Treason is deeply embedded in the Democratic Party and the New York Times

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Stephanie, Jul 2, 2006.

  1. Stephanie

    Stephanie Diamond Member

    Jul 11, 2004
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    Gerard Jackson
    Monday 3 July 2006

    The Dubai ports imbroglio should have been one of those delicious political spectacles where every political windbag that was dumb enough to rush in where even idiots fear to tread should have found himself covered in egg. But this is not about the Dubai fiasco or bloviating politicians: it’s about that most despicable and loathsome of God’s creatures — diseased leftwing media slime.

    ‘Pinch’ Sulzberger, the New York Times publisher who strives to make treason respectable and patriotism a shameful word, is a putrescent specimen of the moral rot that that is eating away at the mainstream media. One should note that for the America-hating Sulzberger (the James Taggart of the media) treason is predicated on not whether it damages American national security or even results in the deaths of US troops but whether it presents an obstacle to what these political bigots piously call progressive opinion. Therefore, what decent Americans call treason Sulzberger calls the “public interest” if he thinks it will advance leftwing causes like Moveon.Org while simultaneously subverting the Bush administration’s attempt to defend the US against terrorism.

    Let us now review some recent political history. It was the Johnny Chung story that revealed what was really putrid at the core of the Clinton administration, and not the Lewinsky scandal. At a Judicial Watch dinner in 1998 Chung revealed for the first time in public details of the Clinton administration’s cash-for-military-secrets deals with the Beijing regime.

    But the truly shocking revelation was the extent to which America’s left-wing mainstream media cooperated with the Clinton administration in trying to silence Chung. I would even go so far as to suggest that it has some responsibility for attempts on his life and his need for a 24-hour guard by armed FBI agents.

    This is neither fantasy nor speculation. Acting under tacit instructions from ‘Pinch’ Sulzberger the New York Times deliberately sabotaged the FBI’s investigation into the ‘Chinagate’ scandal by blowing Chung’s cover and putting his life at risk. But Sulzberger’s vicious behaviour toward Chung was not an aberration. On 30 June Sulzberger had his treasonous rag print large photos of the holiday homes of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.

    This red rag identified the state and town in which they lived, even making sure that would-be assailants could recognise the driveways. And just to make sure that if any leftwing psychotic decided to rid America of these conservative tyrants the Slimes obligingly revealed where the security cameras were hidden.

    This outrage was justified by the contemptible Bill Keller as the “public’s right to know’. But under the malevolent influence of Sulzberger and his fellow American-haters the so-called ‘the right to know doctrine’ is now nothing but an open conspiracy to murder by alerting terrorists to the measures being used against them.

    In truth there are no depths to which the Times’ gang of leftwing thugs will not sink.

    The cold-blooded targeting of Rumsfeld and Cheney removes any doubt whatsoever that the Times exposure of Chung was a calculated act to kill the investigation and destroy Chung’s efforts — even if it resulted in Chung’s murder.

    (That the Times openly engaged in the intimidation of a man who blew the whistle on Clinton’s Beijing dealings did not surprise those of us who are fully aware of its links to the ardently pro-Castro Institute for Policy Studies and CounterSpy, an IPS spin-off that fed papers like the Times with KGB-supplied information on American agents).

    And could it be pure coincidence that at the same time as the Times was deliberately endangering Chung’s life Clinton appointees at the Justice Department instructed that FBI bodyguards assigned to protect Chung and his family were to be withdrawn? As expected, this action did not elicit any objections from the Times’ sensitive and caring journalists. (I wonder how disappointed it was in not being able to write Chung's obituary?) The Times, unfortunately, does not stand alone in its political hatred and contempt for national security or even, so it appears, the lives of American citizens.

    Of the three television networks that sent camera crews to the Judicial Watch dinner, only C-span reported Chung’s address. The other networks spiked the report. The tale Chung related was pure nitro that exposed the Clinton White House as not only the most corrupt in American history but the only one that actually engaged in what would ordinarily be called treason.

    And yet I cannot help but conclude that the real scandal lies with the media, the Democrats, academia, the IRS and the Justice Department. These institutions were so corrupted — and still are, including the CIA — under the Clintons that they have became a serious threat to the United States’ security.

    It is true that a determined administration can fumigate the Justice Department and the CIA but what of the others, of which the mainstream media is the most dangerous? I’m certainly not ignoring the fact that the mainstream press published sanitised versions of the Clinton espionage scandals. Nevertheless, it refused to give them the same weight as the so-called Iran-Contra scandal. As for the three major networks, a truly cancerous presence in the media, they behaved — and still do — as if they were a branch of the Democratic Party.

    Journalists who expose undercover operatives like Chung can scarcely be called patriotic. And it is this absence, or even loathing, of patriotism that explains the mainstream media’s efforts to censor Chung’s revelations and destroy the current administration’s anti-terrorist operations. Chung’s life was threatened and Clintonista IRS officials brazenly filed a tax lien against his property the day after he went public on Chinagate.

    The Democratic National Committee even had the gall to directly interfere in the judicial process by trying to force Judge Manuel Real into imposing a heavy sentence on Chung for campaign funding violations — but not on those Democrats who took the funds. The judge sarcastically noted the DNC’s hypocrisy, calling DNC officials Sullivan and Don Fowler “two of the dumbest politicians I've ever see”. He also condemned Janet Reno for refusing to appoint an independent counsel.

    Why Chung? Why didn't these great American patriots in the DNC insist that Clinton and his cronies be punished? Could it be because these political pimps no more care about patriotism than they care about the Constitution? I fear the answer is in the affirmative, so deep is the rot in the Democratic Party. A rot that has now turned into a massive running sore for all to see.

    Compare the Dems’ Mafia-like treatment of Chung with the ridiculous sentence Reno recommended for Charlie Trie, even embarrassing the Little Rock judge who convicted him into raising it.

    Clinton was a symptom, not a cause, of what ails America’s body politic and its media. When he was thankfully gone the rot did not go with him. These institutions are as corrupt as ever and the Democrats have become more vindictive and demagogic in the tactics of personal destruction and national subversion, knowing full well that the media, especially the networks, will act as their willing assassins.

    How can any decent person be surprised by the Dems’ treason and the Slimes collaboration with terrorism?

    Gerard Jackson is Brookes’ economics editor
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page