Brickbats and the Lying Rat Pack

It would be funny if Donald Trump and Conrad Black starred in a Dukes of Hazzard-esque buddy caper in which they roared around in their souped-up muscle car cleverly thwarting their degenerate enemies. Or maybe they could pile into a van with Ann Coulter, Lana Lokteff, and Emily Youcis, et. al., and drive around the world solving mysteries. I’m not sure who the Shaggy-like hippy character would be yet. On second thought, let’s leave him out altogether. Henrik Palmgren would be the perfect stand-in for a Viking-like Freddy. Perhaps Scooby-Doo could be played by General James “Mad Dog” Mattis who would motivate the Scooby Gang and exalt in the annihilation of assorted monsters as he personally called down heavy ordnance. Mad Dog would be rewarded with MRE Scooby Snacks and hastily prepared combat coffee (Canadian soldiers are featured in this combat coffee making tutorial, but you get the idea). “I would’ve controlled Fallujah, too, if it weren’t for you pesky kids!” a particularly swarthy monster would yell as he was dragged off by the military police. Or maybe Trump and his pal Conrad could be running away from a posse of metapolitical enforcers led by Richard Spencer and Mike Enoch. “Who are these guys?!” Trump would admiringly declare à la Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid as they leapt into a raging river torrent.

That’s pie-in-the-sky LARPing, I know, but it was interesting to see Conrad Black, a high profile Trump loyalist, support his friend (maybe friend is too strong a word? Colleague? Compatriot?) in Canada’s National Post newspaper. The content farm is a verdant place these days, and Conrad Black did not disappoint. I know Black has had his own series of setbacks, triumphs, and follies over the years: his failed history Ph.D.; calling a diminutive Cultural Marxist historian a “little twerp” (for the record I thought this was especially apt and hilarious); marrying Barbara Amiel; being the subject of at least one unauthorized biography; a stay in prison; and other hilarious shenanigans. But I digress.

In his recent article about the God-Emperor, Conrad Black observed that during his run for president, Trump “pointed to the press sections on multiple occasions at his heavily attended campaign rallies and drew down on them crescendos of brickbats and fist-shaking hostility.” A bit of hyperbole to be sure, but in Black’s mind, justified. For Black himself goes on to write that the media in the United States and Canada were “exposed as impotent stooges of the Clinton-Bush-Obama vieux jeu…” The mainstream media (hereafter MSM) acted throughout the campaign like a “swarm of bugs that ha[d] just been blasted with insecticide.” The MSM’s penchant for falsehood has been commented on astutely by members of the Alt Right for some time now, and they’ve been right all along. Baron Black of Crossharbour is (almost) on the same page in that particular regard. As far as the professional bankruptcy of Canada’s MSM is concerned, Black emphasizes that it suffers from a similar malaise afflicting its American counterpart:

“I found myself a few days ago listening with slack-jawed incredulity while two former Canadian ambassadors in the Middle East and a pompous Anglo-Canadian academic historian expressed the hope that Justin Trudeau would advise the incoming foreign policy team of the Trump administration that not all of the world’s 1.4 billion Muslims consider themselves to be at war with America. It was the clearest confirmation of many I have had in recent years of just how vastly more stupid our media have become…”

Despite Conrad Black’s erudite assurances, are you still having trouble trying to convince your normie friends, family, and colleagues that the mainstream Lügenpresse is biased beyond all reckoning? Well, have no fear, fam, Wikileaks is here. When debating with your blue-pilled compatriots you can have some primary source substantiation in your back pocket, ready to retort with extreme prejudice. There’s a brilliant website called Most Damaging Wikileaks (hereafter MDW) that has done lots of the heavy lifting for us. It’s like an online finding aid for researchers or an annotated bibliography with flare. On the subject of media corruption, collusion, and jaunisme (yellow journalism for us Anglos), this site is a veritable goldmine. In the Frequently Asked Question section (hereafter FAQ) of the MDW website, question number 5 asks rhetorically why is it that the media has barely covered the leaks? The answer is that almost 100% of mainstream media sources are implicated in the leaks. Based on the primary source evidence provided in the leaks themselves, these news sources “have conspired to get Hillary elected, by only reporting anti-Trump smear pieces, manufacturing or exaggerating scandals, and hiding anything damaging to Hillary.” Most of the news outlets implicated in the leaks even donated money to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. The leaks were not being covered because CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, Politico, Huffington Post, AP, and others are all implicated in the leaks. That’s one of the reasons MSM news organizations conducted a relentless campaign of hatred against Trump (not the only reason, of course, but a major one).

Let us now have a look at some examples. Access MDW’s top 100 list and scroll down to number 35 entitled “List of reporters that Hillary wined and dined, including biggest journalists and pundits of CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, NY Times, and a lot more. Off the record.” The very fact that journalists agreed to be wined and dined is enough to set off the media collusion alarm klaxon. MDW links to four Wikileaks emails that outline some of the logistics for this comfy night with ole Hill. The first email of the four is a comprehensive list of attendees (who don’t deserve tendies) of the “off the record” soiree in question at Hillary Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta’s home (aka the den of depravity). The list includes journalists John Heillman, Mark Halperin, Maggie Haberman and others such as Diane Sawyer, George Stephanopolous, Mika Brzezinski and many others. According to the author of the MDW website, the largest number of invitees who agreed to attend the party were from the New York Times, Bloomberg, MSNBC, and CNN. But hold on there, goy, are you trying to say that this indicates corruption and a pro-Hillary bias? It’s not about me though, is it? It’s about what the documents say; and the alligator mouth is open towards “yes” in this equation. Incidentally, this dinner was held in April 2015 and the Clinton campaign’s investment in influence paid off during her run for president (in terms of fawning positive coverage that is).

It doesn’t end there, oh no. Number 37 on the list of the top 100 Wikileaks is entitled “The New York Times colluding with Hillary, allowed quote edits.” MDW quite rightly states that the Clinton campaign was very involved in the editing process of a New York Times (hereafter NYT) interview piece conducted and written by NYT reporter Mark Leibovich. In a forwarded email from Jennifer Palmieri, a Hillary Clinton campaign staffer, to John Podesta, dated 10 July 2015, Palmieri provides an exchange between herself and Mark Leibovich. Leibovich essentially gives Palmieri the option to pick and choose the sections of his interview with Hillary Clinton that he could use: “I wanted the option to use all – and you could veto what you didn’t want. That’s why I selected the 5 or 6 I sent to you…but I’d really love to use the other things I sent, too. They were all on point. Sorry for mis-communique here, but do you you [sic] think you can check?” Palmieri replied in subsequent messages in the thread about having control over what Leibovich was to include in his article: “Uh, I thought you told me that you wanted us to pick.” And Palmieri suggests specific edits as well: “My apologies for the delay. I finally had to get her in person. Fine to use the moose, but appreciate leaving the mention of Sarah Palin out.” That’s collusion at its finest, in just one small example.

There are several instances where the NYT colluded with the Hillary machine in these leaks; an email from Brent Budowsky, a political opinion writer and blogger, sums that up quite succinctly. In an email to the then Public Editor of the NYT, Margaret M. Sullivan, dated 19 May 2015, Budowsky wrote about his concerns surrounding the NYT’s coverage of the House Benghazi committee “one of the most partisan committees in memory.” Budowsky states

“Should the NY Times reporters be stenographers for a partisan committee, taking dictation and writing stories? And if the committee unethically leaks an email shouldn’t the NY Times give some general indication of the partisan nature of the source? And shouldn’t the NYT reporters do some legitimate reporting rather than repeating from partisan committee handouts?...The NYT should not be not [sic] having exclusive arrangements with Peter Schweizer or writing stenography-handout stories from a partisan committee. In sorrow rather than anger, Margaret, I find it sad this happens because the NYT should be different and better. Your foreign correspondents are. Your political reporting is not. Too bad.”

"Fake News" is a meme that has been seeded by the MSM Lügenpresse into the culture in a pathetic attempt at retroactive butt-coverage, it’s not going to work though, not this time. The reason for their frantic attempts at deflecting criticism from alternative news sites and independent researchers is obvious: there is a mountain of primary source evidence detailing their collusion with the Hillary Clinton campaign. The examples above, albeit significant, have barely scratched the surface of the MSM’s corruption. The rotten edifice of the anti-White Lügenpresse should be destroyed even as they try to salvage a modicum of credibility as they engage in this desperate rearguard action. Just as Daniel Friberg, president and CEO of Arktos media said, whilst channeling his inner Ra’s al Ghul, in his great book The Real Right Returns, that the anti-White Left is in its death throes and now is the time to give it the coup de grace. These MSM entities are not progressive social justice warriors who have sacrificed the sanctity of the fourth estate to save humanity, they’re nothing but anti-White power wielders. Wikileaks proper and MDW can provide exceptional ammunition for the future salvoes in the war of ideas that is raging throughout our embattled civilization. If anyone can harness their power, it’s you, fam, the new ideological soldiers of the West.