Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Nothing To See Here: Hacktivist Media Two-Steps From No Evidence of Biden Wrongdoing To No ‘Direct’ Evidence

Nothing To See Here: Hacktivist Media Two-Steps From No Evidence of Biden Wrongdoing To No ‘Direct’ Evidence

And other things the media under-reported last week.
Posted by Tuesday, September 19, 2023 at 09:00am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-T0fyzMFAM
More Sharing Options

The big gaslight last week by the Democrat hacktivist media was that there is no evidence to support the House’s impeachment inquiry into Joe “I am the Democrat Party” and the Big Guy Biden.

They are either pretending not to understand the difference between an impeachment investigation and the filing of articles of impeachment, or they do actually know the difference and are counting on their ill-informed readers not understanding said difference.

Either way, they are ludicrous in claiming there is no proof of wrongdoing by the corrupt Biden organized crime family and therefore no need for ::: checks notes ::: an inquiry into potential wrongdoing that rises to the level of impeachment-level offenses. The evidence for an inquiry is, of course, decidedly there.

Even they have changed their tune, from “no evidence” to “no significant evidence” and “no hard evidence.”

And let’s not forget the evergreen “no direct evidence.”

They are rightly being dragged over the coals for their ridiculous partisan journalisming.

And then there’s this:

Meanwhile, there’s some busy buzzing on the hactivist scene to craft a coverup for Biden’s Ukraine corruption.

Just the News: “Fact-checkers revise narrative on Biden’s role in firing Ukraine prosecutor as new evidence emerges”

Nothing To See Here

This is my shocked face: There was a whole lot of fraud going on during the covid plandemic, under both Trump and Biden.

Hot Air: “How bad was the pandemic unemployment fraud?”

Washington Free Beacon: “Government Gave Over $100 Billion of Taxpayer Money to Welfare Fraudsters During Pandemic, Watchdog Finds”

Even the twisted lefties over at Slate are wondering if just maybe those kiddie porn books parents are demanding be removed from public school libraries might be the teensiest bit unsuitable for children.

Hot Air: “Slate: Maybe some of these books really aren’t suitable for younger kids”

This is just weird.

Daily Fetched: “Another Explosion at Major Food Processing Plant Adds to Long List of Mysterious Blazes”

House Republicans are pushing back against Newsom and Biden’s Green New Deal to destroy civilization.

Fox News: “Republicans to force floor vote reversing California’s electric vehicle mandate”

If you’ve been wondering how the establishment GOP works (?) and why they keep pushing omnibus bills packed with pork, read this thread.

In case you missed it, some reprobate Democrat who is running for state office in Virginia was found to be peddling her live sex videos on some porn site (including actually offering to pee for her paying customers!). It turns out that the AP had the story first, but didn’t run with it.

It seems she may also have run afoul of Virginia’s prostitution laws.

Daily Wire: “Virginia Democrat Who Raised Money By Selling Sex Acts Could Be Charged With Prostitution, Lawyers Say”

Democrat propagandists aren’t covering this because they agree with Trump.

So sad. No, Trump, Democrats will NEVER like you. Get a clue. Please.

More at Hot Air: “Trump says heartbeat bills are ‘terrible’.”

And then there was this complete cringe-fest:

Definitely Nothing To See Here

.
The Obama-Biden WH is busily trying to make it harder to fire the deep state . . . just in case.

Daily Caller: “Biden Is Trying To Make It Harder To Fire Unelected Bureaucrats In Case A Republican Wins In 2024”

Biden’s corruption seems to have rubbed off on his chief of staff.

Yeah, Biden’s just fine.

Biden’s keeping kids (and whole families) in cages, but you won’t hear about it from Democrats or their U.S. intel-run media cheerleaders:

Florida governor Ron DeSantis dropped a truth bomb:

Make that two truth bombs:

This is just surreal.

Red State has more: “What Peter Strzok and Nicolle Wallace Say About FBI Unit to Protect Agents From Americans Is Astonishing”

Okay, this just amused me, so I thought I’d share.

This is good.

More Sharing Options
DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:
, , , , , ,

Comments

UnCivilServant | September 19, 2023 at 9:27 am

They already had their goalposts on wheels just in case.

    henrybowman in reply to UnCivilServant. | September 19, 2023 at 4:17 pm

    “they have changed their tune, from “no evidence” to “no significant evidence” and “no hard evidence.”
    This is the standard playbook.
    The next step is:
    “We already reported that happened. And it was a good thing, and here’s why.”

The_Mew_Cat | September 19, 2023 at 9:39 am

Trump isn’t “compromising” with democrats on Abortion. He is mollifying swing voters in the swing states, because those voters care about that issue enough to determine their votes. If those voters are afraid that the GOP nominee will implement any kind of federal abortion ban, they will reflexively vote Dem.

    gonzotx in reply to The_Mew_Cat. | September 19, 2023 at 10:11 am

    It is unfortunate that President aTrump has to play politics while others are presented as God

    I believe abortion is murder

    Let’s present all the double speak and lies of DeSantis

    Fair is fair, till it’s not

      paracelsus in reply to gonzotx. | September 19, 2023 at 11:34 am

      “I believe abortion is murder”
      not to get into a whole religious discussion – and not to veer too far off topic, but…
      If the killing of an innocent individual unable to protect him/herself isn’t the exact definition of murder, I, for one, don’t know how to define it.
      Yes! there are exceptions
      that may be made,
      but let’s at least,
      call a spade a spade.
      but let’s at least call a spade a spade.

    thalesofmiletus in reply to The_Mew_Cat. | September 19, 2023 at 10:22 am

    Right, wrong or indifferent, that is Trumps’ style — to negotiate. It’s how he governed before, it’s how he’ll continue if elected.

    There shouldn’t be any Federal ban on abortion. It’s just the never-ending Boomer political football that distracts us from the reality that our nation is on life-support.

      CommoChief in reply to thalesofmiletus. | September 19, 2023 at 11:45 am

      On abortion, as with a great many other cultural issues, the Federal govt should not be involved beyond observing and in rare cases the DoJ intervening when constitutional limitations are violated by State or Municipal govts. Let Federalism do its job and the voters of each State can be comfortable knowing that the laws of their State reflect their collective cultural choices v DC making and imposing a one size fits all BS policy/statute.

        DaveGinOly in reply to CommoChief. | September 19, 2023 at 3:33 pm

        Wasn’t this the whole point of overturning Roe? It seems politicians on both sides of the aisle didn’t get the memo.

          CommoChief in reply to DaveGinOly. | September 19, 2023 at 7:12 pm

          It doesn’t seem as if they did outside a very few. Most still want the issue to use to exploit, grandstand about and fundraise off.

          Milhouse in reply to DaveGinOly. | September 19, 2023 at 11:31 pm

          No, it wasn’t the whole point of overturning Roe. There is not one word in Dobbs that says it belongs to the states. It says it belongs to the political branches — that means state and federal. Whether an abortion ban can fall under one of Congress’s enumerated powers is a whole nother debate, but Dobbs didn’t address it.

Q | September 19, 2023 at 9:44 am

Nice job, Ms. Slippers.

mailman | September 19, 2023 at 10:20 am

And here I thought this thread was about Biden corruption, instead its more about Fuzzy’s hatred of Trump.

Really tells you a lot about where people are at where they hate Trump more than Biden irrespective of the fact that there is absolutely nothing about this current administration that has benefitted normal every day Americans compared to the previous administration.

If you want to get your hate on towards Trump then at least do that in a separate threat so the two issues dont get swamped by irrelevancy.

    wendybar in reply to mailman. | September 19, 2023 at 4:49 pm

    HEAR!! HEAR!! Exactly what I was thinking.

    Fuzzy Slippers in reply to mailman. | September 21, 2023 at 8:06 pm

    Sorry, mailman! I didn’t mean to confuse you, but last month I started doing this weekly “Nothing To See Here” post that focuses on underreported stories, stories the Democrat hacktivists ignore or downplay or actively kill in their ongoing propagandist efforts on the part of the rabidly anti- and un-American Democrat party. We didn’t do an announcement about it (mostly because I wasn’t comfortable doing that and figured that if people hated it, I would just stop doing them), so I get that this is confusing.

    Anyway, when you see the “Nothing To See Here” thing in a title, just know it’s this and will have a lot of different issues pointed out and links provided. We do the title on the main issue, but the rest will be whatever catches my interest that week or that I think is important enough to include as something that is going on but that is not getting any (or at least any significant) commie media coverage: thus the static subhead, “And other things the media under-reported last week.”

    So in this particular post, for example, I focused on the media trying to bail Biden out of his corruption (won’t work), but I also included other things that happened that I found significant and worth pointing out. A couple (I think literally two) had to do with Trump, but there’s a lot here (scrolling through, there are 18 different points/topics pointed to), all important and worth noting.

    These “Nothing To See Here” posts will continue, mailman, since they seem to be rather popular (if not with you), so just know what they are going forward. I’m not out to trick you or anything, it’s just a sort of roundup style post to keep our readers informed of stuff they may have missed and/or that they think friends and family may have missed and can send along.

    I hope this helps!

Wisewerds | September 19, 2023 at 10:32 am

“Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.” ~ Henry David Thoreau

2smartforlibs | September 19, 2023 at 10:55 am

Didn’t need direct evidence to impeach Trump.

    georgfelis in reply to 2smartforlibs. | September 19, 2023 at 1:26 pm

    Or indirect evidence. Or any evidence at all, really. Either time.

    DaveGinOly in reply to 2smartforlibs. | September 19, 2023 at 3:45 pm

    All they had was a suddenly strong conviction that Trump had done something for which he could be impeached, and his administration was winding down. So they had to do something pronto!

    SDN in reply to 2smartforlibs. | September 20, 2023 at 7:17 am

    That would be because impeachment is a political process and NOT a legal one.

    As I said at the time, they could have impeached Trump over his combover.

    Impeachment relies on 2/3 of the Senate being confronted with something that violates a common moral standard that goes beyond politics.

    Take away that standard, and no one is going to reach 2/3.

      murkyv in reply to SDN. | September 20, 2023 at 4:59 pm

      I used to joke that a president could be impeached for his haircut if enough in congress agreed to do so

      And that was 17 years before Trump came down the escalator

markhum | September 19, 2023 at 11:05 am

A very high proportion of cases, both civil and criminal, rely on circumstantial evidence. How often do you see a defendant, in either a civil or criminal case, jump up and say, “I’m sorry, you got me.” If it does occur, most frequently it’s because the provable circumstantial evidence is so compelling that a deal is desired.

    not_a_lawyer in reply to markhum. | September 21, 2023 at 7:23 am

    The rise of forensic evidence is relatively recent. Basically, all criminal trials over the last millennium prior to the CSI innovations were based on circumstantial and eyewitness evidence and everyone was fine with that.

bev | September 19, 2023 at 12:32 pm

As Candidate Trump prior to the 2016 election, Trump professed to be pro-Life. I believe he had described a life-changing epiphany when he saw a grandchild’s Ultrasound. I gave him the benefit of the doubt; many ardent abortion advocates, including some working in abortion clinics, have described similar epiphanies. Although I knew it could just as easily be political expediency.

Several months ago, when he criticized the Florida “heartbeat law”, saying that “even Pro-lifers thought it was too strict”, he made it clear that he was himself never truly life-begins-at-conception pro-life. And besides, why would he refer to pro-lifers in the third person if he considered himself pro-life? It was an idiotic thing to say anyway, since we bona fide pro-lifers think all abortion is wrong, except when the mother’s life is in actual physical (not emotional) jeopardy.

Obviously abortion has become a political football in the wake of Dobbs. If he’s willing to negotiate to try to eliminate late term abortions, so be it. However he needs to tread carefully and perhaps be more ambiguous about his future intentions, IMHO, or else risk losing the pro-life voters in the primaries.

chrisboltssr | September 19, 2023 at 12:49 pm

I like how you harumph that Trump wants Democrats to like him, but for years you sorry Republicans would always say we need support candidates who are capable of appealing to independents and moderate Democrats, and not support candidates who do take hardened stances on issues such as abortion.

Which is it? Should a candidate engage in nonsense to be appealing to nonRepublicans and conservatives, or should he always stay principled and not waiver? After all, even Ron DeSantis established that baby’s life has no value before the fifth week. Why does that make you happy, but upsets you when Trump says he’ll negotiate it with Democrats? The issue here should be to try to nail Democrats down on when chuld sacrifice is unacceptable to them, but you’d rather be pissed Trump gave an answer you didn’t like.

Lastly, what is your take on abortion? Are you against it in all instances? Or do you want the same exceptions the Leftists always give when they want to make such an immoral and evil act palatable?

    CommoChief in reply to chrisboltssr. | September 19, 2023 at 7:23 pm

    IMO the correct answer to the question of Abortion for Presidential candidates is something like ‘this issue has finally been placed back in our State Houses where the State Legislatures and Governors can craft the statute that best reflects the culture and traditions of their State without interference from DC politicians’.

    IOW emphasize the benefit of Federalism which allows Massachusetts to be Massachusetts and Mississippi to be Mississippi without having to compromise their local values and personal beliefs to accommodate those who live out of the State. Use that introduction of Federalism to segue into other areas and issues that would also be better left to the States with a corresponding reduction in the power and size of the Federal govt.

    mailman in reply to chrisboltssr. | September 20, 2023 at 3:54 am

    It’s odd isn’t it. Fuzzy and the other pretend conservatives have been lecturing us about the need to have a candidate that can appeal to Democrats (irrespective of the fact these people are talking about other people who if they won’t vote for Trump they sure as hell won’t vote for DeathSantis or that Vikram fella or anyone else with an R next to their name) suddenly get an example of trying to appeal to Democrats and suddenly they are all “why’s he going soft in us” 🙄 These people need to make their mind up one what exactly it is they want other than for Democrats to tell them who they can vote for.

    SDN in reply to chrisboltssr. | September 20, 2023 at 7:20 am

    “Lastly, what is your take on abortion? Are you against it in all instances? ”

    Simpler question: “Do you believe that it’s a baby at conception? If so, can you explain why you aren’t using lethal force to prevent it’s murder?”

Dliefsarb Yrral | September 19, 2023 at 2:56 pm

I wonder where the end state is on this “poor evidence” schtick.

Yes, in the video that object being passed by a foreign agent to Xiden has the color of a cash bundle, but it was a wad of cash-colored dirty socks. We have his word as a Biden! The video is not evidence to the contrary!

LeftWingLock | September 19, 2023 at 6:12 pm

If only we had videotape of Biden accepting a briefcase of 100 dollar bills. And the videotape was authenticated by bishops from all the major religions. That should do the trick.

    Milhouse in reply to LeftWingLock. | September 19, 2023 at 11:55 pm

    But we won’t, because that’s what Hunter was for. That’s what he did to earn his 50% commission (which he complained to his daughter was too little).

henrybowman | September 19, 2023 at 7:17 pm

“Biden told a group of rabbis on Thursday that he was “raised in synagogues in my state [Delaware]” — after previously claiming to have been raised by Delaware’s then-tiny Puerto Rican community”

Biden was raised by members of the secretive Puerto Rican Jewish Illuminati — the cabal that has had a lock on the central quesito banks worldwide for the past 1,400 years. This explains a lot!

    CommoChief in reply to henrybowman. | September 19, 2023 at 7:28 pm

    Maybe that’s why he’s so odd. All this bouncing around from community to community and different religious and cultural upbringing? Probably doesn’t help that he held so many different jobs (claims anyway) or that he rode eleventy billion miles on Amtrak and was handing out Silver Stars in Afghanistan during a Taliban barrage after his helicopter was shot down or some such crazy ass lies.

    Milhouse in reply to henrybowman. | September 19, 2023 at 11:57 pm

    I don’t see the contradiction. He was raised in synagogues, by their Puerto Rican cleaners.

Steven Brizel | September 20, 2023 at 1:44 pm

You would be hard pressed to name any member of the legacy media who an define direct versus indirect evidence

Capitalist-Dad | September 20, 2023 at 5:16 pm

Obviously all these hack journalists love the feel of crawling on their bellies before their Democrat Party masters. They have no shame.

not_a_lawyer | September 21, 2023 at 8:05 am

I’m going to use some graphic language here, so please feel free to censor my post.

To those who continue to argue that there is ‘no evidence’ regarding Biden’s corruption, I would like to stick my C@#$ up their A$$ and when they complain, I would say, “There is NO EVIDENCE THAT MY C@#$ IS UP YOUR A$$! How dare you suggest such a thing? There is no evidence! Not a shred!”

That was fun.

Erronius

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

CONTRIBUTORS

  • William A. Jacobson

    Founder

  • Kemberlee Kaye

    Sr. Contrib Editor

  • Mary Chastain

    Contrib Editor

  • Fuzzy Slippers

    Weekend Editor

  • Mike LaChance

    Higher Ed

  • Leslie Eastman

    Author

  • Vijeta Uniyal

    Author

  • Stacey Matthews

    Author

  • Jane Coleman

    Author

  • James Nault

    Author

  • Mandy Nagy

    Editor Emerita

  • Learn more about the Contributors
Log in or register to comment.Logout
Accessibility by WAH