Fake News and the Constitution


By Joe Ragonese

On the cold and snowy night of March 5, 1770, a crowd of angry American colonists gathered in front of Boston’s Customs House to protest the occupation of the city by British troops, who were sent to enforce the hated taxes imposed by King George III.  These patriots taunted the British soldiers standing guard, and reinforcements were called to quash the illegal protest.  King George had outlawed any gathering that would oppose the crown.  Patriots, being Americans who took authority they deemed unlawful with a grain of salt, began pelting the soldiers with snowballs.  It has been said that some of those snowballs contained rockets; but we will never know for sure.  What is known is that the British responded by firing into the crowd, killing five Americans and wounding three more.

Sam Adams, a patriot journalist, published pamphlets that described the night’s events in words filled with fiery and explosive adjectives, turning an illegal protest where the mob became violent with the British soldiers, into a massacre of innocents.  Adams was well known to the patriot community, it was through other pamphlets, flyers and posters that he and others like him wrote, that sent this crowd to face off the British in the first place.  It was their explosive rhetoric that caused King George to outlaw their production and distribution and to impose prohibitive taxes on writing material. It was through the words of these outlawed and non-main stream media that excited American’s patriotism and reinforced their hatred of British rule.

Today, that puffed up journalism, told through the eyes of patriots, is fake news to modern day Democrats.  The information, although not always completely accurate, kept the King of England from running America into the ground, just as Breitbart News, U.S. Defense Watch, and others like them, sent Donald Trump to the White House to stop modern day tyrants from destroying this country.

In 1775, when the Minutemen first confronted the British Army on the greens at Lexington, Massachusetts, it happened only because fake news had been printed and read by enough patriots that encouraged them to stand against a tyrant.  While the shot heard round the world was fired at Lexington, those poorly armed and massively outnumbered militiamen were only fighting a delaying action, to provide more time for other patriots to gather to protect weapons stored in a shed in Concord, Massachusetts.  It was 70 militiamen facing 700 regular soldiers of the British Army.  What could induce a man to stand against those odds?  It was the fiery rhetoric of people like Sam Adams, John Payne, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton and others, that encouraged them to stand for American principles.  Who fired that first shot is still debated; however, the end result was that as the morning’s sun rose over that green field, seven patriots lay dead, while the rest retreated to stand again at the North Bridge of Concord.

As many as 400 minutemen gathered and were waiting in Concord to deny the British access to a bridge they needed to cross to get to the shed holding the arms and powder.  Unknown to the British, most of the arms and powder had already been moved due to patriot spies providing advance information of British plans.  The battle for the bridge was joined, and while the British did cross, only to find an empty warehouse, they were driven back to Boston in a forced retreat, while under a murderous fire.  More minutemen joined the fray along the way, and by the time the British reached Boston, over 200 redcoats lay dead and wounded.  America’s War of Independence had begun.  It was fueled with the information provided in the alternative media, that the British tried to suppress, just as the interchange of ideas on Twitter and Facebook drove 21st Century patriots to the polls in massive numbers to stop another tyrant, Clinton.

None of this would have occurred without a free flow of information.  For almost 15 years tensions had been growing between the crown and its colonial subjects.  King George III, who ascended to power in 1760, was low on cash due, in part, to Great Britain’s war with France.  A part of that war was fought in America, known as the French and Indian War, and the King decided that the colonialists should pay for their part of the war.  To do so, he began taxing the colonies with new, innovative, ever growing and uncommon taxes.  He was a king and could do so capriciously.

Colonials didn’t like it much and began printing in the newspapers stories in opposition to the oppressive taxes.  The King, being a tyrant who could get away with such things, ordered the newspapers to stop printing stories opposing those taxes.  Publishers, being loyal subjects, complied rather than be shut down and put out of business.  To counter a main stream press which was in lockstep with the king, an alternative press blossomed.  When a void is created, something always fills it.  In this case, people who wanted to know the truth, not the words of a tyrant, were informed through word of mouth at meetings in public gathering spots, such as bars, barber shops, butcher shops, markets, and eateries; as well as through letters, flyers and posters placed on boards at those gathering spots.

To end this free speech, the King imposed writing taxes on all paper and ink, as well as forbidding the posting of bills and the printing of seditious pamphlets.  He had to shut down this alternative media, least the truth became known; which differed from the King’s words.  Needless to say, Americans did not comply.  America was already different from anywhere else in the world.  We had a middle class the rest of the world did not, so we saw ourselves as being different than other British subjects; we saw ourselves as citizens.

Those beliefs were reinforced through that outlawed press. It is the American way.  In this election the middle class was again under attack and learned how badly they were being treated through alternative sources.  The main stream media being in lock step with the Democratic Party, bought and paid for by the global elite, there was no other way to become armed with enough knowledge to make a decision on what was best for America.  Once the truth was learned, we the people fought back through the ballot box and defeated those would be tyrants once again.

Until the first shots were fired and America found itself at war with the crown, the alternate press of flyers, pamphlets and posters, were the only way that the people knew what was really happening.  Some of the news was real, some puffed up; and some outright lies.  Yet, without this information, there never would have been an American Revolution.  As mixed as the information was, Americans decided for themselves which to believe and what seemed far off the mark.  President Ronald Reagan always said that Americans will always do the right thing.  He was speaking through his knowledge of American history. In 1775, they did the right thing, based on the information they had from all sources, just as we the people did in 2016.

If the Democratic establishment and its useful idiots in the main stream media, which is a part of the Democratic establishment, had their way, only what they deem to be news would be allowed to be printed, heard or seen.  They tried everything in their power to suppress any opposing points of view.  Only through alternate media, such as talk radio, blogs, websites and social media, did we the people learn of the corrupt Democrat Party, Hillary Clinton’s crimes and those of the DNC.  Without this alternative media would we have a President-Elect Trump today?  Just like Sam Adams, who printed posters full of rhetoric meant to incite the passions of Americans, this new media saved the Republic this year, and probably for the next quarter of a century.

President Obama, just this week while on his last foreign trip as President, whined to the press about how we must stop these non-elitist and non-globalist points of view from being heard.  It was shameful and unconscionable that those words came out of an American President’s mouth in a foreign land.  His lack of stature as President was shown through vividly in this incident.  He has picked up on the mantra of America’s elitists that fake news must be stopped.  They are trying to shame Facebook and Twitter, as well as other social media sites, to prohibit an open and free transfer of information.  They want people who are elitists just like them to be the gatekeepers of the news.  Obama and German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, followed up with statements asserting that the Internet must be controlled in another attempt to control the news.  The problem with their joint statement is that it defies the Constitution.

When our independence had been won from England, our founding fathers drew up a constitution.  They argued for many years on what should be in it, finally agreeing on the document that we have today.  Prior to ratifying that document; however, they needed safeguards, so that no tyrant would ever again control we the people of America.  To insure that would never happen, ten amendments were written, which are known as the Bill of Rights.  The U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights were ratified together.

The order of ratification is important.  The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for redress of grievances.”

The First Amendment, contains three items relating to our freedom to convey information to one another and are lumped together.  Freedom of speech, meaning the ability to speak openly about whichever candidate you choose without intimidation or violence against you; freedom of the press, and they didn’t mean the Wall Street Journal or the Topeka Times. They were talking about those alternative outlets like posters, flyers, and pamphlets that were full of fiery rhetoric.  In today’s world, it would be talk radio, blogs, social media and internet websites.  And, the right to assemble, peaceably, in order to speak to one another and let your points of view be known.  There is no mention of fake or trueness about the people’s rights, only that they have a right.

I find it inconceivable that it is me, and not some talking head on national television who earns 20 million dollars a year, saying this.   Yet, it is not.  That is frightening to me and should be to you, too.  For all the hoopla about freedom of the press we hear from the main stream media, they are silent on the rights of conservatives.  Just as they were silent when Fox News was barred from the press room of the White House by President Obama, or when James Rosen, a Fox News reporter, was investigated for filing a true news story, which undermined the President.  Freedom of the press to today’s main stream media means freedom for them to spew their hate against conservatives, but not to those who think that they are wrong.

I am not worried about this new push to shut down conservative thought; it is nothing new.  It might have happened if Hillary had won and packed the Supreme Court with her Marxist judges.  As long as that court remains in the hands of people who believe in the original Constitution, and not some living document, our republic will remain safe.  I am not even worried if Facebook caves to the leftist thought police and deletes conservative thought.  The marketplace will fill that void with new social meeting places, maybe called outreach or facepage.  Who knows, but the void will be quickly filled and the loser will be Facebook as over half of their followers will go elsewhere.

In America, the one thing that will continue to exist because alternate media told the truth over the lies of the left and the nation woke up from an eight-year nightmare and elected Donald Trump, is the right of the people to keep and bear arms…which is the Second Amendment and the one placed to protect all of the others.  Our founding fathers knew what they were doing. I never stop marveling about their foresight.

3 comments on “Fake News and the Constitution
  1. By declaring something that they disagree with ‘fake news’ the Democrats hope to stomp out freedom of speech, discourse, and debate from differing viewpoints. The ‘fake news’ Democrats are wanting to ban is anything being written, distributed, or discussed by conservatives or others who threaten the narrative and propaganda being spewed by Democrats.

  2. Great article. Agreed that what we are witnessing is a 2nd American Revolution. I would argue that the forces of tyranny operating today within our own country are far more insidious than George III was 250 years ago. BHO policies have put us on the edge of the abyss. We would without a doubt have gone over the edge had HRC won.

  3. You have done it again, what a GREAT article it puts the lefties and Obama where they belong. I will send this to all the patriots on my list everyone should read this.

Comments are closed.


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)