CNN Using the ‘Have you Stopped Beating Your Wife’ Technique with RUSSIA Narrative CNN Treats Russian official's Denial of Election Interference as actual evidence there was Election Interference

Home  »  Elections  »  CNN Using the ‘Have you Stopped Beating Your Wife’ Technique with RUSSIA Narrative
Print This Post Print This Post
Mar 2, 2017 No Comments ›› admin

By Ben Barrack

Russian official Maria Zakharova asked a no-win question by CNN

It’s a tired, sick media tactic. It starts with a premise of guilt. The target of an interview has been accused of beating his wife. There is no evidence but the media wants a story. So, they manufacture one. After sticking the microphone into the subject’s face, the reporter asks, “Have you stopped beating your wife”?

The subject will have to deny a charged question that assumes that he did beat his wife. The headline the next day reads, “Man denies beating his wife”. The problem is that the media operated from a premise that he did. It’s the quintessential ‘guilty until confirmed guilty’ technique.

That is exactly what CNN is doing with the false narrative that Russia hacked the U.S. Presidential election. No evidence has been presented. The media cannot name any sources; the head of the House Intelligence Committee says there is nothing to the charges; all the charges are from anonymous sources; and no one can tell you how Russia did what it was accused of doing.

In the clip below, a CNN reporter speaks with Russian official Maria Zakharova. When the reporter asks Zakharova about the charges of Russian involvement, she tells the reporter that CNN should stop spreading false news. The most telling part of the video below is what happens afterward. Somehow, the reporters interpret Zakharova’s comments as being an admission through denial because she sounds just like Trump.

Ms. Zakharova, when did you stop beating your wife?

Here is the audio in case the video is taken down:

Note the charge is espionage. The charge is made without a scintilla of evidence.

There is plenty of evidence of espionage. It’s just that it happened during the Obama administration and would have happened on an even larger scale if Hillary Clinton became president.

You see, unlike the charges of Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election, the evidence that close Hillary Clinton confidante Huma Abedin is a spy is overwhelming.

Trump should introduce this evidence into the public discourse.

He should do so at a news conference.

It would not only change the media narrative. It would also focus attention where it deserves; an espionage case full of actual evidence.

Tagged with: , ,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

%d bloggers like this: