Replies

The source is the news network heads, as they explained to their on-air personalities why those personalities’ careers and potentially their lives would be over if they allowed Obama’s ineligibility or Muslim leanings to be brought up on air. What the media heads said was reported to Doug Hagmann by multiple people who attended the meetings where the statements were made. One of the on-air personalities gave Hagmann a signed statement describing what had happened. It happened at least twice - once in October 2008 and again shortly after the election.

I don’t believe it was a threat of FCC annihilation either though, because Bush was still in office then and if any of the media heads had gone public with either the threats or Obama’s ineligibility they could potentially have kept Obama from being elected and rendered the threat impotent. I believe there was a bigger threat that was made to the media heads and the media heads only TOLD the on-air personalities that the threat was FCC annihilation. I believe the real threat was another Islamist run on the bank, like the one made in Sept of 2008 to give Obama the lead in the polls - a terrorist financial attack that our intel sources in the Middle East were saying was imminent and which George Soros reportedly asked both Hillary and Obama if they were on-board with.

I believe that threat of another run on the bank is what silenced GW Bush, Dick Cheney, John Roberts, etc. (Bush was saying that if TARP didn’t get passed it would be the end of the world as we know it, so somebody seriously scared the crap out of him!) I’ve written elsewhere about some of the other reasons I believe this was the case, but if your point about the way the FCC operates is correct, then it supports my theory that there was actually a much tougher threat and the media heads made up a cover story about the FCC to hide the real threat. In any event, the media heard that they were NOT to let the eligibility issue be reported, and they obeyed, LOCK, STOCK, and BARREL.

And if there were any questions amongst the more independent news sources by the time Arpaio’s press conference rolled around, there was the Breitbart death and the Limbaugh death threat - both on the same day as that press conference. And the “news” sources (the few that reported at all) all followed a script on how they reported about that news conference. They gave no evidence that Arpaio mentioned, said that Arpaio was being investigated by Holder’s DOJ for corruption, and claimed that Obama had presented his long-form birth certificate at a press conference (confusing the issue by not noting that it’s that very claimed BC that Arpaio found probable cause of being a forgery and fraud.)

IOW, as much as the media might laugh at the suggestion that those 2 events were meant to silence them.... their silence speaks louder than words. They obeyed the message they claimed was never sent...