State of Friday: R KELLY GIFTED LIBERALS THEIR SUPER POWER
Documentary evidence? No problem.
Greetings, Dear Reader,
Today in SOTD, we’re taking on the father of modern left-wing communications.
As usual, I am the enemy of euphemism and misdirection. I give it to you straight. No ice and definitely no mixer.
R. KELLY GIFTED LIBERALS THEIR SUPER POWER
It’s 2008, and prosecutors are playing video in the courtroom.
The video depicted R. Kelly performing various sex acts on a 14-year-old girl. His face is clearly visible. Several people identify both him and the girl.
Faced with damning evidence, the defense tried something bold.
“That is not Robert Kelly in the video.”
The shocking thing: It worked.
There are other details of course. The girl wouldn’t testify. Various other witnesses weren’t sure it was her. Later Kelly would be accused of illegally “rigging” the prosecution through intimidation and bribery.
But ultimately the prosecution showed video of “Robert Kelly” having sex with a child, and the defense denied it was real and it worked.*
*(Until MeToo blossomed more than a decade later. Now Kelly is in prison for crimes related to sexual exploitation and human trafficking. Funny how that works, eh?)
The initial defense – deny overt reality, deploy euphemism (they were just “groupies”), blame the victim – proved to be effective in the face of overwhelming evidence.
A few months later, Barack Obama is inaugurated. A few years after that, he runs on a platform of Mitt Romney is racist. The media dutifully apes Obama’s platform. Uses of terminology like racism, sexism, white privilege and the like explode across major mastheads. Trump runs, wins, and in the process, supercharges the new hysterical delusions of the left.
We’re told Antifa “doesn’t exist.” We’re told men are women. We’re told conflagrations are “mostly peaceful.”
Now we’re at present day, and R. Kelly liberals show no hint of stopping.
Here’s NBC:
I’ll always be amazed by the ability of R. Kelly liberals to look at prolific documentary evidence of reality and flat out deny it exists.
Same day, different publication: The New York Times finally touches the so-called “Teen Takeovers.”
These are essentially riots organized on social media. They’re almost exclusively black teenagers. I haven’t seen a single one end well. People are assaulted, property is destroyed, storefronts are looted. Truly vile behavior.
Let’s just take a look at how the NYT describes the people behind these riots and the riots themselves.
The “perennial worry” about “teenage misbehavior” has a “new name with ominous undertones: teen takeovers.” The “gatherings” are teens “socializing” that often become “noisy” and “boisterous,” and yes, “at times violent.”
At times = literally every time.
The people perpetrating the riots are just “youthful organizers” who simply want to “[break] free of … constraints.”
And what are those constraints? The New York Times wants you to know they’re post-covid, Trump-induced economic woes, and they even mention “war in Iran.”
lmao
No victims of this destructive trend are named in the article. Both Alianna Ujueta and Landyn Reyes were 17 when they were shot and killed at teen takeover riots. Armani Floyd was only 14, also shot and killed. Twenty-year-old Ashley Knutson was visiting Chicago with her boyfriend when a mob of black teenagers descended on both of them. Her boyfriend ended up in the hospital. And these are just the beginning, there’s way more.
The reporting also omits the injured police, the looting, and hundreds of thousands in destroyed property.
The Times only cares about girls when they play dress up with Donald Trump in the 90s though. They only care about injured cops on January 6, 2020. And we all know looting is just “justice shopping.” Otherwise, it’s all just “teenagers socializing.”
It isn’t just corporate liberal media either.
This is how Democrats described new districts that would disenfranchise millions of voters in Virginia.
Right now, in Memphis, Tennessee, they’re calling a redistricting effort that would end racially segregated districts “racist.”
The kicker? The newly drawn district is highly likely to result in a black woman beating a white man.
But, Dear Reader, the black woman is a Republican.
What would R. Kelly do? He’d look at that black woman beating a white man in a racially diverse district and say: That’s racist.
And that’s just what they’re doing.
Kyle Rittenhouse “opened fire at a 2020 civil rights rally.” Members of MS-13 are just “Maryland Fathers.” Riots are just teens “socializing.” And newly elected black women are “racist.”
It’s R. Kelly liberals following the R. Kelly playbook, through and through.
MORE LINKS
State House Descends Into Chaos As Democrats’ Only Congressional District Eliminated In New Map
If you missed this, you gotta check it out.
—
Same with this.
—
As Obama’s Healthcare Crown Jewel Implodes, Americans Foot The Bill
Still haunting us.
Like what you’re reading? If so, please consider subscribing to State of the Day or sharing this with a friend. You’d be supporting this newsletter and helping keep independent journalism alive.
If you are already a paid subscriber, make sure to join the conversation in our subscribers-only chat below.
Great piece today! (Well everyday, but today was pitch perfect!)
But out "there" it's the same energy as always ~ riots are reparations parades, MS-13 are “Maryland dads,” and reality is whatever they say it isn’t.
We've got to just keep doing what's right - chin tucked, hands up, punches in bunches and don't neglect the body! In essence - keep punchin'!
Deny, Deny, and Deny all over again.
If you've never seen it, this strategy (as impossible as it might seem to be) was perfectly captured back in 1967, in the movie, "A Guide for the Married Man". You can find the actual scene (with Joey Bishop as the Progressive) here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cE3K0PRlx0
And at the temporary end of the Categorical Denials? Yes, the main stream media always asks: 'What would you like for dinner?"
The only thing surprising about all this is not the Denial...rather it's the fact that Conservatives still find it gobsmacking. We're stunned every time we hear it.. As a result, we tend to find ourselves running about spluttering: WHAT? You're serious? You really are saying that men can become women just by clicking their heels together? That men can become pregnant? And that men's restrooms now require tampon dispensers? WHAT? You're serious? You really believe the cold-blooded murder of the innocent (to the tune of 1M+ annually) is "reproductive care"...and that mothers have a Right to kill their babies at whim? WHAT???! You're serious? You really believe borders should be open and that illegal aliens have a right to vote, a right to healthcare, and free public schooling? WHAT???!!! You're serious? Despite more than a century's worth of evidence to the contrary, you still believe that Leftism (Communism, Socialism, et al) is a real road to Utopia? That Capitalism has been proven a failure (just don't look behind the curtain at the West)??
The only alternative is to face the ugly truth that the people who preach these impossible gospels are either morons (and I don't want to be unfair to morons) or .... exactly what this quote from 1984 describes: "Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”
It can't be any more obvious.