When The New York Times writes about The Gateway Pundit it’s typically a political hit piece that is lacking in integrity.
Another liberal reporter at the New York Times attempts to damage the Gateway Pundit and other conservatives. He ends up showing his ignorance of the 2020 election.
Liberal hack Jeremy Peters at The New York Times and the mainstream media do not want to report on the facts of the 2020 election.
- The massive fraud included Republican observers in battleground states locked out of rooms and prevented from reviewing hundreds of thousands of suspect Biden votes
- Impossible vote trends and spikes in several states that are statistically impossible. The fake news media has no intention of looking at this.
- Voting systems with virtually no controls that link to the Internet and have functionality built in to change votes.
- Hidden ballot cases pulled out from under tables —ON VIDEO— all for Biden after a fake water main break was claimed in Georgia and Republican observers were sent home,
- Massive vote drops on the morning after the election, after someone ordered 5 battleground states to stop counting the night before!
No this is The New York Times – the newspaper of record — the same outlet that promoted the fake news Trump-Russia collusion narrative the past five years. The NY Times is synonymous with today’s Big Media – ignoring the great accomplishments of this President while printing disgusting misrepresentations of our President instead (which is what they are doing here).
President Trump had the greatest election win ever for a sitting president. The NYT rather than looking into the rampant election fraud decided instead to attack the few in the media who are reporting the truth.
President Trump’s media criticism is usually binary — there are “good stories,” favorable to him, and then the other category.
Most news coverage on Monday fell into that other category. One by one, presidential electors in all 50 states and the District of Columbia formally recognized Joseph R. Biden Jr. as the president-elect, the latest and most significant rejection so far of Mr. Trump’s desperate attempts to undo the will of the voters.
But inside the sprawling and self-reinforcing network of websites, podcasts and video news that has fed some of the most reckless and unrealistic claims about the election, the myth of Mr. Trump’s political survival endures.
The lead story on the Gateway Pundit, which researchers have identified as one of the major sources of pro-Trump misinformation online, floated the idea of a “BOMBSHELL” ruling in a case on Monday that the site teased as a possible game-changer: “Will a Small County in Northern Michigan Be the Key to Overturning the Nation’s Election Results?”
Peters doesn’t have a clue what this story signified. We know of rampant country-wide voter fraud. We know of absentee ballots being created by the tens of thousands in swing states. We know the numbers make no sense and huge batches of Biden-only votes suddenly appeared the morning after the election in swing states where Trump was crushing expectations, but we never had an independent audit of the voting machines used in this election, until Monday morning in Michigan. And that audit found fraud!
Peters is certainly no auditor and he’s not an IT professional but he does appear to play the role of mainstream media of ignoring and discounting the truth and stubbornly attaching himself to the liberal narrative.
Mr. Peters next went after Mark Levin:
Mr. Levin, along with Rush Limbaugh and Mr. Bannon, was one of the first to give a national platform to the conspiracy theories of the lawyers Lin Wood and Sidney Powell, whose various claims of fraud involve a multinational network of saboteurs and domestic enemies of the president both dead (Hugo Chávez of Venezuela) and alive (“Never Trump” Republican officials).
This too was a mistake as Levin let Peters have it on his daily news show yesterday:
Mark Levin: Democrat Jeremy Peters is a leftist… I’m honest he’s a liar he’s a fraud.
Levin is honest – brutally honest.
Here is a link to his show yesterday where he addressed Peters’ piece, starting around the 25 minute mark: