The Kavanaugh hearing was a clarifying moment for countless conservatives because it revealed the depths to which the other side will sink in order to get power.
I don’t think most conservatives need a reminder, but in case you‘ve forgotten...
🧵Thread🧵
We saw how eager the media, Dems, and others were to push baseless claims to destroy someone without evidence.
They’ll take unsubstantiated claims and level accusations against you as if they were already true. Elected officials, members of the media, thought leaders, and beyond would attack you from all sides.
Even the future Democratic Vice Presidential nominee would be involved. @KamalaHarris
These attacks and general skepticism will only apply to you, of course. Your accuser will get only fawning coverage. Here’s @nytimes and one of their opinion columnists, @michelleinbklyn.
They’ll amplify conspiracy theories and baseless accusations against you without making any pretense of vetting them first.
Rather than have a shred of incredulity when the most ridiculous of allegations, pushed by an outright fraud, come to light, they buy the claims hook, line, and sinker.
Hard to overstate how pervasive this phenomena was.
Here’s @CNBC’s White House reporter @christinawilkie running with the entire allegation.
I needed an entire tweet to highlight @SethAbramson, who said of @MichaelAvenatti and his invented claims “the man plans to run for president; my gut tells me he doesn’t go public with these allegations unless he’s got some pretty compelling witnesses and evidence”
Even their fact checkers will push unverified allegations that would eventually be referred for prosecution. Here’s @CNN’s @ddale8.
The truth of it doesn’t matter at all. If it bleeds, it ledes.
They’ll publicly crucify you for the crimes of others, or the crimes of a system. Here’s @voxdotcom
And if you dare protest - if you push back with even a hint of frustration as you see your good name dragged through the mud - you’ll have that used as a mark against you, too. Here we have @JohnBrennan, @MSNBC, @MalcolmNance and @lithub.
Really hard to overstate how frequent this line of criticism was.
I wonder if @NAACP, @NickKristof, @JoyAnnReid or @peterdaou could envision why someone would be angry for having their character picked apart on baseless claims?
And then they’ll demand you complete yet another background check - after you’ve passed SIX of them - if you want any hope of convincing them.
Are these the people and institutions you think you can trust and count on? Are these the parties you think you can negotiate with on a new SCOTUS Justice? Are these your good faith partners?
Because I, for one, have had it. I’m not interested in another round of this bad faith insanity.
I know there’s a lot going on but we just had a media conspiracy implode that I think captures something important about the corporate press.
Did you hear about how Trump was allegedly going after John Bolton as retribution for his criticism?
Well…follow along ⤵️
We saw a week straight of media suggestions that Trump was abusing the powers of the state to deal out “retribution” to John Bolton following the news that the FBI (“Trump’s DOJ!” headlines rang out) raided his house.
We were in “unsettling” times, to hear @nytimes tell it.
The *Editorial Board* at @nytimes put out an even more dramatic statement, asking who Trump’s next payback victim after Bolton would be.
A single poll has bootstrapped a media narrative that DC residents are outraged by Trump’s takeover.
I poked around the cross tabs of the poll — of 600 or so of DC’s more comfortable residents — and I think it’s pretty suspect.
How come? Follow along: ⤵️
Let’s start with the poll. The @washingtonpost talked to 604 people, of whom 90% — 90%! — self-described as living in “very good” or “good” neighborhoods.
So, fine. 80% of people who like where they live in DC are upset.
But even beyond that, it’s worth asking whether this poll really captures DC’s opinion.
In the poll, only 31% describe crime as a “serious” or “very serious” problem in DC.
When @washingtonpost asked this same question in May, *50%* said it was a serious problem.
I feel like I’m losing my mind about the Biden autopen pardons.
The former president said he made every decision. His staff says that he didn’t actually make the final call on thousands of them.
We’re supposed to treat this as normal?
I try to unpack. ⤵️
This got new life from a Biden interview w/ @nytimes.
NYT leads by repeating Biden’s claim that he made the calls…burying the admissions that 1) he really didn’t & 2) where he allegedly did, the aids sending details to the autopen weren’t in the room when the call was made…
…instead, they relied on what senior staff had allegedly heard, which was then passed along.
The piece ends with the revelation that Biden’s then-chief of staff gave the final sign off.
Given what the former admin has lied about, why should we trust this reporting of events?
The coverage of the anti-ICE riots in LA is perhaps the clearest example of advocacy “journalism” in Trump’s second term.
Reading the reporting, you would never know the most significant fact: the American people support Trump’s deportations.
Follow along ⤵️
First, the facts about the riots.
You’ve seen the burning cars, looting & clashes between police & protestors.
Demonstrators blocked the freeway, attacked ICE agents, all in an effort to prevent the deportations of illegal aliens. Trump deployed troops to allow ICE to operate.
As @MarkHalperin and @seanspicer discussed, the situation in LA is so tranquil that the mayor has instituted a curfew for the city.
The new book “Original Sin” from Jake Tapper & Alex Thompson recounts the effort to cover up Biden’s cognitive decline ahead of the election. The authors point to many guilty parties.
The one glaring omission? Their colleagues in the corporate press. Follow along ⤵️
There are numerous dramatic reveals. The Biden team considered condoning him to a wheelchair? Maybe in his fog he forgot about the border?
But as I worked on a review for @commonplc, the one thought that I kept coming back to was that you can’t tell this story without the press.
Perhaps no one was more vital to the continued fiction that Biden had it together than the media.
Tapper and Thompson even highlight some of the telling moments.
Biden’s cancer diagnosis is a tragedy I know first-hand.
But our sympathy can’t silence questions about Biden’s cognitive decline, clarified just days ago by the Hur tape.
The media tried to bury the story then. They’re trying again now.
I’ve got the receipts. ⤵️
When the report first came out in 2024, outlets rushed to demean Hur, accusing him of serving as a Republican hatchet man.
Just look at this take from @USATODAY, who assembled sympathetic voices to make the case that Hur “crossed the line.” They found an expert to call it a “disgrace” and then featured the obviously unbiased Eric Holder to lead a section titled “Way too many gratuitous remarks.”
The audio makes clear that Hur, if anything, played down how alarming the claims were.
(If you haven’t listened to the Hur audio yet, you should.)