“Stormy” Daniels

The Copyright Battle that Gave Cinematic Life to Dracula ‹ CrimeReads

Let’s have some fun! Provide a caption for this picture, and we’ll see whose is the best.

Ah, that double standard! What would they ever do without it?

Remember this? Democrats wanted to punish Fox News for not running a story that would’ve made Donald Trump look bad (that Stormy Daniels flap, if you remember that). Not running an unfavorable story is “a contribution in kind,” and against the law.

But so is running a favorable story. So either way, they’ve got you.

Dems Seek Still More Control over Nooze Media

Good grief! Remember how they all suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop story? Didn’t want that to see the light of day, did they?

It’s impossible to ensure that only strictly true news stories get published for strictly honest reasons. So our country’s founders decided to publish ’em all and let the public sort ’em out.

Libs just can’t live with that much freedom. It makes their skin break out. If other people who aren’t liberals have freedom, the libs can’t sleep at night.

See the source image

So Fox News, in 2016, did not run a story about then-presidential candidate Donald Trump’s so-called affair with porn actress “Stormy” Daniels–and now House Democrats are looking to punish Fox for that decision (https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/04/02/house-democrats-want-oversight-over-fox-news-editorial-decisions/).

This is our “free and independent press” that the Dems absolutely love when it’s carrying their water–which most nooze outlets do, most of the time. And now Dems are saying that the “free and independent press” should be punished for freely and independently choosing not to cover a certain story in time to bend an election toward the Democrats.

Are these people totally disgusting, or what?

So the House Committee on Crushing Freedom or whatever they call it has demanded “documents” held by the Fox reporter who researched Trump & Daniels. Meanwhile her editor has told them to take a long walk off a short pier.

They want the “documents” because they’re trying to show that Fox’s decision not to run with the story constituted an in-kind campaign contribution and therefor violated campaign finance law.

They could just as easily say a favorable story about a candidate was also an in-kind contribution and a violation of the law. They can get you for running with the story, or they can get you for not running with it. Either way, they’ve got you.

So what we have here is a barefaced attempt to exercise total control over what news gets reported in America and what news doesn’t–even at a time when almost all the “mainstream” nooze media have voluntarily sold themselves into slavery to the Democrat Party: and sold themselves cheap, at that.

If you voted for them, you really ought to be ashamed of yourself.