Will liberals stop trusting the MSM?
Matt Taibbi thinks so, and he thinks the media coverage of the Mueller report will have been instrumental in fostering that lack of trust:
News audiences were betrayed, and sooner or later, even the most virulently Trump-despising demographics will realize it and tune us out. The only way to reverse the damage is to own how big of a screw-up this was, but after the last three years, who would hold their breath waiting for that?
I agree with Taibbi that the MSM will not be doing that. But I don’t know what I think about his contention that “even the most virulently Trump-despising demographics will realize” that they were lied to about Trump and Russiagate. His article, which appeared in Rolling Stone, has no comment section, so it’s hard to gauge the tenor of what the responses would be from the periodical’s mostly-liberal readership.
But if I had to guess, I’d say that the number of Trump-haters who realize they were duped by the MSM will be vanishingly small. Maybe I’ve gotten too cynical, but I certainly haven’t seen a lot of soul-searching or mind-changing on this. Yes, the media’s stock has fallen even on the left and not just the right. But that doesn’t necessarily lead to mind-changing and the rejection of the basic message, or to trust of a source from the right such as National Review or Fox News.
Taibbi is about as far from a Trump supporter as you can get, and he is definitely not a Republican either (see this). But his outrage in the article is at the stupidity and mendacity of the press, and he is clear-sighted enough to see their errors in covering Russiagate. His interest doesn’t seem to be that people should have a change of political heart; his concern seems to be about the ever-falling reputation of the press, one they have justly earned.
The journalists long ago gave up reporting the news and became shills for the democrats. That was why I quit subscribing to the Washington Post years ago.
Well, just listen for any comments your friends have, and you will know first hand how amenable the nicer liberals who you get along with, are to changing their minds on the basis of pretextual or predicate information being shown to be false.
You can then make a reasonable surmise as to how the more foaming-at-the-mouth types, will react. Which will be a shrug at the dis-confirming portions, a doubling down on the speculative portions, and a ferociously renewed tearing at the object of their rage.
Wait till they find out that the media-supported Avenatti has endorsed Biden.
Not a chance. If anyone has made it this far and is still a liberal – they ain’t gonna make a change over the Mueller Report.
Agree with DNW.
I consider the “collusion” believers to be in something like a spaceship cult that believes that extra-terrestrial visitors will arrive on a certain date. When the extra-terrestrial visitors fail to arrive on the predicted date, a certain number of believers immediately lose their faith. Other believers look to explanations from the cult leaders (in this case the MSM) about how they got the date wrong. The process continues as more and more believers fall away. Eventually, the cult leaders become discredited.
He’s out of touch with the left. Consider the following which takes Lawrence Tribe as an expert. Hah, the man who had his books ghostwritten and plagiarized, a genuine man of integrity.
https://daringfireball.net/2019/04/the_drumbeat_of_impeachment
“Lawrence Tribe — constitutional law professor at Harvard and the man who literally wrote the book on impeachment — writing in USA Today, on the Mueller report as a roadmap for impeachment:
The report is unequivocal in concluding that even if Trump is criminally innocent of obstruction, it is not for lack of trying. The main reason the investigation wasn’t completely thwarted was not that the president didn’t “endeavor” to thwart it — the definition of criminal obstruction — but rather that Trump’s subordinates refused to comply.
Consider, for comparison, that a president who ordered the military to destroy his political enemies would undeniably have committed impeachable offenses, even if the military failed to obey the directive. Add to this Trump’s decision to respond to the report by taking a victory lap rather than protecting our election systems from ongoing attack, and the likelihood that he continues to be compromised by leverage (financial or otherwise) from adversaries, and one sees a president indifferent to the security of the nation he is sworn to lead and to the Constitution he is sworn to uphold. Allowing such a president to remain immune not only from indictment but also from removal would betray Congress’ own responsibility to the public it represents.“
Joe DiGenova dropped a bombshell last night on the Ingraham Angle (hosted by Huckabee). Things are going to get really interesting in about 2 weeks according to Joe.
He was on a powerful panel, and it is well worth you time to listen to the 9 minute 25 second clip if you missed that airing. His reveal at the end is explosive. Also look at the comment on the clip by Bud Meyers. It names all those who should face the American justice system.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZD9ITDStQk
Modern “liberalism” is another version of the age-old Cult of the State, and there’s no logic among cultists. So I’m guessing the number of “liberals” who will say, “Hey, you know I guess we were wrong about this,” will be very, very small. Look how many of them, in this day and age, are saying, “Hey, you know that socialism stuff may be better than we thought it was.”
The average liberal will cling to the absurd idea of “putin’s bitch” and that the Mueller Report has more than enough “evidence” to kick trump out of office. Do you think they are going to actually read the report for themselves or just take the word of Maxine Waters or Adam Schiff from a soundbite on their twitter/facebook feed?
It’s a religious matter to them. You’ll have more luck getting a Muslim to doubt that Mohammed rode a flying horse to the moon.
Pelosi, AOC, Adam Schiff, Avenatti, Maxine Waters, nadler, the democratic party is so full of colorful ridiculous comical characters that they put Dick Tracy’ Rogues’ Gallery to shame. No wonder so many people believe in the Reptilian humanoid conspiracy theory given how inhuman the democrats look.
Omar Navarro is going to run against Maxine Waters, who is truly despicable.
Check him out.
We need to get busy trying to rid our Congress of these people!
I hope to God that something does happen; that the miscreants in that list at the end of Edward’s video link, are drawn and quartered but I’m not holding my breath. Call me cynical but the swamp is strong.
My liberal brother is convinced that Trump, if given the opportunity, will ban abortion, set up camps for dissidents (progs), shut down the MSM, profit greatly from being President, sell us out to Russia, attempt to become President for life, and other such ideas. When I ask him for evidence, he says that is what the investigations are all about – to get the evidence. I think that is pretty typical of liberal thinking at this point. They don’t like Trump and they dream up all kinds of weird reasons to hate him.
I wonder if I was as irrational when Obama was President? I’d like to think not. I disliked his policies and could enunciate what he had done that I disagreed with. Not so much of that with the libs. Their complaints about Trump are more visceral and associated with feelings about what he might do rather than what he has done.
Oh yeah, the Mueller report reporting changes nothing. The entire rest of the left has made that clear long before the report was released.
Taibbi is a refreshingly honest lib, like Dershowitz, but (as noted above) they are more concerned with the damage being done TO their party than with the damage being done BY their party.
Reactions will depend on the ideological quadrant (not quartile: the numbers are vastly uneven) of the individual.
(1)The upper far-left leaders won’t lose trust in the media because they were the ones feeding the fake news to the journos; the media did exactly as they wanted, and that’s not where they get their “news” anyway.
(2) The lower far-left followers (as noted above) don’t care that the media got pretty much everything wrong; they hate Trump and Republicans and Conservatives regardless, and will never be convinced otherwise; they will swallow whatever the media feeds them now and forever.
(3) The upper mid-left leaders, who were not part of the fake news stream, may question media more closely in the future, but will still probably be subject to both the Gell-Mann Amnesia Syndrome and the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
“Well, they got that part about MY special issue kind of messed up, but everything else is probably true; besides, I’m too smart to be fooled by them.”
(4) The lower mid-left followers who are actually looking for effective government and a good life for themselves (not for an Ideal Socialist Utopia) AND who follow political news more closely than the norm MAY be interested enough to look into what else the media has lied about.
That partial quadrant is where we get converts to Blexit and WalkAway — not necessarily to the GOP or even classical conservatism, but it’s a start.
Meyers’ list from Edward’s link: time to make up score-cards?
I recognize most of the names, thanks to Neo & the conservative Blogosphere, but I wonder how many are known to the left’s LIVs or even HIVs (yeah, that acronym is already taken-sorry) and if they would be shocked, or outraged, at any indictments?
My very limited anecdotal evidence suggests that the seriously Trump-deranged have only been further inflamed. He slipped through our nets again! The investigation was not zealous enough! We were betrayed! The real dirt will eventually come to light! All this *must* be so, because the Trump presidency is an abomination that cannot be endured. It is, for them, more or less literally a sacrilege; this is the office that was but lately occupied by the Messiah-King Obama.
I too think their will be little change among liberals.
Neo, you’re not being cynical, you’re being realistic.
I’m not sure its possible to be too ‘cynical’ about the left. After all, they support the killing of living, breathing babies. And, regardless of what polls show, where is the criticism among ‘moderate’ democrats of an utterly silent leadership on that monstrousness?
It is also a virtual certainty, that if that long list of traitors faces justice for their specific crimes, liberals will cite their prosecution as proof of Trump’s ‘fascism’.
“Will liberals stop trusting the MSM?”
Not until it stops telling what they want to hear.
Taibbi says this because his personal bubble likely contains a few lefties who can think for themselves. That is, however, a pretty small bubble.
Today, it’s clear, the MSM has no intention of letting this go, and as long as they can get the likes of Adam Schiff to continue to stand in front of a camera and rant on about what their audience really wants to hear, it will not change. They know their revenue stream is tied to keeping this same set of viewers in a permanent state of outrage. Their Q2 numbers demand this.
I personally would like to see the crazy faction push forward with impeachment, because it will force a few more on the edges to look at actual details, rather than the representation of details. But for the vast majority of outrage junkies on the left, they just want to hear what they want.
The Taibbi article is well worth reading in whole. I don’t know his work well, but I first saw his stuff when he was analyzing the causes of the credit bust of 2007-2008. I thought he got those articles about half correct, but he was at least looking in the right places unlike most everyone else.
I like AesopFan’s quadrants. So a qualified group of lower mid-left followers might be disaffected by the MSM. (What’s wrong with the upper mid-left followers? Too arrogant and intellectually lazy?) I agree with Neo that this will be a small group, but hope that it is not vanishingly small. I’ll take 2% or more as non-vanishing.
Interesting cross-currents today (as there often are).
On the “How large..voting rights” post, Art Deco linked this by Ann Althouse:
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2019/04/bidens-announcement-video-is-anchored.html
Biden referred to the deliberate lie-by-omission of the MSM about Trump’s Charlottesville speech, the “some of them are nice people” that has been mischaracterized since then as referring to the neo-Nazis, rather than overtly excluding them, as Althouse shows.
In the comment thread:
“It’s a standard lie, and the audience likes it. Like the MSM, the ad is aimed at the entertainment desires of the audience.”
“It’s absolutely sickening that the MSM will cover for old Joe. After all, Joe got his false narrative from the MSM(D).”
“They are gaslighting you. They know it’s a lie.”
So: are we conservatives in a bubble of our own, or are we on the same page because it’s the truth?
That’s what some of the “questioning quadrant” may be asking themselves, whether about themselves (a left bubble), or us (a right bubble).
“What is Truth?” and how do we know we have it in our sights?
The Left won’t lose their trust of Authority until the Flat Earth Theory hits mainstream prime time the way Alt Right, Deep State term, and various other things did.
Aesop, the Kingdom of God is within you and at hand. Look at your hand. Don’t look at blogs, other humans, the media, or your human Authorities. Look at your hand.
The Trump-hate of the MSM and its followers is now at a religious fervor pitch. As such, their beliefs are not falsifiable. It is a waste of energy to even consider that the conclusion of the Mueller report would change their minds. The concept of “truth” here is irrelevant.
“Will liberals stop trusting the MSM?” They ARE the MSM!
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/04/elijah-cummings-refuses-to-allow-witness-to-have-attorney-present-for-grilling.php
“That’s dishonest reporting. As noted, the DOJ is willing to have Gore testify. It just wants him to have a lawyer present. The Post fails to inform its readers of the real nature of this dispute.
The pattern is all too familiar. The Democrats decide on their anti-Trump theme de jour. Their media allies peddle that theme leaving out any facts that might call it into question.
If “democracy dies in darkness,” the Washington Post is doing its best to kill it.”
https://babylonbee.com/news/cnn-publishes-real-news-story-for-april-fools-day
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/381041.php
April 25, 2019
Ace makes mention of an obscurity that puzzled me in the Taibbi post.
His answer appeals to me for obvious reasons. 😉
“The Mueller report makes clear reporters were sold wolf whistles [sic] over and over, led by reams of unnamed official sources who urged them to see meaning in meaningless things and assume connections that weren’t there.”
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/381031.php
Will switching to Geico really save you 15% or more on car insurance?
No, and No
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2019/04/25/we-see-you/
Liberals might start trusting the MSM if they would start reading conservative reports about what the leftist media actually does.
https://www.city-journal.org/seattleforall-campaign?fbclid=IwAR2gFW4KIY72FKsAAomUqFiVqa-2pMdW-jC8fpmTaHC6i0WhUUdjYPE9bwY
“Selling wolf tickets” and “wolfing” are very old street culture terms (way, way before the internet) that have zero to do with “the boy that cried wolf”.
If someone is selling wolf tickets they are attempting to scare/intimidate some one person or a group of people. The expression implies the use of potential violence.
I first heard the expression on a Harlem street many years ago. Buying a wolf ticket is analogous to buying “protection” from mob people.
Hmm, I think the wolf whistles was wrongly added (no sexy blondes being whistled at) by replacing wolf tickets. I like Aesop’s explanation, but LeClerc seems correct. Urban dict says it came from woof ticket verbal intimidation (“I’m about to beat your ass”), but all know nothin’ is really gonna happen.
Stopping the believing of Dem media is too hard for most pro-choice/ pro-abortion Dems. They are NOT going to become pro-life, nor support pro-life candidates. However, there are probably ways Dems can remain “moderate Dems” and reduce their believing in Fake News media, like in reduced watching.
CNN ratings way down.
Another way would be with more reasonable alternative news — but while I like a bit of Tucker Carlson, I don’t like TV news much at all. I try it, I do NOT like it. Every year.
Like in digging a hole, first step is to stop. Stop watching. Then think, look around. Stop reposting & retweeting the “bombshells” about Trump.
I think this IS happening, to a large number (20%) of “independents” who usually vote Dem — they are more open to learning about other things. I think these folks were about 20% of Hillary’s vote, so we’re looking at 4% of Hillary’s voters. Not trusting the Dem media.
That’s not so many.
That’s huge for elections.
But this is only the midpoint. Will there be indictments & trials of the deep state criminals?
Only trials of the real guilty folk will break off a majority (large plurality?) of the Trump-haters’ obsession, mostly because they’ll also be trying to defend their own criminals, and be seen as obvious hypocrites.
Two weeks? The sooner the better. America needs justice.
Tho by then the Dem media will have other reasons to vote against Reps. They will remain infected with Democrat Derangement Syndrome — against all Reps that don’t oppose Trump (so less so against Romney now).
I think his analysis is correct — people will realize they were betrayed by the press “sooner or later.” Mostly later. But it has already started. The media big-shots will be the last to know.
I dunno. I know some libs, some quite far out. One set did a face plant with regard to the Covington Catholic thing and hadn’t even brushed themselves off before they went all in on Smollett.
Except they didn’t. When the progressive narrative of each–the first narrative–fell apart, they doubled down on the causes and microaggressions and the nobility of the First Peoples and slavery and…..nothing changed.
They trust the media to tell them what they want to hear and if it turns out not to be true….no big deal. They’ll believe something else about the issue is important even if they have to make it up.
From time to time, I ask why they think I don’t know better than whatever factoid they’re pushing. I know they know better. What, do I look stupid?
The response is puzzling. It’s as if on one level they know better but on another level they believe it. It’s not just lying to me. They lie to themselves and know they do it.
Not worth discussing some things.
Last night the President did a phone interview with Sean Hannity during which he made news of various sorts. In particular he committed to declassifying the FISA applications on Page, the relevant (my word in sum) FBI 302s, “gang of eight” material, “and more” than the list of items Hannity had just recited. All these documents will be hard on the coup plotters I suspect. Hence, they will be difficult for the media and impossible for the courts to ignore as cases are brought on in train.
Historians will have a trove of materials with which to build stories, whether the media joins early or not. Decades of research are in the offing. Infamy will be the Obama/Clinton reward for their sacking of our nation’s institutions. Disgrace at least, in lieu of prison time.
Ah, and DAG Rod Rosenstein made a speech last night as well. It’s worth a read: https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/deputy-attorney-general-rod-j-rosenstein-delivers-remarks-armenian-bar-association-s
Quoting: *** At my confirmation hearing in March 2017, a Republican Senator asked me to make a commitment. He said: “You’re going to be in charge of this [Russia] investigation. I want you to look me in the eye and tell me that you’ll do it right, that you’ll take it to its conclusion and you’ll report [your results] to the American people.”
I did pledge to do it right and take it to the appropriate conclusion. I did not promise to report all results to the public, because grand jury investigations are ex parte proceedings. It is not our job to render conclusive factual findings. We just decide whether it is appropriate to file criminal charges.
Some critical decisions about the Russia investigation were made before I got there. The previous Administration chose not to publicize the full story about Russian computer hackers and social media trolls, and how they relate to a broader strategy to undermine America. The FBI disclosed classified evidence about the investigation to ranking legislators and their staffers. Someone selectively leaked details to the news media. The FBI Director announced at a congressional hearing that there was a counterintelligence investigation that might result in criminal charges. Then the former FBI Director alleged that the President pressured him to close the investigation, and the President denied that the conversation occurred.
So that happened. ***
Thanks for fine link on Rosenstein, who said:
“But the bottom line is, there was overwhelming evidence that Russian operatives hacked American computers and defrauded American citizens, and that is only the tip of the iceberg of a comprehensive Russian strategy to influence elections, promote social discord, and undermine America, just like they do in many other countries.”
The hacking happened under Obama, and there was evidence Obama’s administration was against anti-Russian cyber counter-measures. Hillary hired Fusion (thru a couple dummy companies?), which hired British Steele, who was getting dirt on Trump from some Russians, as party of that comprehensive Russian strategy. Hillary in conspiracy with Russians to get dirt on Trump.
Rosenstein doesn’t mention the Woods protocol and his own, probably illegal, role in signing off on a FISA application. There was NOT evidence, overwhelming or otherwise, that Carter Page, or Trump, was dealing with the Russians. And it’s clear Rod avoided claiming that, while saying words to allow those who believe it to keep believing it.
He should be indicted for his FISA app sign off using the unverified Steele dossier.
John Solomon, The Hill:
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/440730-how-the-obama-white-house-engaged-ukraine-to-give-russia-collusion
“He should be indicted for his FISA app sign off using the unverified Steele dossier.”
I understand many concerns regarding DAG Rosenstein’s role(s) in this long story of rooting out corruption at the highest levels of American politics. I see Sean Davis complain against the DAG every other day. I’m not terribly concerned myself however, for a couple of reasons.
First, he’s still trusted by the Pres. How come? Does DJT know something about Rosenstein that we don’t? Or would we have it that we know something the Pres. doesn’t know?
Second, even supposing Rosenstein some sort of malefactor, he’s mighty goddamned low in my potential list of bad guys to be looking at, which list has been aptly summed in another thread, but which should have been led by Obama’s name, followed by Clinton’s, rather than seeing those buried somewhere down in the middle.
So again, small potatoes, Rosenstein. Focus rather on the bigger picture.
The Eagles seem relevant here regards the MSM: “You can’t hide your lyin’ eyes”
Second, even supposing Rosenstein some sort of malefactor,
No doubt he is. Wagers Trump is biding his time and playing his cards when he thinks optimal.
Very well and you’re welcome to your firm belief on the subject.
I’ll, meantime, (that is, awaiting a great many more facts and other accounts of events to emerge) keep an impartial skepticism on the questions. Could be surprise in store, verging in either direction, even.
My fellow Americans. I spent twenty years of my life in Naval service to our country. And I believe I can speak on behalf of all Americans who served in the armed forces of our country in this and only this regard.
The leftists hate you and want you dead.
Just read some of an argument made by a fellow called Blake Rutherford, and published on The Hill web site.
It convinces me that liberals, or Democrats are insane to some significant degree. You are not going to reason them out of their desire to manipulate and use you and destroy anyone or anything which interferes with their ravening, or as they call it, “the tide of history” or “social evolution”
These people, who wish to turn you into mindless dray horses serving their progressive hay rides, who call Middle Americans bitter clingers and Neanderthals, and who giggle at the prospect of their extinction, then say stuff like this, with an ostensibly straight face:
There is so much implicit lunacy there, be it moral, psychological, or both, that one hardly knows where to start.
First: Does any Democrat anywhere really imagine that a Russian troll could cause me, or anyone with any classical liberal sensibilities at all, to despise that amoral, manipulative, mental spawn of Stalin, i.e., Hillary Clinton (and her ilk) more that we already did? What could a couple of Russian trolls add to the knowledge which we Americans already had gained of her (and the Democrats’ in general) morally depraved, self-serving, and opportunistic character during these last 30 and more years? Start paddling by the White House travel office, journey alongside the ObamaCare wreck, climb ashore as Biden’s son and Greg Craig greet you with foreign cash.
Second: What’s up with this “our” and this “we”, shit? Really? Isn’t that like the Soviet Communist Party conveniently calling on the Church they tried to suppress yesterday, for support today just as the Nazi’s invade?
Does any Democrat anywhere think there is a good reason why I should be concerned, (much less align sympathetically myself as an ally with the Demo-victim/perpetrator) who it is that exposes Democrat malevolence and dirty laundry: any more than I should care who wins a rat fight between two rats named Satan and Lucifer?
First they lawlessly try to make you a slave to their ambitions and the dysfunctions of their client class. And then, when they get their asses in a sling, they start waving the flag and talking about “our” republic.
What a sight: a Demonicrat switching from shouting about “our [no limits by any means necessary] democracy” to professing respect for, and hiding behind, “the republic”, as in “constitutional polity”.
So rich with irony, it’s got to be the product of insanity.
Tom Grey on April 26, 2019 at 6:15 am at 6:15 am said:
Hmm, I think the wolf whistles was wrongly added
* * *
The suggestion, as I read it, was that Taibbi wrote “wolf tickets” – in either meaning; the editors (do they still exist?) didn’t know the term, but did know the leftist go-to “dog whistles,” and decided that “wolf whistles” was a step up from there.
Or Taibbi had a momentary lapse and typed it himself.
“Good words to you!” — I miss John Ciardi.
Would the Democrats let this dude vote?
https://www.theepochtimes.com/parrot-trained-to-warn-drug-dealers-of-police-presence-taken-into-custody_2894381.html
Oh you are far too cynical. They will change their minds once they realize that some global warming was a locally caused artifact produced by the more transparent atmosphere subsequent to earlier clean air efforts; and that the Affordable Care Act actually caused the premiums of healthy people to skyrocket; and that Trump didn’t actually collude; and that expressing disdain for false charges is not obstruction, and that Ted Kennedy actually did try to conspire with Andropov, and that Bill and Hillary sold technology, and influence, and their office to whoever would pay …
And then … all will live as brothers and sisters under the lemon drop tree.
They vote dead people, illegal aliens, and everything and everyone else they can get away with. So, why not?
I was watching an old (in relative TV time) video of Mark Levin interviewing Brandon Straka, who founded the #WalkAway movement. The entire hour is worth watching (even if you usually don’t do the tv thing; Levin doesn’t interrupt, and Straka is exceedingly articulate and persuasive).
Most of you know his conversion story already, and how so much of it comes from his research into how much the leftist press has lied repeatedly (especially about Trump), and how few people he knows are interested in hearing about it.
This line particularly struck me in the context of this post (start listening at 4:00)
(4:23) giant red banner at HuffPo “Nightmare: President Trump” — warning of the disaster of Trump presidency – millions to lose health insurance, and “other possible headlines” —
“So they started scaring us with fake headlines literally immediately, after, like the moment he got elected.”
The Obama-Ukraine connection goes deeper than I had seen previously — Solomon’s conclusion at the Hill –
“But what is already confirmed by Ukrainians looks a lot more like assertive collusion with a foreign power than anything detailed in the Mueller report.”
sdferr on April 26, 2019 at 7:32 am at 7:32 am said:
Ah, and DAG Rod Rosenstein made a speech last night as well. It’s worth a read: https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/deputy-attorney-general-rod-j-rosenstein-delivers-remarks-armenian-bar-association-s
* * *
Notable quotes from Rosenstein — now to find out if he was just blowing hot air.
The observation IS the critique.
Somehow, these excerpts don’t ever look as long in the preview as they do in the final posting…
A reminder that it is not just the MSM aka Legacy Media that is generating distrust, and presenting us with fake news.
It is aided, abetted, and sometimes driven, by the New Media aka TwitBook.
Major and important case in point: read the first part of the post to get the context.
https://spectator.us/scruton-tapes-anatomy-hit-job/
I am not entirely sure of Don Caron’s ideological position (he seems to skewer both parties), but this is a brilliant parody song for the topic du jour, and darn good singing as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaWeYqotUJs
LIE LIE LIE – a Parody | Don Caron
https://babylonbee.com/news/biden-vows-to-return-nation-to-era-when-press-didnt-bother-reporting-on-presidents-scandals