The Washington Post followed a familiar scheme when it comes to the incessant media gaslighting on the existence of censorship of conservatives: First, deny it exists. Second, admit it exists, but excuse it away by asserting that such censorship is justifiable.
The Post released an eye-popping Oct. 3 story that reeked of absurdity. “Why conservatives get suspended more than liberals on social media,” read the irony-laced headline based on a new so-called study published by Nature.
The leftist rag attempted to play gotcha with Sen. J.D. Vance’s (R-OH) comments during the vice presidential debate, when he suggested that censorship was the “much bigger threat to democracy.” In the process, The Post committed peak, double-talking hypocrisy of the first degree by admitting that censorship of “conservatives” was real after spending column inches in…
