The media was very wrong on both counts and the ramifications were significant. A presidential candidate and later president spent valuable time fending off media attacks, a lengthy special counsel investigation, and two failed impeachments which we now officially know was a smear operation by the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democrat National Committee. Despite widespread social media censorship and legacy media derision, it turns out the Hunter Biden laptop (and all of the incriminating data within) story was true after all.

Seeing how multi-million dollar salaries depend on the public having trust in those who deliver news, it comes as no surprise that the media is being reluctant to admit they were wrong again. They’re going to dig the credibility hole deeper by today acting like they knew the media should have taken the 2020 October Surprise seriously instead of flailing their arms in crazed opposition disgust.

The problem is, they are and they did.

What’s most annoying is “How stupid you think Americans are.”

The media today will LIE to our faces, claiming they really, really wanted to know more about the Hunter Biden-laptop story when it broke in October 2020, despite their very public shaming of Americans who did want to know more and were punished on social media for sharing it with others.

It’s a forgone conclusion that the squelching of the existence and contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop was one component that swung the presidential election for Joe Biden as millions now admit had they heard about it, may have either voted for Donald Trump or stayed home on Election Day. Now, they’ll be trying to decide, on the fly, whether they should hope Hunter takes a fall to save Joe or let the shady finances documented on the laptop take out failing “the big guy” before the 2022 midterms.

We expect the media to choose sides. We expect the media to play to their audience. We expect the media to report or omit to suit their political narrative. Insulting the intelligence of the media’s viewers is a bridge crossed because their videos don’t lie even though the overpaid commenters do.

Nice, right?

Subscription business models are based on the idea of selling a product or service to receive monthly or yearly recurring subscription revenue. They focus on customer retention over customer acquisition. In essence, subscription business models focus on the way revenue is made so that a single customer pays multiple payments for prolonged access to a good or service instead of a large upfront one-time price. Now, the economy is trending toward more subscriptions instead of ownership for cars, software, entertainment, and shopping. This increases the lifetime value (LTV) of the customer.
— Investopedia

When you have to call “customer service” and have to endure a Filipino accent when being told what they can’t (or won’t) do, do you feel like a valued customer after they have your money?

Corporations make you pay for monthly subscriptions despite the fact that some of the services provided are those you really don’t want and would never pay for on their own.

You buy a cell phone so you can communicate instantly with others, but you also get a device that spies on you, “free” functionality apps that also sell your data, divulges your location to people you don’t know, and based on your activity online, sends you dozens of annoying ads per month for products you have no intention of buying.

Granted, there are some “free” products that people can obtain like Facebook, Twitter, and their Big Tech subsidiaries. They just sell your personal data to advertisers.

Mark Zuckerberg repeatedly claims Facebook does not sell data. The statement has become a shield in the tumultuous era for the company. But is it true?

“As a data scientist, I am shocked that anyone continues to believe this claim,” wrote Michael Kosinski, assistant professor at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business, in a New York Times opinion piece. “Every time you click on a Facebook ad, Facebook sells data on you to that advertiser.”
— AZCentral, 2/15/19

Multiply that within the estimated 1.9 billion daily users, that’s a good chunk of income from what in essence are just social media websites and after they get user data, they can abuse their customers as they wish. That’s a business model probably not taught at the Wharton School… yet.

Music streaming subscriptions give you access to genres you appreciate, thus there may be two or three channels of music you’d religiously listen to. But as you (and millions of others) are paying for the service on a monthly basis, you’re also paying for genres you may genuinely dislike and artists you really abhor whose music you would never purchase.

Streaming services, like the music companies of old, screw the artists, but that’s another story altogether.

Cable companies charge monthly for hundreds of television channels while there may be less than a handful any given person may watch on a consistent basis. But since millions of viewers are paying (in some cases) close to a hundred bucks a month for bundle packages, consumers are paying for channels that would go belly up if they had to compete in an ‘à la carte’ environment.

Corporations like Amazon, thanks to their “Prime” subscriptions, are in the entertainment business, are actually making product. Some movie companies are in the streaming business. Simply by adding a “plus” on their brand gives you access to new productions of varying quality, old movies and shows you probably viewed years ago and will probably never voluntarily view again. Consistently good product is another thing, but at least Hollywood is getting paid….

But this is the current business model for corporations who want a steady stream of income despite how well their product performs and/or if all the “services” provided are what people really want or will use.

Apple Inc. is working on a subscription service for the iPhone and other hardware products, a move that could make device ownership similar to paying a monthly app fee, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The service would be Apple’s biggest push yet into automatically recurring sales, allowing users to subscribe to hardware for the first time — rather than just digital services.
— Bloomberg, 3/24/22

So now it’s not enough for families to pay outrageous monthly fees to pay for the phone and service but now Apple wants to charge people for the device’s guts every 30 days.

People used to buy physical newspapers because the wanted to be informed of local and national news. But now that the talent pool has degraded the product to the point where people just find the news they want online for free, some companies are putting out introductory hooks that can be as low as a dollar a week.

 
Seriously, if someone is trying to get you to buy something for a dollar a week, just how good is that product? In some cases, all you’re paying for is the privilege of seeing and hearing people blab. On the course of one’s daily activities, paying people (some of whom you may not choose to hear) to talk doesn’t exactly sound like a wise use of the monthly budget.

For the most part, when you pay a subscription you are subsidizing mediocrity. Some companies are making you choose between paying for crap or losing functionality of an expensive device you either bought outright or are making more monthly payments on.

While there are some aspects of subscription services you need or enjoy, you’re also paying for services and/or talent you may truly despise. That’s how they all stay relevant, fed and you get to pay for it. This is the current business model so suck it up.

That is until the Internet goes down.

One of the latest examples comes from Montgomery County, Virginia.

A Montgomery County School Board meeting briefly became rowdy Tuesday, prompting the elected body’s chairwoman to leave for the remainder of the night after being directly targeted by a local right wing activist over masking. Board Chairwoman Sue Kass, who just started the third year of her term and was selected to the leadership role last month, left the meeting during the midst of the regular public comments period a short time after a speaker, Alecia Vaught, held up her phone and showed what she said were Facebook photos of Kass without a mask on while in a crowd.
—– Roanoke Times, 2/16/22

The left wing school board chairwoman took offense to parent Alecia Vaught’s presentation of pictures of Susan Kass posted on Facebook maskless at a time where masks were supposedly mandatory on school property and functions….

It appears Kass has scrubbed those inconvenient pics from her Facebook page.

Kass, a former teacher, lamented the level of personal politics and “selfish beliefs” that she said have been injected into discussions on the pandemic.<
“I volunteered to do this because I care about teachers, and I care about students,” she said.

Kass said the photos Vaught showed on her phone proved “absolutely nothing.” Kass said Tuesday was also upsetting because her father was in the hospital at the time of the meeting.

“And I stayed here for this,” she said.

Well, no one is forcing her to stay on the school board either and hopefully, she walked out for good.

This is not being covered by the legacy media and social media is squelching it as best they can and for good reason.

It’s about one of them….

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, has confirmed to TechCrunch that Jeren A. Miles, who had been a manager of global community development, is no longer employed by the company after a video went viral on YouTube, which was then reposted on Reddit and other sites, featuring him in a sting operation conducted by amateurs with the intent of catching paedophiles.

The two-hour video, posted by an amateur group called PCI Predator Catchers Indianapolis on its YouTube page, does not depict Miles caught in any sex act, nor admitting to any specific sex act, nor admitting to intending to carry out any sex act. And it is not clear what the legal ramifications of this will be, if any. But it does feature two people questioning Miles, who in the course of the interrogation admits to having graphic and inappropriate communications with a 13-year-old boy. It’s a damning enough exchange that Miles has subsequently deleted his social profiles on sites like Facebook and Twitter, and — whether he was fired or resigned voluntarily — Miles has left his role at Facebook over the matter.

”The seriousness of these allegations cannot be overstated. The individual is no longer employed with the company. We are actively investigating this situation and cannot provide further comment at this time,” said a statement from Meta spokesperson Drew Pusateri. I’ll point out that Pusateri also tried to talk me out of the newsworthiness of this story over the phone before sending over the statement, noting that other outlets were not covering it (thanks for the advice).
— Yahoo News, 2/18/22

So, Meta believes this is not newsworthy because “other outlets were not covering it”. We see how that worked with the Hunter Biden laptop and the fact Big Tech companies believe they can dictate what is and isn’t news is the big problem.

Especially when it involves one of their freaks.

When it was posted on Facebook, the following prompts came up….

We’re to unconditionally accept and believe “fact checkers” with no names or credentials provided because they say so.

Independent fact-checkers on Facebook are signatories to the non-partisan International Fact-Checking Network Code of Principles. Independent fact-checkers investigate stories in a journalistic process meant to result in establishing the truth or falsity of the story.
— Facebook

That “International Fact-Checking Network” is Poynter.org and we’ve discussed them before.

So, how does Facebook counter Dr. McCullough’s claims?

With selective, partial information.

Apparently, the “fact checkers” at Facebook have consciously decided to blow off opposing opinions from actual doctors and scientists.

NIH: Lasting immunity found after recovery from COVID-19
Israeli Researchers: Study: Natural immunity ‘stronger, longer’ than vaccine immunity
Natural Immunity After COVID-19 Found Durable and Robust
Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections
U.S. official finally acknowledges Covid-19 natural immunity: ‘As good as vaccine’
Emory University: COVID-19 survivors may possess wide-ranging resistance to the disease
MedPage Today: Quit Ignoring Natural COVID Immunity
Washington Post: Natural immunity to covid is powerful. Policymakers seem afraid to say so.
Fauci lacks ‘firm answer’ on COVID-19 natural immunity question
‘Ignore The CDC’: Johns Hopkins Professor Says Half Of Americans Have ‘Natural Immunity’

To be fair, there are many doctors and scientists who claim that the vaccines are superior to natural immunity. But for Facebook’s anonymous “fact checkers” whose credentials are withheld and then selectively label alternative medical and/or scientific opposing opinions signed by doctors and scientists as “false” is irresponsible.

That is, if forcing people to do something they don’t want is really the purpose.

In simpler words, Joe Biden won the election, there was no cheating, the “media” said so; shut the fuck up… or else.

Dominion Voting Systems is even going as far as issuing million dollar lawsuits against anyone who dare imply their machines did anything to alter the solemn votes of Americans in favor of one candidate over another.

Lawyers for Dominion Voting Systems have asked Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Parler to preserve posts about the company, even if the material was already removed for spreading misinformation.

The posts need to be kept “because they are relevant to Dominion’s defamation claims relating to false accusations that Dominion rigged the 2020 election,” according to the demand letters from Dominion’s law firm Clare Locke. Dominion sued Rudolph W. Giuliani and Sidney Powell for more than $1.3 billion each in January, alleging that the lawyers defamed Dominion by saying the machines were used to steal the election from President Donald Trump.

Dominion warned in its letters to the social media companies that more lawsuits would be coming.

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube all have policies against spreading election-related misinformation. They have been removing — with varying degrees of success — posts falsely suggesting the election had been rigged since the baseless rumors began spreading in November. Parler was effectively knocked offline in January when Amazon, Apple and Google stopped providing it technical services for violating their policies against online posts that incite violence.
— Washington Post, 2/4/21

If ANY mention of voting machine “irregularities” can and will be met with a lawsuit, why are voting machines being blamed for an election loss?

Respondent the Oswego County Board of Elections (“Oswego County”) encountered “voting machine issues in Constantia Districts 1 and 3 and Williamstown,” which required all ballots cast to be “hand counted and added to the machine totals in those election districts.”

In this case, there is reason to believe that voting tabulation machines misread hundreds if not thousands of valid votes as undervotes, (supra at 4), and that these tabulation machine errors disproportionately affected Brindisi, (id.).
— Memorandum in Support of Proposed Order to Show Cause of Respondent Anthony Brindisi, Perkins Coie LLP, 2/1/21

Upstate New York’s Oswego County uses voting machines and software provided by IMAGECAST®.

Who makes IMAGECAST® machines and software?

Uh oh.

And what lawyer, who values his or her license to practice and speak freely, would risk it all to imply a Dominion voting system provided problematic results in an election?

Marc Elias, the election lawyer who represented Democratic challenges to state rules throughout the 2020 election, alleged in a court filing this week that a close congressional race in upstate New York was marred by faulty voting machines.

In the congressional race for New York’s 22nd district, Republican Claudia Tenney currently leads incumbent Democrat Anthony Brindisi by a razor-thin margin of 125 votes. Tenney declared victory on Tuesday, though challenges continue. In a legal filing Monday requesting a manual audit of the election, Elias, whose Perkins Coie law firm is representing Brindisi, argued that there were “substantial errors and irregularities in the conduct of the election.”

Citing alleged discrepancies between votes counted by hand and votes counted by ballot machines, Elias argued that the error rate, extrapolated across the entire district, could mean that thousands of votes were improperly counted by the machines.

Marc Elias has made a nice living casting doubt and trying to overturn the results of elections; ONLY elections where the Democrat lost.

Elias is also representing defeated Democrat Rita Hart in Iowa’s 1st congressional district, who lost by six votes to Republican Rep. Mariannette Miller Meeks (R-IA). He is asking the Democrat-controlled House to overturn the result of the election and seat Hart, despite certification of the vote by state election authorities, bypassing Iowa courts in the process.

In addition, as Breitbart News has noted, “Elias was responsible for hiring opposition research firm Fusion GPS, on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee, [which produced] the fraudulent “Russia dossier” on then-candidate Donald Trump in 2016.”
— Breitbart, 2/3/21

Of course, and as usual, the hypocrisy is in your face.

If you’re a Democrat who lost a race in 2020 due to voting irregularities with a Dominion voting machine, everything necessary can and will be done to overturn the results of that election with no fear of media criticism and legal repercussion on the horizon.

However, if you’re a Republican who makes similar claims and dares mention Dominion, you will be publicly labeled a kook sharing fact-checked and debunked misinformation, be banished from social media and sued into oblivion.

Welcome to the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, circa 2020-21.

But with the ongoing socialist-Democrat, #BigTech-led purge of all things conservative and Republican, these “principled” corporation is taking the cowardly approach and have joined in on the left-wing attacks.

Republicans in Congress faced growing blowback on Monday from businesses that said they would cut off campaign contributions to those who voted last week to challenge President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.

The announcements by Amazon.com, General Electric Co, Dow, AT&T, Comcast Corp, Verizon Communications, American Express Co, Airbnb, Best Buy and Mastercard, among others, threaten to throttle fundraising resources for Republicans who will soon be out of power in the White House and both chambers of Congress. AT&T and Comcast, for example, are among the biggest corporate donors in Washington.
— Daily Mail (UK), 1/11/21

The question to these corporations and their newly-woke values should rightly be, where the hell were they in 2000 and 2004 when Democrats lost the presidential election and shortly thereafter, challenged the outcome using the same process used by President Trump and his allies now decried?

BTW — To acknowledge a consistency to this day, the majority of “irregularities” cited in 2000 and 2004 occurred in Democrat-run black districts. Funny how that keeps happening….

The pile-on is now safe.

Deutsche Bank AG and Signature Bank, two of Donald Trump’s favored lenders, are pulling away from the billionaire president in the wake of last week’s deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The German lender has decided not to conduct any further business with Trump and his company, said two people with knowledge of the matter, asking not to be identified because the deliberations were confidential. Trump owes the Frankfurt-based lender more than $300 million.

Signature Bank, the New York lender that’s long catered to his family, is closing two personal accounts in which Trump held about $5.3 million, a spokesperson for the firm said on Monday. It’s also calling for the president to step aside before his term officially ends on Jan. 20.
— Bloomberg, 1/12/21

Some of these corporations have made it known they’ll revisit this policy in time for the 2022 elections where political winds may change and it may be necessary to curry favor with Republicans. They’ll depend on short memories; something too many in politics have in abundance where campaign dollars are concerned.

The blowback from Trump supporters, and the sane portion of the public, is real and it hurts.

Facebook sees $34 billion erased from market cap as Trump-ban fallout continues to spook tech investors
Twitter loses $5 billion in market value after Trump is permanently barred from the platform

It never takes long for the arrogants to display their chutzpah and racist condescension.

The current damage done to the conservative, Trump-supporting electorate will be something we’ll be told to get over and these cowardly, politically-motivated corporations will soon find out how their #woke decision plays out in the real world.

Before they lost the 2016 election, the Hillary Clinton campaign tried to set up Donald Trump with fake accusations and use those accusations to portray him as a traitor. They wasted near $32 million taxpayer dollars paying Democrat lawyers in a failed investigation. They lied to courts so they could spy on American citizens. Entertainers publicly fantasized about killing the president. They used third-party hearsay to launch an unsuccessful impeachment proceeding. They harassed and intimidated Administration officials at restaurants and at their homes. They doxxed and assaulted the president’s supporters. They assaulted and assassinated police officers. They used social and the news media to cover-for and censor opposition. They cheated to win the 2020 election. During that time, they vandalized, burned, looted and seized control over parts of major American cities. In 2020, they voted for a senile, old man who, at times, didn’t know where he was or which office he was running for and now wants us to “unite” behind him.

One can clearly see that Democrats are certifiably insane.

Now that Joe Biden believes he’s going to be the next President of the United States, even though his supporters threaten mass violence if he lost on Election Night, he conveniently wants Republicans and conservatives to forget an elongated, abusive past.

“Unite” with Democrats means give them all they want, or else.

That’ll be a tough one, Joe.

But it also appears Facebook, in particular, has been up to much more nefarious activities unbeknownst to their customers. It took having CEO Mark Zuckerberg under oath, in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, for some illuminating truth to come out.

Truth he knows very little about (again)….

Search “Facebook Centra”. Aside from medical institutions, you can’t find anything on it. Facebook’s consumer “Tasks” comes off as benign, but a lot of things over the course of history has appeared to be all nice before all hell broke loose.

Incredible, but not unexpected.

During the A&E program, Secret Life of a Gang Girl: The Untold Story, much is made of the use of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to distribute the promotion and threats of gang interactions, not to mention the so-called music industry carrot-dangle for the creation of product that glamorizes, thus incentivizes the potential for murder.

BTW — At no point during the near 42-minute program is a “father” or “mother” mentioned with regards to the upbringing of any of the black youth featured. It’s not surprising those insignificant details were avoided….

So while conservatives and their social media content promoting an ideology and president they prefer is removed from public view because it’s deemed inappropriate, it’s impossible to explain why social media platform monitors allow Facebook posts, Tweets and YouTube videos that legitimize the killing of young black people. If we’re being forced to address racism, let’s also ask the social media “titans” why blacks using their platforms as essentially an accessory to murder is not policed anywhere near as aggressively as they do conservative speech and videos.

Or for progressives, is the ongoing extermination of black people acceptable as long as they keep it in their neighborhoods?