Lying Corporate Media Are Responsible For Kamala Voters’ Delusional Despair
One cannot overstate just how much influence the corporate media has over the majority of leftists. No wonder they're shocked once again.
Undaunted by weeks of duds, exponents of the public-private campaign to neutralize Justice Samuel Alito on the U.S. Supreme Court believe they've finally got their hands on a bombshell: an audio recording wherein Alito can be heard both expressing a hope for healing in the face of political polarization and acknowledging that in the culture war underway, one side might ultimately prevail.
This time around, the sensational headlines were made not by Obama hagiographer Jodi Kantor at the New York Times but rather by leftist blogger Lauren Windsor, a self-described "advocacy journalist" on the team at Robert Creamer's Democrat-aligned Democracy Partners who helped the Lincoln Project stage a fake white supremacist rally in 2021 to smear then-candidate Glenn Youngkin ahead of the Virginia gubernatorial election.
Pretending to be a religious conservative at the Supreme Court Historical Society's annual dinner on June 3, Windsor approached and surreptitiously recorded brief conversations with Justice Alito and his wife, Martha-Ann Alito.
As with the various flag stories pushed by the Times and other liberal publications, Windsor's apparent aim — and that of Rolling Stone, the libelous publication first provided the audio recordings, which are now on X — is to paint Alito as ideologically compromised and incapable of dealing with cases related to the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 protests as well as regarding the question of former President Donald Trump's immunity in U.S. v. Donald Trump.
The trouble for Windsor and other Democratic-aligned public-private campaigners is, once again, that notwithstanding their framing and manufactured hoopla, the recording is relatively benign. In fact, it undermines the public-private campaigner's previous narrative and reveals Justice Alito has no aspirations of weaponizing the high court, even against criminal leakers.
Windsor, taping Alito without his consent — legal in D.C., which is a one-party consent state — suggested at the outset that her imaginary husband implored her to "tell Justice Alito that he is a fighter and we appreciate him and he has all the grit."
After blowing more smoke, Windsor raised the matter of political polarization and how to repair it.
"Considering everything that's been going on in the past year, you know, as a Catholic and as someone who, like, really cherishes my faith, I just don't know. I don't know that we can negotiate with the left in the way that needs to happen for the polarization to end," said Windsor. "I think that it's a matter of like, winning."
Justice Alito said, "I think you're probably right. On one side or the other, one side or the other is going to win. I don't know."
"I mean, there can be a way of working a way of living together peacefully," continued the justice. "But it's difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can't be compromised. They really can't be compromised. It's not like you're going to split the difference."
In response to Justice's Alito's observation regarding the incommensurability between contemporary liberal and rightist worldviews, Windsor stated, "It's just, I think that the solution really is like winning the moral argument. Like, people in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that, to return our country to a place of godliness."
Justice Alito responded, "I agree with you. I agree with you."
'It's easy to blame the media, but I do blame them because they do nothing but criticize us and so they have really eroded trust in the court.'
Upon the justice's supposedly controversial affirmation that the country should aspire toward spiritual purity and virtue, the remainder of the first audio clip concluded with Windsor bloviating.
In a second recording, apparently taken last year, Windsor again asked Justice Alito about how to remedy political polarization in America, to which he responded, "I wish I knew. I don't know. It's easy to blame the media, but I do blame them because they do nothing but criticize us and so they have really eroded trust in the court."
"I don't know, I really don't know," continued Justice Alito. "American citizens in general need to work on this, to try to heal this polarization because it's very dangerous. I do believe it's very dangerous."
When Windsor began to beat around the bush about possible judicial activism, Justice Alito said, "I don't think it's something we can do. ... We have a very defined role and we need to do what we're supposed to do. But this is a bigger problem. This is way above us."
Later in the secretly recorded 2023 conversation, Windsor asked whether the radical who leaked a draft of the Dobbs decision would ever be "ferreted out." Justice Alito dispassionately reminded Windsor that such work is neither the business of the high court nor within its authority.
"We're not a law enforcement agency, you know," said Justice Alito. "So, law enforcement agencies can issue subpoenas and get search warrants and all that sort of thing, but we can’t do that. So, you know, our [U.S.] marshall, she did as much as she could do. But it was limited."
While in both secretly recorded conversations, Justice Alito said nothing compromising, Rolling Stone suggested, "Alito's comments add to the controversy surround the conservative justice."
Liberal publications, likely cognizant they were serving up another nothing-burger, leaned on Windsor's surreptitious recording of a conversation with Martha-Ann Alito at the same June 3 event last week — even though they ultimately reveal Justice Alito works to maintain neutrality as well as the perception of neutrality while respecting his wife's autonomy.
Windsor expressed sympathy for the ordeal the liberal media had put Mrs. Alito through, to which the justice's wife said, "It's okay! It's okay! ... It's okay because if they come back to me, I'll get them. I'm gonna be liberated, and I'm gonna get them."
Mrs. Alito clarified that by this, she means that she may seek to hold the liberal media accountable for perceived defamation.
Windsor asked about the manufactured scandal over the inverted flag at her house and Appeal to Heaven flag at her beach house. Mrs. Alito made clear that contrary to the presumption of "femi-Nazis," she is an agential woman whom Justice Alito "never controls," thereby bolstering Justice Alito's previous statements following the New York Times' false flag reports.
Later in the conversation, Windsor noted, "They're persecuting you and you're like a convenient stand-in for anybody who's religious."
"Look at me. Look at me. I'm German, from Germany. My heritage is German. You come after me, I'm gonna give it back to you," said Mrs. Alito. "And there will be a way, it doesn't have to be now, but there will be a way, they will know. Don't worry about it. God — you read the Bible — Psalm 27 is my psalm. Mine. Psalm. 'The Lord is my God and my rock. Of whom shall I be afraid?' Nobody."
When the question about polarization came up, Mrs. Alito allegedly said leftists "feel ... they don't think," then noted, "I want a Sacred Heart of Jesus flag because I have to look across the lagoon at the pride flag for the next month. ... And [Justice Alito] is like, 'Oh, please don't put up a flag.' I said, 'I won't do it because I'm deferring to you. But when you are free of this nonsense, I'm putting it up and I'm gonna send them a message every day. Maybe every week, I'll be changing the flags."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
As the 2024 presidential election heats up, Dave Rubin is well aware that “things are starting to get serious” — and independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is ready for the challenge.
Especially considering that he doesn’t think Trump and Biden are all that different.
“Trump and Biden are kind of mirror images of each other,” he tells Rubin. “They’re different in temperament and their rhetoric and their personalities, but on the issues, there’s not a huge amount of difference.”
While the two differ in their stances on issues like gun control and abortion, neither of them seem as focused on the issues that are really hurting Americans.
“The big issue is the debt, $34 trillion debt, that can sink our country,” he explains, noting that another major issue is the chronic disease epidemic.
“When I was a kid, the average pediatrician saw maybe one case of juvenile diabetes during his entire career. Today, one out of every three kids who walks through his office door is pre-diabetic or diabetic, and nobody’s talking about it,” he says, adding, “and that’s just one chronic disease.”
Rather than focusing on the issues that are killing Americans, Trump and Biden are using the polarization of them to win.
“They get elected by polarization,” he explains. “If you want to talk about assaults on our democracy, the big danger to our democracy is we’re going to get torn apart by this toxic polarization that is worse today than probably any time since the American Civil War.”
To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Former President Barack Obama expressed concern in a CNN interview Thursday that the United States has become less tolerant since he left office, stressing that this is a problem shared by both Republicans and Democrats.
Obama told CNN's Christiane Amanpour that "democratic institutions are creaky." He made clear he wasn't necessarily referring to the indictment of the Democratic incumbent's top rival ahead of the 2024 presidential election, which he suggested serves as evidence that no one is above the law.
Rather, the former president indicated he is more concerned "with the fact that not just one particular individual is being accused of undermining existing laws, but that more broadly we’ve seen — whether it’s through the gerrymandering of districts, whether it’s trying to silence critics through changes in legislative process, whether it’s attempts to intimidate the press — a strand of anti-democratic sentiment that we’ve seen in the United States."
"It’s something that is right now most prominent in the Republican Party, but I don’t think it’s something that is unique to one party," said the former president. "I think there is less tolerance for ideas that don’t suit us."
Obama stressed that the "habits of a free and open exchange of ideas and the idea that we all agree to the rules of the same game ... even if the outcomes aren't always the ones we like" have "weakened since I left office, and we're gonna need to strengthen them again."
The former president attributed the breakdown of bipartisanship and tolerance, in part, to the isolation of information.
"If you're watching Fox News or following some right-wing radio host or getting Facebook feeds within that bubble, your reality is different than if you read the New York Times or watch [CNN]," he said. "When people are getting such fundamentally different facts, or what they think to be facts, and their worldviews are so skewed in one direction or another, and it's very hard for democracy to work."
Although Obama intimated in his CNN interview that intolerance, anti-democratic sentiment, and the silencing of critics are on the rise, these trends appear to have preceded his departure from office.
The Pew Research Center found that partisan polarization surged in the Obama years, which he led into with the suggestion that elements of the working class, frustrated with economic conditions, "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
The Internal Revenue Service, under the Obama administration, discriminated against hundreds of conservative groups in their applications for tax-exempt status. On the basis of their names and politics, these groups' applications were singled out, delayed, and denied.
The Obama Justice Department determined in 2015 that no one at the IRS would be penalized in the scandal, and key proponents retired with full federal benefits, reported PBS.
Only after Obama left office did the IRS get around to expressing its "sincere apology."
While Obama indicated critics are now being silenced by elements of the state, at least more than they had been when he was in charge, Pulitzer-prize winning New York Times journalist Matt Apuzzo underscored at a Duke University event in 2017 that nothing in the years following Obama's tenure came close to the "chilling effect" the former president's crackdown on journalists and leaks had on the profession, reported the Duke Chronicle.
The New York Post indicated that Apuzzo, who like the Times' Adam Goldman had his phone records seized, called Obama "the most oppressive" for journalists since Richard Nixon.
Obama suggested to the New York Times in 2009 that Fox News, which had been critical of his policies and leadership, was not a legitimate news organization.
The Washington Post reported that the Obama Department of Justice obtained telephone records for then-Fox News journalist James Rosen, who was suspected of obtaining leaked information about North Korea. The Obama administration "used security badge access records to track the reporter's comings and goings," perused his personal emails, and traced the timing of his calls with the supposed leaker.
The Times editorial board wrote, "With the decision to label a Fox News television reporter a possible 'co-conspirator' in a criminal investigation of a news leak, the Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news."
The Obama DOJ also secretly subpoenaed phone records from Associated Press offices in Washington, Hartford, Connecticut, and New York, again trying to determine the nature of reporters' sources.
"The Obama administration has pursued more such cases than all previous administrations combined," reported the Washington Post.
Depreciated tolerance on racial matters was also a feature under Obama's presidency.
A 2016 Rasmussen Poll found that 60% of likely U.S. voters believed race relations had worsened since Obama's inauguration.
— (@)
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!