Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


Over the past week, the Left has brought up the same idea in two different circumstances, one involving their favorite “woke” CNN reporter and the other involving their least favorite investigative reporter. Jim Acosta accosted a female Trump Administration aide when she tried to take a microphone away from him, leading Acosta to deny he even touched her in spite of video footage showing he did. On the other side of the spectrum, James O’Keefe and Project Veritas released videos showing prominent Democrat campaigns doing nefarious and possibly illegal activities.

So, what is the unifying theme? Allegations of doctored footage by the Left. Oh, and dumb allegations of doctored footage.

Whenever the Left brings up doctored footage, you can bet there’s a deeper story, and you can bet I’m going to write about it!


What the Left thinks it means – video footage that has been edited in such a way as to create a dishonest narrative

What it really means – any video footage the Left can’t bullshit their way out of

As you might expect, Leftists accusing footage of being doctored is loaded with a lot of partisanship. After all, if footage is doctored, it can’t be trustworthy, right? Welll…considering the Left still cheers when Michael Moore comes out with a “documentary,” it’s clear they don’t have a problem with doctored footage when they do it.

The implication of the allegations of doctored footage is that the footage cannot be believed because it has been deceptively edited. That’s what the Left continues to bring up with O’Keefe and Project Veritas because their early videos were edited. That’s right, kids. Leftists think edits made by conservatives are deceptive because…that’s what they do.

However, edits aren’t necessarily dishonest by nature. If you are removing content that has nothing to do with the subject matter or doesn’t fit with the idea you’re trying to convey, it may not be an act of dishonesty, but of necessity. Without edits, documentaries would be hours and hours long, instead of just seeming like they are. (By the way, if you have insomnia, check out any documentary on a sloth’s life, especially if the narrator is Al Gore. You’ll be out in seconds.) And considering documentary directors tend to swing Left, that means their documentaries are dishonest and, thus, can be disregarded.

Unfortunately for the Left, Project Veritas is a step ahead of them because O’Keefe and company has been putting out the full unedited videos of their stings, which makes it harder for the Left to accurately accuse Project Veritas of doctored footage. Oh, they’ll still make the allegations, mind you…

That brings us to Jim Accoster…I mean Acosta. The video footage of his boorish behavior has been slowed down and zoomed in to focus on the actions he took. And, surprise surprise, the Left says the footage is doctored. Of course, they also bring up the fact the footage was provided by InfoWars which is as reliable as Palm Beach County’s vote counting. But in this case, InfoWars got it right. Their footage wasn’t doctored by definition because it wasn’t designed to create a false narrative. It was done to address whether Acosta made contact with the aide, which he did. Of course, the footage also made Acosta, CNN, and all the reporters defending him look like liars and idiots, so…win-win.

When Leftists make the allegation something is doctored, you have to look closer at the footage and try to determine the intent. I’m not going to say there aren’t bad players out there on the Right who would deliberately distort video footage for political purposes, but I would argue there are fewer on the Right than there are on the Left because the latter needs to lie consistently for political benefit. Why else do you think they haven’t done a thing to help gays, blacks, Hispanics, and other groups they claim to represent? Put another way, the Right may lie, but the Left will lie.

And when it comes to video footage and allegations of doctored footage, that distinction makes all the difference.

In the case of Project Veritas, the doctoring allegations fall apart with their transparency. In the case of Jim Acosta, the doctoring allegations fall apart because the footage isn’t deceptively edited. In both cases, it creates an environment where the Left has a vested interest in discrediting the footage: the footage exposes their dishonesty. And the allegations of doctored footage doubles down on it, which should be a major red flag to anyone interested in the truth.

Which is to say, anyone to the right of, say, Nancy Pelosi.

Ronald Reagan had a famous quotation related to the former Soviet Union: “Trust, but verify.” When it comes to Leftist allegations of doctored footage when it makes them look like scumbags, maybe it should be “Verify, then trust.”

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


If you were here last week, you saw my award-winning piece on voter/election fraud. (Granted, the award was a No Prize, but still, it’s a prestigious award. And it’s from Italy.) If you weren’t here last week, you missed by award-winning piece on voter/election fraud. This week, I’m going to flip the script a bit and talk about the other side of the equation: voter intimidation.

voter intimidation

What the Left believes it means – Republican efforts to discourage potential Democrat voters from voting

What it really means – Leftists trying to claim to be victims while strong-arming the opposition

Remember the 2000 election? Ah, those were the days to be a political junkie. It was back in those days when Democrats first floated the idea of voter intimidation in Florida. You see, blacks were scared away from voting because…there were barricades! And we have Rev. Jesse Jackson’s word for it, and we can totally trust him! It’s not like he’s lied about anything or done anything immoral, like…oh, I don’t know…having a child out of wedlock.

Since those heady days, the concept of voter intimidation has expanded to the political equivalent of a double whammy. In 2008, members of the New Black Panther Party stationed themselves outside of polling places in Philadelphia as security. And by security, I mean intimidation with clubs. Of course, the Department of Justice under President Obama saw nothing wrong with that (mainly because it worked in his favor), so the matter was dropped.

At least until Republicans could be blamed for it on evidence thinner than a drawing of Kate Moss on paper one micron thick.

After pretending actual voter intimidation against Republicans was a thing, Democrats have seemingly found voter intimidation in everything from voter ID to Donald Trump asking supporters to do what the New Black Panther Party did in 2008. Granted, the latter might be considered intimidation (unless we use the Obama DOJ definition), but the former isn’t threatening at all. On an intimidation scale from a fluffy puppy to Brock Sampson on PCP, voter ID is a lot closer to the puppy.

This begs the question of why the Left is scared of barricades and voter ID. After all, these people are supposed to be super smart and not afraid to get their knuckles bloodied when it comes to fighting the good fight. Yet, they turn into Scooby Doo in the Amityville Horror house at pieces of wood and paper? No wonder they like the French so much. They look like Rambo in comparison.

The barricade intimidation is a bit hard for me to swallow. If you’re frightened off by a barricade, maybe you just aren’t meant to vote for anything more important than Prom King and Queen. Voting, even in the privacy of a polling booth, requires a level of courage most people can muster just by waking up in the morning. Of course, the racist Left wants us to believe these barricades are racist in nature because it only scared off blacks. I’m sorry, but that’s monster-under-your-bed kind of frightening.

Now, the voter ID being intimidating is easy for me to swallow, especially considering the lengths Democrats have gone to turn voter ID into something only slightly more popular than Andrew Dice Clay’s one man show “Hitler, the Misunderstood.” This is by design, of course. If they can demonize voter ID, it not only makes it harder for Republicans to fight for these laws, but it makes it easier for Democrats to circumvent existing laws.

Think about it for a moment. Wouldn’t you be scared out of your wits if laws were put in place that would effectively turn almost every “get out of the vote” effort your party enacts into a crime? Of course you would. The problem is the laws are seen as inconveniences to Leftists until they find a way around them. And as the one-two punch of Wikileaks and Project Veritas has shown us, there are more than a few people in the DNC willing to play as fast and loose with the laws as Bill Clinton likes his interns.

Of course, this won’t cause any handwringing or clutching of pearls with the Left. They believe the ends justify the means, so even if the means are dirtier than Larry Flynt’s porn collection it’s fine if it gets the results they want. That’s one reason the voter intimidation concept doesn’t fly with me. It’s purely a political move designed to make the Democrats’ target audience (potential voters who are dumber than a box of rocks inside a bag of hammers) believe there are Republicans under their beds telling them not to vote. And given the fact these are the same people who thought a half-term Senator and his old white guy sidekick were qualified to be President and Vice-President, they might actually believe that.

But there’s another reason voter intimidation claims don’t work for me. It makes people believe they’re the cowards the Left wants them to be. Most people don’t want to create waves, so they tend to knuckle under to the demands of people they consider to be more informed than they are. This fear of retribution causes a lot of people to accept concepts they wouldn’t normally hold. Just ask anyone who has been chastised by the Left for contradicting them on global warming.

But here’s the thing. Voting requires you to take a stand. There is no “maybe” to a vote; you pick a candidate you support and that’s that. The beauty of our system of government is we can vote in private and no one else needs to know who you voted for. (At least, not until Leftists find a way to track your DNA signature based on fingerprints left on ballots and electronic voting screens, but that’s a long ways off…I hope.) You know who makes you accountable for your vote? You. End of list.

So, don’t believe the hype when it comes to voter intimidation. And make sure you vote. The only wasted vote is one not cast when you’re eligible to cast one.

Well, that, or a vote for Jill Stein.