Anatomy Of Yet Another January 6 Hoax.
Elites' Recent Reaction To Latest Ginni Thomas' E-mails Reveals Yet Another Baseless Media Frenzy Surrounding January 6.
Yesterday, the Washington Post published what supposedly was a “bombshell” piece about Ginni Thomas’ supposed participation in the supposed “insurrection” that was January 6. Elite members of the MainStreamMedia and political class quickly parroted and promoted the false talking points in the article. You can find examples everywhere, but here is a prime example:
Politicians as high as the United States Senate chimed in as well:
There is quite a bit to this gaslighting and we have talked before about the Justice Thomas “ethics” and recusal angle. The short version is that there is no conflict for Clarence Thomas with respect to his wife’s political advocacy. If you want to learn about the facts and law why, you can read our prior article here.
If you want to see the Livestream of this article, you can here:
The reason the latest Washington Post article about Ginni Thomas is a hoax is that what purports to be a bombshell has been known for quite some time; indeed, over a year and a half. Despite knowledge of these events for the last year and a half, the MainStreamMedia keeps retelling essentially the same story about efforts to prevent Biden’s certification on January 6 as if its bombshell, “breaking” news. The Washington Post’s article yesterday is just the latest example. For example, in March of this year, nearly the identical story now being run about Ginni Thomas’ supposed participation in Trump trying to reverse Biden’s victory was printed about her when Mark Meadows then recently released texts messages were released, and by the same MainStreamMedia publication—The Washington Post.
Similarly, on December 21, 2021, Rachel Maddow broke what supposedly was a groundbreaking story about Trump’s plan to challenge Biden’s certification in Congress—that members of the Wisconsin Legislature had met “in secret” to elect “fake electors” to send to Washington, D.C. for the 2020 Election certification to be held on January 6, 2021. The problem with that story, just as with the Washington Post’s latest about Ginni Thomas, is that this story has been known since December, 2020. If Media publications want raise the issue of Presidential Election certification challenges, they are free to do so, but to pretend that they are somehow new or groundbreaking simply is a hoax.
That alternate electors were being sent by seven States has been known for some time and Ginni Thomas’ urging that such challenges take place similarly is old “news.” Proof of the former is plain to anyone who listens to Maddow’s story, while proof of the latter was revealed in the Washington Post’s own March, 2022 article. In covering the “breaking” news, Maddow goes into great detail about how members of the Wisconsin Legislature selected a slate of electors for Trump on December 14, 2020 and thereafter allegedly created fake paperwork to support there appearance at the later January 6, 2021 Election certification. She seemed genuinely astonished that they submitted this supposedly “fraudulent” paperwork to the proper United States Election authorities, such as the President of the Senate of the United States, and all by certified United States mail. Setting aside the fact that submitting the paperwork along the lines called for by United State Presidential Election guidelines tends to demonstrate that the legislators possessed an innocent state of mind, it should have occurred to Maddow that she was covering something as “groudbreaking” when, in fact, it had occurred over a year before her program aired. More astonishingly, since the legislators mailed the paper work to the appropriate authorities, it should have occurred to her that many, perhaps thousands or hundreds of thousands of people knew of this action within days, weeks, or months of December 14, 2020, when the event took place. Apparently, it did not (or did it?).
The prior paragraph is demonstrative of how much of our Media system is corrupted in the present era. Maddow either knew this was not a breaking story and ran with it anyway or was too biased or insufficiently mentally capable to question it. Had she taken a moment to reflect on what she was “reporting,” it would have occurred to her that many knew about the plan of Wisconsin, and indeed, various States, to send alternate electors to the January 6 certification. In fact, the architect of the plan to challenge certification of the Election on January 6, Trump lawyer John Eastman, had circulated his now famous “Eastman Memo” (in both short and long form) to various parties, including reporters, prior to January 6, 2021.
Indeed, the “Eastman Plan” to challenge Biden’s certification on January 6 was revealed on to the entire world on January 6, 2021, shortly before protesters at the Capitol Rally descended onto the Capital as United States Senators and Congressmen rose to challenge Arizona electors. On that day, seven States sent alternate electors—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Shortly after Congress began to take up the objections raised to Arizona’s electors, the Capitol was breached and the special session was paused. When order was restored hours later, the plan to challenge electors from the seven States was abandoned and Biden was certified as the forty-sixth President of the United States.
There is no excuse for anyone, including Maddow, not to know of the plan to challenge Biden’s certification under the procedures provided by the Electoral Count Act of 1887 as late as December, 2021. In fact, in addition to the fact that the world had learned of it on January 6, 2021 when it was unveiled in Congress, the AP had reported on December 17, 2020 that the Republicans were “trying to appoint themselves as ‘alternate electors’ who cast votes for Trump.” In light of the history and facts, there can be no doubt that, in May of 2022, there is and never was anything “groundbreaking” about Trump’s plan to challenge Biden’s certification via an alternate slate of electors from various battleground States. Ginni Thomas’ support of such a plan, to the extent it not known before the Washington Post’s report of it in March of 2022 (and this is extremely unlikely), similarly has not been “newsworthy” since that time.
This brings us to the very point of articles such as The Washington Post’s story about Ginni Thomas—they are not intended to impart news, but propaganda. In this particular instance, the design appears to be to undermine the Supreme Court majority generally and Justice Thomas specifically. Of course, there is some pain for Trump, his supporters, Republicans generally, and the like. What there is not, is any genuine attempt to convey “news,” inform the public, or aid the political policy debate in the United States. This would almost be comical if it were not so dangerous, especially coming from a supposed leading political news publication.
Adding insult to injury is that fact that so many in one major political party, as evidenced above, were quick to promote what The Washington Post is engaged in. But then, that is all the January 6 Select Committee appears to have been created to do. Indeed, it has been promoted this same type of hoax by selectively “leaking” (illegally by the way) new alleged “evidence” on a near weekly basis using nearly the same model—dropping information about events already known to have occurred, whiles suggesting that they are fresh evidence merely because the “information” originates from alternate sources.
Nearly all news in the present era is of this type and the damage to our Republic is immeasurable. At least now you know the facts behind this latest hoax.
If you enjoyed this article, please comment below, subscribe and share: