Have Journalists become Traitors to the United States?

Guest Post by Martin Armstrong

Those in management at most of the mainstream media should be dragged from their offices and charged with conspiracy to overthrow the United States government and to eradicate the US. Constitution. The Washington Post displays its motto “Democracy Dies in Darkness” and indeed they are at war against the United States just as Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum which is out to remove the United States as a superpower and transfer that status to the United Nations. Their report, along with CNN, New York Times, ABC, NBC, and CBS along with most others, are indeed conspiring to overthrow the United States and if they were put on trial using their own words, any unbiased jury would find them guilty.

The Supreme Court’s key decision in 1964 in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), which has since protected many media outlets from lawsuits. It is time that it should be scrapped along with total immunity for vaccine companies. If you buy a car and you turn on the ignition and it blows up, is not the auto-manufacturer liable? In every other field, companies are responsible for the products they produce. Why is the media and vaccine companies have any immunity whatsoever? In that case, Supreme Court reversed a libel damages judgment against the New York Times. The decision established the important principle that the First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and press may protect libelous words about a public official in order to foster vigorous debate about government and public affairs. To sustain a claim of defamation or libel, the First Amendment requires that the plaintiff show that the defendant knew that a statement was false or was reckless in deciding to publish the information without investigating whether it was accurate.
Facts

I believe that the deliberate bias in the media is historically the first step taken by any potential authoritarian or dictatorial regime is to gain control of communications, especially the delivery of news. The one-party control of the press and media in the United States and worldwide is a serious threat to a viable democracy and human rights. This is giving support for the unelected movement of Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum working with the United Nations to usurp control of the global environment without ever allowing the people to vote. The media is simply taken up the role of propaganda agent no different than Pravda during the communist days of Russia.

The First Amendment guarantees a free press to foster a vibrant trade in ideas. However, when the press is so biased, they are deliberately distorting the marketplace and the rights of the people. The media is advocating positions from unelected entities and denying any right to allow the people to vote. Hence the motto of the Washington Post “Democr4acy Dies in Darkness” is precisely their new objective. Since mainstream media has proven its eagerness to distort the news, it is profoundly unjustified in any legal foundation to provide any immunity whatsoever and they are deliberately engaging in treasonous conduct and should be hauled into court where ONLY a jury is allowed to decide the facts.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise

40
Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
overthecliff
overthecliff

Traitors Maybe. I don’t know. Corrupt stupid dangers to western civilization for sure.

Zulu Foxtrot Golf
Zulu Foxtrot Golf

I seem to recall that yellow journalism had its start in Cuba with the Maine getting false flagged at the onset of the Spanish-American war. Fuck 99.9% of journalists. They are shit bags that live off of the misery of others.

Ken31
Ken31

Wasn’t that all about protecting sugar/rum corporations?

Zulu Foxtrot Golf
Zulu Foxtrot Golf

Likely. That and JP Morgan still had some big debts owed to him for bailing out Uncle Sugar in the 1880s.

Ken31
Ken31

Do stupid questions make good lead-ins?

Ed
Ed

Ask Pat Buchanan. He uses that kind of title everyday, it seems.

Ken31
Ken31

I am starting to think Pat is a bot.

Llpoh
Llpoh

Clearly does not know what treason means in the US.

That said, journalists should not be protected as much as they are.

Stephanie Shepard

The press would be knowingly committing treason if they intentionally were writing false and subversive information to undermine or overthrow the US government for the benefit of a foreign nation or entity.

Fox news is owned by Murdoch who is Australian and Carlos Slim who is Mexican has a 17% stake in New York Times. Most of our press is owned in one way or another by foreigners and I highly doubt their allegiance is to the American people.

H. Greeley
H. Greeley

Not sure of the most effective solution to remedy a seditious media, but in general competition is the quickest way to solve similar problems. In other news, it has been reported that #45 is considering forming a new media outlet. He would likely have millions of subscribers, instantaneously.

Glock-N-Load

It is shocking to me that this was not done long ago. How difficult could it be for Trump to pay a team of coders to make it happen?

Ken31
Ken31

If it were the government, it would cost about $3B and eventually the project would be abandoned in favor of manually processing pdf forms.

Ghost

This is gonna be YUGE.

Ghost

Hey, if time? Take a peek at the H. Greeley reply I posted above your green blockhead.

It is relevant.

Once upon a time, an open letter to the president from a newspaper challenging his executive actions would be answered. Now? Shut them down!

Ghost

So, are you related to Horace Greeley? After I looked up and pasted Lincoln’s famous reply to the publisher of the New York Tribune, I got interested in the original letter Greeley published that prompted Lincoln’s reply.

So, in editing, I’ve included Greeley’s original editorial here. Some interesting parallels with Greeley demanding the president follow the law and Lincoln sitting there with the Proclamation in his desk drawer and not bothering to mention it.

[Horace Greeley, “A Prayer for Twenty Millions,” New York Tribune, August 20, 1862]

To ABRAHAM LINCOLN,
President of the United States

DEAR SIR: I do not intrude to tell you–for you must know already–that a great proportion of those who triumphed in your election, and of all who desire the unqualified suppression of the Rebellion now desolating our country, are sorely disappointed and deeply pained by the policy you seem to be pursuing with regard to the slaves of the Rebels. I write only to set succinctly and unmistakably before you what we require, what we think we have a right to expect, and of what we complain.

I. We require of you, as the first servant of the Republic, charged especially and preeminently with this duty, that you EXECUTE THE LAWS. Most emphatically do we demand that such laws as have been recently enacted, which therefore may fairly be presumed to embody the present will and to be dictated by the present needs of the Republic, and which, after due consideration have received your personal sanction, shall by you be carried into full effect, and that you publicly and decisively instruct your subordinates that such laws exist, that they are binding on all functionaries and citizens, and that they are to be obeyed to the letter.

II. We think you are strangely and disastrously remiss in the discharge of your official and imperative duty with regard to the emancipating provisions of the new Confiscation Act. Those provisions were designed to fight Slavery with Liberty. They prescribe that men loyal to the Union, and willing to shed their blood in her behalf, shall no longer be held, with the Nations consent, in bondage to persistent, malignant traitors, who for twenty years have been plotting and for sixteen months have been fighting to divide and destroy our country. Why these traitors should be treated with tenderness by you, to the prejudice of the dearest rights of loyal men, We cannot conceive.

III. We think you are unduly influenced by the counsels, the representations, the menaces, of certain fossil politicians hailing from the Border Slave States. Knowing well that the heartily, unconditionally loyal portion of the White citizens of those States do not expect nor desire chat Slavery shall be upheld to the prejudice of the Union–(for the truth of which we appeal not only to every Republican residing in those States, but to such eminent loyalists as H. Winter Davis, Parson Brownlow, the Union Central Committee of Baltimore, and to The Nashville Union)–we ask you to consider that Slavery is everywhere the inciting cause and sustaining base of treason: the most slaveholding sections of Maryland and Delaware being this day, though under the Union flag, in full sympathy with the Rebellion, while the Free-Labor portions of Tennessee and of Texas, though writhing under the bloody heel of Treason, are unconquerably loyal to the Union. So emphatically is this the case, that a most intelligent Union banker of Baltimore recently avowed his confident belief that a majority of the present Legislature of Maryland, though elected as and still professing to be Unionists, are at heart desirous of the triumph of the Jeff. Davis conspiracy; and when asked how they could be won back to loyalty, replied “only by the complete Abolition of Slavery.” It seems to us the most obvious truth, that whatever strengthens or fortifies Slavery in the Border States strengthens also Treason, and drives home the wedge intended to divide the Union. Had you from the first refused to recognize in those States, as here, any other than unconditional loyalty–that which stands for the Union, whatever may become of Slavery, those States would have been, and would be, far more helpful and less troublesome to the defenders of the Union than they have been, or now are.

IV. We think timid counsels in such a crisis calculated to prove perilous, and probably disastrous. It is the duty of a Government so wantonly, wickedly assailed by Rebellion as ours has been to oppose force to force in a defiant, dauntless spirit. It cannot afford to temporize with traitors nor with semi-traitors. It must not bribe them to behave themselves, nor make cheat fair promises in the hope of disarming their causeless hostility. Representing a brave and high-spirited people, it can afford to forfeit anything else better than its own self-respect, or their admiring confidence. For our Government even to seek, after war has been made on it, to dispel the affected apprehensions of armed traitors that their cherished privileges may be assailed by it, is to invite insult and encourage hopes of its own downfall. The rush to arms of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, is the true answer at once to the Rebel raids of John Morgan and the traitorous sophistries of Beriah Magoffin.

V. We complain that the Union cause has suffered, and is now suffering immensely, from mistaken deference to Rebel Slavery. Had you, Sir, in your Inaugural Address, unmistakably given notice that, in case the Rebellion already commenced were persisted in, and your efforts to preserve the Union and enforce the laws should be resisted by armed force, you would recognize no loyal person as rightfully held in Slavery by a traitor, we believe the Rebellion would therein have received a staggering if not fatal blow. At that moment, according to the returns of the most recent elections, the Unionists were a large majority of the voters of the Slave States. But they were composed in good part of the aged, the feeble, the wealthy, the timid–the young, the reckless, the aspiring, the adventurous, had already been largely lured by the gamblers and negro-traders, the politicians by trade and the conspirators by instinct, into the toils of Treason. Had you then proclaimed that Rebellion would strike the shackles from the slaves of every traitor, the wealthy and the cautious would have been supplied with a powerful inducement to remain loyal. As it was, every coward in the South soon became a traitor from fear; for Loyalty was perilous, while Treason seemed comparatively safe. Hence the boasted unanimity of the South–a unanimity based on Rebel terrorism and the fact that immunity and safety were found on that side, danger and probable death on ours. The Rebels from the first have been eager to confiscate, imprison, scourge and kill: we have fought wolves with the devices of sheep. The result is just what might have been expected. Tens of thousands are fighting in the Rebel ranks to-day whose, original bias and natural leanings would have led them into ours.

VI. We complain that the Confiscation Act which you approved is habitually disregarded by your Generals, and that no word of rebuke for them from you has yet reached the public ear. Fremont’s Proclamation and Hunter’s Order favoring Emancipation were promptly annulled by you; while Halleck’s No. 3, forbidding fugitives from Slavery to Rebels to come within his lines–an order as unmilitary as inhuman, and which received the hearty approbation of every traitor in America–with scores of like tendency, have never provoked even your own remonstrance. We complain that the officers of your Armies have habitually repelled rather than invited approach of slaves who would have gladly taken the risks of escaping from their Rebel masters to our camps, bringing intelligence often of inestimable value to the Union cause. We complain that those who have thus escaped to us, avowing a willingness to do for us whatever might be required, have been brutally and madly repulsed, and often surrendered to be scourged, maimed and tortured by the ruffian traitors, who pretend to own them. We complain that a large proportion of our regular Army Officers, with many of the Volunteers, evince far more solicitude to uphold Slavery than to put down the Rebellion. And finally, we complain that you, Mr. President, elected as a Republican, knowing well what an abomination Slavery is, and how emphatically it is the core and essence of this atrocious Rebellion, seem never to interfere with these atrocities, and never give a direction to your Military subordinates, which does not appear to have been conceived in the interest of Slavery rather than of Freedom.

VII. Let me call your attention to the recent tragedy in New Orleans, whereof the facts are obtained entirely through Pro-Slavery channels. A considerable body of resolute, able-bodied men, held in Slavery by two Rebel sugar-planters in defiance of the Confiscation Act which you have approved, left plantations thirty miles distant and made their way to the great mart of the South-West, which they knew to be the indisputed possession of the Union forces. They made their way safely and quietly through thirty miles of Rebel territory, expecting to find freedom under the protection of our flag. Whether they had or had not heard of the passage of the Confiscation Act, they reasoned logically that we could not kill them for deserting the service of their lifelong oppressors, who had through treason become our implacable enemies. They came to us for liberty and protection, for which they were willing render their best service: they met with hostility, captivity, and murder. The barking of the base curse of Slavery in this quarter deceives no one–not even themselves. They say, indeed, that the negroes had no right to appear in New Orleans armed (with their implements of daily labor in the cane-field); but no one doubts that they would gladly have laid these down if assured that they should be free. They were set upon and maimed, captured and killed, because they sought the benefit of that act of Congress which they may not specifically have heard of, but which was none the less the law of the land which they had a clear right to the benefit of–which it was somebody’s duty to publish far and wide, in order that so many as possible should be impelled to desist from serving Rebels and the Rebellion and come over to the side of the Union, They sought their liberty in strict accordance with the law of the land–they were butchered or re-enslaved for so doing by the help of Union soldiers enlisted to fight against slaveholding Treason. It was somebody’s fault that they were so murdered–if others shall hereafter stuffer in like manner, in default of explicit and public directions to your generals that they are to recognize and obey the Confiscation Act, the world will lay the blame on you. Whether you will choose to hear it through future History and ‘at the bar of God, I will not judge. I can only hope.

VIII. On the face of this wide earth, Mr. President, there is not one disinterested, determined, intelligent champion of the Union cause who does not feel that all attempts to put down the Rebellion and at the same time uphold its inciting cause are preposterous and futile–that the Rebellion, if crushed out tomorrow, would be renewed within a year if Slavery were left in full vigor–that Army officers who remain to this day devoted to Slavery can at best be but half-way loyal to the Union–and that every hour of deference to Slavery is an hour of added and deepened peril to the Union, I appeal to the testimony of your Ambassadors in Europe. It is freely at your service, not at mine. Ask them to tell you candidly whether the seeming subserviency of your policy to the slaveholding, slavery-upholding interest, is not the perplexity, the despair of statesmen of all parties, and be admonished by the general answer.

IX. I close as I began with the statement that what an immense majority of the Loyal Millions of your countrymen require of you is a frank, declared, unqualified, ungrudging execution of the laws of the land, more especially of the Confiscation Act. That Act gives freedom to the slaves of Rebels coming within our lines, or whom those lines may at any time inclose–we ask you to render it due obedience by publicly requiring all your subordinates to recognize and obey it. The rebels are everywhere using the late anti-negro riots in the North, as they have long used your officers’ treatment of negroes in the South, to convince the slaves that they have nothing to hope from a Union success-that we mean in that case to sell them into a bitter bondage to defray the cost of war. Let them impress this as a truth on the great mass of their ignorant and credulous bondsmen, and the Union will never be restored-never. We cannot conquer Ten Millions of People united in solid phalanx against us, powerfully aided by the Northern sympathizers and European allies. We must have scouts, guides, spies, cooks, teamsters, diggers and choppers from the Blacks of the South, whether we allow them to fight for us or not, or we shall be baffled and repelled. As one of the millions who would gladly have avoided this struggle at any sacrifice but that Principle and Honor, but who now feel that the triumph of the Union is dispensable not only to the existence of our country to the well being of mankind, I entreat you to render a hearty and unequivocal obedience to the law of the land.

Yours,
Horace Greeley
New York, August 19, 1862

(Is it just me or could Horace’s letter be very easily adapted to modern situation?)

Letter to Horace Greeley
Written during the heart of the Civil War, this is one of Abraham Lincoln’s most famous letters. Greeley, editor of the influential New York Tribune, had just addressed an editorial to Lincoln called “The Prayer of Twenty Millions,” making demands and implying that Lincoln’s administration lacked direction and resolve.

President Lincoln wrote his reply when a draft of the Emancipation Proclamation already lay in his desk drawer. His response revealed his concentration on preserving the Union. The letter, which received acclaim in the North, stands as a classic statement of Lincoln’s constitutional responsibilities. A few years after the president’s death, Greeley wrote an assessment of Lincoln. He stated that Lincoln did not actually respond to his editorial but used it instead as a platform to prepare the public for his “altered position” on emancipation.

Executive Mansion,
Washington, August 22, 1862.

Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir.

I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.

As to the policy I “seem to be pursuing” as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be “the Union as it was.” If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.

Yours,
A. Lincoln.

Once upon a time, journalists were not afraid to challenge authority and ask questions. And, as Lincoln’s response shows… once upon a time, journalists got real answers.

Auntie K.
Auntie K.

Should be a separate posting due to historic and current applicability.

👻 (ghost)
👻 (ghost)

I may summarize and do that. Is an interesting exchange.

RogerP
RogerP

The 9th Amendment protects the rights of the States to do anything not specifically prohibited elsewhere in the Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution are the States prohibited from seceding. In fact, some States explicitly reserved the right to secede when they ratified the Constitution.

Consequently, the Southern States had every right to secede.

Furthermore, if Lincoln was correct that they were still in the Union, and he was making war against them, then he was a traitor.

Glock-N-Load

Steph,

You seem to be a good researcher(?).

    True or False

(I do not know the answer)
Did Obama reverse a law regarding propaganda?

Stephanie Shepard

True. He basically made it legal and provided funding for the Russiagate hoax before leaving office. The info has been scrubbed from the search domains but this US government pdf about insurgency tactics is very informative about what they were doing and how they were funding it with illegal activity i.e. drug and human trafficking. Just substitute Iraq/Afghanistan for USA and it’s the same game plan.

https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/119629.pdf

Bos'n
Bos'n

Smith Mundt Act change in 2012 seems relevant here as well .

Llpoh
Llpoh

Actually, that is incorrect. Another that does not know what treason is in the US. That is perhaps creeping toward sedition, but it is not treason.

Here is the treason clause:

“Article III, Section 3, Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

To commit treason, you have levy war, or adhere, aid, comfort ENEMIES.
Helping foreign nations is not treason. Unless they are enemies. Which implies a recognised state of war. Which the US does not have.

Stephanie Shepard

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Knowingly waging information warfare against the US government on behalf of a foreign entity is treason. Kinetic warfare isn’t the only way to wage war and it’s probably the most ineffective type of warfare in the modern era. Read the counterinsurgency pdf I posted above. It includes everything the media did last summer during the BLM riots as an insurgency.

Llpoh
Llpoh

Again, not according to the Constitution. Their currently is no “enemy” of the US, which requires a declaration of war to create.

Perhaps you are thinking of sedition, which is different to treason.

Ken31
Ken31

You are reading something that is not there. Nowhere does it say that enemies are restricted only to those under declared war.

Glock-N-Load

I would say propaganda could definitely be treasonous.

Anonymous
Anonymous

Wip – I refer you to the treason clause. No state of war, no enemies, no treason. It is that simple.

Llpoh

Mygirl....maybe

Ah, but you see, we are at war, we are in the midst of a War on Terror and the Patriot Act was written to codify military and intelligence actions against anyone deemed a ‘terrorist’ ergo, a traitor to the United States of America. Nowdays traitor and terrorist are interchangeable terms. Treason, traitor and now…terrorist.

While the Cold War ended around 1989, the War on Terror has not ended, and does not appear likely to end any time soon. The fact that the prolonged Cold War finally ended, though, raises the possibility that the “War on Terror” will also end one day.

There are many very important facts regarding the War on Terror, too many for a mere comment, but not to worry, anyone can be a terrorist these days, especailly Trump supporters, Christians and white people in general.

https://mepc.org/commentary/what-exactly-war-terror

Llpoh
Llpoh

Terrorist is different than traitor. as you well know.

Auntie K.
Auntie K.

Unless a domestic terrorist.

very old white guy
very old white guy

You actually think that language and definitions mean something these days. In the Orwellian environment we are living in, words mean whatever those in power want them to mean.

Auntie K.
Auntie K.

U.S.A. is currently “at war”. The National Defense Service Medal is issued to active duty members of armed forces. It is only issued during wartime. Additionally the Global War On Terrorism Medal is also issued to active duty members.

https://www.afpc.af.mil/About/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/421890/national-defense-service-medal/

Mygirl....maybe

Most true journalists are dead. The current crop posing as ‘journalists’ are nothing more than stenographers repeating the party line and pushing the leftist agendas.

The late Udo Ulfkotte admitted that he and most journalists took bribes from the CIA and similar organizations. He wrote a book about just this topic and…died unexpectedly of ‘heart failure’shortly after it was published. German journalists were threatened with termination if they mentioned his book Bought Journalists….

I’ve been a journalist for about 25 years, and I’ve been educated to lie, to betray, and not to tell the truth to the public,” Ulfkotte told Russia Today. “I was supported by the Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA. Why? Because I am pro-American.”

“The German and American media tries to bring war to the people in Europe, to bring war to Russia. This is a point of no return, and I am going to stand up and say… it is not right what I have done in the past, to manipulate people, to make propaganda against Russia.”

Udo went on to state that he published a fiction at the behest of the CIA stating that Quadaffi was making poison gas.

Ulfkotte said most corporate media journalists in the United States and Europe are “so-called non-official cover,” meaning that they work for an intelligence agency. “I think it is especially the case with British journalists, because they have a much closer relationship. It is especially the case with Israeli journalists. Of course with French journalists. … It is the case for Australians, [with] journalists from New Zealand, from Taiwan, well, there is many countries,” he said.

Former Newspaper Editor Who Exposed CIA Found Dead

Ghost

Exactly.

yahright
yahright

Most of the media are scum. Imagine fighting ww2 and having the press rooting for the Nazis. I sure don’t get a pro-American vibe from the media. Now I get a pro-Communist vibe from the folks who don’t want to say anything negative about our stupid and senile President and the idiots surrounding him. They also keep pushing this stupid Russia is to blame for everything crap, while ignoring the Chicoms.

ReluctantWarrior
ReluctantWarrior

The drive to institute a one world government is going into high gear. The only way to combat it is for localities to become more self reliant. I would say that the more local we can become by growing our own food, generating our own power and living simply close to the land the better off we will be. Many intentional communities have been and are being established around the world based on the ecologically sound, off the grid paradigm. These are the seeds of a real new world vision that will grow in the ashes of our failed post-modern civilization.

very old white guy
very old white guy

I realized that I knew the answer to the question before reading a word. Yes, they are traitors to both the country and free people who live not just in America, but other countries that have what passes as freedom these days.

Remo
Remo

I have to assume that’s a rhetorical question.
The leftist media have been traitors to the United States for over 50 years now.

Jdog
Jdog

Have journalists become traitors? First there are no more journalists.
Are the media lying scumbags traitors. Yes, yes they are. They all deserve to be dangling from lampposts and overpasses.

ReluctantWarrior
ReluctantWarrior

Do bears shit in the woods?

Discover more from The Burning Platform

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading