Podcast Summary
Media's shift in coverage of Biden not due to issues, but political motivations: Once media figures lose credibility, they may resort to selective reporting to regain audience trust, as seen in MSNBC's coverage of Biden and the baby formula crisis
The media's turn on President Biden is not driven by a desire to report on issues like the baby formula shortage and inflation, but rather by political motivations. Dan Bongino explains that this is a result of what he calls the "David Dinkins dilemma," where once a media figure loses credibility with their audience, they may resort to random acts of journalism in an attempt to regain it. An example given is MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski, who previously defended Surgeon General Vivek Murty's handling of disinformation on COVID-19, but failed to address the baby formula crisis. This shift in the media's coverage of Biden is not a sign of them doing the right thing, but rather a strategic move.
U.S. baby formula shortage: Political focus overshadows urgent need: The U.S. baby formula shortage demands immediate attention and resources, yet political commentary dominates the discourse, delaying relief for parents and their children.
While other countries, like Poland, have effectively addressed their baby formula shortages with swift action and international aid, the United States has faced significant delays and political prioritization. MSNBC's coverage of the issue highlights this discrepancy, with reporters focusing on the political implications rather than the urgent need to alleviate parents' stress and ensure access to formula for their children. This situation can be compared to the David Dinkins dilemma, where the media's obsession with politics and ideology overshadowed the pressing issues at hand, ultimately leading to negative consequences. The baby formula shortage in the US is a serious problem that requires immediate attention and resources, not just political commentary.
Media protects liberalism from public backlash: Media focuses on Biden's failures instead of liberal policies to shield liberalism from criticism
The media's focus on Biden's failures is not an attempt to do journalism or hold him accountable, but rather an effort to protect liberalism from public backlash. The media will blame Biden and not liberal policies for issues like inflation, border crisis, and the baby formula shortage, which are all results of big government intervention. The media's message will be to disconnect the bad people from the good policies of liberalism. For example, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, despite her failures, is not being criticized for liberal policies, but rather for her personal performance. The media's protective stance towards liberalism will become more apparent as Americans continue to question the effectiveness of big government solutions.
Biden administration's energy policies criticized for rising gas prices: Critics argue that Biden administration's policies like Paris Accord, Keystone Pipeline cancellation, and new regulations have negatively impacted domestic oil production and availability, leading to higher gas prices
The Biden administration's policies regarding energy production have been criticized for contributing to the increase in gas prices. These policies include rejoining the Paris Climate Accord, canceling the Keystone Pipeline, halting leasing programs, and imposing new regulations on oil and gas production. Senators have accused the administration of being unqualified and incompetent in handling energy issues, citing examples like the Interior Secretary's lack of knowledge about department memos. Critics argue that these actions have negatively impacted domestic oil production and availability, leading to higher prices for consumers.
Growing concerns over censorship and suppression of free speech: The New York Times and Democratic Party are silencing opposing viewpoints through censorship and labeling individuals as domestic terrorists. Social media has made it easier to report on events, but negative news is dominated by liberal policies and crimes. Support companies that value free speech and stay informed about efforts to suppress it.
There are growing concerns about censorship and the suppression of free speech, particularly from conservative voices. The discussion highlighted the efforts of the New York Times and the Democratic Party to silence opposing viewpoints, using tactics like censorship and labeling individuals as domestic terrorists. The era of democratized news through social media has made it easier for everyone to report on events in real-time, but the overwhelming majority of negative news is due to liberal policies and crimes. The New York Times and other media outlets are trying to control the narrative by censoring conservative voices and labeling them as extremists. Companies like Patriot Mobile, which support free speech and constitutional rights, are important partners in combating these attempts to silence opposing viewpoints. It's crucial to support companies that share our values and to stay informed about the ongoing efforts to suppress free speech.
Suppressing conservative voices under the guise of combating misinformation: The New York Times and individuals, as well as global organizations like the WHO, are pushing for censorship of conservatives, labeling them as dangerous right-wingers, potentially leading to the suppression of opposing viewpoints in democratic societies.
There are ongoing efforts to suppress and silence conservative voices, both domestically and internationally, under the guise of combating medical misinformation and dangerous political ideologies. The New York Times and individuals like David Leonhardt are contributing to this silencing by labeling conservatives as dangerous right-wingers, despite evidence to the contrary. Meanwhile, global organizations like the World Health Organization are pushing for their own Ministry of Truth and international compliance committees to enforce their edicts and orders, potentially leading to the censorship of conservatives on social media. This pattern of silencing opposing viewpoints is concerning and highlights the importance of vigilance and open dialogue in democratic societies.
Concerns over authoritarian control and food shortages: Stay informed and prepared for potential crises, including authoritarian control and food shortages. Adapt and live with ongoing situations, but be wary of fear-mongering and manipulation.
There are concerns about a potential shift towards authoritarian control and manipulation of information, as seen with the WHO and the proposed Durban Marshall Credit Card Bill. Additionally, there is a growing food shortage issue that could rapidly escalate into a scarcity problem, making data security and food preparation crucial. It's essential to be informed and prepared for potential crises, as many may dismiss warnings until it's too late. The ongoing COVID-19 situation serves as a reminder that we must learn to adapt and live with it, while being wary of potential fear-mongering and manipulation from those in power.
Political Misinformation and Frustration: Speaker expresses frustration with repeated political mistakes and misinformation, specifically regarding President Biden and the Clinton case, emphasizing the importance of factual information and critical thinking.
The speaker expresses frustration with repeated mistakes and misinformation, specifically regarding political figures and global issues. He mentions the ongoing controversy surrounding President Biden's comments about a non-existent President Moon of South Korea. He also discusses the Clinton case and the inconsistencies between the stories of Michael Sussman and FBI lawyer Jim Baker. The speaker emphasizes the importance of factual information and critical thinking, encouraging listeners to tune in to his show for more discussion on these topics.
FBI vs Team Clinton: A Confrontation Over Election Allegations: The ongoing dispute between the FBI and Team Clinton over election allegations is causing controversy, with both parties potentially looking bad. Critics on the left are trying to discredit the film by focusing on minor details, while the overall conclusion of election malfeasance remains.
The ongoing dispute between Team Clinton and the FBI over the handling of allegations of collusion during the 2016 election is likely to result in both parties looking bad. The FBI is expected to argue that they were misled by false information, while Team Clinton may claim they were acting in good faith by bringing the information to the FBI. The issue of 2000 mules and ballot harvesting in the 2020 election is also causing controversy, with some on the left trying to discredit the film by focusing on minor details rather than the overall conclusion. These criticisms can be seen as bad faith actors attempting to undermine the evidence presented in the film, as seen in the case of NPR's Tom Driesback and his attempts to discredit Dinesh D'Souza's film. The use of cell phone geo-tracking as evidence in the film is a prime example of this, as those same critics have previously relied on similar evidence to make serious allegations against Trump and his associates. Ultimately, it appears that both the FBI and Team Clinton are heading towards a confrontation, while the left continues to try and discredit those who expose election malfeasance.
Denying and dismissing important issues, promoting false narratives: Some individuals and media outlets spread false narratives and dismiss important issues, such as the Hunter Biden laptop controversy and election fraud allegations, while ignoring economic signs of potential instability.
Despite clear evidence and allegations, some individuals and media outlets continue to deny and dismiss important issues, while promoting false narratives. The Hunter Biden laptop controversy is an example of this, where a signed receipt was dismissed as Russian disinformation, while unverified claims of a "pee-pee tape" were given credence. Additionally, there have been allegations of election fraud, with geotracking data showing potential irregularities, but these claims have also been dismissed. Meanwhile, economic signs of potential instability, such as increasing numbers of subprime borrowers missing loan payments, have been ignored. These bad faith actors are more interested in propagating false narratives and covering up potential wrongdoing, rather than addressing the truth. It's important for individuals to be aware of this and to seek out reliable information from credible sources. And in terms of self-defense, while an arm bar may be an easy submission to execute, it may not be the best move in a life-threatening situation. Instead, carotid obstructions can be more effective in defending oneself, as they allow for a period of semi-consciousness before the attacker fully regains consciousness.
Address concerns and make decisions beforehand: To prevent conflicts and ensure readiness, speak up before trips, understand implications of international treaties, and prepare for crises with essentials.
It's essential to address concerns and make important decisions before embarking on a trip or entering into agreements. During the discussion, a listener expressed regret about urging her family not to go on a trip to Disney and faced backlash. Dan Patrick suggested that if she had spoken up before the trip, it might have prevented the conflict. Similarly, when it comes to entering into international treaties or preparing for potential crises, it's crucial to take action before the situation arises. In the case of international treaties, the Constitution requires ratification by the Senate, making it essential to understand the implications and vote accordingly. For personal preparedness, Dan recommended stocking up on essentials like canned goods and powdered milk, focusing on shelf life and calories. Lastly, in the context of election integrity, states like Florida and Georgia have taken steps to combat election fraud, emphasizing the importance of fixing the system state by state.
Going back to a gold standard for the US dollar is constitutionally possible but currently unlikely: Be cautious of liberal media biases, as they often protect liberalism by attacking individuals rather than the system
Going back to a gold standard for the US dollar is constitutionally possible but currently unlikely due to the severe inflation crisis and the ease with which the government can print money. However, it's essential to be cautious when consuming news from liberal sources, as they often distort the truth to protect liberalism, and it's crucial to listen closely for their biases. Dan Pongino emphasized that left-leaning media outlets, such as MSNBC and The Washington Post, often protect liberalism by attacking individuals rather than the system, making it essential to be discerning consumers of news.