For the second straight night, crowds have taken to the streets of major American cities to protest the outcome of the presidential election, but who are these protesters, anyway? The answer might surprise you.
The mainstream media have proven they cannot be trusted, once again. CNN has just run an interview with an angry protester in downtown Chicago. Problem is, it turns out he wasn’t really a protester at all. He was a cameraman who has worked for CNN.
What word did President-Elect Trump use to describe this entire political process? Oh, that’s right… rigged. Thanks, CNN, for making his case.
Republican Donald Trump’s victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton is over. Or is it? Apparently, there are thousands who refuse to accept the outcome. And they are trying to be heard.
With thousands of so-called protesters to choose from, how is it they used a former, or maybe even current, CNN employee as the subject of their interview? Makes you wonder. Maybe it’s because the real marchers are so inarticulate they had to use replacements? Or maybe it’s because CNN has its own talking points it wants to communicate. So, it drums up a crowd and then throws its own spin onto it. Sounds rigged to me.
Don’t misunderstand—the guy did actually appear quite angry. Beside himself, actually. A perfect fit for the talking points. Homegrown maybe? “I need Hillary to stand up right now and walk in to the Supreme Court and sue the United States of America,” he shouted. “How did he win fair and square? Hillary had more votes. More human beings voted for Hillary. This isn’t fair.”
Well, that’s one perspective. The other is that we are a land of laws, and those laws state our political process is one based on the electoral college. The candidates know that. You can’t change the rules of the game after you lose. Nice try. At the very least, if you want to change our electoral process, you should be talking about it before your chosen candidate loses. Otherwise it looks a little… rigged.
The interview seemed to be legitimately conducted up until the moment where anchor Don Lemon said he knew the man to be one of their pals at CNN and identified him by name. Oops! Rigged indeed. You almost feel bad for Lemon at this point—he clearly didn’t know his fellows were trying to falsify an interview.