A simplification - Basic pattern of ResponseThe basic gist of the way the media and many within the democratic party is this:
1. High ranking members of the Democratic Party direct the media outlets what to say, and what articles to run
2. The media focuses it's outrage on a particular individual or organization, stoking the flames of political dissent
3. Violent angry mobs go after said individual supposedly with no connections to the democratic party or the media, even though in some cases they do
The basic gist is to point the gun at the enemy, load it, and tell everyone why the enemy is so evil, but let someone else pull the trigger for you. This is designed so they don't have to openly accept blame; it's basically a way to provide plausible legal deniability to themselves, while still achieving the intended effects. It's about exploiting the political environment (which they helped to manufacture), stoking the flames of political tension, and with this political tension intensified, then carefully and deliberately direct this outrage at specific individuals they don't like. This then brings on the ire of the angry hate mobs who attack the individuals attacked and sometimes even doxed by the media in any way possible, ruining their reputation or careers, destroying their livelihoods, but sometimes even getting acts of violence committed against them.
Pewdiepie for instance lost his contract with Disney and millions of dollars, the
slingshot guy almost lost his channel, and various other individuals have received similar attacks by companies with what essentially amounts to libel. People have even been threatened to have attack ads ran against them and reveal their identity so they can "release the hounds" against them, such as someone posting an otherwise harmless meme, which has lead to considerable backlash for it. [
1][
2][
3][
4][
5]
It's as much about intimidating the populace as it is about attacking certain individuals. They understand they can't attack everyone, so they make a pariah out of people to have them serve as examples. "This is what will happen to you if you stand up to us!" The goal being to threaten their opponents, and using the fear to control them, with examples being made of individuals every now and again to show that they are serious. This is similar on operation to a terrorist group or mafia, beheading people or doing a drive by shooting to scare the rest of the populace, the rest of the people they threaten, in to submission. There's an inherent understanding that they can't kill everyone and that it would not be beneficial to do so, but they kill or hurt certain people in order to send the message of how powerful they are and regain control. The reason certain individuals are chosen is to send a message to the 99% of us what might happen if we aren't careful. The operative goal not being wanton destruction, but control, with mindless destruction simply serving as a tool of instilling that sense of fear. The person they blackmailed and threatened to dox in the end didn't do much harm to them, but they served as a perfect example of what might happen if you cross them. The basic strategy is in effect, very simple. Manufacture outrage through manipulative language, lies of omission or even straight libel against someone. Use that outrage of said person to get them attacked, and then use them as examples for future targets of their ire. It's so far been extremely effective and has suffered no legal consequences despite being considered by most to be libel, doxing and even in some cases blackmail. The plausible deniability of indirect favors for them allows themselves to ignore any true legal culpability, although that may be changing soon. Libel is a crime, and if damages from a ruined reputation can be proven in court to have not only resulted in monetary damages but even acts of violence, this sort of reckless endangerment from attack ads and deliberate attacks, can be potentially subdued.
Even more terrifying, this likely has direct connections to certain individuals within the Democratic party, who are connected to the media outlets doing this, and benefit from their specific enemies being taken down. While not all democrats are involved, and in fact this tactic has been used by democrats against other democrats (I.E. Bernie Sanders), a select group within it pushing a very specific narrative has done this in order to help win the election, make money and even simply get back at people they dislike. While sickening, it's important to note that this is a grave accusation, and likewise demands proof not only to prove it's existence, but the depth and scope of the attacks. By explaining each part in detail, I will hopefully shed some light on their methods of actions and who is involved.
Reply
