980 Comments

Most Trump voters aren't "radicalized", Matt, nor are we in danger of becoming so. You may have noticed that it wasn't Trump voters who raged through the streets of our cities this summer, burning, looting and killing. We ARE mighty pissed off, though. Who wouldn't be, with the media, Big Tech, the entire Democrat party and half the GOP working together to drag Biden over the finish line. The YouTube fiasco is merely the icing on a very rotten cake. Fuck Google, Facebook and Twitter, their woke-but-morally-bankrupt CEOs, and their obvious progressive biases. I don't know what the answer is, but an old-fashioned pillory might not be a bad place to start.

Expand full comment

It wasn't Biden voters who burned, looted, or killed, either, lol. If you guys don't want to look like kooks you should engage with reality.

Expand full comment

Harris and other democrats funded their bail, big time. Democratic DAs refused to prosecute. Democrats in Oregon right now refuse to remove antifa from occupying blocks of Portland brandishing guns. Biden said Antifa was just an idea. He and Harris supported them in word and deed before the election, yet you still voted for him. Seems all Biden supporters are simply blind or liars.

Expand full comment

"Harris and other democrats funded their bail, big time. Democratic DAs refused to prosecute."

-Due to the amount of wrongful detentions and arrest. You're also saying this as if they specifically sought out self-identifying Antifa "members" and bailed them out, which is nonsense.

"Democrats in Oregon right now refuse to remove Antifa from occupying blocks of Portland brandishing guns."

-I'm sorry...is this a complaint from the Right about brandishing guns??? You're right to criticize Democratic leadership for being weak on the issue of their illegal occupation, but unless we just erase the Bundy stand-off and the Republicans' non-reaction from history, this really doesn't say anything about Democratic voters. The "CHAZ" people are way out on the fringe.

"Biden said Antifa was just an idea. He and Harris supported them in word and deed before the election, yet you still voted for him."

-And Trump couldn't do anything more to denounce White Supremacy than to say "Proud Boys, stand back, and stand by." That was after he pardoned Joe "I racially profile brown people" Arpaio. If Democrats are somehow guilty of Biden's words and actions, then so are Trump voters. Unless they're all "simply blind or liars."

You basically just mirrored ridiculous Leftist talking points that are designed to prove all Trump supporters must be racist.

Expand full comment

Trump has explicitly, specifically denounced white supremacy on numerous occasions, you do know that, right? And the Proud Boys are not white supremacists, you also know that, right?

Expand full comment

Let’s be honest. The people who call him a racist are racists themselves. They use race as a weapon. It’s not as if they care about minorities, other than for their votes. They don’t give a damn about the horrible conditions in urban areas and do NOTHING to mitigate them. Indeed, I think they prefer it that way. It provides Democrats with a large base of people who can be manipulated with the race card, accusing other people - conservatives - as the source of their problems.

When they call Trump a racist, they know that they are lying. They known that they are taking only a part of a quote to present a false image. They just that they don’t care. The left has degenerated into a group of people who will do ANYTHING to win. They lie. They encourage election fraud. They engage in it themselves. They are just horrible people.

Expand full comment

Sounds like you have it all figured out, lol.

Expand full comment

He does it days after the incident in question, and does so in the pissed-off monotone he uses when he doesn't want to do something but everyone in his circle insisted he has to. For instance after Charlottesville it took him 3 days, and still a day later he backpedaled. As for the Proud Boys, they're "Western Chauvinists," their words, and are against non-European immigration. That's not a dog whistle, that's an air raid siren. No one, even trump, is going to say "I'm pro white supremacy." That doesn't mean they don't believe it. I mean, the first time Trump was ever in the newspaper was when Nixon's justice department fined his company for redlining apartments in Queens. You don't refuse to rent apartments to black people because you consider them equal to whites.

Expand full comment

I also have a personal rule. Anyone who uses the term “dog whistle” is to be ignored as a political hack

Expand full comment

It’s funny...the right didn’t riot, they didn’t burn down businesses, they didn’t loot and they didn’t harm on a grand scale over weeks and weeks.

That is what the left did.

They supported it in word and deed. They bailed out rioters and looters. Biden and Harris. And they did it open and notoriously.

But you prefer to read between the lines and make assumptions that fit your narrative, and obsessively focus on them even if they pale in comparison to what the left did.

The left are racist to the core. Why, for example, is it a political crime to say blue lives matter? Or all lives matter? Oh no! It’s only BLM. And of course, let’s all ignore that the actual BLM group is a front for raising money for the Democrat party.

But that must not be spoken of.

Expand full comment

"He didn't say it soon enough" -- that's cool, you're agreeing that he said it.

"He backpedaled" -- nonsense, he changed his mind and supported white supremacy, then, did he?

"Proud Boys are Western Chauvinists" -- great, we agree that they're not white supremecists.

"They're against non-European immigration" -- you think they're against Australians, New Zealanders, Canadians, for example, immigrating? Disentangle race and culture and rethink your stance.

"Refuse to rent apartments to black people" -- don't mix up correlation with causation, and while you do that, consider as a secondary point, why is it not considered sexist and ageist for car insurance companies to charge higher premiums to young male drivers?

Expand full comment

I think that it’s beyond doubt that the rioters were Democratic voters. The arguments that they were making were Democratic arguments without any doubt. Democratic public officials allowed the riots to go on - I assure you that if they were Republicans they would have hammered them. Biden was quiet until Don Lemon warned him that his silence on the riots wash hurting him electorally. Which means he was fine with the riots. Liberals “prove it”. One doesn’t have to prove the obvious. Amd one shouldn’t deny it either.

Expand full comment

You're lumping the most extreme elements in with all Democrats, as if they represent the "Left" (broadly speaking) anymore than the Nazis chanting "Jews won't replace us" in Charlottesville represent the "Right."

Additionally, you're conflating the speech of peaceful protestors with those who were violent or rioting. How do you know the guy throwing a brick through a police car's window votes at all? You act like there are only two kinds of people: Democratic Party loyalists or Republican Party loyalists. A lot of the rioting and looting either has fuck all to do with politics, and is usually just perpetrated by destructive opportunists, or is perpetrated by those who are so disenchanted by a system they see as beyond broken that they despise the Democratic Party as much as the Republican Party.

I don't take issue with people denouncing the looting and rioting. I do take issue with conflating those actions with peaceful protests, and I take issue with using the most extreme actions and speech from one side or the other and attributing them to the entire Left or Right.

Expand full comment

There comes a point in time when you become responsible formthemsctioms of others, where you can’t demy responsibility.

I am sooooooooooo sick amd tired,of the term “peaceful protestors”.

First of all in a large proportion of the “peaceful protests”, they were violating curfews and didn’t have permits to assemble. That is NOT peaceful.

Secondly, they knew at some point in time that their illegal assemblies would draw violent people into their midst and continued with their illegal protests anyways.

Whether they planned the inclusion of violence or not, they became responsible for it at some point in time.

Expand full comment

Can you show evidence of any of this ? So funny when people refuse to recognize US foreign policy. All assumptions driven by the media narrative. Funny how it never dawns on people to question both sides of the fake isle.

Expand full comment

This is a standard fallback of the left. Prove the obvious to a legal standard or your wrong, ignore what’s in front of your face. But prove what someone put on a secret ballot, which they know is impossible. Which brings them to their aha! moment that is dependent upon ignoring that their actions totally align with the left leaning candidate. No! You aren’t allowed to draw natural conclusions from obvious facts. Okay. So I will play your game. I saw how they vote. I watched them fill out their ballots.

Expand full comment

Yes, I told you. I watched how they all filled out their ballots.

Expand full comment

Since the BRATS got their way, they ended their 4 year long TNATRUM.

Expand full comment

Riiiiight. Have you been into the Tide pods again?

Expand full comment

So you're saying the looters voted for Biden, okay. Anything to back that up?

Expand full comment

You're being awfully literal today, aren't you? I seriously doubt whether a single one of them voted for Trump. If they voted, they voted for Biden. I haven't seen any unrest and looting since Biden claimed victory. That give you a clue, Mr. Market Researcher?

Expand full comment

Your hostility and name calling is undermining your arguments. Might want to pull back on that.

Expand full comment

I'm actually not hostile, and if "Mr. Market Researcher" triggers you, then you better get off the internet! :-)

Expand full comment

I didn't see any serious unrest in the 3 months prior to the election, either. I did see a BLM protest last night in midtown Manhattan, shut down a major intersection at 34th and Broadway. Does that count? Lol

Expand full comment

Once again you fail to see what the US has done all over the world just because it's in your back yard.

Expand full comment

Did you believe the Democrat’s 2016 Russia hoax? More evidence of 2020 voter fraud than of Russian collusion.

Expand full comment

You have to be more specific. And there's no evidence of 2020 voter fraud, so that's not a great metric.

Expand full comment

No voter fraud? You seem to be saying that the official surveillance video from the management of the State Farm Arena in Atlanta is fake.

The vote counting manager said to everyone that voting was stopping for the night, and was quoted by TV News media saying that. Yet the video clearly shows people moving ballots around and vote counting machines going through thousands of ballots after everyone supposedly had left. That is definitive fraud: counting ballots right after officially announcing that counting was stopped and everyone should leave.

More than a thousand dead people "voting" in one state. Someone who was born in 1823 voting in another. Thousands of people who voted in two states in the Presidential election. None of this is fraud????

Expand full comment

How do you know if there is or isn't evidence ?

Expand full comment

As in, framing it as "Democrat's 2016 Russia hoax" forces me to say "Yes, I believe in a hoax," or wholesale dismiss the idea that Russians weren't involved at all in the 2016 election. If you want to have real discussions and not just spray partisan opinions around like a feral cat, don't address topics using leading language.

Expand full comment

Why not focus on the impeachment charges. As for Russia’s involvement in 2016, and 2020, sure they were messing around. We could save a lot of space and time if we list the foreign governments that didn’t try to influence.

No voter fraud? So all of the networks were incorrect when they predicted massive fraud from President Trump?

Expand full comment

Mostly not voters at all. Those defending them and keeping them out of jail and pulling back the police were probably Biden voters, though.

Expand full comment

Nah, the O'Biden permanent warfare administration does its burning, looting, and killing overseas. Much more acceptable to the suburban wine mom constituency and Biden fanx like John O. Brennan, Max Boot, and David Frum. NIMBY!

Expand full comment

Oh boy, another partisan sleep walker.........

Expand full comment

Just pointing out that a guy throwing a brick through the window of a LIdz is probably not a centrist Democrat. That you somehow read that as an endorsement of Biden says something about your partisanship.

Expand full comment

Serious question. What’s a Centrist Democrat? I used to think I was one until the center of the party pivoted continually left while those of us not comfortable with the woke corporatism of the new party were maligned as ignorant racists...

Expand full comment

trying to wrap my head around the concept of "woke corporatism" being a "pivot to the left." "Left" means a lot of contradictory things to a lot of different people, which is why it's become a largely useless label. That said, I'm fairly sure that "corporatism" is an outlier as a component of even an obsolete definition of "the left."

IMO the success of the Woke project has been in untethering (at least the vocal) cultural/social justice component of the traditional "left" from the economic justice component of the traditional "left." As I say often and tiresomely, cui bono? Nike, probably.

Expand full comment

Well exactly. I don’t know what it means to be left. I’m generally left on some topics and “right” on others. I was referring to Nike or BAML or Twitter. Which is to say. Massive public corporates that engage in objectively awful predatory behavior here and elsewhere in world while intentionally projecting and enforcing “woke” social standards as a cover. You can dig in In a longer format into why corporates want loose immigration for instance and j assure you it has nothing to do with actually social justice. So candidates like Yang and Sanders (off the wall but genuine) and dare I say trump. Are knifed by the Corp media in favor of demonstrably awful humans like biden Harris. For the simple reason that Trump/ yang/ Bernie are (for admittedly different reasons) bad for global business. The key is. This knifing is done by someone holding a rainbow flag (another topic corps pretend to give a shit about). But a lot of the superficial pro corporate pablum has infected policy. And the way regular people think about policy. Roughly speaking that’s what I meant by woke corporatism.

Expand full comment

The center of the party pivoted left? Is Joe Biden a leftist? Tom Perez?

Expand full comment

...can you be a corporate leftist? Is that a thing...? I get it, you're anti-PC or whatever but you can't just make shit up.

Expand full comment

But at least they are very diverse...

Expand full comment

Taibbi is right though. If this continues anger will turn to rage. If you treat people like dogs, fair enough, but don't be surprised when they bite.

Expand full comment

If that anger turns to rage, the Dem brass will be delighted to use the ensuing disorder, to justify implementing the ultimate Endlösung der DeplorablesFrage.

When people are treated like dogs, the point usually is, to provoke them to start biting.

So, Matt, conscientious guy that he is, is just pointing us to the blatantly obvious.

Expand full comment

"Do you want 70 million Trump voters in the streets with guns and go-bags? Tell them you consider them the same as foreign enemies, and start treating them accordingly."

In all likelihood, this whole thing has been war-gamed, up one side and down the other.

Expand full comment

I bet people could scare up enough tar, feathers and poles for just such an occasion.

Expand full comment

Oh no! facepalm

Expand full comment

So true.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

So conservatives destroyed the New York Times? Conservatives pushed the Russia Election Conspiracy so hard that the Times published some 2500 articles pretending it was true? Conservatives pushed the left-wing opinion editor out after he published a carefully written and edited column by Senator Tom Cotton? Conservatives created so much hate in the Times' newsroom that liberal Bari Weiss quit the fulltime position she had at the Times? Conservatives created the "1619 Project" which is so bad that intellectuals on the left as well as the right denounced it and the Times has made revisions in the online version to protect themselves? And all the columnists the Times has are secret conservatives, despite nearly every one of them identifying with the Democratic Party and as anti-conservatives?

Expand full comment

I think Cotton sucks because he is a crazed anti-Iran warhawk, but I largely otherwise agree with this post.

Expand full comment

Thank you.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

The journalists destroyed the press. They are responsible for their own behavior. Well, and the corporate owners of the organizations.

Expand full comment

The elite have always owned the press. Nothing new to see hear.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Or Hanlon’s......

Expand full comment

How the f---- did conservatives destroy the MSM? I worked in the MSM for 25 years, and for most of the years I was the ONLY conservative in the newsroom. This included a major metropolitan daily in one of the nation's largest cities, and also wrote for a national wire service.

And my experience is hardly unique. One of the national journalism think tanks used to do a survey of working editors and reporters after every election. Poynter Institute, I think. Last survey I saw results for was Obama's first victory, and I believe about 90 percent of all journalists voted for him.

Expand full comment

Getting pretty tired of the conservative victimhood status. What did conservatives ever do to stop any of this ? They are and always have been in on it.

Who gives a warm runny shit who voted for who in a rigged system ? Have you ever stopped to think about why there are only two of these fake parties and two ideological positions in the first place ?

When you stop with the blame game and start looking at solutions you get mass propaganda and censorship.

Let's not forget who wrote the Patriot act and how it got voted into place with bipartisan support.

Expand full comment

Think tanks destroyed the US government, press, and society.

Expand full comment

Add the giant trough that feeds the pigs ;-)

Expand full comment

The NYT, WA PO are LEFT. They destroyed themselves. They have become entertainment TABLOIDS, having nothing to do with reality. Just stroking the marginally intelligent. those who enjoy stuff like "The Trump Virus", "The Golden Shower", Trump the Traitor", "Melania the prostitute" Melania the Illegal Alien."

Expand full comment

They really have true Trump derangement syndrome. He broke their minds and they’re too damaged to go back.

Expand full comment

There is no left or right, only top and bottom. Or do we need to talk about Rupert and his whack a doodle world ??

Expand full comment

"The Trump Virus", "The Golden Shower", "Trump the Traitor", "Melania the prostitute" or "Melania the Illegal Alien" are all TV and blog stuff. I get the feeling that's what you're reacting to, that you actually don't read NYT or WaPo.

Expand full comment

New York Times Reporter Claims There's a Tape of Trump's Golden Showers Incident...

BY PJ VIDEO MAR 22, 2017 2:00 AM ETs Reporter Claims There's a Tape of Trump's Golden Showers Incident...

https://pjmedia.com/video/pj-video/2017/03/22/new-york-times-reporter-claims-theres-a-tape-of-trumps-golden-showers-incident-n87916

NOT EVEN ALLEGED. reported as fact!

Ms. Ramirez’s story would seem far less damaging to Mr. Kavanaugh’s reputation than those of Dr. Ford, who claimed that he pinned her to a bed, groped her and tried to remove her clothes while covering her mouth.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html

Two Men Tell Judiciary Committee They Assaulted Christine Ford, Not Kavanaugh.

https://time.com/5408094/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-two-men-claim-attack/

New York Times ripped for column saying coronavirus should be called 'Trumpvirus'

"Let’s Call It Trumpvirus"

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/opinion/coronavirus-trump.html

"Trump, Treasonous Traitor"

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/15/opinion/trump-russia-investigation-putin.html

"Russian Spy or Hustling Political Operative? The Enigmatic Figure at the Heart of Mueller’s Inquiry"

" just as Mr. Trump was clinching the Republican presidential nomination — he first received polling data about the 2016 election from two top Trump campaign officials, Mr. Manafort and Rick Gates, as Russia was beginning a social media operation intended to help Mr. Trump’s campaign." This was not proven in court. IT WAS A LIE PUT PUBLISHED AS FACT!

You are the one who doesn't read the Papers or SELECTIVELLY REMEMBERS. You are so simpleminded, you'll believe anything NYT says and therein lies the danger.

Continue your cheap tabloid romance with NYT and WaPo.

Expand full comment

You would be wrong. I read the NYT every day. Wapo, I don’t have a subscription to but they have Jennifer Rubin & Max Boot on staff sooooo.....

Expand full comment

What planet are you on?

Expand full comment

It’s not a planet he’s from the “fourth estate”

Expand full comment

He's from the 6th estate....... the wandering unconscious mind!

Expand full comment

The founders never “designed” the press to be anything-they simply recognized it’s proper role in the political ecosystem and protected it. John Peter Zenger was a generation or two older than Madison and Co.

Expand full comment

I proudly masturbate nightly to the US Constitution. Some get off on the flag. Me, I get off on the Constitution.

Expand full comment

Rubbish on steroids. Rush and Fox (until recently) built a heck of a counter platform to what was already a progressive corrupt leaning media. It is now big tech that is destroying any chance at free speech. Good grief what a lame take.

Expand full comment

Yes and I remember seeing an old episode of Firing Line (it’s on youtube now) where William F. Buckley was complaining of liberal bias in the media going back to the 1950’s. It’s that personality type who is attracted to positions like that so I’m thinking it’s always had that type of slant.

Conservative types start businesses or manage corporations, they don’t go become teachers, journalists ect...

Expand full comment

Well, if you're from William F. Buckley's class, you start out at no effort with a gimme job in the CIA, but if you get bored there's always a career in punditry.

Expand full comment

Lol, read The Third Bullet by Stephen Hunter for a good send up of Yalian CIA douchery......

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Journalism? Where? CNN, NBC, NY Times, Washington Post? If you think that there is no sense in continuing this discussion. Good day.

Expand full comment

From an earlier article on TK News:

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/the-scarlet-letter-club

«Meanwhile, there was exactly one major American news organization that didn’t buy the British-American war story: the Knight-Ridder newspaper chain. Their Washington bureau chief, John Walcott, offered a simple explanation:

“Our readers aren’t here in Washington. They aren’t up in New York. They aren’t the people who send other people’s kids to war. They’re the people who get sent to war and we felt an obligation to them.”»

Expand full comment

The smaller outlets did journalism. They where "Rockefellered" into obscurity.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

It existed everywhere but within the mainstream.

Expand full comment

I find you refreshingly incompetent. I will point out that Fox was the original propaganda outlet (going to war 20 yrs ago)

Expand full comment

New York Times: we were wrong on Iraq

Claire Cozens

Wed 26 May 2004

The New York Times today issued an extraordinary mea culpa over its coverage of Iraq, admitting it had been misled about the presence of weapons of mass destruction by sources including the controversial Iraqi leader Ahmad Chalabi.

The New York Times' role in promoting war on Iraq

“One of the most entrenched and disturbing features of American journalism [is] its pack mentality. Editors and journalists don’t like to diverge too sharply from what everyone else is writing.”

https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/the-new-york-times-role-in-promoting-war-on-iraq-20040323-gdilbl.html

Expand full comment

Come on, dude. All of the "news" was tightly controlled before the internet.

Were you born after the internet?

Expand full comment

I assume you are talking to me. So, I'm old enough to remember sitting in the living room watching the news show body bags lifted onto Hueys for the ride back to "the world". So yeah, pre internet.

Those views were instrumental in a shift of public opinion away from the warmongers' propaganda and towards sanity. How tightly controlled was the news then? It's all been refined since then, for sure.

Apologies if we are talking two different things.

Expand full comment

«Their counter platforms are for entertainment purposes only by their own legal standards.»

There is a similar ruling where a very important Wall Street corporate claimed successfully that they are not liable for the financial advice their advisors provide because they are actually entertainers and they don't give advice but entertainment to customers. They are truly comedians! :-)

Expand full comment

You’re describing Rachael Maddow to a “T”. Look up the “news” vs “entertainment” lawsuit she was involved in.

Expand full comment

 February 14, 2003 FOX wins right to falsify NEWS. Ist Amendment supersedes.

In a stunningly narrow interpretation of FCC rules, the Florida Appeals court claimed that the FCC policy against falsification of the news does not rise to the level of a "law, rule, or regulation," it was simply a "policy." Therefore, it is up to the station whether or not it wants to report honestly.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2007/7/31/364678/-

Expand full comment

The lead up to war. One month after this decision, the war was launched. So they got to the appeals court- so much was at stake.

Expand full comment

The NYT endorsed the war also.

Expand full comment

Fox News is part of the mainstream media, no matter how they try to spin it. They are part of the problem too. And if you think "grift and make money selling hatred" is a goal unique to conservatives then you are woefully naïve.

Expand full comment

Spot on. Fox is not on our side(s). They are owned by the MIC- that's who they work for. The left media does too. I fear we are out gunned at the moment

Expand full comment

They always have been. Haven’t trusted Fox since they called Florida early in 2000. They’re still the neocons news network. They called Arizona early for Biden this year. Old habits die hard I guess.

Expand full comment

Thank goodness the left-leaning media (meaning all of it except Fox) are sober, serious, balanced journalists. It's only those crazies at Fox and Rush L. causing all of our problems today. /s

Expand full comment

You can include Fox, as it isn't particularly conservative. Especially the "news" which is where the problem ultimately is with all the "news" organizations.

Expand full comment

What a deflection from the point of Matt's article! Matt does propose in Hate Inc. that Fox News developed the model. But that is NOT the point of this article. Why change the subject? Are you so blind with hatred towards the right? The point of this article is censorship/suppression/ manufacturing consent ... or whatever you want to call it. Keep on topic.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

It isn't just an assault on Trump though. It's an assault on the ability of anyone who questions the official narrative to post on social media. Remember the article on covid19 that Twitter censored in March, to temporarily shutting down the Federalist magazine account until it was deleted? The guy who wrote it wasn't partisan at all, Federalist was just the 1st media outlet he shopped it to that agreed to publish it. Now that the precedent is set, what stops them from labeling the next Occupy Wall Street as "anti democracy disinformation"? Or using similar censorship tactics on anyone who may be injured by the Pfizer vaccine?

Expand full comment

Exactly. Suddenly, an information sharing platform is blocking the free flow of ideas -ALL ideas.

They're not doing it to protect anything but their own bottom lines and everyone knows it. They're really raking in the cash during this pandemic. Amazon and Google are still rising.

This shit is rotten to the core and I'm starting to feel like Eraserhead. Trapped and terrified, but mostly just despondent.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

We get it: Fox News is stupid and "The Conservatives" are responsible for all of this.

Where does that chain-of-blame end? How far back do we go?

Forget it. "Red v Blue" or "Con v Lib" is just so pedestrian. It's literally the product these media people baked up for the corporate masters.

Everyone needs to stop thinking along these programmed lines of logic. Shit's not BINARY in real life: it's multidimensional.

Beautifully complicated.

Expand full comment

Yep, it is all conservatives fault. Everything. The cold weather. The hot weather. Everything. You know one rule of life that I find is 100% definite. When one side says the other is at fault for everything they are 100% of the time wrong. The other rule is that person who says they are the smart ones and the other side are the dumb ones...well 100% of the time they have it backward.

Expand full comment

Even more conservative victimhood ?

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Unfortunately, many people conflate Rachel Maddow and Rush Limbaugh with "news" - people and increasingly, media, conflate opinion with news. Rachel and Rush spin information and feed it to a willing audience. Suppressing news and information inconvenient to its audience is the new "news"

Expand full comment

Why do people spell out "period", just before an actual period? So dramatic

Expand full comment

I think it may derive from old telegraphy typology ("STOP"), but perhaps more recently Twitter clout typography.

Expand full comment

dictation for transcribers

Expand full comment

Beautifully and eloquently stated. Like one side of a fight between five-year-old twin brothers: "He started it!" End of story. So where does it go from here? You suppress the voice of your accused instigator and shut down all his channels of communication, and he simply withers on the vine and disappears? No problem at all. It's not like we've got historical precedent to show that this sort of thing comes back to bite you in the tail. "100% of all the responsibility for all of this lies at the feet of the conservatives." Man, if I'd only had it explained to me so reasonably and equanimously before. A voice of reason in the cold, dark forest.

Expand full comment

I partially, totally agree with you. 🥺 It is a shame Rush, and the few other conservatives in the media, didn’t create a better source for news. Not a conservative based platform, a factual platform. I don’t need some moron reading into a camera to try to form my opinion for me, let me know the facts and I’ll form my own opinion.

The reason we have minimal sources for facts is the current distributors of stuff, as opposed to news, are afraid facts will cause people to think what said distributors don’t want people to think. I’m hoping once the 2020 dust settles the landscape will change.

As for today’s stuff reporters, think “operatives of the state”.

Expand full comment

Actually there are several very good, fair-minded and reliable sources of news that are worth using because they provide facts: NewsMax TV; City Journal; The Federalist; RealClearInvestigations and its sister sites, etc.

Expand full comment

I understand, but a lot of people are not attached to WIFI. I’m a country boy and what little I watch is OTA, have no interest in streaming.

But thanks, I stand corrected.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Don't think that's fair to City Journal. I personally skew "left" and they skew "right" but I frequently find their often contra-conventional-wisdom takes on urbanism refreshing.

Ever tried not being an absolutist, not picking a "side," and evaluating ideas on their own merits?

Expand full comment

Now do NBC, CNN et al.....only the opposite, your point is somewhat reasonable, if you can see 360 degrees, not just 90 degrees.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

NewsMax TV is conservative. City Journal is non-partisan. The Federalist leans conservative but mainly does good, well sourced reporting.

RealClearInvestigations is definitely non-partisan. Their latest weekday email (12/11) lists articles from the following sources as its Top 8 of the day: Wall Street Journal, Associated Press, Reuters, Daily Beast, Businessweek, ABC, ZDNet and Wired. That covers a pretty wide range of sources. Associated Press, Reuters, Daily Beast and ABC News are all firmly on the left side, while the other four are generally neutral (and ZDNet publishes little or no politics).

Expand full comment

The real problem with the so called "conservative" media such as Fox and Limbaugh, is that they were never conservative. They were the original propaganda outlets and their push to war 20 yrs ago was as cynical and corrupt as any left leaning media is today.

Expand full comment

I'm still a soft leftist, for whatever the term is worth. Lately I find I tend to have more in common with sincere conservatives; we want to achieve a mutually acceptable politics that allows working people in this country to make a go of it.

I will never forget how gross Rush and Fox were in the 1990s.

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Dec 12, 2020
Comment removed
Expand full comment

What in the wide wide world of sports is a neoconfederate? Spell check doesn't recognize it.

Expand full comment

Stand Watie or me, probably. I grudgingly recognize that Lincoln and FDR probably did more good than harm in toto. Still don't mean I like the 1934 NFA or revenooers.

What I wouldn't give to have been around back in the Depression. Black Americans inventing American popular music while motorized crackers were shooting up banks with submachineguns is just distilled Americana. I may get my wish yet in my lifetime!

Expand full comment

Basically the type of person whose grandfather was a segregationist in the 50s and is into confederate flag decals on their truck today.

Expand full comment

«didn’t create a better source for news. Not a conservative based platform, a factual platform. I don’t need some moron reading into a camera to try to form my opinion for me, let me know the facts and I’ll form my own opinion.»

And who is willing to pay for that, which is quite expensive, and pay for monitoring that actually happens? The people who are willing to pay (from Bezos onwards) want that paid-for content to reflect their interests. Just like politics, journalism is pay-per-play, and you only get what you pay for.

Expand full comment

Oh my. Are you clutching pearls as you write this?

Expand full comment

I consider myself a cynic of the highest order but not in my darkest dreams did I think that tech companies would intentionally transform themselves into biased political actors intent on openly censoring information that does not comport with San Francisco Bay Area dogma (and I have a pretty decent handle on this dogma having lived here since 1985).

How could anyone of whatever political stripe think what YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter are doing is appropriate? I'm at a complete loss.

Expand full comment

Follow the money. They had accurate tea leaves as to Biden's chances for victory, and are participating in the time honored but integrity free tradition of quid pro quo.

Expand full comment

This is way past traditional quid pro quo. Alphabet as far as profits are concerned still greatly relies on targeted advertising during internet searches. to make money. Why would one use Google for searches when Google is expressly censoring content? That is the exact opposite of what a user wants his search engine to do.

I've been - an extremely small - shareholder of Google/Alphabet for over a decade but this lunacy seems designed to kill Google's extremely golden goose. What Pichai is doing is flat out nuts.

Expand full comment

I have changed to BING. Google will place some old article first because it supports their political view, sometimes as much as 6 years old. NYT and WAPO have up front place settings on Google and are repeated instead of an article that might have a different view. They are the GESTAPO. The information GESTAPO!

Expand full comment

I use DuckDuckGo

Expand full comment

Thanks Todd. I am going to try it.

Expand full comment
founding

>Follow the money.

But's it's a mystery, isn't it? It is obvious enough that basically all major media, online media, and major corporations are aligned in an unprecedented way, and they're all being directed by the same powerful force. But who? Is it simply the U.S. deep state? Or is it China? Perhaps a temporary alliance between the two to remove their common enemy?

Expand full comment

They all support one entity and that one entity is the only one to require such an alignment: the MIC.

Expand full comment

Left wing Tories.

They wish to conserve their gains, however with the levels of indebtedness this requires unlimited Federal Reserve and other Central Bank Bailouts. In many ways this really is a Heist Film - but its Cascading into an entire Franchise of Heist Films - they must keep robbing us or go bankrupt. To avoid being bankrupted they must stop any chance of a Politician stopping them - or God forbid the victims demand to see the books. To stifle all political dissent they must now rob free speech (the point of this post) so as to prevent the disaster of accountability.

Here by the way are the Derivatives - the Book of Books on how overextended we are.

Now its a bit technical- so in sum - in 2008 $80B in derivatives broke the world.

Its now $606, 810B.

Or $606.T. Trillion.

https://stats.bis.org/statx/srs/table/d5.1

Expand full comment

It's Vince Lombardiism. "Winning isn't the main thing, it's the ONLY thing."

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

For tech firms it was the other way around though. They used to be libertarian, and champagne socialists are a real thing.

Probably the difference is making money and having money. The libertarian, capitalism-loving OGs who built firms like Google are mostly gone now. A few persist but I can tell you most have drifted away over the years. The culture drifted away with them. They were replaced with an infinite supply of entitled grad students who have never seen a budget or had to make a difficult decision, and have spent their lives being told they're the smartest people in the room ... even when they're not. Tech firms encourage this mindset. Perhaps once it was true, in their early glory years. But not anymore.

Expand full comment

Which means nothing since both liberal and conservative are meaningless labels.

Expand full comment

That's why I don't use these (and many other) words. I discuss specific issues instead.

Expand full comment

That's what's happening to the immigrants. They don't want to compete with the newcomers for a job.

Expand full comment

The scariest bit to me is the preemptive inoculation of the entire population against the idea that domestic dissent could exist. If every form of dissent and criticism is automatically classified as of-foreign-origin, then domestic critics cease to be a recognizable category of people. We’re just erased, along with our views. Zeroed out.

Expand full comment

Yep, sort of like the needs of many small businesses that have been ordered to close, but little attempt to make them whole or to shore up unemployment insurance.

Our government's reaction to COVID has been pathetic. We ought to listen to what our elected leaders are saying. They're telling us to f*** right off.

Expand full comment

President Trump has done an excellent job. Stopping people from China already in late January; setting up a high level task force headed by Dr Birx (who was a logical choice since she was head of the US World AIDS program under President Obama; getting every need for equipment, supplies and even the fully staffed naval medical ships sent to New York and Los Angeles, and getting vaccines developed and supplied in record time. Congress has been terrible, thanks to the Democratic leaders, who have constantly obstructed sensible legislation (think of the "HEROES" act in May, which had many provisions solely to aid the wealthy; and Nancy Pelosi preventing a relief act from being taken up until after the election).

Expand full comment

And our highest-in-the-developed world infection and death rate is testament to Trump's wisdom and engagement.

Expand full comment

Really? You mean that Italy, Spain, Belgium, and the U.K. are not in the 'developed world??? They all have higher death rates than the U.S. as of right now (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries).

And if New Jersey and New York, whose governors caused many deaths through their directives, were separate countries, the rest of the U.S. would rank around 20th.

Expand full comment

Anything to not blame Trump. You're full on delusional.

Expand full comment

Or... Anything to blame Trump in your case? Honestly, if you sleep better at night by pinning it on him, more power to you. But at some point, I think we can take a step back and just say that pandemics suck. They suck no matter who is in the oval office.

Expand full comment

One might think it difficult to be a more appalling figure in public office than Trump, but Andrew Cuomo and Bill DeBlasio have lapped him and then some. Cuomo should literally be charged with 6,000 or so counts of involuntary homicide for ordering the Covid patients back into the nursing homes. Jack McCoy would do it!

Expand full comment

I work in assisted care in 2 16 hour shifts on the weekend. That's where I'm at right now. Initially we dodged Covid even though my employers did everything in their inept cheapskate power to assist its flowering. Not so lucky with the 2nd wave. Within a week we've gone from 11 cases isolated in one building to a campus wide flowering. We had one death on Friday. I expect there will be more.

My employers had months of grace time to come up with a cogent plan & stock up on protective equipment.

Instead they appear to have done what they always do when they can see a crisis approaching which is little or nothing.

They have nurses working with infected patients & then going from there to buildings that are unaffected.

The same with agency staff. They bounce them from building to building.

They initially had all Covid cases in the gym but they've decided to leave the infected in their normal residences with unaffected clients.

Their policies change from day to day.

They are egregiously short on staff & nurses.

Some nurses are threatening to quit.

As are staff.

I don't think we're unique.

As a matter of fact I'd bet that cheapskate ineptness is the fucking norm in this field.

Since I've witnessed this for myself I have to wonder exactly how many of the deaths could have been prevented if health care wasn't profit driven.

If these companies weren't constantly cutting corners & rewarding managers with monetary bonuses for cutting corners would there be as many dead.

In a field that produces nothing there are only so many ways you can wring profit out of it. You can overcharge the client's families but most of the folk I work with don't have families.

You can keep employees wages down which has been their modus operandi for awhile. It only changed when staff shortages literally hit danger levels.

Or you can fudge on the services.

I really feel bad for the residents. They are trapped here.

I also feel bad for my coworkers. Most of them need this job. I'm luckier because my wife & I have a business that pays for most of our expenses. I do this job on weekends for the health care & other personal reasons.

I suppose, if push came to shove, I could do without the health care.

I just don't know if I want to abandon these residents. I've known some of them for years. They may have mental issues and occasionally have violent outbursts but they're not bad people, just troubled & short changed by life.

I also don't want to die choking on my own snot.

I don't want to infect my wife & watch her die the same way.

My point is that placing the blame solely on Trump is pretty misguided.

Both parties own this mess.

The Dems were much more interested in moving wealth upwards towards their donors than they were interested in the fate of the average American.

The trillions they gave away to people who didn't need it could have funded a sizeable cash handout to ensure that folk could lockdown without simultaneously losing everything they worked for up to that point.

The entire government abandoned us to half measures & spare change.

From what I understand the wealthy are practically salivating as they wait for the evictions & the foreclosures to start so they can swoop in like vultures and buy up all that cheap real estate.

Finally, while Pelosi & CNN don't feel that cash payments are needed this time around, the food lines & eviction notices tell a different tale. The only two people in government right now who are trying to get cash payments for Americans are Bernie Sanders & Josh Hawley, a Republican.

Did Trump make mistakes? Yep.

Was he alone? Fuck no.

I feel the need to say I didn't vote for Trump & I don't even particularly like Trump. I can't actually think of any president in my life that I did like so Trump isn't remotely unique. Maybe that's why my dislike stayed as dislike without mutating into pants shitting fear like so many Americans seemed to have experienced.

Expand full comment

Right here you see the difference between someone who has been in the trenches vs someone who just disses Trump. You don't have to like or vote for him, but the name-calling and outright lies are pretty ridiculous and a sure sign that the programming has done its job.

Expand full comment

Uh, do you suppose our being so incredibly unfit and unhealthy might have something to do with it?

Expand full comment

A lot of the difference in death rates is due to the different demographic profile of various countries, for example various african countries have very low rates as 85% of their residents are under 30. The USA have a larger proportion of younger people than very-low-birthrate Spain or Italy etc., also because of immigration.

Expand full comment

I agree with some of Trump's policies, but he's been a series of ever growing train wrecks from the time he was inaugurated.

Expand full comment

A very cogent response - unfortunately it appears it got politicized into two party politics like so much else on Matt’s page.

I’m not sure if there is anything more American, maybe more human, than the right to dissent. Both parties are working to remove that.

Expand full comment

This is a sturdy piece, it’s what we once stood for. Some don’t mind the foot on the neck, don’t see the tearing of the compact, or don’t care. They think selective news, blocking, and buried stories are temporary and necessary, limited to Trump. Who are the anonymous censors deciding what millions of Americans can see and hear? One needn’t be a Trumpster – I am not- to find the ponderous Amanpour’s smugness grating – and unforgivably dense.

Expand full comment

I think that over 50% of the country is okay with this. We will probably see more of it. Ultimately

Expand full comment

I'm pretty far from being "radicalized." So YouTube is explicitly trending into a propaganda organ. Since they’ve made that explicit, I’ll be trending away from them and toward one of the alternatives. At an individual level, I think they can do whatever they like. So can I.

As for the business of regulating big tech platforms, the principles have been in place for a long time. Antitrust legislation has been around for half our history. This medium for interactive transmission of information by private parties and privately-owned businesses is a jumped-up next step from broadcast frequencies. The government has asserted public-good regulatory authority over those for at least 93 years.

It's not that nobody knows how to do it. It's not that it's magically so revolutionary and unapproachable because it's happening on a GIZMO instead of a television set. It's that we lack political will to move ahead at this point. Since we have people seriously asserting that half of their fellow Americans are a dangerous sub-citizen element in need of re-education and firm control, maybe a lack of political will to develop new broad-based government regulatory schemes is understandable. Maybe we have bigger fish to fry at the moment.

Good on you for publicly criticizing these boneheads, Taibbi.

Expand full comment

You know what's fucked up? The fact that I don't know which side you're talking about with this sentence.

"Since we have people seriously asserting that half of their fellow Americans are a dangerous sub-citizen element in need of re-education and firm control"

I need a drink...

Expand full comment

I think we are heading into a confusing time; confusing but necessary. We'll find out what kind of a country we want. It won't come easy largely because the PTB understand their survival is at stake. The dirty tricks, subversion, misdirection will be epic (well it already is epic but it'll get even crazier). The MSM will go berserk. Individuals may go berserk too- many of them already have, but perhaps another element will decide to show their contrary influence.

Outcome is difficult to predict but it should be interesting. I may be viewing it all from outside the country.

Expand full comment

I agree, but I'm pretty much stuck here. Might be too bad for me.

Expand full comment

Don't despair, but realize you may have to pick a side.

Expand full comment

Let me know when you suss out who the sides are definitively. "Right" vs. "Left" ain't doing it for me any more. "Free speech" vs. "Controlled speech" is an early tell.

Expand full comment

All the old terms are near useless: conservative, liberal, democrat, repub... I do figure that the far left and the far right are actually closer together than suspected. Neither wants the wars, the corrupt institutions and so on. They just want a country that looks out for its citizens.

I figure it will take awhile for the country to decide. The controlled speech is an enormous effort to keep Americans from realizing their plight.

Expand full comment

He might not be either identifying with or talking about a preapproved "side," which might be going towards your point, or into your drink.

Expand full comment

I hasten to clarify that I would never deny anyone a necessary drink regardless of how much their political views might diverge from mine. The 18th Amendment was a crime against America and humanity.

Expand full comment

Because they’re both saying it now! smh

Expand full comment

What if 74 million Americans switched from Google Chrome to Brave browser...by Monday. Would Google notice?? RT to make it happen

Expand full comment

I still use Chrome but I search with Duck Duck Go. Is Brave better? Do they have it for Mac?

Expand full comment

Brave browser uses Duck Duck as a search engine. Brave conversion is REALLY easy - it automatically copies all bookmarks and automatically stops advertising. And is a poke in the Google Eye! 74 million pokes would be awesome!

Expand full comment

Been a DDG user for years but didn't know Brave. So thanks: I'll check that out. How's the speed, generally? Any complaints vs. Chrome?

Expand full comment
founding

It's just as good. I use Google/Chrome at work and have used DDG/Brave at home for a couple years now. The only difference is the palpable feeling of being manipulated when viewing certain google search results.

Expand full comment

I don’t find DDG returns as good results. That said, I’ve been finding Google results becoming harder and harder to find useful information. Unless you have a very specific time period to limit results, the overwhelming return of recent (and repetitive) results is getting crushing.

Expand full comment

Brave works on Mac, Windows, Android, etc. I've been using it exclusively for a year and a half. Performance equal to or better than anything I used previously. Ads blocked. Privacy protected. Recommended without reservation.

Expand full comment

Which influencers can make this Chrome boycott happen?? Or are they all talk and no action?

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Dec 14, 2020
Comment removed
Expand full comment

I suppose I was thinking that frustrated people might be looking for something tangible to do in response to Google's oppressive censorship. Journalists keep complaining about Google as though there is nothing that can be done. If 70 million people switched it would make a difference. When you and I do it....nada

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Dec 14, 2020
Comment removed
Expand full comment

I've heard Brave recommended by people I trust. It's not what I personally use (because I'm a user with extremely specific needs and the knowledge to do my own customization), but everything I've read about it is good, and it's certainly going to spy on you less than Chrome. It's based on Chrome but strips out a lot of the junk and comes with things like a built in ad blocker. It's also made by the guy who used to be CEO of Mozilla, who created Firefox.

Bottom line: It's definitely not going to be worse than Chrome.

Expand full comment

Funny how "disinformation" seems to be anything that is even in the slightest way subversive to approved political orthodoxly. Think American imperialism is bad? Disinformation! People are suffering because of government policies? Disinformation!

Also this phrase "domestic anti-democracy disinformation". We invaded Iraq and Afghanistan in order to "Spread Democracy™" and that they are now using language like that targeted at American citizens should be fucking terrifying to everyone.

Expand full comment

Matt Taibbi keeps hitting every piece out of the park. I think he's juicing like Barry Bonds did! I know Silicon Valley will be happy to allow that scurrilous accusation.

The MSM and Silicon Valley are acting just like the mullahs in Iran, only allowing the masses to read and see what they deem "truth." Wouldn't it be ironic if we US citizens and Iranian citizens have a revolt at the same time.

Expand full comment

I think we've both tried a time or two, we just suck at coordinating it. Another shout-out to my Persian soul brothers. Maybe one day we'll get it right and fire on all eight cylinders.

Expand full comment

I notice Russia mentioned frequently but China wasn’t. One of the charter plays in the Democrat playbook is accuse your opponent of what you are guilty of. The racist label is a good example.

Russia is not one of the top 10 world economies, China is number two. While Obama was prez I was employed by LMT and that portion of the Military Industrial Complex (MIC), freaked out when, while BO was visiting Asia, China rolled out their stolen, from MIC/LMT, version of the F22.

Only a fool (think the Bush family) thinks China is our pal They control much more of the US than the deep state is willing to admit. Money, also known as power, talks in DC.

Some friends and I have come up with a great way to become massively wealthy, we are opening a nation-wide chain of schools to teach Mandarin. You better register soon, beat the rusha... [sic]

Expand full comment

The elite from every country work together far more than they compete. It's all bread and circus that drives the casino they orchestrate in order to maintain their socioeconomic status. China has an equal to every monopoly the US does and relies upon fear mongering the masses to stay in power just like the all the other countries that claim to have elections and free markets.

Expand full comment

Bingo.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

«even though communism is dead in Russia, one could argue given the current state of Russia we still failed.»

Well, Russia is not an american protectorate like Brazil, but it is pretty irrelevant in the big picture, like Brazil is. Without the legacy ICBMs it would be even more irrelevant. The salience of Russia in the media is just the result of propaganda, not its relevance.

Expand full comment

It's too bad the fake red team/blue team phenomena has worked so well here in the US.

Divide and conquer is as old as our first "civilizations". Maybe one day we will evolve as a species but until we do away with the concept of the elite, we will continue to experience the suffering currently underway.

The Ray-gun years where that of a consensus among the beltway bandits and billionaire funded (get paid what to)think tanks.

It also shows the propensity of the elite to use dementia patients as their puppets.

Expand full comment

«I notice Russia mentioned frequently but China wasn’t»

It is because "Russia" is a well established brand for "evil", because of decades of anti-USSR propaganda. China is less established as brand because since it opened itself as strike-free low-wage no-benefits offshore location it has been a big darling of USA vested interests.

Consider the case of Vietnam: a more brutal communist dictatorship than China, but no USA vested interest is sponsoring an anti-Vietnam campaign, because it is both an anti-China ally of the USA and another strike-free low-wage no-benefits offshore location for vested interests.

Expand full comment

Vietnam has been an anti-China ally of the USA ever since they kicked our ass and we took the L. Who today brings up RVN invading Democratic Kampuchea to put down Pol Pot? "Communism" and "capitalism" are flags of convenience, kinda like "Right" and "Left."

Expand full comment

Vietnam kicked China’s ass in war more recently-by 4 years-than they kicked ours. You are absolutely right about Vietnam being a practical ally of the US. I really like Vietnamese people and their culture in general.

Expand full comment

The whole "I (D), Russia BAD" narrative flipping to "I (R), China BAD" in the last year or so is just hilarious. Angel Orwell has to deal with his metaphors being run threadbare well after his death, but it really is Eurasia vs. Eastasia. Skutch calls it out below.

Expand full comment

«we are opening a nation-wide chain of schools to teach Mandarin»

Jim Rogers, an outspoken 100% capitalist (previously run an hedge fund with Soros), moved to Singapore in 2007 and ensured that his daughters become bilingual in Mandarin (without realizing that most chinese Singaporeans are descended from speakers of southern dialects close to Hokkien or Cantonese), because that's the future.

https://mothership.sg/2018/09/jim-rogers-singapore-english-chinese-standards/

Expand full comment
founding

My personal response:

1. Cancel subscriptions with pandering, one-sided publications, including NPR, WaPo and NYT, and recently NR and Fox

1.5 Open Substack account for subscriptions to individual journalists such as Matt and Glenn Greenwald

1.75 Become more familiar with Edward Snowden and Julian Assange

2. Close online accounts for Twitter, LinkedIn, etc

3. Exit Google ecosystem for Brave

4. Source foreign publications to read in-depth analysis of whatever the hell it is that's going on here

5. Exercise, a lot

Expand full comment

Okay, you got me - why #5? Is it an “eat your vegetables” inclusion or are you hinting at something?

Good list though. I would add - be truly willing to give up any vestiges of belief in either political party. Period. And yes, you will likely lose friends and family and possibly become a pariah.

Expand full comment
founding

#5 is simply a way to channel the impotent rage in a more constructive way. Reese's cups only take me so far 🤪

As to your final point, it's already happened. The more history I read the more I reside in my own thoughts. Aligning to a party is no different that aligning to skin color, and about as helpful -- which is to say, it's not.

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Dec 12, 2020
Comment removed
Expand full comment
founding

+ + thanks for expanding my reading lists!!!

Expand full comment

Excellent Matt. You are punching in the right direction and with sufficient force. It will take some time and effort, but the public needs- desperately needs- to see the MSM for the cancer they are. That certainly includes the social media and youtube guys. Their efforts are well supported, coordinated and funded to program us.

Expand full comment

It is also censorship to fail to differentiate between reasonable and unreasonable beliefs, stating "no evidence" , etc. for any idea about fraud.

Unreasonable: Foreign powers (Venezuela, etc.) were hacking the election. While it is a great mystery that tales of a voting machine ceased in Germany appear true, nothing came of it. A promise of evidence in a lawsuit turned out to be "The machines are proven to have the potential to be hacked, but are programmed such that no hacking can be traced even if it took place". Because something could have happened does not prove it did.

Reasonable: There are videos of thousands of ballots hidden under a table with a long tablecloth and only brought out and counted when all observers were told to leave in Fulton County. It is proven observers were told to leave. I'm still looking into proof that the count from those ballots was almost all Biden (have not seen it yet) but why tell everyone to leave, sit and talk for half an hour until you can be sure they are gone, then start counting hidden ballots?

Lots of other things are reasonable as well. However, it would take months to prove whether or not fraud was sufficient to influence the election. *****It is an open question as to whether the fraud was sufficient to influence the election, one we will probably never answer*****

Cries by lawyers of "throw out all votes in the state because it was unconstitutional to drop the signature verification process" simply won't work. But since there were, for example 17 time as many mail in ballots disallowed for signature problems in Georgia's election before 2020 as in the 2020 election, it appears not verifying signatures likely had an effect on Biden's approximately 12,000 winning margin- Mail -in ballots were heavily democratic - It was Stacy Abrams group that got Georgia to agree to not verify signatures. But there is no remedy - ballots have long been separated from their signatures.

Near-all Trump supporters ***will accept*** that though there was widespread fraud, we can't prove it changed the election result in court, or certainly can't prove it in the time allowed. Republicans are "rule of law" people. They know the law states that the courts have final say on this, and the courts have spoken.

The next battle is to do what Democrats asked all along until Nov 3 - combat election fraud by doing things such as getting rid of the Dominion machines that all experts can can be hacked. Also (Democrats don't want this but they are wrong) send mail-in ballots only after a voter request to receive one - You send a form to every voter on the list and they send it back with a signed request. That is what we did in Florida and it worked well.

Expand full comment

This is a fantastic comment. The sad fact is that playing games with elections is rampant on all sides. Republicans do it by repressing votes; Democrats by screwing around with counting. Really the issue is that party in power manipulates elections to favor their party. Simple! In New York the election system is a disastrous, absurdly corrupt shamble, used by Democrats to keep progressives from upending the establishment (hasn't worked so well lately). Voting machines are a scandal. On nakedcapitalism they have a mantra: "hand-marked paper ballots counted in public" period. In today's society, voter registration and in-person voting is a form of voter suppression. Everyone alive with a SSN should be automatically mailed a ballot starting the day they turn 18 (very easy to implement technology to verify current addresses against SSNs against death records - the credit bureaus do it).

Expand full comment

"hand-marked paper ballots counted by hand in public"

Expand full comment

There was a video of all that took place during the entire time. It has been reviewed by election officials and no irregularities were noticed. No observers were told to leave, although they were told that counting would stop for the evening. Other than that misinformation, the ballot counting was observed by the video and could be reviewed and was reviewed.

You must be mistaken about Georgia and signature verification. Georgia did verify mail-in ballot signatures, twice. You must be thinking about another state.

It doesn’t matter to me whether Trump voters “accept” the results. The process has taken place in hundreds if not thousands of separated election districts. In many cases, especially in heavily Democratic cities, the ballot counting was live streamed. Observers were present in all of those places. Judges have reviewed the court filings and dismissed all of them for lack of evidence. If that isn’t enough, there is no point in wasting another minute on it.

The real fraud is the one perpetrated by Trump and his “legal team”. They have filed junk lawsuits that looked nothing like the hot-breathed news conferences that they held describing all manner of fraud and misdeeds. The cases were poorly argued and lacked any evidence of fraud, or even any allegation of fraud. The Supreme Court case just argued that many voters didn’t believe the results, so they should be overturned. What a sad laugh of a lawsuit. That’s what you guys get for $250M. You should be angry at them, not the election.

Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Dec 12, 2020
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Really? All observers were told to go home, and went - documented fact. The water leak as a reason for sending them home was a fake - documented fact All workers didn't go home - a few remained, then after time had elapsed started counting ballots previously obscured from view under a tablecloth. It is not legal to count without observers (when observers have volunteered to be present). Use Occam's razor.

My hypothesis: If this was, for example, a rural county and presumed Republicans had sent everyone home over a fake leak, then resumed counting without required observers present, you probably would not be saying this. (But yes, I have to ask myself what I would be saying if that were the situation....hopefully that cheating was almost certain but not absolutely certain, which is I have said here....its a good test of being intellectually honest with oneself)

Expand full comment

"As of September 24th,1964, the Warren Commission determined that President Kennedy was killed by an unassisted weirdo with a bolt action rifle. The accuracy of assassination investigations is guaranteed by many safeguards. No discussion of conspiracy will be permitted. Click SHOW ME MORE to be directed to trustworthy information."

Expand full comment

Almost all bad things in history are the fault of unassisted weirdoes. I call for legislation to deter the rampant activities of the unassisted weirdo, from whose shabby person all social evil emanates.

Expand full comment

another crucial piece Matt, thanks.....beautifully fleshed out by detailed examples drawn from the past several years, particularly the examples drawn around the 2016 election...so ironic that people on the left are now complaining about the nearly exact thing they did when Trump was elected...any attempt to block or adjudicate the free flow of information and opinion is bad, no matter who is doing the adjudicating or blocking...used to be conservatives were the ones try to block information/opinion...now it is more so people on the left, which is disheartening. How to fight this?

Expand full comment

How is it Matt literally drives a mack truck through the lefts logic of trying to silence dissent?

Expand full comment

The usual warning: it is not the left, it is the whig/globalist/neoliberal side of the right, the bit that is more aligned with Wall Street and Silicon Valley and less with Main Street and the Rust Belt.

Expand full comment

Whig is an appropriate designation. I'm pretty sure arguments and accusations about freedom of the press happened in the 17th century already, plus ça change.

Expand full comment

self publishers start leaving pamphlets lying around in conspicuous locations, Comrade Jaques.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Define the “left” first and not by contrasting it to the Republican Party or by being “left of the right” and then maybe a conversation can be had - Wikipedia level invocation of “no true Scotsman” and similar fallacies is part of the destruction of critical thinking. Some things don’t belong to certain groups or classes - there are actually differences.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

As I assumed - you have no idea what you are talking about and just throw words around. I have a working definition of the “left.” Just as I have a working definition of “tall” or “neoliberal” and “neoconservative” - or anything else I’m going to discuss. If you can’t define your terms you can’t even form predicates to put in an argument - which is kind of the point of the no true Scotsman fallacy. The informal fallacies are not just “get out of thought” first cards or zingers for debating and sophistry.

Instead of flinging words on the wall and hoping they form a pattern you could just go do some research and learn what the “left” historically has meant and perhaps understand what some people are talking about?

Postmodernism done poorly is all the rage today. Hillary Putnam must be this generation’s patron saint. You can’t have a cogent, grown up argument or discussion with a word salad of words with no meaning.

Expand full comment

I think it has meaning it's just stated in the most convoluted manner possible.

and the creation of categories that really already exist. Maybe they think the further detail for subgroups is necessary, but really can anybody explain how White Privilege differs from the benefits conferred upon the majority group by the majority group in any culture?

In so far as it is useful in attacking white majority cultures, sure! brown privilege or black privilege doesn't carry the same ummph, but really. It's all a house of cards. and certainly diversionary when attempting to understand why Ilhan Omar's obnoxious anti-American spiel isn't duplicated by Florence in Dubai.

Expand full comment