Adolph Hitler and the National Socialist Party (Nazis) had Josef Goebbels, the regime’s Reich Minister of Propaganda. Today’s American socialist/Marxists have CNN, and it is now crystal clear that the network merely poses as a “media” organization, but is, in fact, nothing more than an ongoing psychological operation aimed at undermining American democracy — and a duly-elected president.
The operation was fully exposed this week by the admission of a CNN senior producer who admitted during an undercover investigative journalism operation by Project Veritas that the network’s laser-like focus on the oft-alleged, but never proven, “Trump-Russia collusion” narrative is, in a word, “bulls**t.”
“I mean, it’s mostly bulls**t right now,” said John Bonifield, of the network’s coverage. “Like, we don’t have any giant proof.”
That’s because there isn’t any. (RELATED: CNN credibility collapses under weight of fake news scandal… “no longer a news organization”)
And while some network insiders attempted to dismiss Bonifield’s claims because he’s a health news producer and not involved in political investigations and reporting, a CNN contributor and former Obama administration official, Van Jones, was caught in a separate sting by Project Veritas saying “the Russia thing is just a big nothing burger.”
See for yourself:
But that hasn’t stopped the network from continuing to insinuate and allege nefarious Team Trump dealings with Russia over efforts to “steal the election” from Hillary Clinton. On a near daily basis, the network publishes innuendo, allegations, suppositions and, in another case last week, outright lies — for the express purpose of forwarding the undermining of Trump.
CNN.com published a story claiming that Senate investigators were probing former Trump campaign official and fundraiser Anthony Scaramucci over an alleged conversation he had with a Russian investment fund manager regarding U.S. sanctions. The story was based on a single, unsubstantiated Deep State source.
But it turns out that was not the case. Officials with the Russian Direct Investment Fund, with whom Scaramucci allegedly spoke, denied the subject ever came up. The fallout: Another hit to CNN’s reputation and the resignation of three employees.
This is not journalism. It’s sedition, and sedition is treason, pure and simple.
Can a media organization be held liable for sedition? It’s a novel legal and constitutional question, for certain, and no doubt that the network would argue it is protected under the First Amendment’s freedom of the press protections. They may also argue that there are statutes dealing with slander and liable that give aggrieved parties like Scaramucci legal redress if they feel unduly slighted.
But at what point does “the free press” cross the line into seditious behavior? Is there such a point?
The Media Legal Defence Initiative in London explains that sedition is a very old criminal offense under English common law dating back at least to 1275. The offense “can be broadly defined as criticism that causes the public to lose faith in – or act violently against – the government,” the organization noted. “The offence [sic] was punishable with unlimited fines or imprisonment.”
Without a doubt, CNN’s dubious Trump-Russia narrative is designed to convince as many Americans as possible to abandon any faith in the current administration. Some can even argue that the network features hosts and guests who are inciting violence against the president and members of his party, as evidenced by the shooting attack earlier this month by a Left-wing Bernie Sanders supporter on Republican lawmakers.
Many of our sound legal principles were based on English common law, because, after all, our 13 original colonies were founded by settlers from England. But would this principle apply today?
Should it apply to CNN today?
If the intent of this media organization is to conduct PSYOPs against the country in a blatant attempt to take down a duly-elected president and his administration, in part by causing Americans to lose faith in the institution of government, then yes, the concept should apply.
Freedom of the press should not be used as cover to promote the overthrow of our elected leaders.
J.D. Heyes is a senior writer for NaturalNews.com and NewsTarget.com, as well as editor of The National Sentinel.
Sources:Submit a correction >>