Must See… Fox News caught red handed, trying to undermine and suppress the Trump vote!

{The Conservative Treehouse} – Brit Hume Fumes …When NC Vote Futility for Evan McMullin is Exposed on Air…

During an interview about North Carolina voting on Fox TV, a local pundit was explaining how voting for Evan McMullin was futile because it doesn’t count.

As soon as this aspect was being pointed out #NeverTrump Brit Hume became enraged because such an expose’ transparently works against the objectives of the Rupert Murdoch Fox Media enterprise. Unfortunately for Brit, the camera caught his outrage.

Watch Hume angrily shouting “wrap him, WRAP HIM” as the discussion unfolded:

Previously, we have outlined how the Rupert Murdoch approach to undermine Donald Trump was being advocated by his primary Fox News operatives: Bret Baier, Chris Wallace, Megyn Kelly and Brit Hume.

Those primary attack agents are assisted by the #NeverTrump consortium of Stephen Hayes, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, George Will, Jonah Goldberg, Ben Shapiro, Rich Lowry, Glenn Beck, Dana Loesch, Katie Pavlich, Chris Stirewalt and Guy Benson.



GOP Lawmaker Sends Letter to Corrupt Media: Warns of Consequences for Extreme Anti-Trump Bias

Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) warned network executives on Friday their anti-ROP propaganda must stop or the networks could face consequences.

Rep. Cramer sent the letter to:

Ben Sherwood, Disney Media Networks, Co-Chairman
Stephen Burke, NBCUniversal President and CEO
Leslie Moonves, CBS Chairman, President
Dana Walden, FOX Television, Chairman and CEO

These broadcast networks enjoy the use of federally-allocated spectrum to increase their access to the American public. Rep. Cramer accused the networks of using this privilege to spread propaganda against Republican Donald Trump.

The media corruption and bias is so out of control in America today that a recent poll found just 6% of the public trust the news media in America.

Here is a copy of Rep. Kevin Cramer’s letter:


Here is a transcript of the letter:

Dear Mr. Sherwood, Mr. Burke, Mr. Moonves, and Ms. Walden:

As a member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce with subcommittee assignments to Communications and Technology and Oversight and Investigations, I am writing to inform you that I intend to request a hearing to explore network media bias in coverage of the 2016 presidential campaign. A recent Gallup poll indicates that Americans’ trust and confidence in the mass media – to report the news fully, accurately and fairly- has dropped to 32 percent, its lowest level in polling history. Last week, a poll released by the Associated Press also found that 56 percent of likely voters think the media is biased against Republican nominee Donald Trump while just 3 7 percent say the coverage of the race is mostly balanced. Furthermore, a Harvard University study this summer reported that Donald Trump coverage went from 57 percent positive and 43 percent negative during the early Republican primaries to 61 percent negative and 39 percent positive after Trump defeated his last Republican rivals.

With the most recent RealClearPolitics poll average showing Hillary Clinton at 45.3 points to Donald Trump at 42. 7 points, your broadcast news networks – who utilize federal spectrum to conduct their operations – have a moral obligation to provide balanced, unbiased news coverage for the American people.

To be clear, I do not support a return to the Fairness Doctrine. However, while the principle of an independent media is critical to our constitutional government, a news media free of political bias is required for a free system to flourish. Our national broadcast networks have a unique relationship with the American people, one that should not be taken lightly, and has been supported by our federal government from the very beginning. Still today, broadcast networks enjoy the use of federally-allocated spectrum to increase their access to the American people. For this reason, I am alarmed by recent polls and studies, which seem to confirm that our national network news has devolved from fact-based journalism to surreptitious propaganda.

As you are well aware, the privilege to broadcast a free signal is a privilege afforded to very few, and with it comes tremendous responsibility. The broadcast license awarded to you by the Federal Communications Commission is on behalf of the citizens. The spectrum your news is carried on is not yours alone but rather the property of a skeptical citizenry. Your FCC license and the liberty that comes with your First Amendment rights are not a license to broadcast anything you want or in any way you choose. Rather, this special freedom comes with basic moral and legal parameters.

Kevin Cramer

1 Comment on Must See… Fox News caught red handed, trying to undermine and suppress the Trump vote!

  1. About friggin time, that’s right the spectrum is divided, allocated, licensed with FCC oversight.

    Broadcast Programming: Law and Policy on Specific Kinds of Programming
    Broadcast Journalism

    Introduction. As noted above, in light of the fundamental importance of the free flow of information to our democracy, the First Amendment and the Communications Act bar the FCC from telling station licensees how to select material for news programs, or prohibiting the broadcast of an opinion on any subject. We also do not review anyone’s qualifications to gather, edit, announce, or comment on the news; these decisions are the station licensee’s responsibility. Nevertheless, there are two issues related to broadcast journalism that are subject to Commission regulation: hoaxes and news distortion.

    The broadcast by a station of false information concerning a crime or catastrophe violates the FCC’s rules if:
    (Remember the doctoring of the George Zimmerman 911 Call To Stanford Police Department)
    the station licensee knew that the information was false,
    broadcasting the false information directly causes substantial public harm, and
    it was foreseeable that broadcasting the false information would cause such harm.

    In this context, a “crime” is an act or omission that makes the offender subject to criminal punishment by law, and a “catastrophe” is a disaster or an imminent disaster involving violent or sudden events affecting the public.

    The broadcast must cause direct and actual damage to property or to the health or safety of the general public, or diversion of law enforcement or other public health and safety authorities from their duties, and the public harm must begin immediately.

    If a station airs a disclaimer before the broadcast that clearly characterizes the program as fiction and the disclaimer is presented in a reasonable manner under the circumstances, the program is presumed not to pose foreseeable public harm.

    Additional information about the hoax rule can be found on the FCC’s website at the Broadcasting False Information page.

    News Distortion.

    The Commission often receives complaints concerning broadcast journalism, such as allegations that stations have aired inaccurate or one-sided news reports or comments, covered stories inadequately, or overly dramatized the events that they cover.
    For the reasons noted above, the Commission generally will not intervene in such cases because it would be inconsistent with the First Amendment to replace the journalistic judgment of licensees with our own.
    However, as public trustees, broadcast licensees may not intentionally distort the news:
    the FCC has stated that “rigging or slanting the news is a most heinous act against the public interest.”

    The Commission will investigate a station for news distortion if it receives documented evidence of such rigging or slanting, such as testimony or other documentation, from individuals with direct personal knowledge that a licensee or its management engaged in the intentional falsification of the news.
    Of particular concern would be evidence of the direction to employees from station management to falsify the news. However, absent such a compelling showing, the Commission will not intervene. For additional information about news distortion, see the Broadcast Journalism Complaints page.

    Political Broadcasting: Candidates for Public Office. In recognition of the particular importance of the free flow of information to the public during the electoral process, the Communications Act and the Commission’s rules impose specific obligations on broadcasters regarding political speech.

    Reasonable Access.
    The Communications Act requires that broadcast stations provide “reasonable access” to candidates for federal elective office. Such access must be made available during all of a station’s normal broadcast schedule, including television prime time and radio drive time. In addition, federal candidates are entitled to purchase all classes of time offered by stations to commercial advertisers, such as preemptible and non-preemptible time. The only exception to the access requirement is for bona fide news programming (as defined below), during which broadcasters may choose not to sell airtime to federal candidates. Broadcast stations have discretion as to whether to sell time to candidates in state and local elections.

    Equal Opportunities.
    The Communications Act requires that, when a station provides airtime to a legally qualified candidate for any public office (federal, state, or local), the station must “afford equal opportunities to all other such candidates for that office.” The equal opportunities provision of the Communications Act also provides that the station “shall have no power of censorship over the material broadcast” by the candidate. The law exempts from the equal opportunities requirement appearances by candidates during bona fide news programming, defined as an appearance by a legally qualified candidate on a bona fide newscast, interview, or documentary (if the appearance of the candidate is incidental to the presentation of the subject covered by the documentary) or on–the–spot coverage of a bona fide news event (including debates, political conventions and related incidental activities).

    In addition, a station must sell political advertising time to certain candidates during specified periods before a primary or general election at the lowest rate charged for the station’s most favored commercial advertiser. Stations must maintain and make available for public inspection, in their public inspection files, a political file containing certain documents and information, discussed at page 28 of this Manual. For additional information about the political rules, see the Media Bureau, Policy Division page.

    Objectionable Programming
    Programming Inciting “Imminent Lawless Action.” The Supreme Court has held that the government may curtail speech if it is both: (1) intended to incite or produce “imminent lawless action;” and (2) likely to “incite or produce such action.” Even when this legal test is met, any review that might lead to a curtailment of speech is generally performed by the appropriate criminal law enforcement authorities, not by the FCC.
    (inciting rioting)

    Obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment and cannot be broadcast at any time. To be obscene, the material must have all of the following three characteristics:
    an average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
    the material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and
    the material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: