I remember “Freedom of the Press” was instituted to allow the press to monitor the government for the people and report its shortcomings and corruption. Today, that is not practiced at all. The MSM is a mouthpiece for the Biden government, a liberal piece of shit not doing its ordained function at all.
I remember “Freedom of the Press” was instituted to allow the press to monitor the government for the people and report its shortcomings and corruption. Today, that is not practiced at all. The MSM is a mouthpiece for the Biden government, a liberal piece of shit not doing its ordained function at all.
I have in mind that Trump had been criticizing the likes of "Fake News CNN" for perhaps a year prior to his election.
Trump was on the defensive throughout his first 4 years as president. Indications are that he will be on the offense for the duration of his second 4 year term, and I can think of no better person to administer justice to these news organizations who have destroyed the fabric of society than DJT.
Just imagine what would happen if the Trump administration adopted a 24/7 White House press briefing where Trump would take the podium at 8am sharp and detail the current inefficiencies/waste/corruption that his administration was dealing with, and laid out the action which his administration intended to do to clean it up, and then took questions from the press. Heck, he could even take the first 5 minutes of his hour long session by addressing one of Joe Biden's executive orders, examining and citing the chaos and destruction it had unleashed, and then ripping it up Nancy Pelosi style. How would the likes of MSM report such briefings?
My bet is that he will put an end to fake news MSM, in New York style.
What is a person to do when the ignorant refuse to entertain an objective perspective?
I am interested in entertaining a perspective that would counter Ritters assessment of how Putin, as a representative of the Russian people, has no choice in how he should view the West's words and actions.
I remember “Freedom of the Press” was instituted to allow the press to monitor the government for the people and report its shortcomings and corruption. Today, that is not practiced at all. The MSM is a mouthpiece for the Biden government, a liberal piece of shit not doing its ordained function at all.
I have in mind that Trump had been criticizing the likes of "Fake News CNN" for perhaps a year prior to his election.
Trump was on the defensive throughout his first 4 years as president. Indications are that he will be on the offense for the duration of his second 4 year term, and I can think of no better person to administer justice to these news organizations who have destroyed the fabric of society than DJT.
Just imagine what would happen if the Trump administration adopted a 24/7 White House press briefing where Trump would take the podium at 8am sharp and detail the current inefficiencies/waste/corruption that his administration was dealing with, and laid out the action which his administration intended to do to clean it up, and then took questions from the press. Heck, he could even take the first 5 minutes of his hour long session by addressing one of Joe Biden's executive orders, examining and citing the chaos and destruction it had unleashed, and then ripping it up Nancy Pelosi style. How would the likes of MSM report such briefings?
My bet is that he will put an end to fake news MSM, in New York style.
I. LOVE. IT.
Will Nancy Pelosi be up for the challenge, or will she fold like a house of cards?
Pelosi is a total ass. The mood of the country now may stop her influence, hopefully.
Pelosi is an attention-seeking skank, but I mean that in a nice way.
Scott Ritter logically lays out how the Biden administration is boxing Putin in, and essentially setting the world up for WW3.
NO NUCLEAR WAR : A Call for Reason [Live Event] - National Press Club
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cpml4q5gw4&list=UUDkEYb-TXJVWLvOokshtlsw&index=9
What is a person to do when the ignorant refuse to entertain an objective perspective?
I am interested in entertaining a perspective that would counter Ritters assessment of how Putin, as a representative of the Russian people, has no choice in how he should view the West's words and actions.