If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

IS SELECTIVE EDITING OF THE FACTS A CRIME?

by Joseph DeMaio, ©2012

Of how many ellipses is NBC guilty in regard to reporting the news?

(Apr. 7, 012) — In the normal course of events, the initials “NBC” have lately carried two different meanings.  For those even vaguely conversant with the continuing issue of the likely usurpation of the presidency by the person now occupying the residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the abbreviation relates to “natural born citizen” as used in the Constitution.  On the other hand, the initials also represent the abbreviated title of the National Broadcasting Company, or as it has become more colloquially known since 2008, the Obama Propaganda Network.

And what do these two seemingly unrelated abbreviations have to do with one another?  Continue reading.

Recently, the events involving the shooting of one Trayvon Martin by one George Zimmerman in Florida have reignited the flames of class warfare and racial division in the nation….just in time for the upcoming general election.  To quote former Obama White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel: “Never let a serious crisis go to waste….”

The propaganda bêtes in the mainstream media, including the National Broadcasting Company, jumped full force into the fray, accusing, prejudging and adjudicating George Zimmerman of guilt in the death of Martin, regardless of Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense.  Unless you have been hiding in a cave over the last few weeks, escape from the incessant media drumbeat of Zimmerman’s guilt and racist motivations has been impossible.

Leading the charge in the effort to prove Zimmerman to be a racist, he was first painted to be a “white” block-watch vigilante who stalked and then shot to death an unarmed black youth.  But then it was discovered that Zimmerman was actually half-Hispanic, prompting Pravda on the Hudson (aka, The New York Times) to invent a new term – “white Hispanic” – to prop up and maintain the essential racial element of the story.

But to further paint Zimmerman as a racist, the Obama Propaganda Network stooped to a new low: it doctored the actual emergency call between Zimmerman and the 911 operator to make it seem even more apparent that the shooting was motivated by Zimmerman’s purported racist descriptions of Martin.  Those alterations are chronicled here.  By editing out certain words in the exchange between Zimmerman and the 911 dispatcher, it was made to appear that Zimmerman, on his own, offered up that the target of his suspicions “looks black.”

In fact, the audio ellipsis performed by NBC omitted the fact that the 911 dispatcher asked Zimmerman whether the person he saw was “white, black or Hispanic,” to which question Zimmerman responded: “he looks black.”

When the new media spotted the journalistic perfidy and exposed it, NBC quickly circled the wagons and performed an “internal investigation.”  That “investigation” has now culminated in the dismissal of an – as yet – unidentified NBC producer.  To characterize that dismissal as “insufficient” to resolve the deceit would be a monumental understatement.

The episode has been dubbed “Editgate” by some and merely underscores the level of deceit to which the mainstream media has descended since the Obama regime moved in.  The solitary motivation for the ellipsis omission of the 911 dispatcher’s question to Zimmerman was to mislead the public into believing that Zimmerman’s actions were racially motivated.  And, by the way, has anyone bothered to check into whether it is a crime – let alone a civil libel – to knowingly publish false information with the goal of painting someone to be a racist?

The problem, of course, is that now, whenever NBC or any of the regime’s media apparatchiks convey as a quote a statement or comment purporting to accurately represent what someone said, one can never be sure that it is accurate.  The National Broadcasting Company “Editgate” blotch on its otherwise already tarnished and corroded public image is rivaled only by the CBS 60 Minutes “Rathergate” disaster.

Which of course brings us to one Jack Maskell and the Congressional Research Service.  As has been pointed out for some time now at The Post & Email here, here, and here, Mr. Maskell – or someone with the authority to edit and finalize Congressional Research Service “product” – has escaped scrutiny for the ellipsis editing of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in order to “spin” for the public and, significantly, the 535 members of Congress, that the decision supports a conclusion that Mr. Obama is purportedly eligible as a “natural born citizen” under the Constitution.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939) was substantively altered via the same species of ellipsis omission as present in Editgate in an April 3, 2009 Congressional Research Service memo authored by Mr. Maskell and intended for distribution to all members of Congress.  This is the body, of course, consisting of people who would pass upon challenges to the counting of the Electoral College votes following a presidential election and/or who would sit in consideration of any articles of impeachment brought before it.

The ellipsis-altered version of Perkins v. Elg first unveiled in 2009 was reprised verbatim in a doubling down of the 2009 deception on November 14, 2011, when a Congressional Research Service Report also authored by Mr. Maskell and entitled “Qualifications for President and the ‘Natural Born’ Citizenship Eligibility Requirement” was unleashed.

There has, of course, been absolutely no explanation whatsoever forthcoming from Mr. Maskell, the Congressional Research Service or anyone else for the deceptive ellipsis alteration of a U.S. Supreme Court decision intended, from all appearances, to drive a predetermined conclusion: the Supreme Court has already confirmed the “natural born citizen” status of persons like Mr. Obama, so there is no need for further inquiry.  Move along here…nothing more to see.  In fact, there is much more to see, but people will need to remove their blinders in order to recognize it.

If the ellipsis editing of a 911 call between George Zimmerman and the dispatcher in order to portray Zimmerman as a racist is grounds for dismissal of the responsible producer at NBC…. why is Jack Maskell still employed as a lawyer at the Congressional Research Service?  If deception of the public in the Zimmerman-Martin matter is bad, why isn’t the deception of both the public and the Congress on the issue of presidential eligibility at least as bad?

Hello….is anyone out there listening?

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.