory in the Electoral College over Hillary Clinton.

One elector, Michael Baca said in a statement that he wouldn’t vote for Trump.//

Wow!!!

That sounds bad.....except that Michael Baca is an elector from Colorado, which Hillary won.  For those of us without an investment in "fake news" that means that Baca is a Hillary-elector. He was never going to vote Trump and if he votes for someone other than the person he was selected to vote for, then Hillary's Electoral College vote goes down and Trump's margin goes up.


Here is Michael Baca - apparently it was too difficult for the NY Daily News to find this information, which identifies Baca as a Democrat.


The other faithless elector mentioned in the article - Bret Chiafalo -  is from Washington, i.e. another Hillary state and another Hillary elector.

So, the truth is the opposite of what the article presents - these electors are increasing Trump's margin, not reducing it.

So, is this fake news?

Cui Bonum.

Sheryl Atkinson wonders why "fake news" has become such a crisis all of a sudden.

It's amazing how political corruption never took off as a story, but fake news does.

Should be interesting to read the Wikileaks on how the Fake News Moral Panic of 2016 was coordinated by the Journalistas.