Connect with us

Politics

Chris Wallace Interrupted Trump 5 Times More Than He Interrupted Biden

Debate moderator displays flagrant bias throughout.

Published

on

Pool/Getty Images

According to a count of how many times Chris Wallace interjected when Trump was speaking compared to Biden, the debate moderator interrupted Trump 5 times more.

Despite the media attempting to create the narrative that Trump was constantly trying to interrupt Biden, the President could be forgiven for doing so given how he was treated by Wallace.

The Fox News host tried to cut off Trump 76 times compared to just 15 times for Biden.

This became so evident that at one point Trump told Wallace, “ “I guess I’m debating you, not him, but that’s OK, I’m not surprised.”

Meanwhile, Wallace repeatedly defended Biden when Trump interrupted the former VP, remarking, “Mr. President let him finish,” and “Please let him speak.”

The debate moderator was so Biden-friendly, he even began laughing along with him at one point.

When Biden stated, “I can’t keep track of all his ranting,” Wallace responded, “I’m having trouble myself.”

Wallace’s behavior is no surprise given his history of anti-Trump bashing, but last night illustrates once again how the debates are always rigged in Democrats’ favor.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

ALERT!

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

———————————————————————————————————————

Politics

Alex Jones Calls on Trump Supporters to Avoid Dangerous Inauguration Protests

De-escalation needed to prevent further damaging unrest.

Published

on

In this edition of Newsmakers, Alex Jones calls for de-escalation and for Trump supporters to avoid attending potentially dangerous protests before and during the inauguration.

He also slams QAnon as a delusional and discrediting movement that has led many well-meaning people astray.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

ALERT!

null

New limited edition merch now available! Click here.

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Politics

CNN’s Acosta Prompts Fake News Wave After Reporting Abe Lincoln Bust Was “Leaving” the White House

Olbermann and others falsely claim it was stolen.

Published

on

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images/Composite

CNN’s Jim Acosta set off a fake news wave when he reported that a bust of Abe Lincoln was “leaving” the White House, leading many, including Keith Olbermann, to claim it was being stolen.

The item was one of a number of things being removed by members of the Trump administration before Joe Biden’s inauguration next week.

“More stuff (appears to be Abe Lincoln bust) leaving the West Wing this afternoon,” tweeted Acosta alongside an image of a man carrying the bust.

This prompted blue checkmarks on Twitter to have meltdowns, claiming a Trump administration member was stealing the item.

“Sure! Add a little theft to treason,” said Keith Olbermann.

“Now they’re looters on top of everything else?” remarked Markos Moulitsas.

John Aravosis jumped on the tweet to assert that the Trump family was “looting the White House.”

However, as the Independent reports, the bust was not being removed as a personal item.

“The statue will be returned to a museum, as incoming officials generally choose their own items from among national artefacts to decorate the White House during their term,” states the report.

Maybe Acosta should have clarified that, although it doesn’t take much to set off Keith Olbermann, who is prone to routine outbursts, including when he angrily asserted that all Trump supporters should be “prosecuted, convicted, and removed from society.”

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

ALERT!

null

New limited edition merch now available! Click here.

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Politics

Attorney: Trump Impeachment Sets Precedent Presidents Are Responsible For Actions of Their Supporters

Says real impact would be to gut free speech.

Published

on

Getty Images

Attorney Jonathan Turley has warned that the impending impeachment of Donald Trump over the storming of Capitol Hill sets the precedent that presidents can be impeached for the actions of their supporters.

Top Democrats say they “have the votes” to introduce articles of impeachment against Trump for “inciting an insurrectionist mob” during last week’s incident.

The text of the resolution accuses Trump of “willfully inciting violence against the Government of the United States.”

However, according to attorney Jonathan Turley, Trump’s speech to his supporters before the occupation of the Capitol “does not meet the definition of incitement under the U.S. criminal code” and “would be considered protected speech by the Supreme Court.”

Turley says that the real danger would be to normalize “snap impeachments,” gut free speech and “create precedent for the impeachment of any president who can be blamed for the violent acts of others after the use of reckless or inflammatory language.”

“There was no call for lawless action by Trump. Instead, there was a call for a protest at the Capitol,” he writes.

“Moreover, violence was not imminent; the vast majority of the tens of thousands of protesters present were not violent before the march, and most did not riot inside the Capitol. Like many violent protests we have witnessed over the last four years, including Trump’s 2017 inauguration, the criminal conduct was carried out by a smaller group of instigators. Capitol police knew of the planned march but declined an offer of National Guard personnel because they did not view violence as likely.”

Despite the hysteria that has been generated by the media surrounding the Capitol Hill storming, most analysts say a second attempt at impeaching Trump would ultimately fail, primarily because many lawmakers fear it would just stir up more anger and distract from Joe Biden’s first 100 days as president.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

ALERT!

null

New limited edition merch now available! Click here.

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.

Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Trending