Liz Cheney Weaponizes Racial Division For Political Power, Baselessly Labeling GOP Leadership White Supremacist

Liz Cheney Weaponizes Racial Division For Political Power, Baselessly Labeling GOP Leadership White Supremacist

Wyoming Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney reached a new milestone in her transition from a center-right lawmaker to a full-blown collaborator in the left’s cultural revolution within 18 months. On Monday, Cheney claimed, without evidence, members of GOP House leadership where she was expelled last May are enablers of white supremacy.

“The House GOP leadership has enabled white nationalism, white supremacy, and antisemitism,” Cheney wrote on Twitter. “History has taught us that what begins with words ends in far worse. [GOP] leaders must renounce and reject these views and those who hold them.”

The post was published Monday morning after an 18-year-old shooter allegedly killed 10 people in a Buffalo supermarket on Saturday. Moments before the killing spree, in which the majority of victims were black, the white shooter published an online “manifesto” airing antisemitic grievances in 180 pages where he also showcased anxiety over “replacement.”

The racial circumstances of the tragedy make the event ripe for leftists and their allies in the corporate media and government to stoke their routine race war, smearing political dissidents as complicit in the latest episode of domestic terrorism. Those allies now include Cheney, whose competitive re-election campaign has been endorsed by Occupy Democrats and funded by the Lincoln Project.

Corporate outlets that were quick to move on from the Waukesha Christmas Massacre last fall — when a black suspect motivated by anti-white racism allegedly rammed an SUV through a holiday parade, brutally killing at least six — have been even quicker to place blame for this weekend’s New York shooting on Fox News.

The New York Times ran a 2,000-word piece Sunday tying the Buffalo attack to the modern Republican Party, Fox News, and the network’s lead prime-time host, Tucker Carlson.

“By his own account, the Buffalo suspect, Payton S. Gendron, followed a lonelier path to radicalization, immersing himself in replacement theory and other kinds of racist and antisemitic content easily found on internet forums, and casting Black Americans, like Hispanic immigrants, as ‘replacers’ of white Americans,” the Times wrote. “No public figure has promoted replacement theory more loudly or relentlessly than the Fox host Tucker Carlson, who has made elite-led demographic change a central theme of his show since joining Fox’s prime-time lineup in 2016.”

Never mind that the “manifesto” from the weekend shooting’s suspect showcased his own contempt for conservatism and Fox News while never mentioning Carlson.

That didn’t stop other outlets from following suit, capitalizing on the episode to amplify their predetermined narrative that the Republican Party, its leadership, and rival networks are to blame for another episode of politically motivated violence. The Washington Post targeted House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik in particular, who replaced Cheney in GOP leadership a year ago.

“Stefanik echoed racist theory allegedly espoused by Buffalo suspect,” headlined the paper, referring to the New York congresswoman’s objections to unchecked immigration — legitimate concerns that were even given credence by Politico.

Stefanik was indicted by the Post as a lawmaker captured by “Replacement Theory,” an idea declared conspiracy by legacy media hellbent on smearing Republicans who merely repeat the open desires of left-wing activists. Former Trump communications adviser Michael Anton outlined the irony as “The Celebration Parallax” in the American Mind.

The Left insists that concerns from certain quarters that immigration policy in America (and Europe) amounts to a ‘great replacement’ is a ‘dangerous,’ ‘evil,’ ‘racist,’ ‘false’ ‘conspiracy theory.’ But a leftist New York Times columnist can write an article entitled ‘We Can Replace Them‘ and … nothing. Same fundamental point, except she’s all for it and her targets aren’t. A U.S. Senator can exult that demographic change will doom Republicans. Joe Biden himself can refer to an ‘unrelenting stream of immigration.’ Except they’re celebrating it and calling for it. Anyone on the Right who uses the exact same words will not merely be denounced; the very fact pattern that is affirmed when Biden says it will be denied when the Rightist repeats it.

The knee-jerk reaction to cast anyone on the right as agitators of extremist violence — nuance be darned and leftist attacks be whitewashed when the profile of the suspect and the victims don’t fit the right demographics — has now drawn Cheney as new recruit, adopting the left’s double standards.

Cheney joined the media chorus to smear opponents in leadership as responsible for spilled blood in Buffalo despite the fact that House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., was almost killed by a leftist “Bernie Bro” five years ago who wanted to “terminate the Republican Party.” But yes, Liz Cheney wants you to think that Scalise is a cheerleader for extremist violence.

Wyoming’s sole representative was coopted by Democrats last summer when she enthusiastically accepted a request from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to vice chair the Select Committee on Jan. 6. Cheney’s appointment replaced Republicans selected by GOP House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who were barred from fulfilling their congressional service by the speaker.

One of 10 Republicans in the lower chamber who supported former President Donald Trump’s second impeachment, Cheney has carved out antagonism of Republican voters as a hallmark of her time in Congress.

Cheney faces a primary challenge from Trump-endorsed attorney Harriet Hageman in August.

Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at


Washington Post Demands The Video Game Industry Speak About Abortion — Unless They’re Pro-Life

Washington Post Demands The Video Game Industry Speak About Abortion — Unless They’re Pro-Life

The Washington Post was pretty proud of itself on Thursday after two of its writers kicked their abortion activism into gear and reached out to 20 major video game companies, trying to get them on the record in support of Roe v. Wade and the taking of innocent human life in the womb — including whether they would help employees pay for it.

“NEW: [Shannon Liao] and I reached out to over 20 major video game companies about whether they intend to speak up in favor of reproductive rights or provide monetary aid to employees. just a few said yes. most said nothing at all,” Liao’s co-writer Nathan Grayson wrote on Twitter.

The duo seemed disturbed that game companies weren’t more outraged and outspoken at the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion indicating the landmark abortion case will likely soon be struck down, writing, “most of the video game industry’s biggest companies have remained conspicuously quiet.”

“Conspicuously quiet” on abortion is an interesting way for journalists to characterize video game companies, which have absolutely nothing to do with sex, pregnancy, or in utero homicide. But it’s an especially interesting characterization coming from Liao at The Washington Post.

That’s because just a little more than seven months ago, Liao wrote about the CEO of Tripwire, a video game company, who stepped down after he “came under fire” for his support of an “antiabortion” law in Texas, as Liao characterized it. Cutting through the WaPo propaganda, the real story is that the former CEO got squeezed out for daring to defend life in the womb and the laws that attempt to protect it.

Here’s a quote Liao included in that story, from one of Tripwire’s partner studios:

“While your politics are your own, the moment you make them a matter of public discourse you entangle all of those working for you and with you.”

In other words, when companies devote their attention to their own affairs rather than murderous left-wing causes disguised as “reproductive health care,” they’re “conspicuously quiet.” But when those same companies or their leaders break from the corporate hive mind to instead pump the brakes on abortion radicalism, they’re “entangling” their workers in their own personal politics.

So says the left and their media footsoldiers at The Washington Post, who serve absolutely no journalistic function. As The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway wrote on Twitter, “Corporate media are the enemies of the people, born and unborn.”

“Double standard” doesn’t even begin to encapsulate the depths of the unethical behavior these so-called reporters in legacy media employ. They have fully embraced their roles as abortion activists and propagandists, and they spend their days bullying companies into helping them achieve said activism and propaganda.

“Right now, game workers just want some semblance of stability with Roe v. Wade’s potential repeal threatening to rock their foundation,” Liao and Grayson wrote. “A commitment to reproductive health care from their employers, in their eyes, would at least be something.”

You know what else would really be something? A commitment to real journalism from our corrupt corporate media.


Fauci Sets New Records for Obfuscation & Confusion

Fauci Sets New Records for Obfuscation & Confusion

Fauci Sets New Records for Obfuscation

By: Debbie Lerman

In an interview with PBS News Hour on Tuesday, April 26th, Dr. Anthony Fauci said “We are certainly right now in this country out of the pandemic phase.”

After over two years of public health officials telling us we are in the pandemic phase, this sounded like hugely important news. At least as important as, for example, the earth-shattering “Caution Urged as States Slow the Virus Fight” published on the front page of The New York Times on March 31st.

Yet on Wednesday, April 27th, there was no mention of Fauci’s statement anywhere in the printed version of The Times, let alone the front page. On that same day, Fauci “clarified” to The Washington Post that we were not out of the pandemic, just “out of the full-blown explosive pandemic phase.”

God forbid anyone should think we were out of danger and able to go back to living our normal lives! Now, Fauci said, we are in “a deceleration of the numbers into hopefully a more controlled phase and endemicity.”

Nowhere could I find any reporters or media outlets questioning Fauci about this incomprehensible gobbledygook or providing answers to obvious questions like: What is a non-acute component of a pandemic? How is a “more controlled phase” different from “endemicity”? And, of course, nobody asked the glaring question: When can we admit that Covid is now endemic and move on?

Well, you might ask, how do we actually know whether or not we’re out of the pandemic? Fauci certainly did not offer a coherent answer. Nor did any other public health official.

As with everything for the last two years, the reliable scientific analysis comes from world experts like John Ioannidis of Stanford University, a professor of epidemiology, statistics and biomedical data. Prof. Ioannidis has been astonishingly consistent and incisive in his analysis of Covid and our response to it, beginning with his March 17, 2020 article in Statists, entitled: “A fiasco in the making” which predicted the calamity we were about to inflict on ourselves at the onset of the pandemic.

Fast forward two years, and in a recent lecture, Prof. Ioannidis turns his expert eye to the end of the calamity. Here he explains that there is not a single measure for when a pandemic ends, but he lists several different reasonable endpoints, and assesses whether or not we have reached them. Four of the top five endpoints he lists are as follows:

  • Over 70% of the global population having some immunity – reached in mid/late 2021

  • Over 90% of the global population having some immunity – reached in late 2021/early 2022

  • Deaths and health system stress returning to pre-pandemic levels – Reached in late 2021/early 2022 in most places

  • Very low risk [of bad outcomes] for the vast majority of the population – reached in 2021

Indeed, way back in September 2021, Prof. Jay Bhattacharya, a Stanford professor of medicine, economics, and health research and policy, and co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration, said “The emergency phase of the disease is over.” And he added, prophetically: “Now, we need to work very hard to undo the sense of emergency. We should be treating covid as one of 200 diseases that affect people.”

As we know, instead of dialing down the panic, the media and public health machinery whipped up a frenzy over new variants, waves, soaring case counts, etc. That’s why it’s important for public health officials to make very clear statements about the end of the pandemic so that people can stop worrying about the next wave or variant.

Once the virus is endemic, it is manageable, it doesn’t as much matter how many people test positive because most everyone will have a mild case and hospitals will not be overwhelmed. That’s where we are now. That’s what it means to not be in a pandemic anymore.

Saying it’s no longer a pandemic is not just semantics. It’s important to clearly message the entire population that the time for panic is over. That’s what I thought Fauci was doing, before he tripped all over himself backtracking and flip-flopping.

I live in Philadelphia, where they recently tried to reinstate a mask mandate, only to rescind it three days later. If Fauci et al. just came out and admitted that the virus is here to stay, we will all be exposed (which, by the way, Fauci admitted all the way back on January 12th), and it’s time to move on, that bit of Covid moronics would not have happened.

Nor would so many other ridiculous and discriminatory Covid restrictions that still linger in places like New York (masked toddlers) and my local arts institutions and theaters (mask, vaccine and booster mandates).

Yes, the virus will evolve and new strains will continue to appear. Probably forever or at least a very long time. Many people will get it many times in their lives, as Dr. Vinay Prasad, a Professor of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics at UCSF, has written and commented on numerous occasions.

We need clear messaging from the media and public health officials that the pandemic is over so we can stop worrying about the next variant or wave that will inevitably occur.

It’s exhausting and demoralizing to continue to live with people who are still in a constant state of panic because our public health officials refuse to admit that the pandemic is over.

It’s exhausting and demoralizing to have to point out, yet again, how the media – for very obviously self-serving reasons — feed on the confusion instead of trying to dispel it.

It’s exhausting and demoralizing to see glimmers of hope, like Fauci’s initial announcement, get muddied, misinterpreted and turned upside down, through more obfuscation and spin, like so much of the news and public health messaging since the pandemic began.

All I can do is continue to point out the hysteria and hypocrisy and scream at the media, Fauci, all public health officials, politicians, and everyone who benefits from fueling Covid panic: enough of this!



The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)


Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.


Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Share this…
Share on FacebookPin on PinterestTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn


Go Ahead, Democrats: Follow That Viral Michigan State Senator Into Your Electoral Grave

Go Ahead, Democrats: Follow That Viral Michigan State Senator Into Your Electoral Grave

Democrats have a new rock star who some think has charted a path to victory for them. If they listen to her, they’ll double down on extremist policies on race and transgender indoctrination. Republicans can only hope that’s exactly what they’ll do.

Overnight Democratic state Sen. Mallory McMorrow is the toast of leftist Twitter as well as the subject of laudatory segments on late-night comedy shows and the recipient of a congratulatory phone call from President Joe Biden. She’s also been featured in a host of flattering articles in corporate media outlets like The New York Times.

The reason for her newfound celebrity was a speech she gave on the floor of the Michigan State Senate in which she tore into a Republican colleague — state Sen. Lana Heis — for sending a fundraising email in which she referred to Democrats who backed teaching critical race theory (CRT) and transgender ideology in schools as “groomers.” The video of her remarks went viral.

McMorrow didn’t so much refute the charge as she sought to flip the narrative: “I want every child in this state to feel seen, heard and supported, not marginalized and targeted because they are not straight, white, and Christian.”

The five-minute speech is, for left-wingers, a bracing example of a Democrat fully embracing wokeness rather than downplaying or denying it. Instead of dodging charges of being tied to extreme education policies such as CRT and transgender ideology in elementary schools, McMorrow chose to tie her party to them.

Moreover, although the cultural establishment has been demonizing conservatives and Republicans as racists and bigots non-stop for many years, with the practice becoming standard political operating procedure in the Trump era, many on the left are under the delusion that their side plays nice while the right fights dirty. So in their eyes McMorrow is a rare heroine prepared to stand up to the onslaught from the right.

Doubling Down on Wokeness

Not surprisingly, this inspired some of the chattering class to proclaim McMorrow as an example to be followed. The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent thinks her speech provides proof that Democrats ought to reject the advice of more moderate members of their party.

Sargent singled out former Clinton advisor James Carville, who has said “wokeness is a problem” for Democrats, “we all know that.” Instead of distancing themselves from their party’s radicals and their race and sexual obsessions, Sargent says McMorrow shows her “takedown requires a ‘wokeness’ rethink.”

Fellow WaPo leftist Jonathan Capehart also chimed in to write that the state senator’s stand means that white Democrats shouldn’t let her “fight bigotry alone,” which is his (and the rest of the mainstream media’s) way of characterizing her defense of radical practices that would normalize allowing children to identify as the opposite sex and even receive life-altering medical treatments without informing their parents.

This all makes sense as a form of group therapy for Democrats dealing with feelings of sadness and depression as they face the prospect of a wipeout in the midterm elections because of the failures of the Biden administration at home and abroad. It’s also exactly the kind of pep talk that the leftist base wants their failing politicians to hear.

They want them to listen to members of the chattering classes who believe focusing on Jan. 6 and the so-called “insurrection” is the path to victory, or former Republican congressman turned Democrat cheerleader Joe Scarborough, who said on his MSNBC show that Democrats can win by calling rank-and-file Republicans “fascists” and “racists.”

Suicide Mission

But their problem is that Carville is right. The idea that Democrats can succeed by doubling down on unpopular and arguably insane policies and by labeling everyone who opposes them as a racist makes zero sense. The polls as well as the evidence of last fall’s election in Virginia show that Democrats are going to pay a heavy price for letting Biden and the rest of their party be hijacked by the hard left and its toxic ideas.

The “groomer” epithet to which McMorrow took umbrage is a conservative riposte to leftist critiques of a Florida law passed by Republicans which banned the promulgation of CRT and transgender doctrines in grades K-3, a law the left mislabeled as a “don’t say gay” bill. But it’s fair that those who support such indoctrination in schools, like McMorrow, be held responsible for the damage that these toxic theories are doing to children as well as the country.

McMorrow is not so much giving heart to Democrats as sending them on a suicide mission. The Times compared her to Wendy Davis, the Texas legislator who got a similar dose of 15 minutes of fame for filibustering an anti-abortion bill. Davis hasn’t won an election in a red state like Texas since her filibuster, but the Times thinks things might be different for McMorrow in a purple state like Michigan.

Yet if Democrats are to remain competitive in Michigan or anywhere other than a deep blue state, it will require them to learn the lesson of Virginia and throw off any associations with the woke. Standing up against parental rights and for idea of small children “transitioning” or inculcating racist ideas about “white privilege” in the schools may win McMorrow plaudits from Jimmy Kimmel. But at a time when voters are sick of wokeness, cancel culture, and false accusations of racism and bigotry, it is exactly the formula for a Democratic midterm wipeout.

Jonathan S. Tobin is a senior contributor to The Federalist, editor in chief of, and a columnist for the New York Post. Follow him on Twitter at @jonathans_tobin.


The Washington Post’s Repulsive Defense Of Twitter Execs Makes Even Elon Musk Look Good

The Washington Post’s Repulsive Defense Of Twitter Execs Makes Even Elon Musk Look Good

Yesterday, amid the ongoing bladder loosening that has accompanied Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter, leaks started coming from inside the tech company. Politico reported that “Twitter’s top lawyer reassures staff, cries during meeting about Musk takeover.”

The lawyer, Vijaya Gadde, has played a major role in some of Twitter’s most controversial decisions, such as removing former President Trump and censoring The New York Post from the platform for reporting an accurate story about the damning Hunter Biden laptop weeks before his father was elected president amid real questions about his involvement in his son’s corruption.

Gadde’s political motivations don’t seem to be a mystery. Six days before the 2020 election, Politico profiled her under the headline, “Is Twitter Going Full Resistance? Here’s the Woman Driving the Change.” And it’s pretty clear that she contributed to Twitter making at least one terrible decision. Former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey would later admit the company made a “total mistake” in censoring the story.

By any reasonable measure, Gadde has earned her fair share of criticism — quite literally. Twitter is reportedly paying her just shy of $17 million a year, and one of the main justifications for such exorbitant executive pay, however flimsy, is public accountability. If you must fall on a sword, I imagine an eight-figure bank balance cushions the blow quite a bit.

So on Tuesday, Saagar Enjeti, the co-host of the popular online political show “Turning Points,” tweeted a screenshot of the Politico headline about Gadde crying and observed, “Vijaya Gadde, the top censorship advocate at Twitter who famously gaslit the world on Joe Rogan’s podcast and censored the Hunter Biden laptop story, is very upset about the @elonmusk takeover.” Musk himself decided to reply to Enjeti, adding, “Suspending the Twitter account of a major news organization for publishing a truthful story was obviously incredibly inappropriate.”

That same day, Mike Cernovich, who has a large right-leaning Twitter account, noted that Twitter’s deputy general counsel is Jim Baker, who was previously general counsel of the FBI. While at the FBI, Baker played a very controversial role in the FBI’s discredited investigation into the Trump campaign’s alleged ties to Russia. (In fact, here’s Baker being asked about the process for FISA warrants, which were used by the FBI to spy on the former president: “Do I need to have every one of those details? I mean these things are already quite long. Look, it’s an art, not a science.”)

Musk responded to Cernovich’s tweet: “Sounds pretty bad…”

These two interactions would be pretty thin gruel for a news story on their own merits, but Musk is the richest man in the world, and obviously what the new owner says about Twitter is noteworthy.

Anyway, you wouldn’t believe what the Washington Post did next! Or maybe you will.

Stifling Dissent

At 3:03 a.m. Wednesday, the Post dropped its story on the matter: “Elon Musk boosts criticism of Twitter executives, prompting online attacks: The targeting of employees by Musk’s massive Twitter megaphone is a major concern for workers.”

The horror only compounds from there. “Musk’s response Tuesday was the first time he targeted specific Twitter executives by using his nearly singular ability to call attention to topics that interest him,” intoned the Post. “Supporters of Musk, a prolific and freewheeling tweeter with 86 million followers, tend to pile on with his viewpoints.”

To be clear, Musk never said anything specific about Gadde, except to imply her role in the decision to ban The New York Post was wrong — an opinion that isn’t controversial, and was publicly stated by Twitter’s previous CEO. As for Baker, Musk was commenting on his previous conduct as a public official, which by any accurate assessment was defined by poor judgment. Regardless, “sounds bad” is not exactly committing to a definitive judgment of the man, much less in his current role at Twitter.

(As for what it says that the FBI’s former general counsel went from a disgraceful role in a spy scandal meant to influence the 2016 election to a lucrative gig at a tech company perhaps best known for its clumsy and dishonest attempts to influence the 2020 election… well, let your imagination run wild. There’s no explanation that isn’t disheartening.)   

Neither person was “targeted.” The entire story is more accurately restated by the Washington Post expressing shock and dismay that millionaire tech executives might find themselves receiving public criticism from billionaire tech entrepreneurs. That’s a pretty questionable premise for one of the nation’s most influential news outlets to endorse.

As Mike Solana, no stranger to observing the tech industry, put it, “This is a country of over 300 million people. If the rule for acceptable criticism of powerful executives and state propagandists is ‘can’t lead to *someone else* saying something awful,’ you effectively end all vital dissent. Then, that is of course the point.”

Believe me, when you learn how this story was reported, the notion the Post was trying to stifle dissent is not an outrageous assumption. The Post almost entirely ignored the substance of the criticisms leveled at Baker and Gadde and did not make good-faith attempts to include alternate perspectives.

On Wednesday, Enjeti took to Twitter and blasted the Post’s story, which hinged on his interaction with Musk: “WAPO says I did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Complete BS, they emailed *my producer* at 2am EST…7 hours after @elonmusk  replied to my tweet with the following RIDICULOUS questions.” Without waiting for Enjeti to respond, the Post published the story in the middle of the night, less than an hour after asking him for comment.

The questions the Post asked were hilariously loaded. Essentially, Enjeti was asked to explain his villainous behavior:

Does [Enjeti] have any concern that mentioning a specific Twitter exec could result in attacks on that exec? What are the responsibilities here? For example, one of the commenters on the tweets made racist comments against Gadde, and said she should be fired.

What does [Enjeti] hope to accomplish by calling out Gadde and getting Musk involved?

Enjeti was rightly disgusted: “This is a great example of how the media smears you. I make a substantive point, randos say something. Now myself and @elonmusk are somehow racist/responsible for them!  All to cover up the fact that they substantively agree with censorship.”

Class Warfare

Aside from their desire to prop up an opaque regime of algorithmic censorship produced by an unholy collusion of tech executives and state propagandists, the more benign explanation for the Post’s motivations — and this in no way negates both motives being true — was summed up by Josh Barro: “The idea that the important thing here is the feelings of Twitter employees (especially senior executives) is just so unhinged. Pure class affiliation on the part of journalists, they consider existing Twitter management to be their partners.”

Indeed, class affiliation increasingly explains this bizarre and indefensible media behavior, as well as their growing inability to describe basic realities. Batya Ungar-Sargon has written a very good book on the problem.

However, if there’s a line between class affiliation and class warfare, the corporate media’s pro-censorship crusade has obliterated it. For a long time, I balked at Trump daring to call the media “the enemy of the people,” but it is becoming impossible to ignore that the media’s motives reflect an “Us” vs. “You” mentality. In this case, as Tim Carney notes, “The best way to understand the media is to ask who do they consider ‘us.’ The college educated progressive high-level tech employees are ‘us’ to the average tech reporter.”

As long as we’re talking about class solidarity, it should also be clear that it would be foolish of anyone critical of the current censorship regime to assume that Musk will be a reliable champion of a set of particular values or whatever else you think might be necessary to preserve America’s legacy of prosperity and ordered liberty. There is no need to go out of your way to defend him, he’s just one very wealthy man, and odds are high he will disappoint you.

Maybe he won’t sell his soul to China. Maybe he will get us to Mars. But here and now, Musk is more important for what he has revealed than what he has done.

By merely expressing support for a conception of free speech that Americans almost universally agreed on 15 years ago, he threatens to take a battering ram to the doors of The Cathedral. He is a threat to an existing order that corruptly benefits progressive elites, an unaccountable government, and a media too dumb and pliable to realize there’s no glory in defending someone who makes $17 million a year from mean tweets.  

It’s not that any thoughtful American doesn’t have serious reservations about an eccentric billionaire presenting himself as a guardian of the right to free speech. The problem is that we’ve been given a choice between Elon Musk and the demented and hostile worldview chronicled Washington Post, and the choice is obvious.


Libs of TikTok Cries Foul After Linktree Deplatformed It Without Warning

Libs of TikTok Cries Foul After Linktree Deplatformed It Without Warning

Just one week after The Washington Post’s Taylor Lorenz doxxed the formerly anonymous creator of Libs of TikTok, Linktree, a popular website used to compile multiple links in one place, deplatformed the account without warning or much explanation.

Present in every single Libs of TikTok account bio is a Linktree link that redirects visitors to the creator’s newsletter and other social media accounts. Now anyone who tries to access the account’s Linktree page is blocked and presented with a message claiming that “this account has been removed due to inappropriate use of this service.”

Linktree’s website says accounts are removed or banned if “found to be in breach of our Community Standards” but did not specify which policy Libs of TikTok allegedly violated.

Libs of TikTok gained popularity for reposting TikTok videos and photos that expose the radical leftism present in America, especially within public schools. The account includes commentary about progressive teachers who try to force advertisements for genital mutilationpornographic library books, and critical race theory on students as young as 5 years old.

Content promoting gender experimentation on children, racist curriculum, and other radical leftist ideologies is present on other Linktree accounts, but so far, the website has yet to ban those.

The account creator alleged that Linktree’s censorship was politically-motivated since “I have done nothing wrong.”

“Linktree just deleted my account citing ‘inappropriate use of this service.’ When I try to log in it says my account is no longer accessible. Why am I suddenly being censored? @Linktree_ Shame on you! Give me account back,” Libs of TikTok tweeted on Wednesday.

The creator also tweeted, “We will have to look for alternatives.”

Linktree did not immediately respond to The Federalist’s request for comment.

Since The Washington Post published its hit piece, which included antisemitic tropes and bragged about “exposing” the woman behind the account, Libs of TikTok has amassed a total of more than 1.1 million followers on Twitter.

“So grateful to @TaylorLorenz and WaPo for helping me achieve this huge milestone! Is there an address I can send a thank you card @washingtonpost?” Libs of TikTok tweeted.

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.


Evan McMullin Is The Democrats’ Utah Senate Candidate

Evan McMullin Is The Democrats’ Utah Senate Candidate

Utah Democrats endorsed failed independent presidential candidate Evan McMullin’s Senate bid last weekend, solidifying the NeverTrump crusader’s place as the liberal pick to unseat incumbent Sen. Mike Lee in lieu of a GOP primary.

“I’m humbled and grateful to the Democratic delegates today for their decision to support this growing cross-partisan coalition,” McMullin said in a statement Saturday.

Taking up the same anti-Trump mantle of Rep. Liz Cheney, who faces a tough re-election bid in Wyoming, McMullin declared Lee “a threat to the republic” whose “extreme partisanship and involvement in a plot to overturn our election are inexcusable.”

Rather than wade into a Republican primary, McMullin launched an independent Senate bid in October while Lee faces an inner-party challenge from two acolytes of the state’s junior Sen. Mitt Romney. The senator elected in 2018 after his own failed presidential campaign as the 2012 Republican nominee has refused to endorse in the race, telling Politico he considers both McMullin and Lee “two friends.”

“I don’t get involved in primaries and I don’t endorse,” said Romney, who, days later would attend a Cheney fundraiser in Virginia.

McMullin drew the endorsement of the United Utah Party earlier this month as the former CIA officer builds an independent coalition to defeat Lee in November, pending the incumbent’s survival in the June primary. Despite a center-right policy platform, McMullin, for all intents and purposes, is a Democrat, working to oust a reliable conservative in the upper chamber while branding Republican opposition as dangerous to democracy itself. McMullin even pledged refusal to caucus with Republicans on Capitol Hill if elected.

“As a senator, he would be accountable to Utahns and to his conscience, not to party bosses or special interest groups which corrupt our politics today,” McMullin Communications Director Kelsey Koenen Witt told the Salt Lake Tribune in a statement published Tuesday. “What Evan is doing is unique, and it is the only way to change our broken politics in Washington and bring better representation to the Senate for Utah.”

Refusal to caucus with either party then calls into question McMullin’s prospective ability to effectively advocate for constituents of a large Western state where nearly two-thirds of its land is overseen by the federal government. Even independent Sens. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Angus King of Maine caucus with the Democrats.

McMullin began to build an anti-Trump coalition in Utah six years ago, when his presidential campaign which garnered less than 1 percent of the national popular vote earned 22 percent of the vote in Utah.

On Monday, McMullin drew praise from The Washington Post’s resident leftist masquerading as a “conservative” columnist, Jennifer Rubin, lavishing routine praise over critics of the Republican Party as holy saviors of Democracy.

In her column headlined, “Utah could serve as a model for saving democracy,” Rubin reviewed McMullin’s record as a glorified NeverTrumper supporting the Democrats’ impeachment efforts and later condemning legitimate questions over election integrity.

“McMullin has excoriated Republicans for plunging into conspiracy theories and using government power to exact revenge on businesses or political opponents,” Rubin wrote.

“He’s a staunch supporter of Ukraine,” she reminded while McMullin’s campaign paints Lee as a pro-Russian puppet in an ad rated “mostly false” by even left-wing PolitiFact.

Since his campaign kickoff last fall, McMullin has become the Lincoln Project candidate of the Utah Senate race, drawing support from all the right corners of the political spectrum with a vengeance for the Republican base.

Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at


Taylor Lorenz Attacked Libs Of Tik Tok Because Corrupt Media’s Main Function Now Is To Destroy The Right, Not Understand Its Appeal

Taylor Lorenz Attacked Libs Of Tik Tok Because Corrupt Media’s Main Function Now Is To Destroy The Right, Not Understand Its Appeal

The Washington Post’s doxxer-in-chief Taylor Lorenz dominated Tuesday’s news cycle with a hit piece “exposing” the previously anonymous creator of the popular Twitter account “Libs of Tik Tok.” But the most important story isn’t that Lorenz engaged in an unethical doxxing campaign; it’s the reason why she did it.

Lorenz sought to destroy the account’s owner by publishing the creator’s name and even linking to details about the user’s day job. She even explicitly referenced the creator as a “powerful” Orthodox Jew who is “shaping” the media, an antisemitic trope, despite religion’s irrelevance to the story.

Lorenz’s hit piece was more than just bad-faith smears with no other discernible cause or effect. It was a diversion so that she didn’t have to explore why content documenting leftist crazies and then reposted by Libs of Tik Tok resonates with the public.

The Libs of Tik Tok Twitter account achieved fame because it gave parents and taxpayers a peek into the leftist radicalism that often happens behind closed doors in schools, such as advertisements for genital mutilation and pornographic library books.

When the corporate media repeatedly claimed that critical race theory isn’t taught in schools, Libs of Tik Tok posted an avalanche of videos and pictures showing the opposite.

Since the increasingly popular Twitter account debuted less than two years ago in November of 2020, Libs of Tik Tok has amassed more than 847,000 followers. Its amplification of left-wing radicalism in schools attracted the attention of the media, politicians, and even Elon Musk. More importantly, it horrified parents who were already growing restless about leftist ideology pervading the nation’s educational institutions.

As the Libs of Tik Tok account’s reach grew, so did its capacity to effect change. In less than two years, Libs of Tik Tok became a powerful, conservative force that inspired real change aimed at combating the indoctrination.

With the click of one button, the account could repost a video of progressives forcing radical ideas on children as young as 5 years old. Plenty of times, Libs of Tik Tok’s highlighting of insane content led to investigations, suspensions, and even firings.

Lorenz admitted that Libs of Tik Tok is “shaping public discourse,” but beyond charging the account with “spreading anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment,” she did not detail why the content is often scoffed at as “disgusting,” “disturbing,” and “dangerous” in replies. She can’t engage with the reasons for the account’s popularity — or at least she doesn’t want to — because that would force her to admit just how radical the left has become and legitimize parents’ well-founded concerns.

That’s why she deliberately did not explain why content that shows teachers saying parents have no place in their kids’ education is problematic for hundreds of thousands of the account’s followers.

While Libs of Tik Tok was calling attention to the issues that mattered to parents nearly every day, Lorenz was busy dismissing TikTok’s effect on children as a “dog whistle” that resembles “QAnon.”

Then, instead of admitting that the media constantly lies to parents about the dangers of CRT, Florida’s parental rights law (labeled the “Don’t Say Gay” bill by the press), and other conservative culture war efforts, Lorenz took the easy way out and charged Libs of Tik Tok with “secretly fueling the right’s outrage machine” in an effort to destroy the effective account. Her tactics are straight out of the corrupt media’s playbook.

It’s the same way the corporate media treats Donald Trump voters. Instead of trying to understand why someone would vote for the businessman-turned-president, the press smears MAGA supporters as “racists” and domestic terrorists. To reinforce their baseless claims, the media amplified fake news such as the Jussie Smollett hoax while encouraging censorship of election integrity concerns.

It’s much more appealing for the media to destroy political enemies than to admit the self-inflicted loss of their credibility and the radicalism of the political party they hold dear. Lorenz is no exception.

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.



Please help truthPeep spread the word :)