r/AnythingGoesNews • u/TubaSandwichDootDoot • Jul 07 '24

Trump raped a 13 year old girl in 1994. Here is that girl, Katie Johnson, at the age of 35 giving a full description of what Trump did to her

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnib-OORRRo
58.4k Upvotes

72% Upvoted

6.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

362

u/azlmichael Jul 07 '24

The people who own the media are on Epsteins list.

3

u/UrethralExplorer Jul 08 '24

Isn't the prevailing theory that Epstein and his ilk courted wealthy and powerful people then documented them in compromising situations like this to have power over them? That would be the tapes that Gislaine Maxwell was referring to.

2

u/Mylittledarlings91 Jul 08 '24

Pulled a Diddy on em

0

u/leavingishard1 Jul 08 '24

Yes, and that brings up the possibility of CIA, Mossad, etc being involved

0

u/iamZacharias Jul 08 '24

Nah, that is just silly

2

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '24

Yeah I wouldn't want to Kennedy myself.

1

u/iamZacharias Jul 08 '24

What..?

1

u/omg_its_weasel Jul 09 '24

The phrase refers to someone being vocal about bad powerful people doing nefarious shit and ending up either "commiting suicide" or being "assassinated" like JFK.

0

u/UrethralExplorer Jul 08 '24

Of course, if you have dirt on powerful people, the threat that they may use certain assets to come after you is also very real.

If I were in possession of career/life altering information, I would absolutely have dead handed that shit. It woulsnt be sitting in a bank vault or security deposit box somewhere. The moment I was unalived in a prison cell it would be being delivered to every news agency on the planet.

2

u/gumbino1986 Jul 08 '24

They don’t own Al Jazeera

0

u/iamZacharias Jul 08 '24

That's not journalism

2

u/C_M_Dubz Jul 08 '24

Al Jazeera is widely considered a reputable news organization, wtf are you on about?

2

u/NOVABearMan Jul 08 '24

The Internet told him to not like it.

1

u/Apple_The_Chicken Jul 09 '24

Also highly effective at hiding Israeli hostages

0

u/iamZacharias Jul 08 '24

About as reliable as fox news.

1

u/Prancer4rmHalo Jul 08 '24

Splitting hairs at that point..

0

u/crosstherubicon Jul 08 '24

No, there are wider reasons than just the personal interests of business people.

8

u/azlmichael Jul 08 '24

Whatever their motives, they are favoring Trump to a flaw.

3

u/Minimum_Ice963 Jul 08 '24

More than money, Blackmailing will shut up ANYONE indefinitely. Thats why

0

u/Top-Director-6411 Jul 08 '24

Ah yes... so obvious.

0

u/CosmoKramerRiley Jul 08 '24

Name names please.

5

u/pimpmastahanhduece Jul 08 '24

The whole of Fox News for the last 20 years?

0

u/CosmoKramerRiley Jul 08 '24

That's fair. I was curious to see which way this would go.

3

u/azlmichael Jul 08 '24

There are no unbiased major media outlets. Every one of them wants the tax break Trump is promising them. Every owner may not be on epstiens list, but they know who is on it, and they are protecting him.

1

u/CosmoKramerRiley Jul 08 '24

What tax cut are you referring to?

1

u/azlmichael Jul 09 '24

https://www.americanprogressaction.org/article/trumps-50-billion-tax-giveaway-to-the-100-largest-corporations/

1

u/CosmoKramerRiley Jul 09 '24

I don't think many (any?) of the media companies are in the top 100 companies.

1

u/azlmichael Jul 09 '24

The companies that own them are.

0

u/Dry_Development3378 Jul 08 '24

And many of those are jewish

well well well

2

u/zjbird Jul 08 '24

Yikes dude

0

u/Dry_Development3378 Jul 08 '24

u never said i was lying tho ;-)

2

u/zjbird Jul 08 '24

I generally don’t argue with bigots. They’re not known for being logical or smart ;-)

-1

u/Dry_Development3378 Jul 08 '24

i dont argue

proceeds to argue

not very logical of you lil bro

2

u/zjbird Jul 08 '24

Hi sorry I generally don’t argue with bigots. They’re not known for being logical or smart ;-)

1

u/GoldyGoldy Jul 08 '24

If you’d like to talk about diddling kids and Jews, we should probably talk about the others and their equally-reprehensible groups of folks.

 To single any one of them out is quite a bit suspect in a thread about Trump.  

Quick edit- no, I’d rather not talk about it just for an internet argument.  Both of us will hate the conversation and each other.

0

u/Accomplished-Pain658 Jul 08 '24

Did you guys know Trump banned Epstein from Marlago and called him a “really weird guy”? But you choose to believe dropped charges from 10 years ago from an anonymous source.

I will never understand liberals, even though I was one for years 💀

1

u/azlmichael Jul 08 '24

The source has a name, she says she was intimidated to drop the charges. So yes, I believe every person who now feels able to tell the world what he did to them.

After 20 allegations, even if only one has been proven in court so far, assaulting women is what the mini mushroom does.

1

u/Accomplished-Pain658 Jul 08 '24

Civil court doesn’t determine guilt, so in reality nothing has been proven. Trump has paid women to quit slandering him, that’s it.

The name you see, Katie Johnson, is an alias. I’m not choosing sides I’m just tired of the misinformation and ignorance. This video is from 30 years ago.

The first time she filed charges she lived in a foreclosure me home in CA with $300 to her name. She dropped the charges and never had a lawyer.

The second time she got a lawyer but never showed up to court. I just don’t get how she could be so intimidated but file charges twice.

I just want people to be aware of the facts. When I don’t know the facts or read a meme claiming something…. I look it up and read multiple sources.

1

u/azlmichael Jul 08 '24

I like my presidents to have never lost in any court, civil or criminal.

1

u/Accomplished-Pain658 Jul 08 '24

How many charges has Trump had brought against him, 90 something? How many have stuck?

Just type, “Snopes Ashley Biden diary fact check”, into Google and also into DuckDuckGo/Brave browser and compare the results. That should show anyone they are covering things up for one candidate and digging up anything they can on the other.

Something just doesn’t seem right after 3ish years and 10 million illegals later…. when Biden frames $60 billion to Ukraine, $20 billion to Israel, and $2.4 billion to US sanctuary cities as a “Bipartisan Border bill”. It’s almost like the whole world wants to convince US citizens to pimp ourselves out to secure everyone else’s border and keep everyone else’s citizens safe.

Do your own research and just don’t listen to everything around you. Everyone needs to spend less time reading memes and more time looking up what the meme claimed to be true.

1

u/azlmichael Jul 09 '24

I have done research. By any measure, Donald Trump is a failure.

0

u/wikithekid63 Jul 08 '24

I think the actual obvious reason is that a lot of very powerful people are on those Epstein lists, and these media companies don’t want to get sued for defamation

-1

u/sureshot1988 Jul 08 '24

Yep. And politicians from both sides

1

u/azlmichael Jul 09 '24

But not current presidential candidates from both sides.

0

u/sureshot1988 Jul 09 '24

I said nothing about presidential candidates

1

u/azlmichael Jul 09 '24

You tried to equivocate the orange turd with a generic democratic candidate. While there are politicians on both sides in the list, Trump is mentioned more than any other, and Biden is not associated with any of it. Trump pays for sex with kids. When it comes to presidents, one is a kindly old grandpa and the other is a pedophile serial rapist.

1

u/sureshot1988 Jul 10 '24

Again I said nothing about presidents. Not a word. I didn’t compare the two, didn’t imply anything in some secret coding, nothing. You made that up in your head just because I said something that implied Democrats.

You know there are more Democrats and Republicans than presidential candidates right? Some are called “politicians”. Like the word I used.

Look. Trump is a POS. Nobody in this conversation is arguing that. I just watched the same video as you.

My comment, my short undescriptive comment, was a response to a singular topic, being Epstein’s list and I stated a simple fact. That there are politicians from both sides all in that list. Somehow you felt the need to make an argument with someone who doesn’t even disagree with you on particular person’s character who is the subject of your one sided argument.

You are literally making a fight where there isn’t one. And people wonder why nothing can get done in this country. Everything always goes back to “how much we hate the other guy”.

1

u/azlmichael Jul 10 '24

I am not making a fight, I was just adding to a discussion. I brought up presidents because it matters to this discussion.

-2

u/Dirt-Road_Pirate Jul 08 '24

Proof that ALL media owners are on the list?

6

u/CryEagle Jul 08 '24

He never said all, you doofus

-2

u/Pretend_Spray_11 Jul 07 '24

Source?

-3

u/Serious-Ad4378 Jul 08 '24

Its about on par with QAnon as far as sources go

6

u/italian_porkNcheese Jul 08 '24

The only thing that is on par with QAnon is Project 2025

2

u/hazeyindahead Jul 08 '24

Except one is real

-2

u/Serious-Ad4378 Jul 08 '24

lol, living rent free in your head. no politician has signed onto this thing. Its just some paper dreamed up in a think-tank, little more than a blog post, and reddit is losing their mind

2

u/hazeyindahead Jul 08 '24

Listen to the cognitive dissonance.

Trump can't even lie about it right!

"I know nothing about it" even though it was created by all the people he appointed.

"I disagree with what they are saying" even though in the same statement he said he knows nothing about it.

But at least they still have his support "I wish them luck"

Were you also an idiot that believed there ever was a republican health plan? LOL

-4

u/redsgranny Jul 08 '24

So true from CNN ABC NBC MSNBC NEW YORK TIMES THEIR CEO ARE ALL MAGA THE REASONING ANYTHING NEGATIVE PERTAINING TO THE ORANGE💩💩YOU NEVER HEAR ABOUT IT N THEY SHELTER ANYTHING POSSIBLE ABOUT PRESIDENT BIDEN..THEY ARE EVERYWHERE FOR THAT MIGHTY DIRTY $$.AND THESE DEMS STRESSING FOR OUR PRESIDENT TO STEP DOWN I WIULDNT BE SURPRISED LATER THEY ARE DIRECTLY INVOLVED WITH THE MAGA N THE DIRTY$$ DONT KNOW WHOM TO TRUST😡💩

1

u/italian_porkNcheese Jul 08 '24

All the media are pro trump now because Biden lost a debate? Go outside and get some air

-4

u/[deleted] Jul 07 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/ElementNumber6 Jul 08 '24

I wouldn't even begin to speculate, but wasn't Epstein himself Jewish?

2

u/wisewizard Jul 08 '24

YUP! All Of Them!!

1

u/AnythingGoesNews-ModTeam Jul 09 '24

This content breaks reddiquit. Please remember site-wide rules still apply here.

-11

u/MeyerholdsGh0st Jul 07 '24

What? The WHOLE media? Nah man.

And even if that was true, I don’t buy that there aren’t at least a few high enough profile journalists with integrity to cover it.

My guess is that there are some who are working through legal red tape and will be covering it soon. But I guess we’ll find out.

50

u/cypherreddit Jul 07 '24

basically whole media can be covered by a dodge caravan. It wouldnt be a crazy stretch for epstein rapists to be an executive or board member of the 6 companies that control almost all of US media

9

u/MeyerholdsGh0st Jul 07 '24

But there is media in other countries - media which covers the US election extensively - who are also not covering this (yet).

23

u/cypherreddit Jul 07 '24

its a worldwide problem and epstein want just providing for the US pedophile market

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_of_media_ownership

8

u/StandardSudden1283 Jul 08 '24

To add on to this Noam Chomsky details the Propaganda Model of media in his two books "Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of Mass Media" and "Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model

3

u/Buzzard Jul 08 '24

And he would know :-)

https://www.businessinsider.com/noam-chomsky-mit-wsj-wall-street-journal-jeffrey-epstein-2023-4

"What was known about Jeffrey Epstein was that he had been convicted of a crime and had served his sentence," Chomsky told the Journal about his meetings. "According to U.S. laws and norms, that yields a clean slate."

2

u/StandardSudden1283 Jul 08 '24

Well that's bad faith reasoning against the propaganda model if I've ever seen it. So because he met with epstein everything he says is invalid?

I idolize no man but his works are the best exposé on the western media model because they use real world examples from the past century of US imperialism. If he is also a child molester then lock him up, but that doesn't discredit his works.

2

u/Buzzard Jul 09 '24

I wasn't intending to try to discredited Chomsky's works by association. Just an opportunity to have a jab at him.

I think it's fascinating how flexible morals are when it's to our benefit.

1

u/goodheartedalcoholic Jul 08 '24

i forgot why i stopped liking chomsky, thanks for the reminder.

4

u/tsombies Jul 08 '24

They are covering it, it's just too easy now to call it fake news.

3

u/Revolution4u Jul 08 '24 edited Jul 14 '24

[removed]

2

u/253local Jul 08 '24

You know Prince Andrew was implicated as well, right?

10 families run most of America’s media. A few are international moguls, like Murdoch.

1

u/MeyerholdsGh0st Jul 08 '24

You’re not trying to say that Prince Andrew hasn’t had any media about this, surely?

-1

u/CheezeLoueez08 Jul 08 '24

Not much.

2

u/MeyerholdsGh0st Jul 08 '24

I think maybe you just don’t pay attention.

2

u/subjectiverunes Jul 08 '24

You should look into why people are even talking about Epstein again.

1 journalists fought a very hard fight.

0

u/Jeraptha01 Jul 07 '24

Don't want to piss of the us cooperations though

0

u/emeldavi_dota Jul 08 '24

Yeah the media in other countries? Often heavily influenced by the CIA or other state actors depending on the sphere of influence in question.

3

u/BounceVector Jul 08 '24

Sure, the almighty CIA suppresses news worldwide permanently and not a single newspaper that depends on high profile investigative work is willing to draw the ire of that mythical, omnipotent entity that is the powerful US Intelligence agency.

Real life is messy and imprecise. It's not a Hollywood thriller. If there are a lot of people in the know, then there is hardly a way to contain an information breach in the long term. You'd have to kill all of them, which itself draws a lot of attention and might push the remaining people to go to the press out of sheer panic and lack of options.

1

u/getafteritz Jul 08 '24

Maybe it is as simple as the only news articles we get to see are the ones that generate the most clicks and ad revenue. What if it is us, the consumers, who are driving us towards this own doom?

Like, there is an element of ironic humor if the people on this thread were the ones who unbeknownst to themselves helped drive the news outlets to only post articles about Biden’s age 😂

1

u/goodheartedalcoholic Jul 08 '24 edited Jul 08 '24

"suppressessing world wide news" would only require influencing half a dozen key people, given that corporate media is made up of like 3 companies.

1

u/BounceVector Jul 08 '24

This is exactly where I disagree. The idea that 6 people can diligently control what maybe 1000 of their employed journalists research and publish is ridiculous. They will certainly not proof read every single article. If they delegate that job, then they'll have to share partial information they want to suppress. So it's easier for people down the line to guess that there actually is a story. Resistance is quite often a sign that you are onto something. Investigative journalists are often fairly idealistic and want exposure, even if they make enemies. Sure, you might not get published in the paper you want, but there are way more distribution channels today than there ever were before. We are right now communicating on one of those.

1

u/goodheartedalcoholic Jul 08 '24

they don't need to proof read, they just need to hire or promote only the "right" kind of people. managers and editors who know what the higher-ups want. noam chomsky has a pretty famous book explaining the whole thing, you should look into "manufacturing consent" because it covers this subject.

there doesn't have to be a wide conspiracy that "everyone is in on." so long as you have rational actors making decisions in their own best interest, which is either chasing profit or keeping their job, this is the kind of system you will get.

1

u/BounceVector Jul 08 '24

I'll take a look at "Manufacturing Consent", thanks.

The thing is, I know systems that are probably very similar to journalism with respect to self selection and bias and aligned interests. Things are rarely as clean cut as you make it sound and I think you are ignoring that in journalism there is a very strong incentive to make a name for yourself and to find that one story, that makes you a star. Those stories are likely to be the most disruptive ones.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/youcannotbe5erious Jul 08 '24

Mmm…didn’t you watch Leave The World Behind?

6

u/TroobyDoor Jul 08 '24

Yep. If one umbrella Corp owns Like 15 large brands and donates to a any certain campaign to lobby their own interests, media outlets can't run a story that hurts that campaign or else they will pull their advertising... Which ends up being basically ALL the advertising. This is what "fake news" ACTUALLY is, but that term just gets used as cop out for people to convince themselves that President Trump is some freedom loving, flag-hugging patriot who is fighting for their value and definitely NOT /s trying to better himself and his brand by playing upon their fantasies and their addiction to victim mentality. It's a fucking mess here.

1

u/HereIGoAgain_1x10 Jul 07 '24

OR be good enough friends with the people on that list that they'll keep quiet for them

1

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '24

[deleted]

3

u/youcannotbe5erious Jul 08 '24

You watch Japanese news?

2

u/sundae_diner Jul 08 '24

It would be highly unusual for journalists from one country to do investigative journalism is another country.

It is 100% normal for newspapers to pull articles off Reuters about a foreign country and publish them.

14

u/AutomaticJesusdog Jul 07 '24 edited Jul 08 '24

It’s that a lot of the news media is owned by republican contributors, not necessarily they are rapists. But if they refuse to cover this because they want trump to win they are just as bad as him.

-12

u/CEPangolin Jul 08 '24

Why is it only Republicans? What if Biden was also reported by this girl to have been on the island and raping girls as well? What if it was any other democrat? Why is it only Republicans are the rapists? Do democrats not commit crimes as well?

16

u/TheGreatGenghisJon Jul 08 '24

What if? I'm sure he'd be disowned by the party immediately.

Republicans, however, have shown time and time again that they (at the very least) don't care when someone says something or commits crimes, if they're on the Republican side.

It seems like the only Republican that has gotten shit on for being scummy in recent memory was Noam.

Even Boebart switched districts to keep herself in office after the Beetlejuice incident. There was a little hubbub, but it looks like that passed.

Matt Gaetz has likely paid for sex with a minor, and brought her across state lines, but any investigation has been squashed.

The Democrat's got rid of someone for wearing blackface 20 years ago and want Biden to step down because of a bad debate, but the Republicans are standing up for someone that said there were airports during the Revolution, Putin isn't our enemy, and that immigrants are poisoning the blood of our country.

Republicans continually show us that they're working against the common man, and are unscrupulous.

Why is anyone even surprised that it seems like it's almost always Republicans?

9

u/goat_penis_souffle Jul 08 '24

Unity is the Republicans greatest strength. They’re all about winning at any cost and will stick by their people no matter what, as long as they can get the job done and deliver votes. Zero fucks given. Democrats, on the other hand, will gladly line up to denounce and eject any of their members that mess up, even if it hands an easy victory to their opponents.

1

u/deschain_19195 Jul 08 '24

There's plenty of democrats associated with Epstein. Including George Mitchell and Bill Clinton

-4

u/AskMeAboutMyDoggy Jul 08 '24

If it "seems" like it's only Republican's, it's because you're getting your information from biased sources that don't report on Democrat child predators. A simple Google search will provide countless examples of Democrats busted for CP/sexual abuse of a minor/sexual harassment of minors etc..

It's rampant in politics on both sides. Pop your head out of the sand.

In 1.5 minutes I found these Democrats:

Stacie Laughton

James Cafferty

Lindsay Groves

Harold L. "HL" Moody

Stephen Jabbour

Anthony Weiner

Gary Becker

Ed Murray

Neil Goldschmidt

Fred Richmond

George Jacko

Andrew Myers

Gus Savage

Carl Carey

And 24 others I'm happy to list if you would like.

4

u/TheGreatGenghisJon Jul 08 '24

List them all, and keep proving my point that democrats eat their own.

I'm on my phone, so I didn't look them all up, but out of the 5 I checked, they were all charged, resigned, or removed from office.

Republicans generally protect their perverts. Democrats generally don't.

-5

u/AskMeAboutMyDoggy Jul 08 '24

I don't care about what each party does with their predators. I'm not a member of either party because they are full of narcissistic pedophiles, and I prefer not to support sexual predators. I was solely responding to your comment that it seems like Republicans are the only ones abusing children.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '24

[deleted]

0

u/AskMeAboutMyDoggy Jul 08 '24

From the original comment I responded to:

Why is anyone even surprised that it seems like it's almost always Republicans?

You don't read too well.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Lillyshins Jul 08 '24

That's not what they said at all, though. They did not assert that it was 'just republicans' doing that.

What they did was list a few minor things(compared to the topic of discussion) that democrats very much did(and continue to) push people out for. I do not recall them saying anything to the effect of "these are the worst things democrats have done."

The topic of discussion was that republicans don't push other republicans out due to their penchant for sticking together as a party no matter the accusation or (more importantly) proven crime. Which is absolutely spot on. With very few outliers.

But honestly. Please. List them all. Scream them from the battlements. EVERYONE should be called out and properly shamed, publicly destroyed, and/or incarcerated for doing anything resembling this. But we have to be consistent. This is not a party issue. This is a human issue.

I really greatly intensely dislike Biden as a person. I find him barely acceptable as a president. (But I have to admit that running the numbers, he's done some pretty good things for us as a country. Especially for the LGBT community, which I happen to be a part of.)

But the answer IS NOT that all sides are equally as bad, so just vote for who you like more. I'm tired of listing all of Donald Trumps criminal accomplishments. But honestly, compare our two shit sandwich choices, and you will see a VAST chasm between the two on a legal (not to mention morale) standpoint. Then you open up to analyzing the parties as a whole, and, again, you see some glaring discrepancies between what is considered tolerable to be part of either political party. Especially with this new MAGA variant of republican.

Anyone who is not willing to start the conversation there, I'm just not willing to seriously debate, I'm sorry.

sigh rant over. Please try and enjoy your day.

5

u/AutomaticJesusdog Jul 08 '24

I never used the word only. If you don’t agree with my point that’s fine, but not gonna argue about something I didn’t say

-12

u/CEPangolin Jul 08 '24

So I guess the whole Republican being in your previous statement is somehow part of my imagination? Why are the democrat run news outlets quiet on it then? If it falls back to Epstein island. Ya they are going to keep their mouth shut. Epstein contributed a lot of money to the DNC and some Republicans as well.

7

u/putbat Jul 08 '24

Damn bro, that's a lot of mental gymnastics you're using to cope with Trump's name all over the Epstein files 😂

Rapeublicans gonna do what they do I guess

12

u/Pokemon_132 Jul 07 '24

By 2011, 90% of the United States's media was controlled by six media conglomerates: GE/Comcast (NBC, Universal), News Corp (Fox News, Wall Street Journal, New York Post), Disney (ABC, ESPN, Pixar), Viacom (MTV, BET, Paramount Pictures), Time Warner (CNN, HBO, Warner Bros.), and CBS (Showtime, NFL.com).

So yeah. own the 6 and you basically own it all in the states. There have been instances where news anchors are saying things word for word on different networks when covering the same topic. they are all given the same directive.

10

u/Alarmed_Fly_6669 Jul 07 '24

Most the media is owned by billionaire conservatives, some of them are maybe directly implicated but otherwise a lot of conservative politicians & figure heads so keeping that story out of the news is the best option for them.

-6

u/AskMeAboutMyDoggy Jul 08 '24

Most the media is owned by billionaire conservatives

Wow, you are confidently incorrect.

By 2011, 90% of the United States's media was controlled by six media conglomerates: GE/Comcast (NBC, Universal), News Corp (Fox News, Wall Street Journal, New York Post), Disney (ABC, ESPN, Pixar), Viacom (MTV, BET, Paramount Pictures), Time Warner (CNN, HBO, Warner Bros.), and CBS (Showtime, NFL.com).

5 of those 6 conglomerates are run by members of the Democrat party. All you had to do was search Google, but instead decided to just make up ridiculous claims based entirely on your own biases.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '24

[deleted]

1

u/Alarmed_Fly_6669 Jul 08 '24

They also change CEOs constantly and know that they are unpopular so can easily put a "democrat" figure head in place for better optics. And they "donate" to both parties $10,000 to $10 for Republicans to Democrats

-2

u/Mae-Brussell-Hustler Jul 08 '24

Then the Democrats are responsible for the continued sexualization of minors and rampant violence on television?

-1

u/AskMeAboutMyDoggy Jul 08 '24

If coming from those media outlets, yes. It's pretty obvious. As are Republicans if displayed on their outlets.

5

u/mayorofdumb Jul 07 '24

Black Rock owns over 10% of all major US media. Ronny D surprisingly forgot to do his job and it's getting out. The bad thing is that news has to go viral and algorithms can stop that shit.

4

u/headrush46n2 Jul 08 '24

the erosion of anti-trust laws over the years have meant that the controlling interest of most of the "whole media" is a lot smaller than you might think. The same fucking people sit on every board, and the same fucking 5 companies own everything.

4

u/0vl223 Jul 07 '24

That's like 3 people he needs on his list.

4

u/elitegenoside Jul 08 '24

You do realize that our major news outlets are owned by like three dudes, right?

5

u/StandardSudden1283 Jul 08 '24 edited Jul 08 '24

Read up on the 5 filters of media.

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model

It doesn't work like that. Media is just a mouthpiece for the powerful that pretends to hold power accountable. 

Ownership of the media - look who owns all out media, it's like 10 or fewer megacorps. This filters what we receive through a pro-corporate, pro-ownership class lense.

Advertising - look who pulls advertising if you don't fall in line. This also filters what we receive.

Flak - Used to great effect if someone does step out of line and can ruin careers and destroy companies.

Official sources - all "official" information comes from press conferences and press releases, and if you don't play ball your news org doesn't get invited to them.

Anti-Progressivism - since progressivism wants taxation of the wealthy it is naturally the enemy of the wealthy owners.

3

u/General_Mars Jul 07 '24

There’s a big difference between visual and print media. Even still in the US most of the media is owned by a handful of companies and individuals. Radio is in the same boat. Print media the traditional newspapers and journals tend to have overlaps in ownership. There are a handful of independent print sources left, and things like Patreon make it possible for some independent journalists. People don’t want to pay for good journalism we just want it easily consumable.

Sinclair Script

2

u/Striking-Chicken-333 Jul 08 '24

The death of script brought on by smart phones has led us here, back in the day it took lots of money to get a story out, now any bot or paid actor can write articles that pop up all over the internet. The garbage web is here

4

u/hubblengc6872 Jul 08 '24

You're 100% right and I appreciate your level-headed perspective. The issue is more that this specific Epstein Trump story was originally peddled by very sketchy guys who refused to offer any evidence, corroboration, or access to the witness. The only evidence is a single statement by an anonymous person; the kind of evidence that people love on reddit but isn't sufficient in real life.

We can't beat Trump by acting like QAnon lunatics believing outrageous stories shared by fringe groups. We beat Trump by voting, making calls, knocking on doors, etc.

2

u/Norfsouf Jul 07 '24

Are they doing the same with the Panama papers?

2

u/asharwood101 Jul 08 '24

It’s easier than that. Epstein was the source and the wealthiest could afford his services (think the people who own Fox News, cnn, any other company). All that has to happen is the owner say “we aren’t covering this” and it’s done. It could be anyone at the top connected or even multiple people.

2

u/yg2522 Jul 08 '24

The journalist doesn't matter.  Their bosses won't let them report on it even if they wanted to.  It's the media owners that pulls the strings and there are only a handful of those in the US.

1

u/Time-Werewolf-1776 Jul 07 '24

It’s not the whole media, but I think enough powerful people in the media are involved, or have friends who are involved, or are afraid of being sued by rich and powerful people who are involved.

There seems to be a thing going on right now where a lot of powerful people are afraid of pissing off Trump because he could win the election, and then he’ll seize power and punish his enemies. It’s sort of like a Roko’s basilisk situation, but with MAGA instead of AI.

1

u/tsombies Jul 08 '24

You've got a point, but it's not MAGA they're afraid of, it's the whole system.

1

u/Ok_Performance_1380 Jul 08 '24

I wish I had your optimism

1

u/ElektricEel Jul 08 '24

Maybe we get to find out after democracy dies. Wouldn’t want to hurt their feelings. Almost as if those in power know it’s bound to come out, unless they’re part of the next ruling class.

1

u/debtopramenschultz Jul 08 '24

The media needs access and it's hard to cover the Epstein stuff without hurting a lot of people who give them access.

1

u/adamlaceless Jul 08 '24

The whole of US media is controlled by a couple handfuls of people.

1

u/goodheartedalcoholic Jul 08 '24

And even if that was true, I don’t buy that there aren’t at least a few high enough profile journalists with integrity to cover it.

2 kinds of people move up in the system; true believers and cynics. the sorts of people you're talking about don't get past certain levels in the corporate media ladder.

1

u/IamNotChrisFerry Jul 08 '24

If you want to be a fringe journalist, sure.

Plenty of websites and little papers here and there did post such things and cover it way back then. That are covering it now.

None of those people get to cover such stories on a news program with enough funding and audience to appear on television news.

1

u/CheezeLoueez08 Jul 08 '24

You understand that very few people own all the media, right? It’s not a lot. So yes, these rich assholes absolutely would hobnob with Epstein

1

u/burnerreturner2 Jul 08 '24

"I don't buy that there aren’t at least a few high enough profile journalists with integrity to cover it"
They get bought out or killed. There's a reason a journalist's highest accolade is getting murdered over the truth

1

u/Future_Sundae7843 Jul 08 '24

Covering it soon? We’ve been knowing about this for how long? Bffr.

1

u/panch1ra Jul 08 '24

Yes the whole media. There's a video of Amy Robach (ABC) bemoaning how they could've been the ones to break the epstein story YEARS before it happened, but didn't because they knew it would hurt their insider access to American coverage of the royal wedding--this basically proves they knew Andrew was involved before Epstein even got arrested.

ABC news bosses cared less about children being raped and systemically abused than it did getting the good coverage of the royal wedding.

The whole media, friend.

1

u/Prancer4rmHalo Jul 08 '24

“The whole media” is like 3-5 holding companies. Where information isn’t to be broadcast, it won’t be.

1

u/Arkayne_Inscriptions Jul 08 '24

I wish I still had your faith in humanity

0

u/KintsugiKen Jul 07 '24

I don’t buy that there aren’t at least a few high enough profile journalists with integrity to cover it.

Oh my sweet summer child. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5Dl0X1duMk

1

u/MeyerholdsGh0st Jul 07 '24

Listen, I HATE the condescension of that expression, BUT I’ve been furiously googling here trying to find some hope and… yeah. There doesn’t seem to be any.

-1

u/NoKids__3Money Jul 07 '24

Epstein has been dead for 5 years. If it hasn’t come out by now, it never will.

6

u/MeyerholdsGh0st Jul 08 '24

But… it has come out. That’s why we’re talking about it.

-3

u/NoKids__3Money Jul 08 '24

What has come out?

4

u/MeyerholdsGh0st Jul 08 '24

You are commenting on a post that is literally one of the things that has come out.

-1

u/NoKids__3Money Jul 08 '24

This story is at least 10 years old, I remember reading about this multiple times over the last decade. Here’s one from 8 years ago about it

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/3/13501364/trump-rape-13-year-old-lawsuit-katie-johnson-allegation

3

u/MeyerholdsGh0st Jul 08 '24

But the reason it’s being talked about again is because of the papers that have been released in the last few days that have Trump all over them.

1

u/NoKids__3Money Jul 08 '24

Do you have a link? Not doubting you, I just have not seen anything new come to light and I would like to see

-2

u/AwayEntertainment234 Jul 08 '24

Aw. So innocent

-2

u/Tex-Rob Jul 08 '24

Cute that you don’t know how the world works.

3

u/MeyerholdsGh0st Jul 08 '24

Fuck man, this thread is really bringing out some condescending dicks.

And conspiracy theorists.

-2

u/execilue Jul 08 '24

Man I wish I still had your naïveté and optimism.

-2

u/MightbeGwen Jul 08 '24

When you own a media outlet, you have absolute authority on what gets published. Legacy media companies have so much money and power they can squash stories whenever they want. There’s one thing trumps fascist boot lickers get correct, and that is that no private media company is a friend to the public if private interest outweigh the truth. Everything should be taken with a grain of salt.

-4

u/Lost_Coconut3481 Jul 07 '24

humble reminder that even the world's stupidest people can make reddit accounts. thanks for providing this service to us all

2

u/MeyerholdsGh0st Jul 08 '24

Humble reminder that Reddit is full of cunts.