During the CA Governor's primary earlier this year, I was intrigued by the number of influencers (in California and across the country) who were pushing for Steve Hilton.
They were repeatedly posting all the hollow propaganda about Sheriff Chad Bianco "kneeling to BLM," when the truth is that he prayed with them.
They also dismissed Bianco's resistance to Governor Newsom's outrageous, unconstitutional lockdown orders and health mandates.
The incessant attacks gave the impression that they were led or even paid to make these attacks.
I don't have anything specific to back up the assertion that they were paid to support Hilton, but it sure looked as if something was going on, because they engaged in such a concerted effort to prop up Hilton, even though he had a clearly more liberal record than Bianco.
At one point, Red State contributor Jennifer Van Laar not only criticized Bianco, but also criticized another commentator on X, Insurrection Barbie, because she had attended the CAGOP Convention earlier this year.
She was supporting Bianco, and then Van Laar contended that it was strange for her to get involved because ... she doesn't live in California. Yes, Insurrection Barbie is based in Texas, but since when did that mean someone doesn't have a right to have a say on elections in other states?
Texas Governor Greg Abbott's leadership was essential to stop the flow of illegals into our country during President Biden's regime. Governor Ron DeSantis set an incredible standard for combatting big government tyranny while accomplishing the MAGA agenda, as well.
I jumped into this discussion, calling out her selective outrage. Why is it wrong for an influencer from Texas to support Bianco, but it's OK for other out-of-state influencers to support Hilton?
She did not handle that very well. Then, Congressional candidate Mike Cargile informed me that Van Laar does not live in California, either. I followed up on that.
And her response?
She blocked me. She claims to be a journalist, yet she blocks people who disagree with her and call out selective enforcement of criteria?
What is this?!
Then she attacked me on another post, claiming that I said that she could not write or comment on California politics. Of course, I had never said that.
I tried to bridge the gaps and extend an olive branch by email.
Below is the response she gave to me.
Read how Jennifer decided to play victim and dodge the issue:
The appropriate place for this type of communication is my personal email address, which I thought you had years ago.
That is an irrelevant criticism, which people often throw up when they know they have been properly confronted about something.,
I haven't had a chance yet to fully reply, but the fact that you can't see a massive difference between my connection to the state I was born in and am only living 25 miles from the border at this moment because of credible threats to my personal safety and Insurrection Barbie's relationship to the state (which is what, again?) tells me there's not a whole lot to talk about. We'd have to start with all of your flawed premises.
It's irrelevant why she does not or does not live in California. The fact is that she was critical of someone who did not live in the state, commenting on the governor's race. She should have considered how hypocritical that stance would be.
Also, your continued posts even after you told me it was a "good discussion" served to just bring a bunch of trolls to my weekend - trolls who were digging up untrue hit pieces on me related to the Katie Hill expose (YOU'RE WELCOME).
She's blaming me for bringing trolls? I can't bring anyone to a social media discussion. That is the choice of every participant, whether they wish to get involved in a discussion or not. Notice again how she deflected and played victim.
It wasn't just a difference of opinion. It was you sending out the bat signal to all your buddies to attack me, and your continued attacks. That's not a good-faith, respectful discussion.
She misconstrues motives. What buddies? I simply confronted her on her hypocrisy, and she didn't like that she got busted.
I don't know of other influencers outside California who are advocating for Hilton. Admittedly, I'm at the mercy of what the algorithm shows me, and I haven't done a deep dive because I have several consequential investigative pieces on Democrat fraud I'm working on. I only asked a question of IB because her interest in the race was so out of left field.
How could she NOT know of other influencers? Laura Loomer doesn't ring a bell? She was evidently all over X attacking Bianco while promoting Hilton. How could she not see that? And what difference does it make if Insurrection Barbie was interested in the race? How is that interest out of left field, exactly?
Oh, and by the way - Kira Davis hasn't written for RedState since 2023 so you might want to take that out of your attack repertoire.
Notice the false language of playing victim yet again, "attack repertoire." Seriously?
I don't recall "attacking" Kira Davis over anything, although I heartily disagreed with her replete support for Hilton over Bianco. That's called "politics," not attacking.
So, this is what Red State has descended into? Journalists who can't take criticism, who clearly tip their hand for one candidate, and then shut down discussion when members of the public confront them about this?
What a disappointment!
No comments:
Post a Comment