Censorship at Fox News

 

Some of the most valuable and reliable sources of news are now found at Substack – where they can’t be censored.  Emerald Robinson/The Right Way is a reporter who digs, and she’s been going after Faux Fox News for some time.  Previously she posted on “What Happened to Hannity?”  Today, she’s unpacking Tucker Carlson’s injunction to censor any mention of Dinesh D’Souza’s 2000 Mules.  That included having True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht on his show – as long as she didn’t mention the name of the documentary.  Here’s some of her commentary at Substack:

This sort of thing would be unthinkable just a few years ago. D’Souza’s tweet virtually guarantees that he will never appear on any Fox News program again. He will be black-listed — a common practice at Fox (just ask Rudy Giuliani and Marjorie Taylor Greene and Peter Navarro). Dinesh knew all of this and did it anyway — and that should tell you something. (He even tagged a Fox producer on Tucker’s team to name and shame him.) Fox has lost its monopoly power on the Right, and it’s no longer immune from criticism by the conservative community.

. . .

The real reason that “2000 Mules” is being ignored by the conservative corporate media and the liberal corporate media is because it’s true. The stolen 2020 election was the largest political interference operation ever conducted in America. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s charity spent more than $400 million to create a private election system in swing states — and he was hardly alone. It took massive coordination from both political parties and the corporate media and federal law enforcement and left-wing NGO’s to thwart the will of the American people in 2020.

The problem for both political parties and the corporate media and federal law enforcement and left-wing NGO’s is that they pulled it off but they got caught doing it. The fraud was much too pervasive and public to be kept secret. That’s why “2000 Mules” is creating such an awkward moment at Fox News. Our corrupt institutions have no idea what to do next. They can't admit to the fraud — but they also can't dismiss the evidence. (They tried for the last 18 months and it didn’t work.) They have to pretend now that nothing is happening and they have to keep pretending until 2024.

. . . 

Read more at her Substack page here. Includes link to video.

# # #

2000 Mules: “pulling the ripcord”

 

Andrea Widburg at American Thinker has the follow-up to Dinesh D’Souza’s documentary 2000 Mules:

In his smash-hit move, 2000 Mules, Dinesh D'Souza carefully, and entertainingly, demonstrated how True the Vote, a voter integrity organization, was able to prove incontrovertibly that left-wing non-profits used mules to stuff ballots, bringing in, at a minimum, hundreds of thousands of Biden votes in swing states.  The movie, however, describes the data without releasing them and does not identify the non-profits.  Now, though, True the Vote is planning to publish everything.  That's an information bomb that should blow apart any claims that Biden's victory wasn't the result of massive fraud.

The genius of True the Vote was that it figured out how to use commercially available cell phone location data, along with videos of drop boxes, to prove that, in the five critical swing states that gave the election to Joe Biden, leftist non-profits used mules to deliver dozens of ballots to drop boxes.  The numbers are staggering: at a minimum, 400,000 illegal ballots in the states that turned the election in Biden's favor.

In the review I wrote about the movie, I explained in somewhat more detail how the program worked, but I urge you to see the film for yourself.  The only thing I found a bit disappointing was the fact that the movie did not name the non-profits involved.

Well, that disappointment is over. True the Vote has announced that, in a few weeks, it will make available to the public every single bit of information it has regarding the drop-box fraud.  Or, as Catherine Engelbrecht, who founded True the Vote, calls it, pulling the ripcord . . .

Read the rest of Ms. Widburg’s column here.  The evidence is in, and the “fact-checkers” she quotes are just blowing smoke.  My usual question remains: will anyone be indicted?

# # #

Dinesh D’Souza’s “2000 Mules” is now accessible online

 

Dinesh D’Souza’s “2000 Mules” is now available [accessible online, just not for free].  This film has been getting rave reviews (see J D Rucker's here), and The Right Scoop has details and links to access the documentary:

“They thought we’d never find out. They were wrong.” That’s what filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza says about his new film “2000 Mules” about the 2020 election.

The website at Rumble’s Locals describes the documentary this way: It “exposes widespread, coordinated voter fraud in the 2020 election, sufficient to change the overall outcome.”

“Drawing on research provided by the election integrity group True the Vote, ‘2000 Mules’ offers two types of evidence: geotracking and video. The geotracking evidence, based on a database of 10 trillion cell phone pings, exposes an elaborate network of paid professional operatives called mules delivering fraudulent and illegal votes to mail-in dropboxes in the five key states where the election was decided. Video evidence, obtained from official surveillance cameras installed by the states themselves, confirms the geotracking evidence. The movie concludes by exploring numerous ways to prevent the fraud from happening again.”

That Geotracking data is something that True the Vote and Donald Trump have talked about a great deal over the last year.

. . .

You can watch “2000 Mules” by going to 2000mules.locals.com to create an account and getting an annual subscription, which costs $29.99.

This report at The Right Scoop includes a promotional video; click here.

# # #

 

2000 Mules trailer - election fraud

Below is a link to the trailer for Dinesh D’Souza's forthcoming film 2000 Mules documenting the extensive voter fraud in the 2020 election.  

The movie shows how the 2020 election was manipulated through the use of mail in ballots; it will be released in select theaters May 2nd and May 4th, has a virtual premier May 7th and will be released online May 8th. 

This clip is via Rumble -- click here.

# # #

Good headline news

image credit: breakpoint.org

At Conservative Treehouse: True The Vote Wins Historic $2 Million Settlement Against IRS….

At Legal Insurrection: VERDICT: Jury awards Gibson’s Bakery $11 million against Oberlin College

# # #

IRS beats tea party in court: Jim Jordan calls out the decision

From Politico:  IRS Beats Tea Party in Court

By RACHAEL BADE | 10/23/14 3:23 PM EDT Updated: 10/23/14 6:39 PM EDT

The IRS may have inadvertently figured out how to win its legal battles against aggrieved tea party groups: Give them what they wanted in the first place — tax-exempt status.

That was a major reason a Republican-appointed federal judge on Thursday threw out two lawsuits brought by more than 40 conservative groups seeking remedies for being singled out in the tea party targeting scandal, a victory for the IRS.

Judge Reggie Walton of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia dismissed almost all counts brought against the tax-collecting agency in two cases, ruling that both were essentially moot now that the IRS granted the groups their tax-exempt status that had been held up for years.

Walton, a President George W. Bush-appointee, also said individual IRS officials could not be fined in their individual capacity for allowing such treatment because it could hurt future tax enforcement.

The ruling, which the groups could appeal, has serious implications for tea party groups suing the IRS, suggesting they may never receive compensation for the long waits they endured for a ruling on their status.

The inspector general report that ignited the targeting controversy last year found that applications sat in limbo for as long as several years and that the groups were asked inappropriate questions about their donors, political affiliations and random things like social media posts.

Republicans said they were outraged at Walton’s decision.

 “You get targeted and harassed for three years but, oh, because you finally get [tax-exempt status], the three years of harassment doesn’t mean anything?” asked Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who heads a congressional subpanel investigating the controversy. “I find that argument lacking tremendously in light of what these people went through.”

But others said the agency needs to do more — not less — to scrutinize nonprofit groups that don’t follow the rules and over-engage in political activities. To obtain the status in question, political activity must not be the groups’ primary activity — a vague and difficult-to-administer test.

“Judge Walton got it right — there is no ongoing injury to these groups,” said Paul S. Ryan [not the Rep.], senior counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, which backs tighter rules on political nonprofits. “The IRS needs to enforce tax law with respect to nonprofit political groups more aggressively.”

A furor erupted in May 2013, after a Treasury inspector general report blasted the IRS for using discriminatory labels to sort through applicants seeking tax-exempt status using terms like “tea party ” and “patriots."

Soon after a raft of right-leaning organizations that applied for tax-exempt status sued the government. Some had had their applications put on hold for years; others were asked what were later ruled inappropriate questions about donors and political views during the application process.

The groups in their suits alleged that the IRS violated their First and Fifth Amendment rights with the inappropriate “be on the lookout” list that used words like tea party to hold up their applications. They sought monetary relief for their trouble as well as injunctive relief barring the IRS from discriminating against conservative groups ever again.

The agency has since changed its practices, including scrapping the lists.

When the suits at hand were filed, 22 of the groups had already received their tax-exempt status, five had dropped their applications altogether and just over a dozen were still waiting to hear from the IRS.

Since then, the IRS had approved all but two, rendering much of the arguments moot, the judge said — and preventing him from considering the case.

“After the plaintiff initiated this case, its application to the IRS for tax-exempt status was approved by the IRS. The allegedly unconstitutional governmental conduct, which delayed the processing of the plaintiff’s tax exempt application and brought about this litigation, is no longer impacting the plaintiff,” Walton said in his decision to throw out True the Vote’s lawsuit against the IRS.

# # #