Jul 30, 2020

Fascinating Synchronicity: The Animistic Or "Mystical" Outlook Of Modern Physics And Evolutionary Science

Animism is the belief amoungst primitive tribal people not influenced by the great religions that all of life is animated with life including the physical world of matter (see Wikipedia description). You find this same idea in Eastern mysticism (such as in Buddhism and yoga) and elements of it in western mysticism in all 3 of the major religions (mystics talk of seeing 'the divine spark in everything' or 'the face of god everywhere'). 

In other words, Animism may be a fundamental part of our psychology and we can see this reflected in our study of physics and biology as well. In physics, with quantum mechanics, it became clear that observations of subatomic phenomenon influenced what was observed and entanglement created theories like "spooky action at a distance" because it seems - to a not strictly mathematical minded person - as if the subatomic world - and thus the very foundations of matter - is alive! Same observation exists in animism from which some of the spiritualism/mysticism of the later religions seem to be derived, without the science.

Such observations became popular in the books The Tao of Physics and The Dancing Wu Li Masters. I'm not concerned with whether this interpretation of all of life as alive is correct or not, or whether the analogy to eastern religions and western mysticism is correct or not, what I'm interested in showing is WHY an observer would think that 'everything is one' - in a very real mystical sense - just by looking at the science. 

Here is an extract from Wikipedia that summarizes some of whats happened in this field;
“Science does not need mysticism and mysticism does not need science. But man needs both.”
According to the preface of the first edition, reprinted in subsequent editions, Capra struggled to reconcile theoretical physics and Eastern mysticism and was at first "helped on my way by 'power plants'" or psychedelics, with the first experience "so overwhelming that I burst into tears, at the same time, not unlike Castaneda, pouring out my impressions to a piece of paper". (p. 12, 4th ed.)
Capra later discussed his ideas with Werner Heisenberg in 1972, as he mentioned in the following interview excerpt:
I had several discussions with Heisenberg. I lived in England then [circa 1972], and I visited him several times in Munich and showed him the whole manuscript chapter by chapter. He was very interested and very open, and he told me something that I think is not known publicly because he never published it. He said that he was well aware of these parallels. While he was working on quantum theory he went to India to lecture and was a guest of Tagore. He talked a lot with Tagore about Indian philosophy. Heisenberg told me that these talks had helped him a lot with his work in physics, because they showed him that all these new ideas in quantum physics were in fact not all that crazy. He realized there was, in fact, a whole culture that subscribed to very similar ideas. Heisenberg said that this was a great help for him. Niels Bohr had a similar experience when he went to China.[1]
As a result of those influences, Bohr adopted the yin yang symbol as part of his family coat of arms when he was knighted in 1947.
The Tao of Physics was followed by other books of the same genre like The Hidden Connection, The Turning Point and The Web of Life in which Capra extended the argument of how Eastern mysticism and scientific findings of today relate, and how Eastern mysticism might also have answers to some of the biggest scientific challenges of today.

This is a walk-through the science to show how everything really is connected and really is one type of life or, as some Buddhists say, "All is interconnected". Lets begin.

In animism the belief in inanimate matter is alive and in modern physics "life" literally comes from "in animate" matter. 

"Non-Life" Becomes Life OR Life As We Know It Emerges From Matter: The basic theory is that one of the most important building blocks of life, amino acids, were possibly created in muddy water (primordial soup) by electricity (lightning strike). This links all of life to basic physical process in the physical world, i.e. "non-life" turns into life. 

Where Did Life Come From? (feat. PBS Space Time and Eons!)
The origin of life is one of the most important mysteries in all of science. When did life begin? How did life first evolve from chemistry? Where did life get started? In some primordial soup or somewhere else? Let’s journey back to the origin of life, as best as we know it, from the RNA world do the last universal common ancestor of everything alive today.



Ultimately, all living things share the same building blocks of life i.e. DNA and the scientific - biological - breakthrough that ties all of life together is DNA. What proves that humans and plants come from the same source - of life - is shown by the fact that humans share over 96% of their DNA with chimpanzees and 60% of their DNA with chickens, bananas and fruit flies

Overview of the science: The science of evolution and how it works explained with the added advantage of genetic science (which seems to have proven the core explanations for how evolution works through natural selection... other ways evolution works is through genetic mutation, genetic drift and gene flow. Such actions, over time, can create new species altogether. Such science makes it possible for us to trace back the origin of life, at least conceptually, to one single organism).

How Evolution Works (And How We Figured It Out)
As a scientific concept, evolution was revolutionary when it was first introduced. With the help of all three of our hosts and the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History’s new Deep Time Hall, we’ll try to explain how evolution actually works and how we came to understand it.



From observation it has become obvious that animals (living beings in an environment) respond to their environment by adapting to it with physical changes. Overtime these changes become pronounced and new species are formed.

The following video takes us to the single cell structures that created life as we know it to us today. One interesting to note is that 40 million years ago primates existed and 23 million years ago the ancestor of the Asian monkey existed. Our common ancestor must have existed 40 million years ago or more. The research on language pathways in the brain appear to take language back about 20 million years, so that could be one of the boundaries for the emergence of our species.

From the Fall of Dinos to the Rise of Humans
After taking you on a journey through geologic time, we've arrived at the Cenozoic Era. Most of the mammals and birds that you can think of appeared during this era but perhaps more importantly, the Cenozoic marks the rise of organisms that look a lot like us.



Since all of life shares the basic buildings blocks (RNA, DNA, Protein) and DNA is shared from complex organisms (animals and humans) all the way to bacteria, there must have been an early form of life where the building blocks of life first came together. This video is about the search for the source of life on this planet.

What Was the Ancestor of Everything? (feat. PBS Space Time and It’s Okay To Be Smart)
The search for our origins go back to a single common ancestor -- one that remains shrouded in mystery. It’s the ancestor of everything we know and today scientists call it the last universal common ancestor, or LUCA.


Note: We found 3 basic forms of life. We (and all animals and plants) evolved from Eukaryotes.


And its possible, as most researchers seem to believe, that Archaea was an earlier ancestor of all life;


This means that whatever existed before life branches into Bacteria and Archaea is the ancestor of all life.


Embryos with jelly, like those that come from frogs, eventually came with a leathery covering and that eventually became a solid shell. So the age old question of which came first, The Chicken or The Egg has been answered. It was the egg. By millions of years.

How the Egg Came First
The story of the egg spans millions of years, from the first vertebrates that dared to venture onto land to today’s mammals, including the platypus, and of course birds. Like chickens? We’re here to tell you: The egg came first.


Here is an extract about an Indian myth from Wikipedia: The Brahma Purana describes that there was nothing, but an eternal ocean. From which, a golden egg, called Hiranyagarbha, emerged. The egg broke open and Brahma, who had created himself within it, came into existence (gaining the name Swayambhu). Then, he created the universe, the earth and other things. He also created people to populate and live on his creation.[11]

Spooky?


Note 1: To emphasize how environment affects evolution and thus forms of life, take a look at these videos;

Another interesting thing is Convergent Evolution where different types of animals will grow and evolve to fill niches and in doing so will begin to look a little like each other in some way or another because of similar lifestyles. Crocodilians looked like dinosaurs and died out;

When Dinosaur Look-Alikes Ruled the Earth
There were a huge number of croc-like animals that flourished during the Triassic Period. Dinosaurs had just arrived on the scene but it was these animals that truly ruled the Earth, becoming both abundant and diverse.



And mammals did eventually did grow to fill niches left behind by the extinction of dinosaurs, with our species (mammals) major early advantage being that it was small and thus more able to survive the cataclysm of that era (maybe earlier dinos were also small enough to survive the cataclysm of their era?);

The Age of Reptiles in Three Acts
Reptiles emerged from the Paleozoic as humble creatures, but in time, they grew to become some of the largest forms of life ever to stomp, swim, and soar across the planet. This Age of Reptiles was a spectacular prehistoric epic, and it all took place in a single era: the Mesozoic.



A perfect example;

Why Triassic Animals Were Just the Weirdest
The Triassic was full of creatures that look a lot like other, more modern species, even though they’re not closely related at all. The reason for this has to do with how evolution works and with the timing of the Triassic itself: when life was trapped between two mass extinctions.



Note 2: More physics about how life emerges from non life.

The Physics of Life (ft. It's Okay to be Smart & PBS Eons!) | Space Time
Our universe is prone to increasing disorder and chaos. So how did it generate the extreme complexity we see in life? Actually, the laws of physics themselves may demand it.



Antiquities Research

Jul 29, 2020

Media Matters Proves Corporate Media's Journalists Aren't Real Journalists

Background/Context:
1. Mainstream Media Is Markedly Pro-Right Wing Lies - Part 2
2. The Phenomenon Of The Muslim Narrative In America Part 2
3. Media Ignore Trump's Well Wishes To Alleged Underage Sex Trafficker And Instead Try To Enhance His Image, A Common Theme When Media Has To Deal With Republicans

Media matters has proven that the journalists you see on TV aren't real journalists. At the end of this research piece they actually state: For the sake of their audiences, for the sake of democracy, and for the sake of the press as an institution, they must start doing their jobs and reporting on reality as it is and not simply what they wish it was. 


Media Matters: Journalists have been obsessing over Trump supposedly changing his “tone” for five years

It’s been more than five years since Donald Trump rode down the golden escalator of his eponymous New York City tower to a crowd containing actors paid to cheer for him. There, he announced his campaign for president. As months passed, it became clear that Trump had a legitimate shot at winning the Republican nomination while running a campaign filled with racist invective and incoherent policy goals. He was not presidential in any sense of the word, and mainstream news outlets struggled to come to terms with that.
Perhaps as a coping mechanism, playing to their own normalcy biases, the press desperately tried to find any glimmer of hope that the Republican frontrunner might not actually be the Trump that was barnstorming the country. Perhaps there was a different Trump beneath the surface. Perhaps, as candidates of the past had, Trump would become more moderate as he moved to win over voters across the political spectrum during the general election.
Whatever subconscious reason for it, many in the media projected their own desire for normalcy onto a Trump avatar. Words like “pivot” were thrown around on such a regular basis that “here comes the pivot” became a joke by the campaign’s end. No pivot came. Then there was speculation that perhaps the presidency itself would inspire a more serious and sober Trump to emerge. That didn’t happen, either. 
Fast forward five years and journalists and commentators are still talking about imminent pivots and praising him for always-temporary changes in his tone.

There is no secret, more presidential Trump waiting to emerge, and years of “new tone” coverage has aged poorly.

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked whether people could expect to see “a less blunt, less angry Donald Trump” in February 2016, less than two months after Trump called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”
A few days later, CNN’s Dana Bash commented that she was “struck at how different his demeanor” was during an interview she conducted with Trump. During the interview, Bash gushed over Trump’s supposed restraint in the previous few days. “I kind of want to ask who are you and what have you done with Donald Trump?” she joked before adding, “You really have seem to have changed your tone. You have gone back to basics. You're really not engaging, even when people engage you and talk about the fact that you're a counter-puncher, it's not happening now.”
Bash’s interview was a day after a debate in which Trump promised to “bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding” to torture enemy combatants. This, somehow, fit in with the “changed … tone” Bash mentioned.
On April 20, 2016, Tom Llamas of ABC’s World News Tonight with David Muir lauded Trump’s “more serious tone” and “more presidential style.” What did Trump do to earn this praise? During a primary victory speech, he referred to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as “Senator Cruz” instead of “Lyin’ Ted,” a nickname he’d been throwing around for a while at that point. The same segment showed Trump almost immediately returning to his insult-slinging ways at his very next event, but for some reason, his ability to be temporarily polite was worthy of ABC’s applause. Reporting on the same speech over at CNN, Jason Carroll said that Trump’s win in the New York primary was “signaling a new phase in his campaign” because he was “dropping most of the insults and sounding more presidential.” In yet another segment, CNN’s Brooke Baldwin said that Trump was “appearing less combative, more presidential.”
“Get ready for the new Donald Trump,” MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski said on the May 4, 2016, edition of Morning Joe, calling Trump’s tone as evidence of “the beginning of a massive pivot” to the general election.
These clips are just the tip of the example iceberg, but hopefully help illustrate how far back the search for Trump’s “new tone” goes.

Media experts’ unwillingness to contextualize the Trump presidency makes them bad at their jobs.

Political analysts’ compulsive need to grade Trump on a curve has made much of their work worthless. For instance, look at the coverage of Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress on February 28, 2017. Ahead of the speech, CNN repeatedly referred to the address as an opportunity to “reset” his presidency. Immediately following the speech, mainstream outlets confirmed this hypothesis. “We saw the long-awaited pivot,” said ABC’s Alex Castellanos. “For the first time, I’m hearing people say he looked and sounded presidential,” said CBS’ Gayle King.
The most infamous and mockable moment came when CNN’s Van Jones gushed about how Trump “became president” that night.
VAN JONES: He became president of the United States in that moment. Period. There are a lot of people who have a lot of reason to be frustrated with him, to be fearful of him, to be mad at him. But that was one of the most extraordinary moments you have ever seen in American politics, period. And he did something extraordinary, and for people who have been hoping that he would become unifying, hoping that he might find some way to become presidential, they should be happy with that moment.
All of these professional analysts and journalists were put to absolute shame by a prescient woman in a CBS focus group.
“That’s not the Donald Trump that I’ve seen for the past 30 days,” she said. “Where is that guy? Where’s that guy that says what he wants to say, that is loud, that says everything is fake news? Where’s that guy? … I’m going to look for him on Twitter tomorrow and see what he really thinks. Great job to the speechwriter, but I will see Donald Trump at 12 a.m.”
She called it. Just four days later, Trump accused former President Barack Obama of having his “wires tapped” in the Trump Tower. “This is McCarthyism!” Trump tweeted, calling Obama, “Bad (or sick) guy!”
This example raises an important question. How are people whose entire livelihood revolves around following politics less in tune with current events than a  focus group member whose life presumably doesn’t involve the non-stop consumption of political news? It comes down to a desire for something resembling a normal world with a normal president.
Members of the press contort themselves in an effort to find something positive they can say about Trump, and that often comes at the expense of accurately portraying what’s happening in the world. Instead of providing context for what is happening, these analysts find still frames completely detached from time and meaning from the Trump presidency. That’s not good journalism. If a food critic goes to a restaurant three times and gets food poisoning twice, would it make sense for them to separate the one trip that didn’t make them sick for its own four-star review? Of course not. Honest journalism relies on adding context that lets you know that the time you don’t get food poisoning is an aberration and not an excuse to ignore the bad.

Media wishcasting cannot replace reporting, and that’s why it’s absurd that the press is still trying to find slivers of normalcy in an utterly abnormal presidency.

In March this year, media outlets again tried to give Trump credit for a supposedly “new tone.”
The Associated Press published an article titled “Trump changes his tone, gets real on the coronavirus threat” on March 17. Though it noted that the change in tone lasted a day, the article claimed that “it signaled an urgent new White House response to a crisis that’s upending American society.”
He called on the country to come together. He warned of pain to come. And he deferred to the nation’s public health experts while at least momentarily putting aside petty squabbling.
After weeks of trying to play down the risk posed by the coronavirus pandemic, President Donald Trump struck a more urgent tone Monday as he delivered a sobering message to Americans grappling with a new reality that will dramatically alter their lives for months to come.
The change in tone lasted a day. But it signaled an urgent new White House response to a crisis that’s upending American society.
During the March 17 edition of CNN’s Right Now with Brianna Keilar, more than three years after she praised Trump’s shift in tone on the campaign trail, Dana Bash called Trump’s coronavirus press conference “remarkable” and something “to applaud.” “He is being the kind of leader that people need, at least in tone, today, and yesterday, in tone that people need and want and yearn for in times of crisis and uncertainty.”
On March 18, USA Today published a piece that mentioned Trump’s remark about a conversation he had with his son Barron who had asked him about the pandemic. Trump said he had replied, “It's bad. But we're going to be hopefully a best case, not a worst case.” The piece said Trump’s “invocation of his son” was the “latest demonstration of a shift in tone for a president who once described concerns over the public health crisis as a ‘hoax’ and who has often mocked the idea of sounding ‘presidential.’”
A couple weeks later, reporters once again credited Trump for being “realistic” and “sober” during a taskforce press conference.
In between those two briefings, and ever since, Trump has downplayed the virus, mismanaged the response, and even argued that the U.S. should slow testing for it. On July 1, CNN was quick to credit Trump’s “pivot” on masks after he said he would have “no problem” wearing one. Two and a half weeks later, CNN again gave him kudos, this time for tweeting a photo of himself wearing a mask.
Last week, reporters were again eager to praise Trump for a “new tone,” this time for acknowledging that the pandemic is likely to “get worse before it gets better,” an episode that probably set off a bit of deja vu in anyone who watched the mid-March applause he got for finally taking it seriously -- supposedly.
It’s not enough for news outlets to report on isolated moments of lucidity from the president. Instead, journalists need to take the extra step of providing basic context for what they’re reporting on. Rather than churning out thousands of words about a shift in tone or a “pivot” every few weeks with the same level of credulity they’d have afforded past presidents, they need to understand that snapshot reporting like that only misinforms audiences and further erodes trust in the news media. For the sake of their audiences, for the sake of democracy, and for the sake of the press as an institution, they must start doing their jobs and reporting on reality as it is and not simply what they wish it was.

Media


Jul 24, 2020

Trump Brags About His Test For Dementia As If It Were An Actual Intelligence Test Proving He's Too Mentally Handicapped To Handle ANY Real Job That Isn't Being A Janitor!

Related: Trump Is Crazy. There's No Denying It. Just Accept It. We Have A Completely Mad President And A Party That Wants A Mad Man In Office For Personal Gain!

The Truth Behind Trump’s Intelligence Test | The Daily Social Distancing Show
Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV. The truth behind Trump’s intelligence test. Plus, Biden calls Trump “the country’s first racist president,” forgetting a whole bunch of previous presidents. #DailyShow #TrevorNoah #Trump



About Trumps little test to see if he can still recognize animals in his confused brain;

a

Trump Obsesses Over His Cognitive Test, Deploys More Secret Police: A Closer Look
Seth takes a closer look at Trump sending more federal officers into cities and trying to convince people he’s taking the pandemic seriously and that his brain works.



Trump Proves His Cognitive Abilities With Five Magical Words
While the country he leads descends further into Covid-fueled disarray, President Trump kept busy Wednesday by summoning Fox News to the White House for a demonstration of his superhuman cognitive skills. #StephenAtHome #Monologue #PersonWomanManCameraTVl Words: Person, Woman, Man, Camera, TV



President Trump


Jul 23, 2020

Pedo Pals: With Trump's Well Wishes For Epstein Associate In Prison, His Support For Roy Moore Makes More Sense

Background/Context:
1. FLASHBACK: Trump, GOP & Right Wing Media Embraced Pedophile Roy Moore
2. Media Ignore Trump's Well Wishes To Alleged Underage Sex Trafficker And Instead Try To Enhance His Image, A Common Theme When Media Has To Deal With Republicans
3. Trump Is Crazy. There's No Denying It. Just Accept It. We Have A Completely Mad President And A Party That Wants A Mad Man In Office For Personal Gain!

CNN: Trump on Epstein confidante Ghislaine Maxwell: I wish her well



CNN: President Donald Trump that he wishes Ghislaine Maxwell "well," as she faces charges for recruiting, grooming and ultimately sexually abusing minors as young as 14 as Jeffrey Epstein's alleged accomplice. "I just wish her well, frankly," Trump said during a White House press briefing on the coronavirus pandemic. Trump acknowledged that he has met Maxwell "numerous times" over the years, but said he hasn't been following her case. The President was also asked whether he believes Maxwell will turn on powerful men, including Prince Andrew, who has faced public pressure to explain his relationship with Epstein and one of his accusers, Virginia Roberts Giuffre. Giuffre has alleged that she was forced into sexual encounters with the prince while she was underage. rump replied on Maxwell, "I don't know. I haven't really been following it too much. I just wish her well, frankly. I've met her numerous times over the years, especially since I lived in Palm Beach. I guess they lived in Palm Beach. But I wish her well. Whatever it is. I don't know the situation with Prince Andrew. Just don't know. Not aware of it." CNN #News


Mika: ‘We allow the shock to wear off’ - When asked about alleged sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, President Trump used the stage to ‘wish her well.’ Morning Joe discusses the normalization of the president's problematic statements.





Related posts:

From Being Pro-Child Rape To Stealing A Conspiracy Site's Explanation For His Yearbook Signing... All Evidence Points To Roy Moore Being A Pedophile Who Used His Influence As A Lawyer & Then A Judge To Scare Some Of His Victims & Charm Others Into Silence

Trump, Hannity, And The Pedophile Brigade

The Veritas Pedophile Brigade Is Just Another Billionaire (Koch & Devos) Funded Fake News Project

With RNC's Funding Of Roy Moore & Trump's Endorsement Of Him... Truth Tellers Can Now Official Use The Term "The Pedophile Party" in Describing The GOP

Stuff Fox News Won't Tell You: Before Having Unprotected Sex With Porn Star Stormy Daniels, Trump Told Her That She Reminded Him Of His Daughter!

Don't Forget: Donald Trump Wants To Bang His Daughter

Height Of Hypocrisy 5: Roy Moore Hypocrisy & Deficit Hypocrisy Show GOP Stand For Nothing. Not Family Values. Not Fiscal Responsibility. Nothing. Except Maybe Pedophiles.

Media Ignore Trump's Well Wishes To Alleged Underage Sex Trafficker And Instead Try To Enhance His Image, A Common Theme When Media Has To Deal With Republicans

Background/Context:
1. Media Uselessness Example: Ignoring Historical Context To Explain The Trump VS Lincoln Poll Of Republicans
2. War Based Money Con: Chuck Todd Of Meet The Press Promoted Pro-Iran War Views By Hosting A Lobbyist/Briber Without Disclosing That He Was Doing That And Helped The Guys Company's Stock Go Up!
3. BREAKING: Corporate Media Is Helping The GOP With Their Lies On Iran The Way They Did With Iraq
4. Why Do News Outlets Bring On Non-Scientists To Argue Against Science?
5. Pedo Pals: With Trump's Well Wishes For Epstein Associate In Prison, His Support For Roy Moore Makes More Sense

Comedians and a media watchdog slam the media for its sheer psychotic incompetence.



Seth Meyers slams the psychotic media as well:

Trump Holds Coronavirus Briefing, Threatens to Send More Secret Police: A Closer Look
Seth takes a closer look at President Trump trying to convince Americans he suddenly cares about the pandemic he’s been ignoring for months.



Media Matters.org: News media hail Trump for “changing his tone” on coronavirus — againThis just keeps on happening



News media are falling yet again into a predictable trap, commending President Donald Trump for a supposed “new tone” at his July 21 press briefing on the coronavirus pandemic, and saying he seems to be taking the crisis more seriously.
This is the same press briefing at which Trump said of the case of accused sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, “I wish her well.”
Media Matters has previously cautioned the media against accepting a supposed “new tone” from Trump on the coronavirus — all the way back in early April, when an initial wave of such praise occurred after Trump warned of a “very, very painful” period ahead at his March 31 briefing. (At the time, this blunt admission came after Trump had previously insisted for months that the outbreak was “totally under control.”)
Indeed, the predictions of a Trump pivot have been going on as long as his presidency, and they keep on coming up no matter how often these prognostications fall through.
Even before the latest press conference on July 21 was actually held, ABC News tweeted this message Tuesday afternoon:
In fact, ABC's Rick Klein has repeatedly praised Trump over the years for changing his “tone.”
Here's how some other media outlets reacted to Trump's appearance:
Even if the articles give more context, headlines such as these are problematic because many people don’t click past them, and the news media’s capacity for handling Trump’s lies and obfuscations in headlines has clearly been a running problem.
Comedy Central’s The Daily Show posted this clips reel showing TV news shows lauding Trump’s supposed “new tone,” from such diverse sources as CBS News, NBC News, Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, and the local ABC News broadcast in New York City.
The Columbia Journalism Review explained the problem in more analytical terms (emphasis original):
One interpretation of the tone obsession is that it reflects a broader, stubbornly amoral approach to political coverage—a warped, superficial fixation on strategy, polling, and style. A kinder interpretation is that it reflects wishful thinking—a persistent desire to believe that maybe, this time, the president really does grasp the severity of the situation, and might act on it. There’s probably some truth in both. Either way, we urgently need a change of course. Actions speak louder than words. They are certainly a much better way of judging a president.

Here media tries to pretend that leaders such as Mitch McConnell are being moral rather than the complete opposite, again, improving GOP image in the public's eye. When it comes to the GOP, the media are more than willing to coverup the truth or moderate it proving they are not real journalists. Just media relation specialists helping terrorists and white supremacists succeed whenever and wherever possible.

Mainstream news outlets keep running stories about performative GOP opposition to TrumpAs Republican lawmakers look ahead to a potential post-Trump future, they’re keeping a safe distance publicly


In June 2016, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) appeared on CNBC’s Squawk Box to discuss Republicans’ imminent nomination of then-candidate Donald Trump. There, he sought to calm the nerves of Trump-skeptical members of his party.
“I do think that the Constitution and the traditions of this county constrain all of us -- those of us in Congress and those of us in the White House -- from some of our impulses, shall I say, that we’d like to pursue,” said McConnell about concerns that a Trump presidency would resemble the chaos of his candidacy.
Three and a half years into Trump’s presidency, and it’s clear that congressional Republicans haven’t been the moderating force McConnell promised that day on CNBC. Far from McConnell’s assurance that Trump’s “not going to change the platform of the Republican Party, the views of the Republican Party,” the party has fallen in line behind Trump’s leadership. McConnell, for his part, has voted with Trump's agenda 94.2% of the time. Even Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), who distanced herself from Trump following the 2016 release of Trump’s infamous Access Hollywood tape, has come around on the Republican standard-bearer, voting with him 95% of the time.
Whether it’s voting to confirm Trump’s questionably qualified and often extremist judicial appointments or clearing the way for acquittal in his impeachment case, Republicans have made very clear that they are his party now. Trump’s presidency is the product of his Republican enablers.
And that’s precisely why it’s so confusing to see article after article in mainstream media outlets reporting on the comments whenever Republican lawmakers do criticize him, however toothlessly. Those critiques often come when it’s politically expedient for the politicians to make them. For instance, as Trump’s poll numbers decline amid the chaos brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic and civil unrest, congressional Republicans appear more willing to break ranks with him. 
These lawmakers want to have it both ways. While continuing to buoy the president’s agenda with their votes and legislation, they have taken to publicly opposing aspects they find politically risky without actually using their power as elected officials to rein in anything they truly see as being out of bounds. News outlets, then, need to take more care in their coverage of these claims, examining the depth of the critiques.

Outlets like The Washington Post and The New York Times hype the “chorus of Republicans” who push back ever so gently on Trump’s rhetoric and agenda.

In January 2019, The New York Times published a piece about McConnell’s “rebuke” of Trump’s foreign policy goals, noting that “the disconnect between President Trump and the Republican establishment on foreign policy has rarely been as stark.” Though several Republicans criticized Trump’s plans to pull troops from Syria and Afghanistan, they did next to nothing to actually prevent him from actually doing it. In October, the House of Representatives passed a nonbinding resolution condemning his Syria policy, but that was the extent of their actions


The New York Times: "A Growing Chorus of Republican Critics for Trump's Foreign Policy"
An article in Navy Times said that such nonbinding resolutions let members of Congress “seem like they’re holding the president accountable without actually doing so.” If Congress actually wanted to act as a check on Trump’s foreign policy decisions, the article notes, its members could have held hearings or restricted military funding. They did neither.
Following Trump’s claim that there was blame to go around on “both sides” of a white supremacist rally where anti-racist protester Heather Heyer was murdered, The Washington Post wrote of the “chorus of Republicans” who “expressed alarm over Trump’s words and their potential cost with voters.” While Republicans may have “expressed alarm” about Trump’s embrace of white nationalists, any concerns they had didn’t rise to the level of actually doing anything about it. 
More recently, mainstream news outlets have provided space for Republicans who may feel wary about Trump’s dwindling reelection prospects to separate themselves from him on his much-maligned response to the COVID-19 pandemic that has resulted in more than 140,000 American deaths to date. The Washington Post adopted the “chorus of Republicans” angle for a May article about Trump’s reluctance to promote wearing face masks.


The Washington Post: "Trump's mockery of wearing masks divides Republicans"
“Fearing Political Peril, Republicans Edge Away From Trump on Pandemic Response,” reads a May 2 headline in The New  York Times. In the piece, Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) said, “You have to sort of thread the needle. I’ve been careful. I said, ‘Let’s look to the future,’ versus ‘Why didn’t we do this a few months ago?’ I’m not interested in pointing the finger of blame. I want to correct the issues.” At the heart of Upton’s comment is an implicit refusal to hold the president accountable for failures. To suggest that this was Upton truly trying to “edge away” from Trump is an overly generous interpretation of what Upton actually said.
Over the weekend, a New York Times article claimed that Republicans had started to “break ranks” with Trump on his response to the pandemic, citing a “quiet but widening breach” between lawmakers and the president

The New York Times: "As Trump Ignores Virus Crisis, Republicans Start to Break Ranks"
McConnell, the Times wrote, “broke with Mr. Trump on nearly every major issue related to the virus” in recent comments.
While it’s true that there is some dissent coming from congressional Republicans regarding the pandemic, news outlets have a responsibility to highlight how transparently self-serving it is.
For instance, after Trump had protesters violently dispersed outside the White House in early June, the Times ran a piece about some Republicans’ supposed rejection of Trump’s “harsh response to unrest.

The New York Times: "In Rare Break, Some Republicans Reject Trump's Harsh Response to Unrest"
Whatever their objections may be, they haven’t taken any action to prevent him from continuing the use of unidentified federal law enforcement officials to engage with protesters. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) plan to introduce legislation that would require federal agents to display identification on their uniforms. While this wouldn’t prevent Trump from using agents to police protests, it would impose a level of accountability that goes beyond shaking heads, furrowing brows, and making annoyed and forced public comments. 
It’s become clear that congressional Republicans are increasingly concerned about Trump’s reelection odds and want to get themselves on the record as being opposed to his extreme actions -- or, as was the case with many aspects of the pandemic, inaction -- so that further down the line they won’t be held accountable for things he did as president. This is about salvaging their own reputation and hedging their bets on Trump’s legacy, and it’s important that news outlets make this clear in their own reporting. This is Trump’s party now, and journalists have a responsibility to hammer that point home in the face of the GOP public relations onslaught.

Whenever Trump sticks to the script the media supports him and forgets ALL past actions and statements and patterns of behavior. Media is pro-GOP no matter how much they lie or fight science. There is no other way to see it.

Trump’s “New Tone” on Coronavirus? | The Daily Social Distancing Show
Trump’s got a message for people who thought he’d never come around on coronavirus… and for Ghislane Maxwell? #DailyShow #TrevorNoah #Coronavirus



Media