Rather than tell voters about biden's mental problems, the media joked about them

As Democrats continue to argue about whether they should keep biden as their nominee, a few people are starting to discuss the larger story: how brazenly the Mainstream Media lied to voters about his true mental condition.

Of course media employees can't let Americans know they've been lying, so what we're seeing now is an avalanche of bullshit denials: "We din' know!" they wail in unison.

But of course they knew.  They all knew.  So now they're engaging in more lies--or as they call it, "spin"--damage control to keep the Lying Media from losing too many more subscribers.

In other words, we're seeing yet another huge coverup.

A couple of usually hard-nosed conservative analysts claim the real loser here is the media, specifically organs like the NY Times that pretend to report "newz" honestly.  I disagree: From many hours of conversations with Democrat friends it's apparent that there's a kind of mind-set among Dems along the lines of "The Media are smaht, and have access to government insiders, so they know what's happening.  And I like what the Media tell me, because they reassure me that everything is fine."

"They tell me there's no corruption in congress or the government worth worrying about.  No massive election fraud, no border crisis, no widespread insider trading by congresscreeps.  That there's no such thing as the 'Deep State.' That the vaccine is 'safe...and effective.'  They assure me that the two most dire problems facing us are 1) Global Warming; and 2) "violent white supremacists."  I believe both things, so the Media reinforces what I believe--which means I like them."

It's no surprise that people love to be reassured.  Soothed.  For Democrats that's apparently the calm, reassuring voice of...Rachael Madcow?  Joe Scarborough?  Laurence O'Donnell?  Joy Reid?  SOooo soothing, eh?

So no matter how clear the evidence that the Media has brazenly lied to help biden and his Democrat Party win, people who need to be reassured will never stop trusting the reassuring, soothing voice of the Media that tells them all is well.  Well, all except for the dire threat posed by Trump and conservatives.

Hopefully some of you spotted the paradox there: I just hypothesized that about half of Americans will do almost anything to avoid being upset or alarmed--and yet the same group regards the prospect of Trump's re-election as "the end of ouah precious democracy."  "The end of America."  Seems like an obvious contradiction, eh?

The reason it's not is because they KNOW--at least unconsciously--that the Dem talking points about Trump prosecuting those who've tried to send him to prison--or any of the dozen of other lies the Media tells--are absurd.  They don't really believe any of those things, but pretend to--because it gives 'em a Great Cause to fight for.  Makes 'em feel virtuous, and look virtuous to their friends.

So the Media won't be measurably damaged no matter what brazen lies are revealed.

And here's one: Yesterday New York magazine published a long article about Biden’s decline by Olivia Nuzzi, supposedly its top D.C. reporter.  Nuzzi admits top Democrats had talked about Biden’s worsening memory and cognitive problems at least since January.

January?  Of what year?  She means this year, but it's been obvious since before he was selected.

But she says the "top Democrats" didn't want to talk on the record. "They were scared."  Gosh Olivia, if you knew but couldn't get anyone to go on the record, why didn't you write something along the lines of "Top Democrat strategists are concerned," eh?

Because you and your mag's editors want the Democrats to retain the presidency, and the senate, and take control of the House.  So even if you'd wanted to write the truth, you know your editors would never have run the story.

Their allegiance--and yours--is NOT to the truth, but to the Democrat party.

She uses the excuse that she couldn't get any Democrats to go on the record.  But reporters write stories quoting anonymous insiders every day.  You could have written a story that way--but you didn't.  Because you knew it would never have been published.

Then late in the piece Nuzzi makes an extraordinary admission — one whose importance she doesn't seem to recognize:  She had personally seen Biden’s mental state at handshake range--and was chilled.

At this year's White House Correspondents’ Association dinner she met Biden--for the first time--at a photo session and reception before the dinner.  Here's how she describes the encounter:

My heart stopped as I extended my hand to greet the president. I tried to make eye contact, but it was like his eyes, though open, were not on…

Recognizing that people love to invent drama, does anyone else find that a really creepy statement?

Leaving the room after the photo she says the group of reporters with her jokingly guessed about "how dead he appeared to be."  She writes that one guessed forty percent.

Nuzzi--a biden fan--looked at his eyes and wrote "It was like his eyes, though open, were not on."  But rather than write about her personal observation, she said nothing...until now, when the Media's mission is damage control.  Biden doesn't matter--they'll eagerly support Cackles or Newsom or Gretch.  All that matters to the Media is a) damage control; and b) that the Democrats retain control.

The reason none of 'em wrote about what they'd all seen is obvious: because they wanted the Democrats to keep control of the government.  So instead of telling voters the truth, they joked about it among themselves: "How dead do you think he is, percentage-wise?"

Even after the debate they claimed real, unedited videos from the G-7 meeting were "cheap fakes" and "misinformation."  So easy when the Democrat-fellating Media covers for ya, eh?

Hating Trump and loving "their" Democrat party, they all knew hiding the truth about biden from the public was the "right" thing to do.  If not for the live, unedited, televised debate they'd STILL be claiming biden is fine.

H/T Alex Berenson
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/what-did-white-house-reporters-know-when-did-know-it