All errors should be reported to

Monday, November 26, 2018

Fake News along the border

Bess Levin of Vanity Fair reported on Monday, "Administration Admits Border Deployment Was a $200 Million Election."

That was a lie.

She also reported, "The military is leaving the southern border, and the caravan hasn’t even arrived yet."

That, too, was a lie.

She accused the president of telling "bald-faced lies" before the election.

She wrote, "First, the president claimed, with no evidence, that 'criminals and unknown Middle Easterners are mixed' in with the group."

How did she know what evidence the president has? The president has privy to CIA, FBI, Homeland Security, and NSA intelligence.

And of course, MS-13 members travel with the crowd.

But she claimed, with no evidence, that the administration admitted this was a publicity stunt.

Fake News.

This was no publicity stunt.

The federal government has a constitutional duty to "provide for the common defense." President Trump is the commander-in-chief.

The military put up concertina wire.

On Sunday, the Associated Press reported, "Migrants approaching the U.S. border from Mexico were enveloped with tear gas Sunday after a few tried to breach the fence separating the two countries. U.S. agents shot the gas, according to an Associated Press reporter on the scene. Children were screaming and coughing in the mayhem."

The wire service quoted the invaders and Mexican officials, but not one U.S. official in its 582-word report.

That is not journalism because journalism requires telling both sides of the story.


Please enjoy my books in paperback and on Kindle.

Trump the Press covers the nomination.

Trump the Establishment covers the election.

Fake News Follies of 2017 covers his first year as president.

For autographed copies, write me at


  1. Fake News only requires one side and AP has become distressingly good at it. Also the troops didn't just string concertina. They strung razor wire which, barbed wire, can be lethal if you fall in it.

  2. What a large mouth Bass hole, telling fish stories.

  3. The NYT called it a "peaceful protest gone wrong". The propaganda mills of the thirties never shut down, really.

  4. An alternative take:

    Yesterday, the U.S. military demonstrated remarkable restraint in dispersing members of an invading army who attempted to cross the border illegally. Unlike the rules of engagement used by the Soviet Union in the mid 20th century, which called for border crossers to be shot on sight, this brief skirmish ended with no deaths as the gatecrashers reluctantly retreated. “They got schlonged,” said President Trump, fresh off a working holiday and back in Washington.

    1. Apparently Mexico is deporting anyone involved in the rush to the border that was caught. That will slow down any attempts to rush the border at least for a while until they come up with something else.

  5. Part of being informed nowadays is being able to read between the lines of many different sources and synthesizing some reasonable facsimile of what actually happened out of a spreadsheet of lies.

  6. Replies
    1. Yeah, I thought there must be a word missing there, but I couldn't be bothered to check Vanity Fair. "Stunt" fits!

  7. The cover of the NY Post this morning shows a "mom and her kids" escaping tear gas. In the far background there are at least 20 men far away from it. Another photo op.

  8. "Levin" Enough said. Democrat commie lib

  9. The problem with Fake News publishers is that there is no real consequences for their lying. We need a corp of angry "Truth Seekers" showing up on their doorsteps protesting their acts.

  10. A FEW tried to breach the fence? Try 500. Fake news at it's finest.

  11. Why haven't we indicted the leaders of "Pueblo Sin Frontiers" the organizers of this illegal alien horde for human trafficking? These turds get half their money from Soros and the rest from drug cartels.

  12. In '93 these attempts to overwhelm US border forces, were referred to (in one article I read yesterday) as banzai charges. There were also two photos, taken a year or more apart, with the same type of banzai charge in the same border area.

    I'm glad the border is better protected than before. I'm also glad the President is being serious about protecting our border.

  13. Why wasn't CNN covering this live with drones, gas masks, etc.? They've had plenty of time to get there to stage/cover this historic event.

  14. Money talks and bs walks.

    "That's quite a chunk of change your getting there - the $25 Billion in cash remittances from the US to Mexico every year. You know? As much as your entire OPEC oil industry. It'd be a real shame if something - cough, cough - were to cause that $25 Billion inflow of cash to abruptly end. Hmmm. I wonder, just what Mexico could do to avoid all that nastiness? Hmmm. I wonder."

    1. Dang it ... "That's quite a chunk of change ***you're***..."

  15. The new bureaucracy that Mexico will now create to decide who's application gets approved to wait in line awaiting US court approval looks like a $$$ cash cow.

    The US will give them some $$$ foreign aid and rough guidelines to follow so Mexico could charge each applicant a few thousand dollars over the table, plus money they'll receive under the table to get felonies taken off the official records. This will help to make Mexico's new government to come in power much stronger financially and politically.

    Sounds like a win win situation for both the US and Mexico since the Mexican government can bypass rich US immigration lawyers and Mexican leaders can become rich instead of the rich lawyers.

    We'll get convicted felons who are put into Mexico's Witness Protection Plan but if it reduces illegal immigration to none then it's worth it as this gives Mexico an incentive to help build the wall we need.

    All Mexico needs to do now is to shoot any lawyers on Mexican soil that try to prevent this from operating smoothly for them... maybe the US government should send most of our immigration lawyers south of the border to talk to their clients?

  16. Another Conde Nast buffoon, I'd expect no less from an employee of an organization that is to news and quality content what fecal matter is to food.

  17. The concept of there being "sides" to an event is fundamentally not journalism.

    It is opinion.

    The essential Who, What, Where, When and, perhaps, How, are the only questions whose answers report as journalism.

    The Why question, requiring the knowing of the motives of any and all participating Who persons, which depends entirely upon each Who person's honesty, is never truly known to anyone other than the person stating their own Why.

    Why has no function in journalism.

    Opinion has no function in journalism.

    News is not opinion.

    News is solely What happened, Where did the What happen, When did the What happen, Who were involved in the event that happened and How did the event happen. That is it. Everything else is opinion. Not journalism.

    The fuckers know this.