Listen Anywhere

A Columbia student tricked some of the world’s biggest news agencies into believing a made-up backstory. They splashed him across front pages and featured him in prominent broadcasts, where he lied with reckless abandon. The media lapped up his every word.

His goal wasn’t just self-aggrandizement. It was far more strategic. He used it to fuel the leading hate movement of our time. “Let's play skillfully with their minds,” he once said, outlining the strategy he would enact.

Even as the media portrayed him through its favorite lens, a false victim narrative, he barely bothered to hide his real aims. While his backers called him a “peace activist,” he was speaking on video and sending out messages aligning himself with the world’s most murderous Islamist terrorists.

Then, two independent journalists looked into him — and discovered that the truth has been hidden in plain sight. David Collier and Rachel Feldman thought they’d publish a brief document outlining their findings. But they unearthed so much proof that they ended up with a 100-page report.

In the new episode, they join me to share details on Mohsen Mahdawi, the 36-year-old pro-terror radical who has swindled the media at all levels — local, national, and global — as well as lawmakers and religious leaders. As David explains:

“I've been doing this for a long time, and this one is gobsmacking. You know, it really is jaw-dropping stuff… Either he does have some kind of split personality, or he is one of the most devious individuals I’ve ever come across.”

We discuss his wild response, “crickets” from the media, and how people can get the word out. Interestingly, it involves local school boards. Listen now for details. Paid subscribers will get an exclusive edited, annotated, hyperlinked transcript.

Subscribe now

Also in the new episode:

• The Macklemore mess is nowhere near as complicated as it seems.

• The NY Times blames an editing error for an offensive, wildly wrong claim.

• I break down the hypocrisy in the battle over press access to the White House.

JL

P.S. Latest on Instagram:

Some listeners and readers have asked me about a Wall Street Journal piece on Sen. John Fetterman. Is it a hit piece? Did the Journal get it right? The answers are: yes and no.

This story says a great deal about today’s media landscape, political divides, and dehumanization. I break it down in Episode 126: America’s Most Unpopular.

The Journal packed the piece with anonymous sources, including some of his former staffers, claiming dysfunction in Fetterman’s office. He says they’re disgruntled, pushing half-truths and smears.

While allegations of dysfunction in any public official’s office are worth reporting, this article cites no tangible problems that have resulted from it. No actual impacts on governing.

That raises a question: Why allow all the anonymity? Editor-in-Chief Emma Tucker has said the paper limits anonymity to only “the most sensitive stories.” How did this story meet that bar? (I’ve asked the Journal, and received no response.)

Fetterman maintains the same overall level of popularity at home in Pennsylvania. While Democrats have turned on him, Republicans and Independents have increased their support for him. The article includes no quotes from people in the latter camp.

In the background of all this is the fact that many staffers who work for Democrats are part of AZHM, the Antizionist Hate Movement — the biggest antisemitic movement of our time. And they hate that he stands staunchly against that.

Coverage of Fetterman, in the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere, touches on his support for Israel in its battle against Islamist terrorism. It also generally points out his failure to play along with Democratic leadership these days. But it leaves out a central point. There’s no understanding Fetterman without understanding this.

From his 2025 book, Unfettered:

“I’ve drunk deeply of the venom of both the left and the right. And as a connoisseur, I can confirm that the most poisonous, the bitterest is from the far left.”

He discussed this on CNN. While the right says “really rough things” to him, people on the left say “they want me to die, or ‘we’re cheering for your next stroke,’ or ‘why couldn’t the depression (have) won, and I hope your kids find you,’” he explained. “One post said, ‘The doctor let us down. And why did they have to save his life?’ That’s really been consistent, in that community online.”

This is what Fetterman’s day is like. And he sees Democrats doing nothing about it. Democrats are letting it get worse as the hate movement on the left outgrows the one on the right. So yeah, guess what? He might not want to spend any energy worrying about what the party leaders want from him. But these stories don’t point that out. They don’t discuss it.

Major newsrooms love to obsess over the symptoms — the friction, the defiance, the bad blood — while deliberately looking away from the cause.

Leave a comment

In other news:

• Trump and the battle over White House press access

• The media is wildly wrong about politicians’ popularity (supporter exclusive)

• The Macklemore Media Mess

On Threads? Join me there:

It’s one of the biggest stories in the country. It speaks to crucial issues of press freedom and democracy.

There’s no one to root for in it. But there is something We the People can do about it.

Trump announced that he’s banning CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House, his latest attack on news agencies he doesn’t like. Having lied so much and called accurate reporting “fake news,” he’s in no position to grandstand.

Meanwhile, news giants lie, too. CNN is a prime example of one presenting itself as mainstream — wanting to appeal across the political spectrum — but regularly pushing lies that fuel left-wing hate campaigns. Click the magnifying glass icon at the top of this screen and search “CNN” for dozens of examples. Just this morning I called out CNN for cherry-picking data. MS NOW, formerly MSNBC, is an avowed left-wing outlet that does the same.

So understanding this story requires rejecting binary thinking. As the brilliant business leader Leslie Zane explained in Episode 69: Connectomes, our subconscious minds naturally veer toward simpler “good vs. evil” scenarios. That’s what makes the media’s false victim narratives take hold so deeply. In this situation, no one’s a victim.

Listen Anywhere

I focus primarily on correcting the mainstream media, so I don’t spend much time analyzing Politico. But I can tell you that in his announcement, Trump falsely claimed Biden’s government funneled millions to the company to prop it up. In reality, federal agencies pay for news subscriptions, as they did under his leadership as well.

Having journalists cover the government is a bulwark of our freedom. And courts have ruled that the White House can’t remove access based on content. So this decision could easily be overturned by a judge at any minute.

While news stories have pointed this out, I’ve raised a question. If fellow journalists recognized that a colleague has become a lying propagandist, and a president removed that person’s access, would journalists rally around that person? I asked this in a reply to an AP reporter on X. So far, of course, the response has been crickets.

In fact, several years ago CNN considered whether Fox should lose its membership in the White House Press Pool, and be “afforded the privileges that come with news gathering.” A listener sent me this:

Americans should not have to choose between a lying president and a lying media. The solution is to use our freedom. Elect leaders who understand and respect the role of a free press, and stop paying news sites that fail to do their jobs.

On another note, with the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur beginning this evening, my latest column for the Times of Israel has just gone up. To all good people who celebrate, wishing you a meaningful holiday/fast.

Leave a comment

Listen to the latest episode for details. Supporters get exclusive, hyperlinked, annotated transcripts like this, below.

Of 12 U.S. political figures tested, including likely presidential contenders for 2028, only two are “above water.” Both are Republicans. All the Democrats have overall unfavorability. A progressive star is as disliked as Trump, and another is trailing the pack at a brutal -18 rating.

The survey found that ICE and MAGA are unpopular. The DSA and socialism are more unpopular. Most despised of all are Islamist terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah as well as their sponsor, Iran.

If Democrats want to win, they need to take this seriously. Inside their mainstream media bubble, they underestimate support for Republican candidates and overestimate support for their own. Consider this survey the signal to burst the bubble.

Where do the politicians rank? Here’s who’s on top, who’s the most unpopular of all… and how measles vaccines fit in.

Read more

If you’ve never heard of him before, that’s a good thing. But given that just about all major news agencies are suddenly covering him, you’re probably hearing the name “Macklemore.” Unfortunately, none are telling you the most important facts.

Here’s what you need to know. Benjamin Haggerty, a rapper who calls himself Macklemore, is a raging antisemite — the kind the political left spawns, rather than the right (e.g. Kanye). He’s similar to the antisemites who oversee coverage in many of the news giants, so they pretend he isn’t one.

He takes every vicious lie he hears about only the tiny Jewish state, calls it truth, and broadcasts to his legions of fans. Make up literally any libel against Israel and he’ll run with it, while ignoring actual evils across the Middle East that Israel has to protect its citizens against every day.

If a teacher fixated on every accusation made against their lone Black student and spread it publicly, sane people would recognize the racism. The media’s inability to instantly see Macklemore’s antisemitism is a sign of just how normalized it has become.

He fuels deadly, ravenous hatred. He’s been told this many times, but keeps it up anyway. After his latest stunt doing exactly this as the opening act of an Ed Sheeran concert, some stadium owners including Robert Kraft had enough fortitude to make clear he would be unwelcome. So he’s no longer part of that tour.

Now, haters are screaming that Macklemore just wants “peace.” That’s a lie. He has no interest in peace for The People of Judea/Israel/Zion. He has praised Columbia University’s violent mobs. He specifically dedicated a song to groups that call for violence.

Share

But the media is, of course, presenting him as a victim. This is how it works. It’s the Palestinian playbook. Attack, play victim, and watch the media help you.

Mourning terrorists

In his rants, Macklemore inflates alleged death tolls from Gaza, while ignoring all other ongoing wars with far higher death tolls. He calls every person killed in Gaza “beautiful soul.” It’s not a spiritual take on humanity; it’s a whitewashing of reality.

Tens of thousands of people killed in Gaza were terrorists, murderers, rapists, butchers, and kidnappers. Many of the rest were their supporters. Not a single Gazan took any action to help the hostages when they were being starved, beaten, and raped in tunnels for two years.

But in Macklemore’s world, infantilizing Gazans is a basic. So he publicly mourns terrorists who carried out the worst massacres of modern times, slaughtering babies, children, the elderly, and legions of young adults at a music festival.

At the time of the October 7 attacks, he momentarily acknowledged the horror, then immediately returned to rabid attack mode.

Jewface History

This is also why it’s worth taking a new look at a previous controversy. In 2014, he performed in an antisemitic caricature costume, a phenomenon known as “Jewface.” (I shared an image yesterday on social media.) When called out, he insisted he had no idea. If that’s true, it’s a sign of his own willful ignorance and that of everyone around him. The ADL accepted his apology at the time, based on the hope that it was genuine. It clearly wasn’t.

The group Stop Antisemitism has written about Macklemore. Pink, the awesome Jewish singer, shared a post from the group about him the other day, and was immediately attacked. Fortunately, she’s not backing down.

Questions? Supporters can post them below, and I’ll discuss in an upcoming episode and/or newsletter. Meanwhile, catch up on the latest episodes wherever you listen.

Picture America the way the news describes it. In that imaginary reality, who are the most popular politicians? A new survey shows the actual popularity -- in most cases, unpopularity -- of political figures. It exposes the massive disconnect between news giants and reality.

Mainstream media darlings are among the country’s most unpopular political figures. Of all the U.S. political figures tested, only two are “above water,” meaning more people had favorable opinions of them than unfavorable opinions.

Both are Republicans. It’s a glaring wake-up call for Democrats and newsrooms. Who ranked where, and why is this methodology so telling? Listen for the full breakdown.

Also in the new episode…

The Wall Street Journal has published an anonymously-sourced hit piece on Sen. John Fetterman. I dug up what the paper’s top editor has said about anonymity, and explain why allowing it in this case seems to violate the paper’s own professed standards. Then, I highlight the giant part of the Fetterman story that just about everyone leaves out. It’s a sign not just of what one lawmaker faces, but of today’s political culture.

Plus, a researcher from an elite university publishes a new report quantifying the New York Times’ bias. I share the key findings. And a listener asks about comment sections. I explain why they’re a cesspool of the Internet.

On Instagram? Join me over there:

But last year, an estimated 7.4 million people tuned in, and millions more watched clips in the days after. So huge numbers of people will probably be subjected to dangerous lies tonight.

For a sense of what’s really going on in Hollywood, and why the battle against hatred there is so important, listen to my interview with Jonah Platt.

Last year, crazed actress and activist Hannah Einbinder used the event to be, as the NY Post accurately put it, a “useful infidel.” Thrilled to hear its lies come from her mouth, Hamas praised her and beamed her photo to its minions while blurring her exposed — gasp — shoulders.

She’s spent the past year justifying every Hollywood antisemite who uses the language of the far left to describe their support for Islamist terror.

Lately, she’s been supporting Mark Ruffalo, one of Hollywood’s most clueless, bigoted celebrities who links his hatred of Israel to everything that ever happens anywhere on Earth, including a Hollywood merger. Not to be outdone, fellow actor Javier Bardem has discovered that he can turn every Hollywood event into a platform for his latest antisemitic screed, even trying to blame Israel for Spain’s Ceuta crisis.

At the Emmys, we can expect that no one will speak out on behalf of actors like Michael Rapaport, who has discussed losing work because he refuses to join the hate mobs. No one will call out actors like Melissa Barrera, who amplifies posts including a demand that Jewish people never be allowed to have a state.

And, sadly, we can expect that no one will mention how a successful new TV show breaks barriers by centering on a heroic Black Jewish family.

Skip the Emmys, and tune in to They Stand Corrected, where I’ll fact-check the liars for you.

JL

Meanwhile, for a tiny group of people who understand the reality of Islamist terrorism especially well, a celebration begins tonight. Sundown marks the start of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish new year. Here’s to a better world in what the Jewish Calendar calls 5787. (Wondering how that works? Learn about it from the U.S. Navy here.)

Among the many things the media won’t tell you about this holiday: Jews are not allowed to pray at the holiest site in our religion. It’s one of approximately 10 bajillion concessions Israel has made in hopes of reducing threats from Islamists.

Why is it even an issue? Arab Islamic conquerors built a mosque on top of the Temple Mount as part of its declaration of dominance and supremacy. Try explaining this to virtually anyone in major news agencies. Their heads will explode.

Share

Here’s a photo of me from last year at the holiest site where Jews are allowed to pray, the Western Wall.

To all those of you who celebrate, wishing you a blessed “Shanah Tovah.”

Supporters: Here’s

Read more

Tomorrow, the United States and much of the world will mark the 25th anniversary of the September 11th terrorist attacks, when 19 hijackers overtook four planes, killing nearly 3,000 people. We’ll see solemn memorials and praise for first responders. But we’re unlikely to get what we need most from the media: the whole truth. In the latest episode, I take you through what the media misses about that day.

Each year, news giants ignore crucial facts about, and lessons of, 9/11. Here’s some of what they leave out.

It was an expression of values in societies controlled by Islamist death cults — hence the celebrations that day among Palestinians. It helped terrorist groups recruit bloodthirsty people all over the world.

It was part of a long string of hijackings by Islamist terrorist groups across decades, and one of many massacres they’ve carried out this century. 9/11 was the deadliest single attack in raw numbers, but nowhere near the deadliest per capita. That distinction goes to the October 7, 2023 massacres in Israel.

Millions of people were killed, both directly and indirectly, in U.S.-led wars after 9/11. Yet no one is screaming “genocide.”

The first known hero of 9/11 is also believed to be its first victim. Daniel Lewin, an Israeli-American who served in the IDF and was trained in counterterrorism, instantly put his life on the line to try to thwart the attackers mid-air. One killed him by slitting his throat.

The media also ignores its own role in a profound shift that has overtaken our society. As Jason Korman, my guest in a previous episode, wrote in a Washington Times column:

“The day after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Americans of various political beliefs largely stood together against Islamist terrorism. We understood that our free, democratic way of life was under attack from those who seek a fascist, theocratic, global government. However, a mere 22 years later, on Oct. 8, 2023, an entire swath of liberal-minded people were celebrating the Hamas atrocities… This massive cultural shift did not happen in a vacuum. It has been designed and executed deliberately, and many of our leaders have failed to see what was right in front of their eyes.”

Now, the left’s most popular so-called influencer is Hasan Piker, a man who said America “deserved” 9/11. Democrats like Michigan’s Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed have repeatedly campaigned alongside him. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has rapped about his love for the Holy Land Five, who were convicted of funneling millions of dollars to an Islamist terrorist group.

But all of these men are media darlings, given carte blanche to spew lies in interviews — and treated as though their support from pro-terror radicals is irrelevant.

To all who lost loved ones that day, thoughts with you.

JL

P.S. In case you missed it:

It’s pathetic to have to say this. But the last thing any news agency should do is refuse to acknowledge reality.

That keeps happening. The latest example comes from our neighbors to the north. As we approach the 25th anniversary of 9/11, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) instructed its staff to avoid calling the attacks “terrorism.”

After a public outcry, it pulled back — but the problems remain.

In Episode 124, Natural Disasters & Democracy, I break down what the CBC told me. I explain why it’s about much more than language — it signals a dangerous shift in core societal values.

Listen Anywhere

‘Appalling and cruel’

The news of the CBC’s instruction to avoid calling 9/11 terrorism was first reported by Warren Kinsella at The Toronto Sun. He described it as denying reality, offensive, wrong, and bad journalism.

“What’s shocking here, and what I think made this news and attracted the anger of so many people, including Liberal MPs (lawmakers), is that they applied this rule, thou shalt not call terrorism terrorism, in the case of 9/11, where thousands of people were murdered by Osama bin Laden’s men. Canadians were murdered. That was an obvious case of terrorism, and it is appalling and cruel for CBC to say that it isn’t.”

It’s the latest twist in a saga I covered in Episode 2: The Media’s ‘Terrorism’ Hypocrisy. I explained that many news agencies claim to have a rule requiring staff to attribute the term — that is, to quote officials calling something terror. But in reality, they apply that alleged “rule” selectively, based on their own agendas.

Take the BBC for example. The British state broadcaster censured its own presenter for accurately calling Hamas a terrorist group, but took no similar action against presenters who used the term for other groups:

Just as the BBC wields massive influence in the UK (and worldwide), the CBC wields massive influence in Canada. It isn’t just the nation’s biggest news agency; it may be the leading source of the radicalization driving Canada’s violent, antisemitic shift. I interviewed journalist Jesse Brown about this:

‘Loaded’ Language

The instruction to avoid calling the September 11 attacks terrorism came from Basem Boshra, the CBC’s senior director of journalistic standards and public trust(!). The network sent me the written guidance, which is filled with illogical nonsense.

First, the network said the terms “terrorists” and “terrorism” are “so loaded with meaning, politics and emotion that they can end up being impediments to our journalism.”

No news institution should be capable of writing that sentence without realizing how insane it is. Media outlets, including the CBC, use words “loaded with meaning, politics and emotion” constantly. They specifically seek out loaded words for headlines to increase click rates. It’s the era of rage bait.

They also use loaded words that are wrong, like in discussing an imaginary “genocide.” After the October 7 massacres, the CBC’s evening news presenter called a rally against antisemitism a “pro-war” event. But yes, CBC, tell us how concerned you are about loaded words.

Meanwhile, Islamist terrorists proudly announce their desire to terrorize. It’s the whole point, and on the rise. It’s a type of crime.

Guiding Values

The CBC says, “Terrorism generally implies attacks against unarmed civilians for political, religious or some other ideological reason. But it’s a highly controversial term that can leave journalists taking sides in a conflict.”

Here’s what I asked them: Do they not want their journalists taking sides against terrorism? News agencies have values. When a shooter opens fire at a school, killing children and staff, a good news agency doesn’t reach out to people who think that’s OK to get their perspective. The agency takes sides. Obviously.

Values guide coverage. Take Al Jazeera, for example. In a previous episode, I pointed out that the Western media whitewashes Qatar’s state propaganda giant, pretending it’s a legitimate news agency. The network’s own people celebrate terror on air and online. That’s where the agency’s values lie.

Ultimately, Boshra walked back the 9/11 rule. He pathetically attempted to claim that a “leaked excerpt” had created misunderstandings. But the original reporting was accurate.

Erasing Accountability

Boshra’s switcheroo doesn’t solve the problem, though. The CBC has now established that it will call 9/11 terrorism, but what about other attacks? The October 7 massacres were exponentially more lethal per capita. I’ve asked the CBC whether it will allow the term for that horror. I’m not holding my breath.

But CBC also managed to sneak in another disturbing piece of guidance. Boshra instructed reporters to cover terrorism this way: “The hijackings led to passenger jet crashes,” and “the World Trade Center was destroyed.”

Note the passive language, removing the terrorists’ responsibility. In the past, the CBC has specifically instructed journalists to avoid this. It published a piece lamenting how the “passive voice deletes accountability.” Now, in its own guidance, the CBC is telling people to do exactly that.

Note to the CBC: The hijackings didn’t lead to crashes. The hijackers intentionally flew planes into buildings in order to carry out mass slaughter.

Listen now to Episode 123: Fighting Back When the Media Targets You:

(Note: We’re having a technical problem with Spotify and working to get it resolved. Listen on Apple, Amazon, YouTube, or other apps.)

The moment comes when I discuss a professor who taught at Columbia, one of the most elite institutions ostensibly dedicated to education. On a book tour pushing “Anarcha-Islam,” Mohamed Abdou literally teaches kids to “be proud of your hate for America.” Qatar’s state propaganda giant Al Jazeera lists him as an author, of course.

After the October 7 massacres, he announced his affinity for the terrorists: “I’m with Hamas and Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad.” Even Columbia, which virtually never holds these propagandists to account, called his remarks “repugnant” and said he won’t be back.

He then sued Columbia, alleging, among other things, emotional distress. He also claimed that when Columbia’s leaders denounced terrorist groups, that was a sign that they’re biased against him. In throwing out the case recently, Judge Kathleen Waterman-Marshall actually had to state the obvious:

“Abdou provides no authority which stands for the proposition that expressing disapproval of a foreign terrorist organization in a Congressional hearing amounts to discrimination.”

But now, other pro-terror radicals are also suing Columbia. The New York Times kicked off its coverage by misquoting and misrepresenting Shai Davidai, my guest in this episode. He explains what happened, and how he fought back.

The new suit is by several people who participated in campus activities that boost Islamist terrorist groups. They’re also claiming discrimination, harassment and emotional distress.

Both lawsuits cite alleged actions by Shai. In reality, he exposed the truth about people who were disrupting, attacking, and endangering students. But in their imaginary world, they’re victims.

This is where we are. Far-left radicals have been so incredibly spoiled by elite universities that they genuinely believe they can violate campus rules, attack students who stand for democracy, make campus dangerous for many students — especially Jewish students — and claim victimhood.

You wouldn’t know any of this from news giants that invert reality to serve an agenda.

Supporters: Send thoughts, questions, ideas, and other feedback in comments or messages.👊

He just wanted to teach students, to help them become ethical business leaders of the future. His research covered topics like “economic inequality and social progress.”

Then, Professor Shai Davidai watched as Columbia University erupted into a hotbed of violent pro-terror radicalism after the October 7 massacres. As ethical, sane students standing for democracy were punched in the face. As radical professors joined mobs in violating campus rules and getting away with it.

So he used social media to report what was happening. The media responded by attacking, misquoting and misrepresenting him. In the new episode of They Stand Corrected, I speak with Shai about the lessons he learned, how to handle the media, and his upcoming book American Intellectual Antisemitism.

He divulges what no one knows about what really happened.

It should be astounding. Campus radicals harassed Jewish students and paid no real price; when Shai called them out, they accused him of harassment. No investigation concluded that this “harassment” took place. But you wouldn’t know that from the news.

The AP broke the most basic rules of journalism to portray accusation as fact in a headline: “Pro-Israel professor at Columbia barred from campus after harassing and intimidating other employees.” Note the lack of “accused,” “alleged,” or any response. (I covered this in Episode 29.)

Fortunately, Shai didn’t back down. Watch this powerful video, and read this exclusive transcript of our conversation:

Read more

In the new episode, I cite examples, and explain why in this era, everyone should be empowered to handle the media. I talk you through it with a man who learned the hard way. Listen to Episode 123, Fighting Back When the Media Targets You, with Shai Davidai now:

Shai was a professor at Columbia. When radicals who support Islamist terrorism overtook the campus, he tried to get the word out. But The New York Times portrayed him as a controversial figure, and he began facing threats.

You’ll learn important new lessons today — things no one knows about what he went through with the Times, 60 Minutes under the previous CBS leadership, and other outlets.

You’ll hear how the lessons he learned pay off. Just the other day, the New York Times published falsehoods about him. He acted immediately; the Times changed the story and ran corrections.

“They’ve realized from my track record that I don’t keep my mouth shut, and I stand up to bullies,” he says.

Shai has a new book coming out, American Intellectual Antisemitism.

Also in this episode:

• Why I can’t stop laughing about a tragicomic lawsuit

• The ways major publishers are effectively boycotting Jewish truth-tellers

• News giants won’t tell you their favorite Columbia radical broke the law

• Have elite universities gotten any better?

And lots more.

JL

P.S. In happier news, here’s an achievement by the “white supremacist apartheid” only democracy in the Middle East and North Africa:

It’s a story pulling together some of the biggest issues of our time: the Trump administration’s battles with the press, the war in Iran, global terrorism, nuclear threats, and an anti-democratic monarchy’s efforts to influence the West. The media missed virtually all of it.

In the new episode, I take you through what you haven’t heard about Trump’s plane ruse. I speak with Joe Lockhart, who was President Clinton’s press secretary during a previous plane ruse in 2000.

I explain what no one is pointing out: News agencies are railing against the possible threat they faced. Which groups presented that threat? The same Iranian proxies that the media is helping by pretending their activists are “journalists.”

Plus, how a giant event of the 20th century fits in — one most people don’t know happened: the invention of a country, originally known by the acronym “Pakstan,” without the “i.”

The founding of India and Pakistan created the largest displacement in human history, with an estimated 15 million people losing their homes — and as many as 2 million people killed in violence.

In other news…

Some Michigan polls are showing Abdul El-Sayed with a lead. This is a danger to democracy, so I’ve made this transcript available with no paywall.

Share

Supporters: Share thoughts, questions, etc. You inspire most of the episode topics.

Leave a comment

When seeking medical opinions, intelligent people listen to experts who know the facts. This same rule should apply to everything. But in our media landscape, facts are left out while uninformed people are given megaphones.

One example is the widespread ignorance about U.S. military assistance to Israel. News giants are actively miseducating people, and helping a hate movement that weakens the United States against a growing threat. The newest poster child for that movement is Michigan’s left-wing Democratic Senate candidate, Abdul El-Sayed.

In the latest episode, I do what the media refuses to do: fact-check.

I shared previously how El-Sayed is hiding the truth about Islamist terrorism and radicalization. But since he and his allies often pretend their concerns are largely financial, let’s look at the numbers.

Hundreds of reports say El-Sayed opposes “unconditional” U.S. aid to Israel. That’s a lie for two reasons: He opposes all aid, and there’s no such thing as unconditional aid. Laws restrict how aid to any nation may be used.

Many reports mention the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and use false references to “foreign money.” AIPAC is American, composed of people who understand the United States is stronger when our democratic allies can defend themselves, keeping threats to democracy further away from home. FDR called it being an “arsenal of democracy.”

Reports note that AIPAC spent millions to support El-Sayed’s opponent. They never mention that Iran, Qatar, and China are spending billions on influence campaigns to support left-wing movements. (Hear a Uyghur leader explain why in Episode 112, “China’s Useful Idiots.”) That’s foreign money.

The mainstream media also fails to call out El-Sayed for railing against money in politics while taking lots of money for his politics, including from groups linked to terrorism.

And the media doesn’t educate people about which countries get aid. In 2023, Ukraine received $17.2 billion; Israel received $3.3 billion; the next two countries combined, Jordan and Egypt, received about the same amount as Israel. Trump has halted new aid to Ukraine. In total this century, Afghanistan has received the most by far.

‘Intellectually dishonest’

The media never challenges El-Sayed’s nonsensical claims that U.S. aid to Israel takes money away from Michiganders. On Instagram, Jeffery Mead took this on:

Unlike aid sent elsewhere, almost all funds helping Israel fight terrorists are spent inside the United States. Under current law, that figure will soon be 100%. Some companies getting that money are in Michigan. It took me a total of one minute to find that out. No major media mentions it.

That military cooperation also includes intelligence sharing. Israel warns the United States about terror cells and possible attacks on U.S. soil. Any of these could be in Michigan, a growing hotbed of Islamist radicalization.

Law enforcement officers in Michigan have received training from Israel in how to prevent, disrupt, and respond to attacks. And Michigan authorities thwarted mass attacks on LGBTQ+ people, a U.S. military base, and a synagogue since last year alone. Those actions save lives. How much money does it save?

When an Islamist terrorist killed 49 people and wounded another 58 at the LGBTQ+ Pulse nightclub in Orlando in 2016, economic losses were estimated at $386 million — that’s $535 million today, according to the Inflation Calculator. Authorities say the attack they thwarted targeting LGBTQ+ people in Ferndale, Michigan late last year could have been bigger.

The Islamist terrorist attack at the Boston Marathon in 2013 killed three people, wounded more than 250, and cost an estimated $333 million — $477 million today.

The left’s arguments about ending military aid to Israel are also based on wildly popular lies that ignore a mountain of evidence. Andrew Fox, the fantastic military analyst who has been on this show, has the receipts:

“They’ve spent three years shrieking about genocide, backed by academic fraud. Now it’s collapsing, they’re throwing smoke to cover tracks… The population of Gaza *increased* since the war began and a comparatively tiny proportion of non-combatants died.”

If the media wouldn’t invite anti-science, uninformed firebrands to provide medical advice, it shouldn’t give El-Sayed — a man adored by the pro-terror DSA — an open mic to spout nonsense about protecting democracy.

Since left-wing candidate Abdul El-Sayed eked out a victory in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary, some Democrats have called on voters to unite behind him. They’re wrong. He and his movement present an existential threat. Anyone who wants a sane Democratic Party should vote against him. Make these extremists unelectable.

In the latest episode, I did what the media refuses to do: fact-checked El-Sayed and the media’s fawning coverage of his campaign.

Listen to hear how:

• El-Sayed has deep ties to the nightmarish, pro-terror DSA.

• His blood libels about Israel and lies about money risk Michiganders’ lives.

• He campaigns with vile antisemites and anti-democracy activists.

• Michigan terrorists attempted to massacre LGBTQ+ people and service members.

and lots more.

Here’s an edited, hyperlinked, extended transcript of one section of this episode.

Transcript

Josh: In March, an Islamist terrorist rammed his car into a Detroit-area synagogue with lots of children inside. People who were there say it was nearly a massacre, and that the training they had received was essential in preventing it.

El-Sayed put out a video. He said he stands against attacks, so that’s something. Then came this madness:

El-Sayed: Hurt people hurt people. Violence is a cycle. Ayman (Muhammad) Ghazali lost family, including two children, in an airstrike in Lebanon last week. They were innocent people.

Josh: “They were innocent people?” All of them? The terrorist’s brother, targeted in the attack, was a commander of Hezbollah, a terrorist organization under U.S. law. And the terrorist put his children in harm’s way. Terrorists always do.

I interviewed neuropsychologist Orli Peter, who has treated people raised in societies run by Islamist terrorists. She explained that these groups launch attacks and then instruct or often force kids to run into buildings that they know are about to be hit.

Civilian deaths are tragic. Tons of kids were killed in Germany in World War II by the Allied forces. I’ve been to Nuremberg. It’s the reality of war. But when Israel fights back, everything it does is depicted as the worst possible thing. Those depictions help Islamist terror groups. Israel is on the front lines of fighting them.

El-Sayed pretended to trace the origin of the synagogue attack. Of course, he insisted it comes down to one source, and cautioned against a “narrative” that suggests otherwise.

El-Sayed: It’ll be shaped in part by the very people who launched that war, that led to those airstrikes, that killed those children, that drove this crazed attacker to violence.

Josh: Hear that? It wasn’t radicalization that drove this attacker, it was the war. In case that wasn’t clear, he repeats it.

El-Sayed: And they’ll use it all to justify the war that created this in the first place.

Josh: To him, that’s the start. Not the decades of terror from Hezbollah against Americans and everyone they could kill in Israel, including Druze children. Not the massive barrage of rockets from Hezbollah on October 7, designed to make people in the south vulnerable to slaughter, rape, and butchering. He does not mention the radicalization leading so many Muslim people and their supporters to carry out and praise terrorism.

It’s not like one guy got some new idea to go attack a synagogue; this is happening constantly. But to El-Sayed, it doesn’t exist. This is the same candidate who said he didn’t want to upset the many people in Dearborn who support Iran. He also used the October 7 anniversary to send out a fundraising email, without acknowledging what really happened on that date.

Earlier in this episode, I discussed the latest slaughter of Christians by Islamist terrorists in Africa. There are no Christian or Jewish terrorist groups going around the world trying to slaughter Muslims everywhere. No leaders in Jewish and Christian communities are trying to convince people to do so. That way of thinking does not exist on any widespread level in any other culture right now.

This is a fact that the media never acknowledges. Hear brilliant Egyptian political analyst Haisam Hassanein discuss the real sources of this extremism in Episode 34:

The Global Terrorism Index finds that terrorism has skyrocketed in the West, up 280% last year. The U.S. saw its highest level since 2019. Terror groups are recruiting and indoctrinating kids as young as eight. The report specifically discussed Islamo-leftism.

In the past, mainstream news giants, including the New York Times, the AP, and CNN, reported on the index. They’ve stopped because it doesn’t suit their agenda. So great people who want society to be better, want peace, don’t know what’s happening.

El-Sayed: We can and must condemn the broken politics that allows leaders to make war that they pretend has no consequences. Violence never ends violence. It only perpetuates it.

Josh: Tell that to World War II veterans who stopped the Nazis.

Teach that to kids in lessons about the Civil War. Say, “The North shouldn’t have done anything about slavery because violence only begets violence.” Tell that to police who sometimes have to fight in order to stop violence.

Of course bad things happen in war. And where did he get “no consequences” from? Consequences are the whole point. Democracies continue to exist because they fight anti-democratic forces. Everyone who ignores Islamist terrorism is weakening democracies against it. The fewer young people know it’s a thing, the fewer people will be prepared to stand against it in the future.

The narrow victory of left-wing candidate Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary exposed a fault line in America. Even some Democrats who have called out his antisemitism (yes, read on) rushed to say that voters should support him in the general election anyway. They argue that MAGA is an “existential threat,” so any Democrat is better than any Republican.

It’s time to shatter that myth. El-Sayed and the political movement that backs him — the Democratic Socialists of America, even though he’s not officially a member — present an existential threat to America.

The DSA openly calls for America’s democratic government to no longer exist, and celebrates anti-democratic terrorism. And it’s growing.

Many good people simply don’t know this because “mainstream” news giants bury the truth. To understand what’s really happening in American politics, listen to the new episode. If you want others to understand too, encourage them to do the same.

Share

In it, I piece through El-Sayed’s:

• Blatant lies that fuel violent antisemitism. It’s not “criticism of Israel.” It’s an obsessive, hateful, dangerous ideology.

• Shocking video, in the wake of a terrorist attack on a synagogue, denying the existence of Islamist terrorism and lying about the origins of the hatred.

• Funding from groups linked to terrorism, and the hypocrisy of demonizing AIPAC while Qatar, China and Iran spend billions on left-wing campaigns.

• Deep ties to the DSA, and more.

This threat is as existential as it gets. Yet a massive number of Democrats say they would consider a DSA presidential candidate.

In the episode, I also do something else the media refuses to do: basic math. I detail the many ways Michigan benefits from U.S. ties with Israel, the only democracy in MENA.

That partnership puts money into companies in Michigan, which leads to jobs and tax revenues. More importantly, it helps to save lives of Michiganders as the state faces an onslaught of attempted Islamist terrorist attacks — including ones targeting LGBTQ+ people and a military base.

People are overwhelmed with content, much of it filled with lies. This is a chance to tune out the noise and focus on concrete truth.

Also in the new episode: a big, important update on the war between Russia and Ukraine; the U.N.’s new admission about Gaza; and the latest attack on Christians in Africa. Plus, I share some of your reactions on Instagram:

Prefer reading to listening? Paid subscribers get transcripts, the chance to weigh in, and more.

Leave a comment

JL

ICYMI:

For years, major news agencies have rightfully called for more diversity among television’s Black characters. “Hollywood needs to show a multiplicity of experiences within marginalized communities,” a New York Times op-ed said.

This past season, there was a TV first: A show centered on a Black Jewish family. Boston Blue, a spin-off of Blue Bloods, is successful, and has made history. But the New York Times has never reported this. Neither has Variety, the Hollywood magazine with a similar agenda.

Of course they haven’t. Jonah Platt and I discuss this, and the fear that grips so much of Hollywood, in the latest episode of They Stand Corrected. Many people in Hollywood are too afraid to portray the beauties of Jewish life, he says. They worry that haters will say they “run the media.” Of course, “they say all that crap anyways.”

But some brave people are willing to tell stories about Jewish people — not just as a brief reference as a joke on a sitcom, but in a deeper way. Boston Blue’s success proves that it doesn’t have to be a business killer. Listen now:

Boston Blue is a police procedural focused on the Silver family. Lena (played by Sonequa Martin-Green) is a tough, loving cop who teams up with equally tough and loving Danny Reagan (Donnie Wahlberg), carried over from the show’s predecessor.

Lena wears a Hebrew necklace that says “chai,” which means “life”, in just about every scene — catching bad guys, grilling suspects, being the ultimate awesome sister/daughter/ partner.

At a time when Jewish people (Am Yisrael, The People of Israel/Judea/Zion) are being attacked on the streets for daring to wear expressions of our millennia-old peoplehood, this character’s fearlessness is a welcome sign.

Share

The family’s matriarch, Mae (Gloria Reuben, daughter of a Jewish father), is Suffolk County District Attorney. Lena’s sister Sarah (Maggie Lawson), the one non-Black family member, is a police superintendent.

The youngest, Jonah (Marcus Scribner, who has said he grew up wanting a bar mitzvah), is a new cop. Side note: Scribner was previously on Blackish, where his mom was played by Tracee Ellis Ross, another Black Jewish actress.

Every episode features Shabbat dinner. Many include Hebrew prayers and expressions. An episode title was “L’Dor VaDor,” which means “from generation to generation.”

The show airs first on CBS on Friday nights, perhaps ironically when religious Jews don’t watch TV. But I’m not complaining. Like most Americans, I stream shows.

Boston Blue is the brainchild of “The Brandons” — Brandon Margolis and Brandon Sonnier. The latter is himself Black and Jewish.

In our interview, Jonah (Platt) mentioned another successful show as well: Nobody Wants This, “a global hit comedy on Netflix. It’s all about how great Judaism is, and how we’re gonna make Kristen Bell into a Jew. It’s awesome.”

JL

P.S. In case you missed it:

For years, the entertainment press has been trying desperately to create a false “cancellation” narrative. In their imaginary world, it takes “courage” to join a hate movement. This week, former pop star Boy George exposed the lie — and immediately paid a price.

In the latest episode, I explain why the fallout from Boy George’s new song is such an important cultural marker. The episode also dives into the media disasters involving Anthony Fauci, and includes an interview with actor-singer-activist Jonah Platt.

The media wants you to think entertainment stars pay a price for “pro-Palestinian” activism. They obviously don’t. Case in point: Variety, one of the biggest Hollywood publications, published a fawning interview this year with actress Melissa Barrera. In their telling, the star of a Scream movie was “canceled by Hollywood” for “calling for peace” and “criticizing the Israeli government’s killing of Palestinian civilians.”

That’s not remotely what happened. She used the October 7 massacres to turn her social media channels into a constant stream of antisemitic propaganda. At the time, a few people in Hollywood still had enough backbone to do something. She was dropped from another Scream movie, and apparently “pushed out” of her agency. Variety, of course, tells you none of this.

Fortunately, the Creative Community for Peace kept receipts. Barrera shares posts filled with wild, nonsensical claims that go exponentially beyond what even Hamas is claiming. And one post said Jews should never be allowed to have a state.

Meanwhile, Barrera is doing just fine on Broadway, and her fellow bigots are still thriving in Hollywood. Take off-his-rocker actor Javier Bardem, who is somehow even trying to blame Israel for Spain’s Ceuta crisis.

Meanwhile, who’s actually being canceled? Jewish performers and artists. Their events are literally being canceled, as venues cave to antisemitic mobs or claim they can’t possibly provide enough security.

And look what happens to allies. Days ago, Boy George released a song standing up to the madness that has overtaken his industry. Titled “We Will Dance Again,” it stands with the people of Israel as they fight an existential war for survival against terrorists. (See the lyrics here.)

On social media, he said the man who has run his record label for years refused to release the song. “When someone is gutless it really does not hurt to say goodbye,” Boy George (George Alan O'Dowd) wrote. As a result of the backlash to his song, he had to pull out from a planned performance of Jesus Christ Superstar.

There are no violent mobs threatening events where Melissa Barrera, Javier Bardem, or any other bigots perform. That’s not a thing. Cancellations are going one way — no matter how badly the media wants you to believe otherwise.

JL

P.S. Part of the massacre Boy George refers to:

In recent years, news giants have been promising to represent minority groups fairly and accurately. But they never meant that for all minorities. There’s an obvious exception. The media works to misrepresent Jewish Americans, who make up 2% of the country. While clearing out space for the token few (very few) who support AZHM (the antizionist hate movement), they ignore virtually everyone else.

Actor and singer Jonah Platt saw this problem, and got an idea. Maybe if Jewish celebrities and others were to speak out about their experiences, people would be interested. So he created a show.

Now, after a career that included a lead role in Wicked on Broadway and an appearance in the final episode of The Office, Jonah hosts Being Jewish. He speaks with Jewish stars like Tiffany Haddish, Marlee Matlin, and Jason Alexander, as well as allies like Patricia Heaton, Cindy Crawford, and Xaviaer DuRousseau.

In this episode, you’ll hear a clip from Jewish actress Ginnifer Goodwin, who starred in Once Upon a Time, talking about how she decided to stand up to hate. (The video is below.) In the interview, Jonah and I discuss:

• The silencing: Who in Hollywood’s spin machine fights to prevent Jewish stars from speaking out

• The brick wall problem: Why appearing on his show requires a Harry Potter-style leap of faith

• The 100-year habit: How a legacy of Hollywood’s founding never got corrected

• The emotional release: Why a Broadway star broke down

and more.

The Interview

Jonah: Most people have never met, and will never meet, a Jew. The only thing they know is whatever 12 seconds of the news they catch, what they see in a movie or TV show, or what they hear the pundits on podcasts or whatever say. We have very few touch points.

Josh: Meanwhile, some prominent Hollywood figures like Javier Bardem, and even “members of the tribe” like Hannah Einbinder, are signing onto AZHM lies. What’s making this hatred so popular?

Jonah: It’s sort of a microcosm for the patterns we’re seeing generally. Some of the most left of the lefties work in Hollywood. But most people are in the middle, moderate, maybe not even paying attention to the issues. They’re quiet, trying to do their jobs, care about their careers.

Some are very pro-Jewish, pro-Israel, and they’re more bound together now than ever before. Then you have people on the far left who are super loud, have fallen for the same lies, and just have a bigger platform, a bigger microphone.

Josh: In one episode you have Ginnifer Goodwin, who says there was a moment when she chose not to be afraid. She was talking about the hatred she experienced when she spoke out after October 7th.

She says:

“In all of my trying to assimilate in Hollywood, and for all that I did to keep my head down, I just realized on October 10th, when these words were used with me, that I was like: No, I'm done. I don't need to apologize for doing something like reposting what my Persian friends experienced escaping Iran. My husband and I had to have a lot of talks, as I then continued to post. What if I lose my career over this? What if I become some kind of pariah because I am standing up for us? And it came down to: We would be okay if we lost the house and had to pull the kids out from school and all of these things. Because there's only one way this goes where I can sleep at night.”

Amen, Ginnifer. Jonah says many performers are trepidatious about coming on his show.

Jonah: For your listeners who are familiar with Harry Potter, it’s very much the experience of when the wizards go to Hogwarts. They have to go through Platform 9¾. It looks like a brick wall. A lot of people go, “That’s terrifying. I’m not running face first into that. I’m out of here.” The people brave enough to go through get to the other side, where they find their people. It’s magical.

I had one guest, Broadway personality Seth Rudetsky, who started crying within seconds. He was like, “I have not been able to talk about this openly, in a safe place, because my own community has turned on me.” This is what I tell folks: You are going to mean so much to so many people.

Josh: I have found that there are people inside Big Media who are glad that I’m doing what I’m doing, but tell me their bosses are afraid. I’m guessing there are people watching your show who don’t want to be punished by the people that they’re surrounded by in their communities.

Jonah: Every time I get connected to a someone through a representative, it’s almost a guarantee they’re not coming on the show. Because the representatives don’t want their client to touch anything.

Josh: The same PR folks don’t see anything controversial about being interviewed about being Black, Latino, Christian, any of these things. It’s just our existence that they instantly perceive as controversial.

Jonah: So, that’s horrible. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. They’re like, “It’s controversial to talk about Jewish stuff.” So then people don’t talk about Jewish stuff because they think it’s controversial. But, like, it isn’t.

Josh: Have you looked at the history of Hollywood and antisemitism?

Jonah: Hollywood was essentially created by Eastern European Jewish immigrants

Josh: who couldn’t get jobs elsewhere

Jonah: who couldn’t get jobs elsewhere, yeah, were sort of allowed to carve out this niche in what was seen as poor, gross consumption for the masses. It was like, “OK, go out in California and do your weird thing.” They wanted to be “American.” So I understand why a Schmuel Gelbfisz changed his name to Samuel Goldwyn and tried to make great “American” films. They wanted to be part of this great nation, write a new story for themselves, and have success.

The problem is that legacy of “hide your Jewishness” never got corrected. So here we are, almost 100 years later, and we’re still hiding and still trying to distance ourselves — and I think to our own detriment.