In 2024, we're yet again constantly being told that corporate media is over, on the ropes, dead or dying. We've heard the lie before. Part of the reason is keeps getting repeated is because people don't understand the difference between reporting and commentary and they don't understand the difference between a news program and a talk show. There's so much that is misunderstood. Last week's claims of reporting and censorship only made that more evident.
Ken Klippenstein is a journalist who has published with a variety of outlets including THE NATION, THE INTERCEPT, SALON and THE DAILY BEAST. Senator JD Vance is Miss Sassy, Donald Trump's charisma-free running mate.
Though it defies logic, the Trump campaign did vet JD Vance before Donald made him his running mate. And the proof of that has been the report the campaign prepared. That report has been offered to some news outlets who declined to cover it. There is an allegation that the material may have been hacked. Whether it was hacked or not, it is information of value to the public. Vance could end up Vice President of the United States as a result of the November election -- early voting has already started in some states.
Ken published the report on his SUBSTACK. Uber creep and Donald Trump groupie Elon Musk immediately banned Klippenstein on TWITTER (X? We don't work for Elon, we'll call it what the people still call it: TWITTER. You 'new Coke' whores keep swinging that ass for Elon.)
And a back-and-forth has ensued that pretends this is a journalistic battle of the biggest form.
We disagree.
Like Matt Taibbi's TWITTER FILES 'reports,' there's no reporting being done here. We called Matt's work "The Twitter Dumps" and that's what Ken has done.
Reporting is not releasing documents. Releasing documents is releasing documents.
We applaud the releasing of documents -- The Pentagon Papers, WIKILEAKS' work, etc.
But we don't confuse that with journalism.
That Ken does makes him appear more than a little out of touch.
271. That's the amount of pages -- that's how long the leaked report is. In what world do most Americans have time to wade through 271 pages. We did. It meant losing sleep time.
Reporting could have been done on the 271-pages.
We'd argue that what emerges is that JD Vance is angry, little boy who's never grown up and feels he'll never become a man because of Daddy issues related to his father abandoning him. He goes around looking for a Daddy and he has no scope or prism by which to examine any issue beyond his own limited personal view. He can't relate to others or understand them unless they share his grievances and immaturity. He clearly needs help.
We say that as two who trudged through every page -- including the page where his September 1, 2006 speeding ticket is reproduced. The ticket, of course, wasn't issued to "JD Vance." It wasn't issued under his birth name James Donald Bowman. It was issued under his first legal name change name James D. Hall. He would have another name change in 2013 -- around the age of 29 -- when he became JD Vance.
Who changes their legal name twice? Once, okay, but going to court to get a third name? That really goes to his inability to be consistent. His name, like his political positions, are all over the map.
As debate prep for Tim Walz, publishing the 271 pages might have some value. They demonstrate how hollow Vance is and how he'll do or say anything America doesn't know JD Vance.
That is the take way from the 271 pages -- and JD Vance doesn't know JD Vance. He's forever changing and remaking himself, forever looking for a daddy figure to guide him.
He's forty-years-old and, if Donald's elected, he could be president because Donald's so old and so very fat that he could easily die in the next two years from a massive heart attack.
Tim might wonder in Tuesday's debate whether, for example, he was standing onstage with the JD that supported the Supreme Court's ruling legalizing same-se marriage or he was standing on stage with the 2020 JD that had a hissy fit over basic workplace protections that prevented someone from being fired for being gay?
Corporate media refused to release the report or cover it because, some claim, it might have been hacked and it might have been from Iran (the hack might have been done by an Iranian citizen acting alone or by the Iranian government).
While that may indeed be a reason given, we'd argue the larger issue is that they take the position that they've already covered it.
Vetting Vance, for any who don't know, is research that the campaign did on JD. They vetted others as well. Marco Rubio, for example, was vetted as well. (His file has not leaked at present.) But, at that Mother Tucker Carlson's urging, Donald went with JD. Whack job Tucker insisted that the 'deep state' would assassinate Trump if he picked Rubio because they'd want Marco to be president.
Remember, kids, when you need the polling on the deep-state go to Mother Tucker, he's the inside man.
We'll come back to Tucker.
How can the media claim that they've already reported on the 271 pages? Because it's largely their reporting. It's statements that Vance made to the media, it's statements from pieces that Vance wrote for the media. It's also his traffic record (public information), his basic school records (public information), etc
If Ken were to do journalism on the 271 pages, he could pick any issue and report on the changing positions that Vance has held in his 20 or so adult years. He could do that on any issue. He could do that on many issues. He hasn't done that though he has published that TWITTER deactivated his account and then he shared a communication informing him that this was permanent -- he was permanently banned from TWITTER. He's shared that FACEBOOK and GOOGLE have also banned links to the 271 page report but they have not banned Ken himself.
We repeatedly castigated Matt Taibbi for claiming Tweets were reporting. They are not. Nor is publishing a 271-page report. There's an argument that can be made insisting it was journalism and we wouldn't quibble with that. But publishing a 271-page report is, in and of itself, not reporting.
Should the 271-page now published report be banned? No. There's no reason to ban it or to ban Ken. The bulk of it is a collection of quotes from publications like THE WASHINGTON POST.
Elon Musk and his whores insist that privacy was violated. How so? They insist that Miss Sassy's phone number and address were published.
So what?
He can change his number at any time and probably already changes it regularly. As for his address? It is true that, in the 20th century in the pre-mobile days, you could get an unlisted phone number. You've never been allowed an unlisted house -- unless maybe you're in the witness relocation program. Property records are public information. His address is not a secret and that became very obvious in August when his neighbors began complaining to the press -- see THE WASHINGTONIAN ("On Saturday night, a few dozen people who live in Alexandria’s Del Ray neighborhood gathered at Judy Lowe Neighborhood Park to bid it goodbye. The city of Alexandria had announced that the park, which abuts US Senator from Ohio and Republican vice presidential candidate JD Vance’s house, would be closed “until further notice” due to a request from the US Secret "), THE INDEPENDENT, THE DAILY BEAST, THE US SUN, THE TIMES OF INDIA, CLEVELAND.COM, WASHINGTON DC's FOX 5, THE DENVER GAZETTE, THE IRISH STAR, THE LAS VEGAS JOURNAL-REVIEW . . . Again, property tax records are not secret and JD's neighborhood was in the news all around the world in August.
Such an idiotic claim falls apart under scrutiny.
Did Elon Musk carry out censorship? Yes, he did. There's no question that he did. And he's a Trump-Vance supporter and that's why he did it. He deserves to be called out.
So do the whores supporting Elon. Especially one whore: Matt Taibbi.
Tabbi has called for Ken to be reinstated on Twitter. However, he's gone to great pains to lie that this is not the same thing as when TWITTER previously censored the Hunter Biden laptop. He's tried to say that the difference is private information. That wasn't private information. An e-mail from Jill Biden to Hunter on his laptop was private information (and most outlets have presumably avoided reporting on it for that reason), the photos of Hunter and others nude would be private information.
There was no private information in what Ken published.
But most damning of Matt's claims is this, "No, it’s not the same, unless the FBI had a hand in getting him suspended." It's 2024 and Matt's a deeply stupid person. But does anyone not see the problem with that statement?
Matt claims his TWITTER FILES reporting blew the lid off it all, showed government attempts to suppress the story.
Okay, let's say that's true. That's 2023.
Go back to 2020. What will you find? Matt stating it's censorship. And that was before Matt's supposed proof emerged in 2023.
Matt's a lying hypocrite. So is Glenn Greenwald and if someone wants to go there you could especially pay attention to his GUARDIAN work but we don't have time for him.
Tucker?
The increasingly deranged personality (he was never a reporter and even 'journalist' is a stretch) has told us that corporate media -- legacy media, whatever you want to call it -- is dying. He's apparently thinks he's the rebirth but we'd argue he's the afterbirth.
We bring that up because Glenneth Greenwald makes the same claim as does Megyn Kelly and, last week, Don Lemon started making the rounds as he made the same claim.
So for how long now? Four years at least, these grifters have insisted that they are the new (and improved) media. What story have they broken? They haven't. They've done no reporting that benefited American public interest.
They've had all these years to produce something of value and they've produced nothing. They do their lousy talk shows where they go on and on about what someone else published -- amplifying the research and work done by others -- and then they do interviews with their friends. And they try to pass this crap off as reporting and their talk shows as 'news' when, not only are they not news, they don't even qualify as public interest programs.
Saturday, we got some good news. It came to the inbox from RUMBLE of all people and it was entitled "Did The Alleged Assassin Have Intel on Trump?"
Top 5 Trending Videos
Did The Alleged Assassin Have Intel on Donald Trump? Watch Now
Springfield Footage from March 2024 of Missing Pets Watch Now
NYC Covid Czar Caught Forcing Vaccines Watch Now
Disturbing Details about the Assassination Attempt Watch Now
Will the US require proof of citizenship to vote? Watch Now
Top 5 Trending Creators
Dan Bongino Watch Now
Andrew Tate Watch Now
Donald Trump Watch Now
The Daily Wire Watch Now
Russell Brand Watch Now
Get it? Get why that's good news?
Glenneth was a failure in corporate media, Tucker was such a failure he was publicly fired, Megyn failed everywhere. They don't do reporting and never really did. They did commentary. But they claim big media, corporate media, whatever you want to call it is failing and that they are the future -- not just the future, actually, they claim that they are the present. But not one of them makes RUMBLE's top five content creators despite having repeatedly attempted to lure people to RUMBLE nor have any of their clips last week made it into the top five.
They're failures. The were failures in the corporate media and now they're failures on right-wing RUMBLE.
