Host Bob Woodley examines the news in a way that might have flown under the radar in Not the Headlines! Let's Go Back Through the Listening Tube examines historical points of relevance from the week, and how they influence today's world. Bob will also welcome guests who have something interesting to talk about. All three options are available separtely. It might be serious, it might be funny, but it's always informative.
Want to be a guest on The Listening Tube? Send Bob Woodley a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/thelisteningtube
Want to be a guest on The Listening Tube? Send Bob Woodley a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/thelisteningtube
SPEAKER_01
The Listening Tube presents not the headlines.
SPEAKER_00
I'm Bob Woodley from the Listening Tube. President Trump addressed the nation last Thursday night to deliver the news that a large number of documents had been declassified. These documents show the degree to which the American voting system is compromised by China and that it could be compromised by other countries or even independent hackers in its current form. Whether or not you believe the president is irrelevant here. What's important to note is how the press covered or didn't cover the president's speech and the contents of it. Three places where you might expect to see a major speech by the president of the United States are ABC, NBC, and CNN. But none of them even bothered to attend. They promised to keep an eye on it in case any news came out of it. Then they would report back to the people. CBS aired part of it. CNN said it was because the president has made false claims about election integrity before. The networks got wind of the subject of the speech beforehand and decided they didn't want to hear any more about election interference and didn't think the public should hear about it either. Again, whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. But the press has taken it upon themselves to decide what, if anything, we should get to hear when the president speaks. Is that because the press doesn't think we're smart enough to decipher the truth for ourselves? Or are they trying to hide the charges the president made? It certainly seems that if there's documentation showing the Chinese Communist Party is meddling in our elections, we should take that seriously. And the president claimed that a treasure trove of documents uploaded to Whitehouse.gov as the speech was being made showed what he was saying is true. The president basically said, You don't have to believe me. All the documents are available for anyone to see for themselves. And the documents are there. Oddly, Firefox kept telling me it couldn't find the server, but I found it when I switched to the Google browser. There are four categories of files, including vulnerabilities in electronic voting and ballot counting systems, China's acquisition and exploitation of American voter data, Michigan voter registration investigation, and non-citizens on state voter rolls. Hundreds, if not thousands, of documents for the press to pour over and examine and draw conclusions. Enough to keep a newsroom busy for quite a while. But why wait? Why do the work when you've already drawn your own conclusion? The press acts like they're protecting us, but what they're really doing is hiding the truth from us. If not the truth, then the opportunity to draw our own conclusions. It would have been one thing for the networks and CNN to deprive us of the opportunity to hear the president speak with our own ears, but it's another to draw conclusions for us without even examining the documents that were being released as the president was speaking. Even before the speech was over, and it was a short one, twenty five minutes for the man who seems to be able to talk indefinitely, the press had already put out stories about how it was all just a bunch of malarkey. The speed at which the reports about the speech came out clearly demonstrated that the media didn't even bother to examine the documentation before publishing. Many of the stories I saw were clearly written before the speech was even delivered, having concluded ahead of time that it wasn't worth hearing and there was no news to report. The stories that seemed to be written after the speech were more concerned with what wasn't in the speech instead of what was in it. The press all concluded accusations about the 2020 election, which the president feels was rigged, and when the speech didn't include any proof of the 2020 election being rigged, they were quick to point that out. But that wasn't the subject of the speech. The press only thought it was. So when the president didn't provide any proof that the 2020 election was stolen, the press said, see, there's no news here, without even looking into the actual subject of the speech.
SPEAKER_01
Well, that can't be right.
SPEAKER_00
Just to drive home how ignorant the folks are at CNN, they published a transcript of the president's speech with remarks from CNN employees. I could call them journalists, but I won't. Included at specific intervals where they felt some clarification was needed. Some examples of how stupid the people at CNN are, or more accurately, to what extent they'll go to mislead you are easily demonstrated. President Trump said, quote, we had the worst border in the history of our country, and now we have the best. CNN's notes on that include a note from Priscilla Alvarez about what CNN called the crackdown on immigration, both illegal and otherwise. And otherwise? What does that mean? What is CNN implying here? Anyway, the note from Priscilla said that it's an overstatement to say that zero people have crossed into the country illegally. Problem is the president didn't say that. He's repeatedly said that no illegal alien has been released into the country. CNN heard what they wanted to hear instead of what was actually said. The next CNN note on the speech came when the president said there are, quote, shocking vulnerabilities in our election infrastructure, unquote. CNN's response was that vulnerabilities are different than evidence of interference. Yes, we know that CNN. But CNN thought they knew what the speech was going to be about, and when it wasn't, they just went with their prejudice anyway. The president was issuing a warning about the future, not harping on the past. But CNN doesn't want to address the vulnerabilities. They only want to highlight the omission of something they thought would be there. With Trump's claim of China's illicit acquisition of 220 million U.S. voter files, CNN was quick to point out that anybody can get this type of information. It's publicly available or available for purchase from individual states. Hmm. Then why are states like Michigan, Illinois, and Pennsylvania so adamant about keeping that information away from the federal government of the United States, which has asked for it many times. So China just bought that information when the U.S. government can't? Nice try, CNN. CNN's Lizzie Lipolis points out that the U.S. has never accused China of tainting or deleting voting records. I guess that means that it never happened, nor could it ever happen. Thanks for clearing that up for us, Lizzie.
SPEAKER_01
Send email to thelisteningtude at Outlook.com.
SPEAKER_00
Later, CNN goes on to, in a roundabout way, show that what the president was saying could be true and needs further investigation. CNN and other news agencies constantly refer to the conclusions of Trump's own administration during his first term to prove that there was no election interference. What they failed to mention is that during the speech, which they didn't show you, the president actually implicated members of his first administration of keeping secrets from him and actively subverting his presidency. The deep state. Trump's exposing them as backstabbers while the press holds them up as proof the president isn't telling the truth. Did the media look at the documents the president declassified about his assertions before discarding them? It doesn't seem like it. Otherwise, there would be notes about the actual documents in CNN's notes, not just past conclusions based on old stories written by many of the same people. Maybe they just don't want to admit they were duped by crooked FBI and CIA personnel. Or maybe they don't want to know the truth anymore. What's worse, ABC, NBC, and CNN don't want you to know the truth anymore. Because they don't trust the citizens enough to come to the same conclusions they would. The omission of the president's speech from standard coverage is thought of as a lack of coverage. But in reality, it was just the calm before the deluge of what the media was preparing in advance, because they had already drawn their own conclusions about what they thought the president was going to say. Oddly, Fox News, which aired the entire speech live, had little to nothing to say about the speech. That may be because after paying a large settlement to Dominion Voting Systems, Fox didn't want to venture there. But at least they let the people hear what the president had to say and even come to our own conclusions.com. I'm Bob Woodley for thou ad infinitum.
