Today I’m launching Operation Eyes Wide Open, a wiki project to expose lying and hoaxing journalists. Through Kings Wiki, we will create permanent pages on journalists to display their hoaxes, lies, and lack of credibility for the public record. The archive will persist beyond the end of their lives.
As you already know, media outlets are full of activists who are masquerading as journalists, serving their billionaire masters instead of the public. Many people are waking up to this fact, but there’s still a large part of the population that has not yet realized that the media produces news that fits their pre-determined globalist narrative. ROK readers saw this first-hand when we were slandered as pro-rape activists in February.
To topple a building, attack the bottom-most foundation
While it’s quite difficult to hurt the owners of media outlets, it’s easy to put the squeeze on the lowly journalists at the bottom, whose reputation and livelihood is sensitive to public perception. By using a wiki platform to truthfully show their misdeeds, we can erode public trust in them over time, an attack method that is slower but deadly.
Right now there are hundreds of journalists and reporters who are deliberately misleading the public about the upcoming 2016 Presidential Election, as the recent DNC leaks show. I’d like to begin the operation by exposing 250 of them who are trying to swing the election in Hillary’s favor by showing a clear neglect and bias for truth towards Donald Trump. I hope we can accomplish this goal by September 26, the date of the first debate. The process has been started by creating pages on these four journalists:
If you encounter wrongful and untruthful anti-Trump reporting in the mainstream media, I ask that you take a few minutes to expose that journalist on Kings Wiki by sourcing the article, interview, tweet, or image that contains the violation(s). Here are step-by-step instructions on how to do so.
How to expose a journalists in 10 minutes or less
1. Create a Kings Wiki account by clicking this link.
2. Go to Kings Wiki and type the full name of the reporter in the search box. Press enter.
3. Click the red link to create the page.
4. Put the reporter’s name in bold using the following formatting: ”’Reporter Name”’
5. Write a few sentences about the reporter, including the bias, hoax, or lie that has been documented about him or her.
6. To add a web site reference, simply enclose the URL within <ref></ref>. Example: <ref>http://www.manosphere.at</ref>.
7. Add the reference listing to the end of the page by pasting this code:
==References==
{{Reflist}}
8. Paste one of the following category codes to the end of the page. You can add both if it’s relevant.
[[Category:Reporters who have demonstrated an anti-Trump bias]]
[[Category:Reporters with a globalist agenda]]
9. Other useful formatting codes
- Bullet point: *Text
- Header: ===Text===
- Link to another Kings Wiki page: [[Name of page]]
- Blockquote: <blockquote>Quoted text</blockquote>
10. To insert an image, click the “Upload file” link in the left column and then insert it by enclosing the full file name.
[[File:Chuck-todd-dnc-email-2.jpg]]
That’s it! Even if you have no wiki experience, you’ll be able to create your first article quickly with the above steps. Bookmark this link for fast access to this guide.
Why we’re starting with journalists who are attacking Trump
Besides the urgency of the upcoming election, Trump is the representation of a masculine and nationalist standard. If a journalist has bias against Trump, it’s an absolute guarantee that they’re also against us, and probably even participated in the meetup outrage earlier this year. Selecting anti-Trump journalists is simply a shortcut for finding liars, hoaxers, and cheaters. You are free to expose other journalists as well.
The point of this operation is not to go after honest journalists who merely disagree with our views or are rightfully critical on politicians or anyone else, but it’s clear that most mainstream journalists vehemently despise Trump and are doing everything they can to prevent him from winning the election in November. They are attempting to be the deciders instead of doing their jobs by displaying the truth to the voting public.
In spite of their blatant corruption, we must be honest on the wiki by citing our sources and not making up false claims. If you’re unsure of a reporter’s intentions, use phrases like “it seems” or “it appears.” We also will not allow anyone to publish private addresses and phone numbers.
Cockroaches hate it when you turn on the lights
Staff meeting at NBC News
When you see journalists pursue bogus attack angles against Trump or participate in contrived “scandals” that all other outlets seem to coincidentally parrot, it’s safe to reasonably conclude that they have an agenda, especially if their reporting history doesn’t show them applying the same critical standard to Hillary Clinton.
ROK has put truth on the first page of Google results for several journalists, such as Rosamund Erwin, Phoebe Moloney, Sarah Lacy, Sara Nelson, Geoff Mulvihill, and Emily Eveland. Now it’s time to take that to the next level through Operation Eyes Wide Open. Next time you see a journalist with an anti-Trump bias, or any other journalist who has shown themselves to be a liar, I urge you to expose the individual on Kings Wiki. It’s time to turn on the lights and watch these cockroaches scatter.
If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh’s book Free Speech Isn’t Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.
Read Next: 5 Shocking Things I Learned From Working In The Mainstream Media
This is a fine idea. For best effect, perhaps these pages should include personal details about these journalists. They often reveal personal details about private citizens who’d have preferred that they remain confidential; wouldn’t turnabout be fair play?
One particularly important case would be firearms rights. Many journalists who’ve written pieces slanted — crudely or subtly — against firearms rights possess firearms themselves. I’d say that’s information the public would want to know. Wouldn’t you?
If you can find it on the Internet and you don’t have to play paparazzi or hacker to get the information, isn’t it already pretty much public? No reason that can’t go on a wiki.
Two things come to mind here.
1) I’ve always wondered what would happen if I was to get a job writing for a super leftist magazine, like TIME MAGAZINE, and just write from a complete different perspective than all those liberal zombies who are incapable of thinking for themselves. Would I be able to bring Truth to anyone, or would I one day wake up dead, with no impact on the community of readers? And how long would I last before they fire me, if they don’t kill me first?
2) Fuck you, Megyn Kelly. I’ve hated her for a good six to eight months now. That damn meeting with Trump to “resolve issues” made me sick to my stomach. Fox News is going down the gutter, and has been for quite some time now, because of cuckservatives like Megyn.
As for 1), that sounds like a nice little fantasy and I hate to burst your bubble, but you seem to have a somewhat naive view of how the publishing world works. (Disclosure: I’m the copy editor of one of the European editions of a major American cultural magazine; please don’t ask, I won’t say which.)
First, you’re not just hired like that to write for a publication if you’re a nobody, especially not as a regular contributor. That simply does not happen. Ever. (Why, you can’t even get a comment in under an article if the site is moderated and the moderator doesn’t like your opinion.) The vast majority of regulars are invited because someone has heard of them or has recommended them to one of the editors, or they’re a pet of the editor-in-chief or a potential money-spinner. Also, there would be endless prescreening concerning your past in publishing (again, no chance whatsoever for nobodies), you would have to provide dozens of consistently good and convincing work samples, and you would be invited to discussions so they can check you out. And they’re thorough and know what questions to ask.
Second, there are far too many people involved in the publishing of an article: your personal editor (the one who commissions your text); at least one other editor, usually two or more others; the editor-in-chief and/or his deputy (in some high-profile cases even someone from the board of managers), and at least one copy-editor or proofreader. Nothing, literally nothing, gets past this absolute bare minimum of four to five people, however famous or cutting-edge you are.
So, nothing for you to be afraid of, at least not when it comes to getting some truly revolutionary stuff printed that might change the world.
“Nothing, literally nothing, gets past this absolute bare minimum of four to five people, however famous or cutting-edge you are.”
Ok so what happened with fake rape case at the University of Virginia published a irrefutable trtuh by Rolling Stone.?
Did they go ahead with it becasue it was a “good” story never mind the reputation of the school and the young men it slandered and destroyed?
If the system you describe is so good at “due dilligence” then why does it seem to be so terrible at it?
Do you want 100 more examples of fradulant stories for me to back up my claim that the system is rotten to the core?
I think you are misunderstanding his point.
There’s a misunderstanding here, Niagara. I didn’t say anything about “due diligence” or about that particular story you mentioned or the sytem in general being “good”. I merely pointed out that there is no way for anyone, let alone an unknown author, to get anything into an edited publication.
I was just as enraged as you about the Virginia story or the Sulkowicz case, perhaps even more, because I work in publishing and I know many people in responsible positions who would print such a story because they’re clickbait/advertising whores and they’re ruining the business for everyone involved.
Hey thanks for replying. Got it. We would both proabaly agree that objective journalism is under siege in favor of that with a strong political, SJW or as you aptly point out “click bait” agenda.
I think that firstly, you would fail to get that article published. Second, they would just shrug and fire you and find a more useful idiot.
It’s business.
Good idea Roosh. Put the coals to em, and let em grill.
This is a good idea and ambitious, although a lot may depend on how polished the results are – anything that comes across as amateurish or too snarky (effective snark aside) may be counter-productive.
While its clear that the whole MSM is pretty much full of scummy progressives, who hate Trump, truth and accuracy etc, it might still be a good idea to see how they all link together – as with discover the networks for example. ROK has previously noted how frequently individual journalists at supposedly separate media outlets seem to parrot or reproduce each others work (e.g. the way progressive journalism Down Under during the meet-up furore). Taking an anti-Trump stance may be drearily characteristic of MSM journos but it is poor, shoddy, and repetitive journalism that ultimately makes them hacks, typists or presstitutes, and if you can demonstrate that they are effectively snowballing each other’s progressive cum from mouth to mouth then that might build on the achievements of Gamergate,, or on the Ezra Klein type scandal involving the progressive list of journalists who were effectively (and corruptly) working with each other (I forget the name of the list)
The best defense is a good offense.
Then make your chess challenge and use your best offense.
USA! USA! USA!
Done.
ok lets rumble
Have you found out how to watch other people play? I’ve been trying to figure out how to watch you and lolknee play, but am not making any progress.
Are you playing on your phone ? I’m playing on the laptop so it might be different from you.
Yeah, I’m playing on the phone app version.
To clarify, there’s an option to watch games, but whenever I click on it and look for friends playing, nothing comes up., even if I’m sure you and lolknee are playing.
The point of this operation is not to go after honest journalists who merely disagree with our views or are rightfully critical on politicians or anyone else
Please take steps to ensure this remains objective criticism and not a right wing echo chamber, and it could have huge effect. If it is seen as just another tool to attack people who don’t like issue “x”, it will be mostly discredited and ignored. Hell, even Snopes is now under attack for political leanings, and it was seen as an unbiased source of truth for a long time.
Snopes is run by an elderly couple, correct? Amazing how that site became a go-to to debunk “myths”
It is nothing extraordinary. In politics, there is the “newcomer” effect. Newcomers are mostly always guaranteed some degree of confidence due to lack of records.
This is why I always vote against the incumbent (unless it is a man being challenged by a woman, never vote for a woman no matter what). The newcomer only wants to be a crook while the incumbent is a crook. The lesser of two evils.
‘Unbiased source of truth’.
Mate, if something like that existed, there would be no wars, ever!
Snopes. I googled the infamous Hillary chestnut “women are the primary victims of war, because the men are all dead..” to get some context. Snopes actually had an article where they confirmed the quote.. and then in an “I <3 Hillary” love fest, spent several paragraphs justifying the quote. Needless to say the author was a woman, and probably a feminst too. Fucking nowhere is free of the leftist cancer anymore.
Exhibit A, the Mikkelsens. a.k.a., the Snopes site owners and editors. The one on the left is your Hillary loving author. The simp on the right is her husband. The fat cat is their child. As Roosh said, appearance is ideology.
I think a good example would be the journalist who wrote this article:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/under-sunny-skies-without-incident-000000844.html
The title and accompanying images seem to give the impression of that the pro-Trump crowd size was tiny. But then the guy admits in his own twitter that the photo was taken as things were wrapping up:
I agree. The problem we have, today, is it’s the media who deems anything that disagrees with their narrative as hateful or critical (including simple questions on an issue).
One important example today: People are asking about Clinton’s health…because it’s important (she’s running for office) and because she has displayed a few characteristics that go hand in hand with medical issues. The media doesn’t want to talk about it and they are going a step beyond that calling everyone “crazy” who questions it or calling it a conspiracy.
Well, I guess I’ll be the crazy one because I’m asking the questions. If she wants to work for me (the taxpayer) then I have the right to know if she has medical issues that will affect her work, her decision making abilities, etc….
Snopes was always run by an aspy Canadian beta and his blimposaurus wife, and left leaning to the core.
the media has no obligation to tell the public the truth
http://www.philly2philly.com/politics_community/politics_community_articles/2009/6/29/4854/fox_news_wins_lawsuit_misinform_public
But they do have an obligation to their shareholders and if their stocks begin to drop because no one is watching them anymore, there’ll be hell to pay.
You are much more optimistic than I am.
I’m just following the principle behind running a business: To make a profit.
I’m curious how much news viewership is background, as opposed to people actually paying attention. I frequently turn on the news while I roam around the house.
That’s a good point. The whole “honesty” and “trustworthiness” of the press has always been a fabrication, because there has never been any system in place to audit the press. The only thing they have ever been held accountable for is generating views and/or selling papers.
I guess over time enough journos hyped up their own integrity to the point where people started to believe it, but then the internet came along and ruined their charade.
Bloggers were to journalists as Uber is to taxis. Turns out that a 4 year journalism degree is a complete waste of time.
Busting dishonest journos at this point is a waste of time; the entire news biz is dishonest. Disgraced journos will just be replaced with more corrupt people
Sweet! I’m on board.
Why restricted to journalists? There are so many CIA spooks around and corrupt politicians, like this Mitch McConnell, for example:
http://nevo.news/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/mconnell-cocaine.png
90 Pounds of Cocaine discovered on a boat owned by the family of Mitch McConnell, the Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate
http://nevo.news/index.php/2016/08/14/90-pounds-of-cocaine-discovered-on-a-boat-owned-by-the-family-of-mitch-mcconnell-the-majority-leader-of-the-u-s-senate/
I will admit, not a bad idea.
However, I think the reasoning for focusing on journalists right now is to counteract all the misinformation they’re spreading. In many regards, MSM has a more powerful platform than the politicians.
People already assume the worst of politicians I think is the reason. Journalists still pretend to cloak themselves in objectivity, so exposing their party line marching orders is of much higher value. You simply assume it with a politician.
If people assumed the worst of politicians, why do they still bother to vote for them?
I believe the “lesser of two evils” plays a major part in the process.
Because they do. The profession generally only attracts the worst kind of people.
Most people believe politicians are corrupt, or bad, but they don’t believe ‘their’ politicians are.
Not voting doesn’t mean the position will go unfilled. It just means your 1/100,000,000th of a voice is worth even less, I suppose.
I believe in the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy philosophy for politics:
“Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”
The lesser of two evils is like voting to be shot in the front of the head instead of in the back of it.
Not if the majority boycott this charade.
Problem is a wide scale boycott wouldn’t work. Let’s go to the extreme and say only one person votes for who should be president. Guess what, that one person who decided not to boycott just decided who the POTUS was. If no one at all voted, then the politicians would just duke it out.
Assuming the elections are not rigged (which they are), if the actual results show that let’s say 90% did not vote at all, the elections will be declared void. It’s too big of scandal to be swept under the carpet.
Keep Calm and Carry on Voting!
My question is, WHY would they be considered void? Is there any ruling/law that would make this so?
I’ve seen estimates that around 40% of Americans who have the right to vote do not vote in any given election. In fact, link below suggests that almost 70% “boycotted” the election two years ago.
They don’t care.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html
Because it gives the 90% the moral grounds to boycott all the laws they make and pay no tax. Because, they can not recruit enough capable police force from the 10% who voted to enforce these laws.
The numbers might be even higher – the elections are rigged.
I think your reasoning is getting a little too convoluted.
I think his stated premise and actual premise were misaligned.
You’ll never get 90% of the population to agree to even what color the sky is, let alone organize efficiently enough such that they all stop voting.
Not true, people are in fact very easily manipulated via the medias. You just have to know how.
Monkey see monkey do.
The color of the sky is “sky blue.”
I win.
I can’t even keep up with my yelp reviews and I get actual perks for that shit.
83.5% of peoples who use random percentages in their argument are stupid.
void? I thought he said Noid.
I’m just telling you the truth of the matter. The people that don’t vote, won’t vote, the people that hold voting as important you’ll never be able to convince otherwise in large numbers. Just how the human mind works chief.
The truth is that through the right propaganda and incentives people can be made to do anything BECAUSE there are plenty of examples in history.
I think it’s one of those cliches that are so common that people don’t take them seriously precisely because they are so widespread.
I bet you are guilty of it every now and then.
about 42.8% of the time
With about 34.4% probability, this does not make any sense.
love this.
never tell me the odds 3PO
I have acknowledged your request and there is a 0% probability I will honor it.
was this from Domino’s or Pizza Hut?
No.. its not. That’s a far fetched assertion to the meaning of another assertion. lol. BTW I don’t think there is anything in the constitution that states if the presidency is won 1245 votes to 376 votes that it wouldn’t still be valid regardless of the number of the populous in the country. Also how would anyone be able to tell what percentage actually boycotted if they fudged the numbers? There is not enough relation between the 300million citizens to be able to figure that out to court any sort of outrage.
Furthermore, if we could get 90% to agree not to vote then why not just over throw the govt? Getting that many people to agree and using it for something so mundane as a vote boycott seems stupid.
Name one.
Almost by default Politicians are by rule corrupt. How is politics even an occupation is beyond me. Look at Bernie, never had a job till he became a senator. It shouldn’t be a Job it should be in addition to having a job, what do they do that’s so time consuming that being a rep or senator is a job? lol. Not the way it was meant to be when this government was set up.
exactly
That’s pretty amazing for a country that devotes so much press and hoopla to the party delegate process and then the final election. Also on online forums (that have nothing to do with politics) you often see americans mix in anti Dem or Rep comments in the comments section. You would think there was this big passion to vote there.
In my country if you don’t vote you get fined. Of course that doesn’t stop people voting for mickey mouse on the ballot form.
They vote for “change”. Election in and election out “change”.
Indeed. Gone are the days of objectivity with this new bunch on mainstream media. They are owned and controlled by corporate interests so there is very little objectivity in “the news” on mainstream media. It’s why the rise of alt media online has been so effective.
Now that the ancient news on TV is dying out, we need to call out those “reporters” when we hear and see them leaning a certain way (opinion versus facts).
Don Lemon on CNN is a good one. Many people hate that guy because he is a bought and paid for corporate guy.
A boat owned by a company owned by his in-laws, based in Colombia. That’s stretching it. If we’re going to go that far into family records, you might as well throw me in prison.
Can’t you read?
Chaos are more than family: they also make huge donations to McConnell’s political campaigns.
That’s his cut!
don’t worry, this dickhead is one of those conspiracy loons that believes all sorts of absurd stuff. General consensus seems to be that taking him seriously is a mistake.
That Polish girl from the other night, her brother’s wife’s father knew a guy who knew Hitler.
Lolknee, you’re literally Hitler now.
I am literally hitler!
“0-0”
–
took me a while to get that face right.
Here’s another one
http://cdns.yournewswire.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Rothschild-money-laundering-scheme-700×350.jpg
WikiLeaks Reveals Rothschild Billion Dollar Money Laundering Plot
The classified cable from the Public Library of US Diplomacy published by WikiLeaks exposes Rothschild Bank “advising” a “secret and corrupt” billion dollar transaction in order to create a “massive money laundering scheme” in Senegal and crash the struggling nation’s economy.
http://yournewswire.com/wikileaks-reveals-rothschild-billion-dollar-money-laundering-plot/
Good thinking Roosh this is probably the biggest bomb you’ve lobbed yet in the Culture War
how do you stop the sjws infiltrating the wiki though?
Oy, I didn’t know about that Wiki. That’s fucking well made! Congrats.
One that deserves mention – whichever affiliate in 2008 cropped an image of a black guy with a rifle at a protest down so that you could only see his shirt and an AR receiver, but not his skin, so they could talk about angry white gun owners protesting Obama.
CNN I believe
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0809/Righty_bloggers_slam_MSNBC_over_gun_clip_network_responds.html?showall
I read something this morning where someone had caught CNN editing a tape of Sylville Smiths sister calling for peace when she was actually calling for the rioters to go burn suburbs.
One is calling for peace, the other ‘wants everyone to feel our pain!’
We just needs some money in owa hoodt, if y’all gives us mo money we ain’t gon be burnin shit down no mo.
Mo gibsmedats
I can git dat? Definition- May I have that? Or “will you give that to me?
Where u be goin at? Defintion- Where are you going?
Where u stay? =Where do you live?
Dere he go! = I see him!
Who yo daddy is?= Who is your father?
What dat is? = What is that?
Who u is?=What is your name?
Who dis is? = phone greeting meaning “Who is this?”
I b down wit dat=OK
Names have no plural or possessive= Da po-leece done found
Leemongellow Glock in he ca and done lock him up. He Mama say she ain’t got no money to git him out needa.
The Ebonic Plague in such a nice primer.
Ebolanikwa say dey ain’t no plaque you jus be makin fun o her name.
“Who u is”
Correction: Who is u
Aw hell nah-don youz be dissin’ me becoz I be da realest of all da niggaz.
No no no…it’s Who u be?
True
That is peace….in a certain dialect.
The translation for ‘peace’ is ‘killwhitey’ in Dindu.
I still can’t get over “dindu” that is a hilarious pejorative
I can pretty much spit a ‘grieving mom’s press conference’ in real time.
lol, can you do it to a beat?
If I could, I would’ve already made it into a youtube parody.
That would go viral so fucking fast.
I’m guessing going to da sub bubs to burn shit down isn’t going to go as well as that hood rat thinks it would.
Ghettobonics I presume?
I saw that on Twitter. Basically they stop the footage a sentence early
The media do as much or more damage by omitting things as they do by misreporting facts.
They dug through Sarah Palin’s garbage looking for dirt, but would not even discuss why Obama lost his law license. (For lying on his Bar Exam.)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3743470/Sister-cop-shooting-victim-Sylville-Smith-tells-rioters-burn-suburbs-reveals-brother-went-high-school-shooter.html
Where is Hitler is literally Hitler?
Fuck yeah this is awesome. Thanks Roosh and RoK.
I fully appreciate the sentiment but it would take far less time and effort to confirm the accuracy of mainstream media news stories…
Goddam Jews!
Have y’all seen the Littlest Chickenhawk’s latest brilliant television? I was already starting a page on him, but this is something to behold.
That voice…yeesh
The entire Michelle Fields incident involving (((Ben Shapiro))) was a Jewish hoax to the core. Shapiro left Breitbart soon after video footage emerged that Trump’s campaign manager barely even touched Fields. Shapiro then White Knighted for Fields and ended up spiraling into neurotic madness.
http://www.dailystormer.com/michelle-fields-hoax-jewish-conspiracy-confirmed/
Notice the “turd tornado” comment he makes in that interview you posted. Why are Jews obsessed with poop and poop “humor”? It’s disgusting. It’s everywhere in their language and filthy (((Hollywood))) productions. Then, they try to project this degeneracy onto people like Hitler, who they claim had some kind of twisted “poop fetish”. Projection much?
Simple. Monkeys throw shit.
Board-certified medicine specialist and TV personality Dr. Drew Pinsky says he is “gravely concerned” about Hillary Clinton’s health, noting that the treatment she has received is “bizarre” and could explain the “weird side-effects” that people are seeing.
Pinsky noted that after her fall, Hillary suffered from a “transverse sinus thrombosis,” an “exceedingly rare clot” that “virtually guarantees somebody has something wrong with their coagulation system.”
Dr. Drew also highlighted when Hillary had to wear prism glasses after her fall, declaring, “that is brain damage, and so that’s affecting her balance….tell us a little more about that – that’s profound.”
Hope people add stuff, Just added one Nicholas Kristof, his piece fron ny times is biased as hell.
Fuck……you’ve your work cut out in Europe…… over here Trump is literally Hitler! And yes I know what I’ve done there… he is Hitler no two ways about it…… Hitler yes he is…..Hitlers underpants with skidmarks……Mein Kampf! Did I say “literally Hitler”?
Most if not all media in Canada are biased as hell. Everything he does is bad while Clinton is an angel. Every story about him has a negative spin on it.
Just don’t be surprised when you find an over-representation of (((the usual suspects))) in the media biz who are Never Trump or are pushing an anti-White narrative. By anti-White, I mean pro-gay, pro-feminism, pro-miscegenation, pro-Israel, pro-immigration from the 3rd world, etc.
The “Chaos out of Order” crowd.
Expose Lying And Hoaxing Journalists?? You are wasting your time ?? They are like two bit whores.. You spit in their face & they will tell it’s raining ??
And if u blow ur load in their face they tell u its free hot vanilla day.
“…and lack of credibility for the public record.”
What “credibility”??? All you need anymore to get a job in the field is to be attractive and have a vagina and/or a British accent!
Credibilty, that’s a good one, RV!
That spineless fuck that used to write for gawker, he didnt have an article that wasnt militantly in favor of the wholesale slaughter of traditionalism
Adam Weinstein
Why not create a data base for sjws and white knights. Put their pic up with their direct comments.
This is an excellent idea and one which is long overdue.
While Trump is causing degenerates, SJWs, and leftists to focus their hatred on him, this would actually be the perfect time to have our international meetups.
I just setup a page for Don Lemon…feel free to edit it with any info.
http://en.kingswiki.com/wiki/Don_Lemon
In my opinion, the guy is outright owned by the corporation.
In the past, we understood that reporters were somewhat confined by their boss on the stories that they could report on. Today, it’s outright propaganda what we are seeing on TV (especially CNN…caught recently editing the story in Milwaukee).
Love it.
How about Sabrina Erdely, the whore being that Rolling Stone article?