Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - Professional Liars

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 12, 2017 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

17:56

Professional Liars

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	So, the esteemed God Emperor has given his first press conference since achieving the throne.
	And this has ruffled a few feathers because he's decided that he's not going to play nice with the mainstream media, specifically CNN.
	Since you're attacking us, can you give us a question?
	No, Mr. President-elect, Mr. President-elect, since you are attacking our news organization, can you give us a chance?
	Your organization is terrible.
	You are attacking our news organization.
	Your organization is terrible.
	Can you give us a chance to ask a question, sir?
	Go ahead.
	Sir, can you stay...
	Quiet, quiet.
	Mr. President-elect, can you stay categorically...
	She's asking a question, don't be rude.
	Mr. President-elect, can you give us a question?
	Don't be rude.
	The President-elect, can you give us a question?
	Can you give us a question?
	Don't be asking a question.
	I'm not going to give you a question.
	Can you stay categorized?
	You are fake news.
	Sir, can you state categorically that nobody no, Mr. President-elect, that's not appropriate.
	As you can see, that was the President-elect telling the senior White House correspondent for CNN that he is fake news.
	And that was CNN's senior White House correspondent saying, sir, this isn't appropriate.
	So, mainstream media voices on Twitter went and decided that this was something that would happen in North Korea.
	This is something completely unjust.
	This was, in fact, the indications that Donald Trump was about to be a complete tyrant because he wasn't going to talk to the media.
	This was particularly stupid because Trump was in the process of talking to other media outlets.
	He simply wasn't going to talk to CNN, and I'm sure a few others, whom he pointed to and called fake news.
	And that's because they lie constantly.
	And I'm going to show you some of their lies because I don't think that this is an unfair accusation.
	Professional liars become very good liars.
	And CNN and the rest of the mainstream media lie to you through omission.
	And in my opinion, this is the highest and worst form of lying.
	This is a form of lying that is so advanced and they have perfected to such a degree that they do not even need to tell you an untruth in order to mislead you.
	You can't actually point to their statements and say this is a lie because they don't make lying statements.
	But by the narrative that they weave, by the story that they tell you, they deliberately leave out key pieces of information that leave you with a false impression of what happened.
	And that is how all of this has occurred.
	Because the victims of Donald Trump's ire here were CNN, I'm going to give you some examples specifically from CNN to show you what I mean.
	But this is not limited to CNN.
	Far from it.
	This is completely endemic to the mainstream media.
	And it's not limited to the left either.
	The right also does this, which is why Fox News has the reputation Fox News has.
	For old lefties like myself, it's just embarrassing to watch left-wing outlets go down exactly the same path.
	So this is how the media lies by omission.
	Number one, they cherry pick.
	So in 2016, there were riots in Milwaukee after a black police officer shot a young black man called Sylvie Smith.
	Here's a part of CNN's coverage of those riots.
	Family and friends holding a vigil marked by prayers.
	Thy kingdom come, thy will be done.
	With his sister calling for peace.
	Don't bring the violence here in the ignorance here.
	Milwaukee police say they made multiple arrests overnight.
	We're still waiting on the Let's Bring Violence here.
	After showing a clip of Sylvie Smith's sister apparently calling for peace, saying don't go out and riot.
	well, if we actually look at the entire clip, the part of this story that they're not showing you, you will see precisely how CNN have lied to you.
	Don't burn it down, shit!
	We need it, Market!
	Take that shit to the suburbs!
	Don't burn our shit down.
	Take that shit to the suburbs, because after all, we need our weave.
	I don't wear it, but we need it.
	That's what they left out.
	And they left it out because this woman was not calling for peace.
	She was not calling to an end to riots or demonstrations.
	She was merely suggesting they select a new target.
	The outrage over this on alternative media became so great that CNN were forced to apologize.
	And I want to take a moment to clarify something from Monday.
	We had a report that inadvertently and wrongly characterized the plea from a Milwaukee woman whose brother was killed by police.
	As our viewers saw, she demanded that the violence stop in her community, but in fact, she also said that protests should instead take their violence to the suburbs.
	I regret that second part of her statement was not included.
	She can regret the error all she wants, but it's quite clear that this was not done by accident.
	It's impossible to go through 30 seconds worth of that lady ranting and raving about how they should take their violence to the suburbs and accidentally take the two seconds of her making it sound like she wasn't.
	That was CNN cherry-picking a very specific portion of footage, taking it out of context and presenting it as if the person saying it meant something else.
	And I could find you many, many, many examples of this.
	But I'm not going to because there are other kinds of lies by omission that I want to cover.
	If you want to know more about this, you can just go to YouTube, go to the search bar, type in CNN lies, and you will find thousands of different videos on different topics of just the people in the alternative media spotting this and calling it out.
	The second method that the media uses to lie to you by omission is through gatekeeping.
	Obviously, these mainstream media outlets have to be the ones to decide what they cover, what information they put out on their network.
	And normally you would think that would include anything that is verifiably true.
	After all, why would you feel the need to suppress relevant information if you weren't pushing an agenda first and reporting fact second?
	Usually gatekeeping occurs long before anyone starts broadcasting anything, so normally you won't see evidence of it.
	But when there is a live broadcast going on, then you can see it in action.
	this.
	What do you think Donald Trump needs to do to come out on top?
	Well on the character issue the public you know two-thirds or more of the public knows that Hillary Clinton's a liar she can't be trusted and now the two faces of Hillary Clinton are coming out the fact through WikiLeaks that she says one thing yeah oh no Alright, let's see if we can get Congressman Collins back.
	Obviously, we just lost his satellite feed.
	That sucks.
	Oh no, that sucks.
	That was obviously completely deliberate, because Chris Collins had gone far off the CNN narrative.
	CNN and most of the mainstream media had lied to the public through a mission by simply failing to report accurately or adequately on the WikiLeaks revelations.
	And it got so bad that Chris Cuomo, the oh no man just there, was actually at the point of intimating that it's illegal for the public to read WikiLeaks.
	And I'm not joking, it's a special exemption for the press because they have to get all of their information through the mainstream media.
	Also interesting, because remember, it's illegal to possess these stolen documents.
	It's different for the media.
	So everything you learn about this, you're learning from us.
	And in full disclosure, let's take a look at what is in there and what it means.
	This was the weakest and most transparent attempt at gatekeeping I personally have ever seen.
	It's so obvious that he's trying to say that you should come to him and him exclusively, or at least anyone in the mainstream media, the press, and not go to WikiLeaks directly themselves.
	Because if you do, you are going to read things in there that run counter to Hillary Clinton's campaign narrative and will hurt her chances of the presidency.
	Personally, I find gatekeeping far more pernicious than cherry-picking.
	With cherry-picking, you're at least not actively silencing someone.
	But if during a live broadcast you pull someone else's feed, then you're actively preventing them from providing the information that they wanted to provide at that moment.
	You are actively censoring them.
	The third method that the mainstream media uses to lie to you by mission is through their own willful ignorance.
	Mainstream media journalists will actually go out of their way to not inform themselves about a specific topic.
	And honestly, I think this comes generally from their own political activism and confirmation bias.
	The best example of this that I can think of is CNN's Van Jones and his white lash.
	This was many things.
	This was a rebellion against the elites.
	True.
	It was a complete reinvention of politics and polls.
	It's true.
	But it was also something else.
	We've talked about race.
	I mean, we've talked about everything but race tonight.
	We've talked about income.
	We've talked about class.
	We've talked about region.
	We haven't talked about race.
	This was a white lash.
	This was a white lash against a changing country.
	It was a white lash against a black president in part.
	That footage was from CNN's electoral coverage on November the 8th as they were tallying in the incoming votes.
	And you can see that Van Jones knew that there were other issues, but he was so focused on the issue of race that he'd simply not investigated them.
	He was convinced that this was white people striking back at black people through the proxy of the first black president.
	And then it became apparent that millions of Obama voters, white, middle-class, middle-American Obama voters, had voted for Donald Trump.
	Then Van Jones needed to explain this.
	And so he decided to do his investigative journalism after the fact of Trump's victory.
	After the election, Van Jones, or presumably someone from his investigative team, actually decided to go to Ohio and find some Trump voters who had also voted Obama and asked them why they had done this.
	And instead of saying, well, actually, it's because we're giant racists and we want to implement a white supremacy, because we are in fact having a white lash against the black president we voted for, he found his stereotypes being shattered.
	Here it is in his own words.
	So let me give you guys a chance to respond to some of the stereotypes about all the Trump voters.
	All the Trump voters hate the Mexicans.
	They hate Muslims.
	they don't like black people.
	They're just, it was all of this explosive kind of racial talk was what really got everybody going.
	Just imagine for a second if there was a white presenter who refused to discriminate between black people, suggested that they all voted for Barack Obama and did so on the basis that he's black, and that Obama's election was a blacklash against George W. Bush's white presidency.
	And then after Obama wins, he goes to find one of these black families and then parrots the negative stereotypes about them to their face.
	Stereotypes this journalist helped create and perpetuate out of deliberate ignorance because they chose not to go to an inner city and instead simply talk about those people without actually talking to those people.
	Because that's exactly what Van Jones has done here.
	What annoys me most about this is that Van Jones is outside of his elite bubble.
	These are working class people.
	They do not earn a lot of money and the downturn in the economy has hit them hard.
	And Van Jones is speaking in such a way as to insinuate that maybe he is the victim here.
	He is the one who has had to challenge his beliefs.
	He's had his stereotypes of them shattered.
	And now he has to do something that's uncomfortable for him, which is admit that not all white people are racist, apparently.
	This wasn't actually a white lash, and these people have legitimate economic issues.
	And the reason that annoys me so much is that Van Jones' net worth is estimated to be around $1.1 million.
	While he's speaking to them about how he has a stereotype of them all being racist on the base that they're white and a Trump voter, he is actually talking down to them from a phenomenal position of privilege.
	He is part of the bubble that is the problem with American journalists.
	I mean, listen to the way he describes them when he takes them to the studio.
	Please welcome Dorinda and Scott Seitz.
	All the way from Ohio.
	As if these people are from parts unknown.
	Remote, strange, foreign lands where they don't even speak English.
	They haven't learned to read or write yet.
	And boy, do they hold some funny opinions.
	Because he's been trapped inside his elite bubble for such a long time, he just doesn't even understand that people have different points of view than him, different problems, different perspectives.
	And if he says, well, this is a white lash because I'm focused on race, he presumes that everyone else is as well until he actually goes and speaks to them and destroys his own stereotype.
	This should have been done long before the actual election, so Van Jones could have informed himself as to what the people voting for Trump actually wanted.
	But instead, he is now doing a rearguard action, desperately trying to keep up and say, look, I'm not actually totally out of touch.
	I actually do have some credibility.
	Look, here are some of those weird mythical beasts that we described as Trump supporters, and they're not actually total racists.
	And this is weird to him.
	You know, that was a life-changing thing for me.
	And I just learned so much from him.
	It was a...
	It was a total stereotype shatterer.
	And it's weird to him because he has been living in a bubble where he doesn't understand their concerns and he doesn't care.
	And voting Trump, voting anti-establishment, same with Brexit, has forced them outside of their comfortable bubble so that they can actually understand what's going on.
	This is why these votes against the establishment were necessary.
	The establishment themselves made it happen because of their arrogance and hubris and just complete disdain for those outside of it.
	By keeping himself willfully ignorant, Van Jones was lying about these people's motivations.
	But as far as he knew, he wasn't lying.
	And yet he still knew in advance of the election that there was this issue to be explored.
	But for him, it was just preferable to believe negative stereotypes.
	It played into what he wanted.
	I don't know about you, but I have like emotional whiplash after the last 24 hours in American politics.
	Last night, I got a chance to watch President Obama's speech, and it was this amazing kind of celebration of American democracy, very uplifting.
	Then this morning, I wake up to President Trump's first press conference where he's attacking the press and comparing our country to Nazi Germany.
	While Trump's comparison of the United States to Nazi Germany is as ludicrous as far-left activists comparing Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler, it's Van Jones' opinion that's most important here.
	He feels rocked by this.
	He feels like he is completely taking a battering when Trump specifically calls the press liars.
	And yet, he is a liar.
	In fact, most of these people are liars, and they have been acting like a privileged class.
	This is why Chris Cuomo wants you to only go through him.
	This is why Van Jones has no idea what people in Ohio think, and he thinks of it like some far-reaching remote place that only backwards peasants would go to.
	These people are totally out of touch, and I think it's because they believe their own lies.
	They believe that all they do is speak the truth, because technically all they do is speak the truth, but they only speak half of the truth.
	And it's the other half that's being left out that is leaving them misinformed.
	So I'm not even sure that this is malevolent, necessarily.
	It could be that this is just a natural effect of this kind of insular culture.
	But either way, the results are the same.
	They have failed as journalists.
	They have failed to accurately inform the public because they failed to accurately inform themselves.

▲