When do mainstream media lie? Whenever they put pen to paper, or whenever they open their mouths to speak.
The recent case of Kyle Rittenhouse and his acquittal in a case that saw him shoot three men (two fatally) in self-defence is yet another proof.
In this situation, the current occupant of the building at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, D.C., felt the need to throw his few cents’ worth in: young Rittenhouse, thus Mr. Biden, was your typical case of white (and therefore racist) supremacism.
Who cares that a President is duty-bound to stay away from commenting on current court trials?
Biden had to have his minions feed him mainstream media drivel only. Who cares about facts when you can claim that the then-accused-now-acquitted Kyle Rittenhouse shot three black men, carrying the gun across state lines, and the weapon was none other than an AK-47, the famous (some say infamous) Avtomat Kalashnikova (Russian: Автомат Калашникова).
Herewith the brief account of the facts: Rittenhouse, 17 years old at the time, shot three men, two fatally, with an AR-15. The tragedy happened in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on Aug. 25, 2020. All of those shot were white, as is Rittenhouse.
A friend bought the weapon, and the accused-now-acquitted teenager, an Illinois resident, picked it up from a home in Kenosha.
Rittenhouse claimed self-defence. The jury considered video footage and witness testimony. All of the evidence presented showed he was attacked by all of the men he shot.
What’s the difference?
Some call what happened in the coverage of the entire case misinformation.
It can be wrong information; false account or intelligence. You can also define it as untrue or incorrect information.
Others say we’re witnessing a major disinformation campaign.
It’s defined as false information deliberately and often covertly spread (as by the planting of rumours) in order to influence public opinion or obscure the truth,
The former description of what the mainstream media and some politicians are doing seems to be too kind to the perpetrators. The latter description is bang on.
It’s the corporate-controlled media that act like vigilantes, Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said. They have been trying to influence the outcome of the trial and convict Rittenhouse by swaying public opinion.
The trick was simple, Dershowitz explained: mainstream media outlets have been lying about the facts of this case since day one. Mainstream media have been trying to influence justice without regard to evidence or the law.
According to Dershowitz, CNN and other outlets made it sound as if Rittenhouse travelled across the country to shoot Black Lives Matter rioters.
In fact, Rittenhouse lives in a town along the Wisconsin border and his family members lived in Kenosha where the riots took place.
Rittenhouse, pointed out Dershowitz, shot three white men, but media outlets – and Biden – smeared Rittenhouse as a white supremacist to whip up hatred in the public by fooling Americans into thinking Rittenhouse shot three innocent, unarmed black men.
Mainstream media make it look and sound as if there was an army of white supremacist Donald Trump supporters threatening violence and thus the Biden administration must launch new domestic war on terror targeting the 74,000,000 Trump voters, Dershowitz summed up.
Reporter Mark Strassman told those watching Face the Nation on CBS that Rittenhouse “drove in from Illinois armed for battle.”
Not to be outdone, Harvard University professor Cornell William Brooks told CNN’s Cuomo Prime Time that Rittenhouse was carrying an AK-47.
To top them all, The Independent came up with another lie: Rittenhouse shot three black men.
In fact, Rittenhouse, 17 years old at the time, shot three men, two of them fatally, with an AR-15 in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on Aug. 25, 2020.
The weapon is a lightweight semi-automatic rifle based on the ArmaLite AR-15.
All those shot were white. So is Rittenhouse. A friend bought the weapon. The teenager, who resided in Illinois, picked it up from a home in Kenosha.
The Epoch Times asked Jeffrey McCall, a communications professor at DePauw University, to comment. Here’s his e-mailed reply, as published by Epoch Times: “As soon as the Rittenhouse situation happened in Kenosha, the establishment media immediately created a narrative that would work with their particular, preferred narrative. As we now know, that led to a good many mischaracterizations and errors at that time.”
But why would they persist?
Simple, Professor McCall explained: “By now, those media outlets are so committed to that narrative that they can’t drag themselves to correct previous errors or provide accurate details today. This not only reflects that some media outlets work with predetermined, ideological narratives, but that they are also too lazy to report facts as provided in the actual trial.”
Ryan Chittum, a former journalist, and media critic with the Columbia Journalism Review, was blunt: “On balance, the press has been a destructive force on this story, from its beginnings in the coverage of the Jacob Blake shooting that set the whole thing off and which we know was justified, to the downplaying of the $50 million in destruction done by rioters in Kenosha, to the libellous portrayal of Rittenhouse and the particulars of what happened. There have been innumerable journalistic disasters in the Trump era, but this is the most blatantly reckless one of them all.”
History of the story
Rittenhouse shot the men during riots that followed an incident that involved a police officer shooting Jacob Blake in the same city.
Blake was armed with a knife. According to video footage, he resisted arrest after visiting the home of an ex-girlfriend who had previously accused him of sexual assault. Prosecutors would not charge the officer as he obviously acted in self-defence. Neither would the Department of Justice proceed with any charges, announcing, instead, that the probe was over and the case was closed.
Blake, though partially paralysed, survived the shooting.
And, of course, some talking heads have kept saying since then till now that he had died.
In this context, it’s not really surprising that, as American economist Martin Armstrong reports, many of the mainstream media employees (journalists they are not) refuse to cover the worldwide protests against the harsh measures fighting the alleged pandemic. That would spoil the propaganda.
Should they be doing their job, it would help disseminate real information. How perfectly foul!