Columnist: ‘Mainstream’ media no longer ‘journalists,’ they’re ‘ACTIVISTS’

(National SentinelMedia Matters: A columnist for the Washington Examiner has taken the so-called ‘mainstream media’ to task for its warped, overtly biased coverage of today’s top political figures, noting that most are no longer “journalists” but really are just “activists.”

“The Washington Post, New York Times, and USA Today still refuse to employ a single columnist that won’t begin each piece with anything less than, ‘Mr. Trump, you are a liar!’ wrote Eddie Scarry in December.

He noted that in his view, the only major “mainstream” newspaper that provides “anything that even looks sort of like a reasonable perspective on the still-young White House” is The Wall Street Journal opinion page.

Scarry noted further:

CNN this year had to retract one story and significantly modify a second one (both were related to Trump and Russia) after it turned out the former wasn’t supported by any facts (otherwise often referred to as “fiction”) and the latter was inaccurate to the point of libel.

Brian Ross, with his apparent lifetime tenure at ABC News, was suspended in early December after he once again reported catastrophically wrong information about Trump and, of course, Russia.

And as if on cue, The New York Times on Saturday ran a lengthy story praising MSNBC host Joy Reid as a leader of the “resistance.” She has been extremely critical of President Donald J. Trump even to the point of becoming shooing pro-Trump guests off her show.

She, too, has persisted in pushing the “Russian collusion” narrative despite there being no evidence the Trump campaign and Moscow worked in tandem to defeat Hillary Clinton — after nearly two years’ worth of investigating by federal authorities and Congress.

Scarry noted in his column some “truths” about today’s major media:

— “Activism” at most news outlets is now acceptable, especially if it is Left-leaning activism:

CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta, who saved democracy when he challenged the administration’s immigration plan by quoting a cliche poem, said in a radio interview that the media need “a different kind of playbook” when it comes to covering Trump. Like an old lady who feels sassy ordering a Sex on the Beach, Acosta defined his new journalism rules as, “That means at times, you know, I bring a little attitude to what I do on a daily basis.” Acosta may be harmless on his own, but when the sea of media decide to rewrite the standards for covering a presidency, to assume an “attitude,” it’s time to accept that they’re no longer journalists. They’re activists.

— “Everything Trump says is controversial,” even when said ‘controversy’ has to be invented by the media:

In September 2016, then-President Obama acknowledged that now-former NFL Quarterback Colin Kaepernick may be kneeling for the national anthem in earnest, but he said that Kaepernick should “listen to the pain that that may cause somebody who, for example, had a spouse or a child who was killed in combat.” It wasn’t controversial to stand up for the country’s most recognized symbol until Trump did it, at which point it became racist. The Washington Post’s liberal blogger Greg Sargent said Trump’s criticism of NFL players kneeling fit into a pattern of attacking “high-profile African Americans to feed his supporters’ belief that the system is rigged for minorities.” The NFL is not an exclusively black league, and patriotism isn’t racially divisive, but that’s a nuance that doesn’t feed a fake controversy instigated by reporters.

— “Willful ignorance isn’t a bug, it’s a feature,” he wrote, explaining:

It’s possible to actually earn prestige in the national media, a field that formerly required an ongoing thirst for knowledge and understanding, by refusing to learn new things. In November of last year, New York Times columnist Charles Blow bragged that he refused to meet with then-President-elect Trump after the election, though he had come to the Times newsroom for an interview with staff. It’s more important for Blow that he stay ignorantly angry rather than learn anything that might change his mind from a face-to-face meeting. And if there is information readily available that disrupts the media’s enduring suspicion that Trump is a closet klansman, writers find it best to simply ignore it.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

Paging Jeff Sessions! DOJ STILL withholding majority of ‘missing’ texts exchanged between anti-Trump FBI lovers Strzok and Page

(National SentinelFull Nondisclosure: The Justice Department has only turned over a fraction of the “missing” texts exchanged between FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Stzrok and his mistress, lawyer Lisa Page.

As reported by Byron York at the Washington Examiner, the DoJ has only given lawmakers about 15 percent of five months’ worth of missing messages that the FBI said were lost from thousands of department cellphones due to a data backup glitch.

What’s more, that may be all Congress gets — at least for the time being, until bureau cyber-forensic experts manage to recover more of the messages, York noted, adding that it is not yet clear how many Strzok-Page texts there are and how many of those contain more anti-Trump, anti-administration content.

“The answers are complicated, but here is what I have been able to figure out from conversations with the Justice Department and Capitol Hill investigators,” he wrote, adding:

The Justice Department has identified about 50,000 Strzok-Page texts. But that is apart from the texts between Dec. 14, 2016 and May 17, 2017, that were declared missing a week ago but are now being recovered. So, the total is apparently 50,000 plus the currently unknown number of formerly missing texts.

But that number refers only to the Strzok-Page texts that were sent and received on FBI-issued Samsung phones. There are a number of instances in the texts in which the two officials say that they should switch the conversation to iMessage, suggesting they continued to talk about FBI matters on personal Apple phones. For investigators, those are particularly intriguing texts – what was so sensitive that they couldn’t discuss on their work phones? – but the number of those texts is unknown. And of course, they have not been turned over to Congress.

Thus far, York says it is estimated that around 7,000 texts have been turned over, a figure that includes messages given to Congress on two occasions. If there are around 50,000 messages, that means lawmakers have only been given about 15 percent of the total.

That’s because, according to a Jan. 19 letter from Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd to Capitol Hill investigators, not all texts were going to be handed over in the first place.

“The department is not providing text messages that were purely personal in nature,” Boyd wrote. “Furthermore, the department has redacted from some work-related text messages portions that were purely personal. The department’s aim in withholding purely personal text messages and redacting personal portions of work-related text messages was primarily to facilitate the committee’s access to potentially relevant text messages without having to cull through large quantities of material unrelated to either the investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server or the investigation into Russian efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.”

Also, York noted that Boyd informed investigators that the department consulted with special counsel Robert Mueller’s office, in order to and made some redactions “related to the structure, operation, and substance of the [Special Counsel’s Office]’s investigation because it is ongoing.”

Hill investigators have said they’re not at all sure how broad that restriction is. However, the DOJ said that if lawmakers had questions about key redactions, the department would “work with” Congress to explain or reveal redacted information “in a closed setting.”

York then reminds readers of the key events that took place during the period of time text messages have gone missing:

The time period involved, Dec. 14, 2016 to May 17, 2017, covered some of the key moments in the FBI’s investigation of the Trump-Russia affair: conversations between Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn and Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak; the completion and publication of the intelligence community assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 election; the briefing in which FBI director James Comey told President-elect Donald Trump about the Trump dossier; the president’s inauguration; the nomination and confirmation of new Justice Department leadership; Flynn’s interview with the FBI (conducted by Strzok); Comey’s assurances to Trump that he, Trump, was not under investigation; a variety of revelations, mostly in the Washington Post and New York Times, about various Trump figures under investigation; Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ recusal from the Russia probe; the firing of top Obama Justice Department holdover Sally Yates; Trump’s tweet alleging he was wiretapped; Trump’s firing of Comey; and, finally, the appointment of Mueller.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

It’s MAGIC! Justice Dept. ‘FINDS’ MORE texts between anti-Trump FBI hacks STZROK and PAGE

(National SentinelDiscovered: The Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General has located more text messages between anti-Trump FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and his mistress, bureau lawyer Lisa Page, after the agency said it had “lost” five months’ worth of texts due to a technical glitch.

In a letter to key congressional committees, IG Michael Michael Horowitz said his office “succeeded in using forensic tools to recover text messages from FBI devices, including text messages between Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page that were sent or received between December 14, 2016 and May 17, 2017,” Fox News reported.

“Our effort to recover any additional text messages is ongoing,” Horowitz said. “We will provide copies of the text messages that we recover from these devices to the Department so that the Department’s leadership can take any management action it deems appropriate.”

The news network reported further that messages were recovered after the IG took physical possession of “at least four phones” that were issued to the pair.

News of the IG’s recover comes after Fox News host Sean Hannity revealed Wednesday night that multiple government sources had informed him that messages were beginning to be recovered.

Initial reports that the FBI had lost five months’ worth of text messages from scores of department-issued cellphones set off alarm bells in Congress, particularly among Republican lawmakers investigating whether the Obama administration improperly spied on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.

DOJ notified congressional committees that there is a gap in records between Dec. 14, 2016, and May 17, 2017. The gap in records covered a crucial period, raising suspicion among GOP lawmakers about how those messages disappeared.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

There IS a DEEP STATE! Text messages reveal SECRET SOCIETY within Justice, FBI, working AGAINST TRUMP (Video)

(National SentinelBombshell: Attorney General Jeff Sessions said on Monday that disgraced FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, exchanged some 50,000 text messages, but added that figure does not include five months’ worth of ‘missing’ texts the bureau said were lost in a database glitch.

“We will leave no stone unturned to confirm with certainty why these text messages are not now available to be produced and will use every technology available to determine whether the missing messages are recoverable from another source,” Sessions said in a statement provided to Fox News. “If we are successful, we will update the congressional committees immediately.”

The missing messages cover a crucial window, as the gap occurs between the presidential transition and the launch of Robert Mueller’s Russia probe — where both officials previously were assigned.

After reviewing all of those messages, Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, told Fox News he believes there is a “secret society” within the Justice Department and the FBI that worked feverishly to undermine Donald J. Trump’s candidacy and presidency.

“What we learned today in the thousands of text messages that we’ve reviewed that perhaps they may not have done that (checked their bias at the door),” he said.

“There’s certainly a factual basis to question whether or not they acted on that bias. We know about this insurance policy that was referenced in trying to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president,” he continued.

“We learned today from information that in the immediate aftermath of his election that there may have been a ‘secret society’ of folks within the Department of Justice and the FBI to include Page and Strzok to be working against him,” the Texas lawmaker said, in a bombshell.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., also reviewed the texts with Radcliffe. Watch:

Regarding the missing texts, which Gowdy and Radcliffe found incredulous, Sessions noted further: “I have spoken to the Inspector General and a review is already underway to ascertain what occurred and to determine if these records can be recovered in any other way. If any wrongdoing were to be found to have caused this gap, appropriate legal disciplinary action measures will be taken.”

“We need to get to the bottom of it and find out what exactly happened,” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, told Fox News.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

CAUGHT: Obama’s DoJ, FBI synchronized anti-Trump classified leaks to Alt-Left media (Video)

(National SentinelViolation: Operatives within the Department of Justice and FBI during the Obama administration worked together to time leaks of classified materials to friendly media outlets to achieve maximum impact in attempts to undermine President Donald J. Trump.

Judicial Watch Director of Investigations Chris Farrell appeared Tuesday evening on Fox Business’ “Lou Dobbs Tonight” to discuss text messages exchanged between FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, with whom he was having an extra-marital affair.

“This is a case of them [Strzok and Page] I think trying to get out ahead of the problem because obviously Strzok is already, Strzok and his girlfriend are already in bad shape,” Farrell said.

“But the text messages today show that they were synchronizing, they were first of all leaking, but then they were synchronizing their story to both The Wall Street Journal, New York Times and perhaps others, and that is a level of investigative misconduct and abuse of process that is off the charts.”

On Thursday, Fox News‘ Sean Hannity followed up with information he said made it clear that the country is facing an unprecedented criminalization of its justice system, which amounted to one of the biggest abuses of power in the history of the country.

“The powerful tools of intelligence have now been politicized and used to influence a Presidential election,” he said.

“Now make no mistake about this, this scandal will reach the highest levels of the Obama intelligence community, the DOJ, the FBI, and what we’re reporting on is only the beginning tonight,” he added.

Here is the Dobbs-Farrell exchange:

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

EXPOSED: Newly revealed texts from FBI agent Strzok, lawyer Page, show MORE anti-Trump bias; Congress probes pair for possible news LEAKS

(National SentinelUnprofessional: Newly revealed text messages sent by FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok show even more bias against President Donald J. Trump than previously reported.

As noted by The Hill‘s John Solomon, Strzok and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, the two shared a National Public Radio article on the opening of Trump’s new hotel in Washington and could “barely contain their disdain,” the report noted.

“That’s one place I hope I never stay in,” Page wrote.

Strzok replied. “Agreed. I hope it fails horribly.”

After one of the presidential debates, Strzok also had an observation about then-Fox anchor and current NBC anchor Megyn Kelly. “Vaguely satisfying to see Megyn Kelly (who had Botox and looks HORRIBLE) utterly going after Trump,” he texted, as Solomon reported.

In addition, the new texts and other information that has been turned over to Congress has sparked an additional probe into whether Strzok and Page illegally leaked classified information to several media outlets.

GOP-led committees in the House and Senate are poring over messages that appear to indicate Strzok and Page had advance knowledge of a Wall Street Journal report close to election day and plotted how they would feign stumbling upon it so they could share it with colleagues.

“Article is out, but hidden behind paywall so can’t read it,” Page texted Strzok on Oct. 24, 2016.

“Wsj? Boy that was fast,” Strzok texted back, using the initials of the famed financial newspaper. “Should I ‘find’ it and tell the team?”

The messages, reviewed by The Hill, also reveal how the two allegedly plotted how to make it appear as though they innocently stumbled upon the article, such as in a Google News alert.

“I can get it like I do every other article that hits any Google News alerts, seriously,” Strzok wrote, noting further he didn’t want his team hearing about the article “from someone else.”

Strzok had a key role early on in the Russia meddling probe and was a part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team until last summer, when initial anti-Trump texts between him and Page were discovered.

But now Congress wants to know whether the pair is responsible for a series of damaging leaks against Trump and his administration.

“The Hill reviewed nearly three dozen texts in which the two agents discussed articles, tried to track down information about a specific New York Times reporter or opined about leaked information in stories that they fretted were ‘super specific,'” the news site noted.

Republican investigators say the messages suggest that the pair had media contacts but they don’t necessarily prove they leaked information.

Also, Solomon reported:

Separately, the House Intelligence Committee says it has obtained information that Mueller’s current deputy in the Russia probe, respected Justice Department financial fraud prosecutor Andrew Weissman, had contact with the news media last April, shortly before Mueller was named special prosecutor, according to a letter the committee has sent the department.

In a deal with current FBI Director Christopher Wray and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Justice officials have promised to provide the Intelligence Committee with information on the Weismann contacts later this week.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

WTH? AG Sessions DEFENDS Trump plotter Peter Strzok; claims anti-prez texts may have ‘innocent explanation’ (Video)

(National SentinelExcuses: Attorney General Jeff Sessions again on Friday refused to answer whether there is a need yet for a second special counsel to investigate members of the FBI and Justice Department over their anti-Trump bias.

Sessions said that although he’s concerned about recent allegations of bias among officials tied to the Hillary Clinton exoneration last year for her mishandling of classified information and the probes of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, “sometimes things that might appear to be bad in the press have more innocent explanations, so fairness and justice should also be provided to our personnel.”

As noted by Zero Hedge, last week the attorney general responded to increasing pressure for a special counsel, saying, “I’ve put a senior attorney, with the resources he may need, to review cases in our office and make a recommendation to me, if things are being pursued that need to be pursued, if cases may need more resources to complete in a proper manner, and to recommend to me if the standards for a special counsel are met.”

But in November, Sessions also pushed back against calls among many in Congress for another special counsel who would be tasked with investigating the origins of the salacious but unverified “Trump dossier” that was paid for, in part, by the Hillary Clinton campaign to launch the Russia investigation.

The dossier, some Republicans also believe, was used by the FBI to justify a FISA court warrant to spy on members of Trump’s campaign.

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, has stated he believes there is proof of the FBI using the dossier for that very purpose:

Former Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, now a Fox News contributor, called on Sessions to resign on Saturday.

“It pains me to say this a little bit [but] I don’t think the attorney general is up to the job he’s doing,” Chaffetz said.

Rep Mark Meadows, R-N.C., and Rep. Gaetz, R-Fla, joined Sean Hannity last Wednesday to also call for Sessions to step aside if he is unable to see evidence they believe is clear that elements within the FBI and Department of Justice conspired to help Clinton and harm President Donald J. Trump.

“Maybe we need to have a Special Prosecutor to investigate the investigators,” Meadows said.

And we’re here to tell you tonight, not only do we have task force that is being set up under Chairman Gowdy and Chairman Goodlatte that includes Jim Jordan, myself, John Radcliffe, Jim Buck, we’re working with Matt Gaetz and Ron DeSantis to get to the bottom of it,” he continued.

“But the American people have had enough… The time is now for Jeff Sessions to do his job. And if he doesn’t do his job he needs to step aside and let somebody else do it.”

Here’s the man who outed Trump-hating FBI agent Peter Strzok

(National SentinelSwamp Creature: The Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General released new details Thursday about how it came into a trove of biased, anti-Trump text messages sent by FBI agent Peter Strzok, the controversial figure at the heart of investigations into Hillary Clinton and Team Trump last year.

Justice Department watchdog Michael Horowitz said his office obtained the text messages from the FBI on July 20. A week later he met with Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to show them the politically-charged messages.

Strzok had been selected as an investigator by Mueller for a team looking into allegations of “collusion” between the Trump campaign and the Russian government last year, to which so far no evidence has surfaced.

Strzok was removed “immediately” from the investigation after Mueller learned of them, The Daily Caller reported.

The Strzok texts, which he exchanged with Lisa Page, his mistress and an FBI lawyer, were discovered as part of the inspector general’s investigation into the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email investigation, the site reported further.

In writing to Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley and Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, Horowitz noted that the IG’s office received the texts after officials requested the FBI to provide all communications from phones the bureau issued to a select group of employees who worked on the Clinton email probe.

As the FBI’s No. 2 counterintelligence official, Strzok conducted many of the most important interviews pertaining to the investigation, including interviews with Clinton herself and her top aides, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills — both of whom may not have answered Strzok’s questions truthfully.

“After finding a number of politically-oriented text messages between Page and Strzok, the OIG sought from the FBI all text messages between Strzok and Page from their FBI-issued phones through November 30, 2016, which covered the entire period of the Clinton e-mail server investigation,” Horowitz wrote to Grassley and Johnson on Wednesday.

The FBI turned over the requested messages on July 20, 2017.

After reviewing them, the IG enlarged his probe to include all texts that Strzok and Page exchanged from Nov. 30, 2016, to July 28, 2017. Those were delivered to his office Aug. 10, The Daily Caller reported.

After reviewing those exchanges, Horowitz expanded the investigation to include all of the text messages exchanged between Strzok and Page from Nov. 30, 2016 to July 28, 2017.

Horowitz’s office received those messages on Aug. 10.

Strzok was demoted after he was removed from Mueller’s investigatory team, but the reason for his demotion remained secret for some four months. The New York Times and the Washington Post published simultaneous, leaked reports Dec. 2 revealed the existence of the texts and naming them as the reason why Strzok was demoted.

One text was cryptic in that it appeared to indicate Strzok was prepared in some way to prevent then-GOP nominee Donald J. Trump from becoming president. It also appears to implicate current FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe.

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way [Trump] gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” Strzok wrote to Page, a reference to an “insurance policy” against a Trump victory.

Andy is believed to be Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

“It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40,” Strzok added.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

What are your thoughts?

BUSTED: NY Times video editor ADMITS anti-Trump bias in latest Project Veritas undercover sting

(National SentinelMedia Bias: James O’Keefe and his investigative media organization, Project Veritas, are continuing their efforts to expose the Left-wing bias of the so-called “mainstream media,” this time snagging a video of an editor for The New York Times who admitted on camera his prejudice against President Donald J. Trump and his family.

In a press-and-video release, the organization announced that the Times’ video gatekeeper, Nicholas Dudich, was caught boasting of his extreme lack of journalistic ethics — which is not only journalistic malpractice but also violations of the Timesown handbook for how its editorial staff should behave.

“Dudich, who serves as Audience Strategy Editor, displays a lack of integrity throughout the video,” the press release said, noting further that Dudich is the one who manages all of the Times‘ social media video postings on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and elsewhere.

In one part of the video, Dudich tells the PV journalist that he “will be objective” in his coverage of the president, but then quickly mouths, “No I’m not,” and says, “That’s why I’m here.” He put the word objective in air quotes. (Related: Project Veritas’ O’Keefe teases biggest media investigation ever: ‘People will be fired.’)

It should be noted that the Timesown Ethical Handbook states, in Sect. 62, “Journalists… must do nothing that might raise questions about their professional neutrality or that of The Times.”

As for his reach and influence, Dudich said that his “imprint is on every video we do,” suggesting that his biases are inserted into the Times’ video products that the video chief summarily markets.

As noted by PJ Media, Dudich also said he has, in the past, worked for the presidential campaigns of President Obama in 2008 and 2012, and again on Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016. “So I have that background,” he told the undercover PV journalist. He added that when Clinton needed a volunteer video strategist, he was recruited to help them made a “heartfelt” video for her.

There’s more. Dudich is also a bit of a fabricator, to put it mildly. He told the PV journalist that he was the godson of former FBI Director James Comey, but when Project Veritas’ journalist went to Duduch’s father to verify that, the father said his son was “embellishing” — a fancy word for “lying.”

When the journalist confronted Dudich with what she had learned from his father, he said he didn’t know why he made it up other than it was “a good story.”

These nuggets are also contained in the video:

— Dudich said he had to quit his job as a journalist to work for the Clinton campaign. “I had to leave my job at Fusion ABC to then take a job at Upworthy where I wasn’t deemed a journalist anymore to be able to work for the Clinton campaign,” he said.

— As to what motivated him to return to journalism following Clinton’s loss to Trump, he said, “Like, after the Clinton campaign, I’m like, no, I need to get back into news and keep doing s**t because, like, this isn’t going to change” — a reference to Trump’s victory.

— Asked how he plots and schemes against Trump in order to bring him down, Dudich said, “I’d target his businesses, his dumb f**k of a son, Donald Jr., and Eric, so they’re running Trump, like, the Trump business … And you put pressure on his business and you start investigating his business and you start shutting it down. … He cares about his business more than he cares about being president … he would resign. Or he’d lash out and do something incredibly illegal, which he would have to.”

Project Veritas’ latest expose, “American Pravda,” is airing exclusively on the One America News Network. The Dudich embarrassment comes after O’Keefe’s undercover journalists exposed CNN hosts and editors as heavily biased against Trump.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

Busted: NY Times video editor caught on tape ADMITTING his (and his paper’s) anti-Trump bias

(National SentinelHack Media: Once again, James O’Keefe and the other good folks at Project Veritas have exposed yet another “mainstream” media outlet’s blatant, purposeful bias against President Donald J. Trump and, by proxy, his tens of millions of supporters.

In a new video (see below), New York Times video gatekeeper Nicholas Dudich was caught on camera admitting the paper’s huge anti-Trump bias:

Dudich, who serves as Audience Strategy Editor, displays a lack of integrity throughout the video, manages videos which go “on Facebook, YouTube, Instagram” for the Times.

While talking about being objective at the Times, Dudich replies candidly, “No I’m not, that’s why I’m here.”

Dudich considers himself an important player at the New York Times, telling the Project Veritas Journalist “my voice is on… my imprint is on every video we do.”

He also explained how he goes about how he targets the president.

“I’d target his businesses, his dumb f**k of a son, Donald Jr., and Eric…

“Target that. Get people to boycott going to his hotels. Boycott… So a lot of the Trump brands, if you can ruin the Trump brand and you put pressure on his business and you start investigating his business and you start shutting it down, or they’re hacking or other things. He cares about his business more than he cares about being President. He would resign. Or he’d lash out and do something incredibly illegal, which he would have to.”

When Project Veritas’ undercover reporter asked Dudich if he could make sure that the anti-Trump stories make it to the front, he replied, “Oh, we always do.”

Well, well, well…that’s not what the paper’s own handbook says about ethics. In Section 62 the handbook says: “Journalists have no place on the playing field of politics. Staff members are entitled to vote, but they must do nothing that might raise questions about their professional neutrality or that of The Times.”

Uh…

Before working for the Times, he worked on the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. So there’s that.

More: “So I have that background, so when Clinton in 2016… they needed a volunteer strategist to do video… well, they needed someone to help them do video, and how to make it heartfelt, for Clinton.”

The video manager also claimed to be part of the domestic terrorist organization Antifa once upon a time.

Legacy Food Storage“Yeah, I used to be an Anti-Fa punk once upon a time.” he told the undercover journalist. “So, I had fun. They’d start s**t, I’m like, I get to hit you. I’m so excited.”

In a twist, Dudich claimed that former FBI Director James Comey was his godfather and that he asked Dudich to join Antifa as an undercover intelligence asset. The FBI and Department of Homeland Security declared the group a domestic terrorist threat during the Obama administration.

Later, after the undercover journalist checked on that and found out that Comey wasn’t Dudich’s godfather, he was confronted — then changed his story.

“The fact remains that Nick Dudich lies and he’s a gatekeeper at the New York Times.” says Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe, “And that fact should be worrisome to the bosses at the paper of record. Who else are they letting spread misinformation in their name?”

Watch:

Advertising disclaimer: Click here