Election 2020 / Election Coverage / Opinion / Politics

Bozell to Levin: Survey Shows 4.6% of Democrats Would Not Have Voted for Joe Biden Had They Known Hunter Biden Story

levin

By Center for Strategic & International Studies – Panel 3: Our Shared Opportunity: A Vision for Global Prosperity, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=82559300

(CNS News) — Media Research Center (MRC) Founder and President Brent Bozell laid out on the Mark Levin Show on Tuesday survey data indicating that the media’s bias by omission resulted in the defeat of President Donald Trump.

Bozell explained that it is well-known how the mainstream media dedicates over 90% of its Trump airtime to negative coverage of the president, but the MRC president argues that their omission of Trump’s successes and Joe Biden’s failures is much more dangerous.

“We took a survey after the elections, on the night of the elections, and asked Democrats if they knew about the Hunter Biden story. A full 36% of Democrats knew nothing about the Hunter Biden story,” Bozell said. “Further, 4.6% of Democrats said they would not have voted for Joe Biden had they known this story. We then took that 4.6% and we spread it across the electoral landscape.”

“Guess what? Had they known this story, Joe Biden would not have carried Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and the Trump lead would have been definitive in North Carolina. Meaning what? Meaning that Donald Trump would have won 289 electoral votes and would be the re-elect president of the United States. ”

Below is a transcript of the segment.

Mark Levin: Quote from The Washington Times: “It’s an indisputable fact that the media stole the election. The American electorate was intentionally kept in the dark during the height of the scandal surrounding Hunter Biden’s foreign dealings, the media and the Big Tech companies did everything in their power to cover it up.” Those words come from a dear friend of the show and of mine, Brent Bozell, founder and chief muckety-muck of the Media Research Center. Brent, how are you, sir?

Brent Bozell: Good, Mark. How’re you doing?

Levin: Very well. Expand on this: the media’s role in trying to defeat the president.

Bozell: Well, let’s go through some numbers. This is something that we could trace back four years, but let’s look just at the Hunter Biden laptop story. It broke on Oct. 14, The New York Post reported it. This laptop contained all the evidence one needed, I think, probably to indict Biden for his activities in China. It has all the material: the phone conversations, the emails, the discussions about payoffs, everything you need to know. It was bigger than anything, I think, and remember the Richard Nixon Watergate scandal and the Rosemary Wood eight-and-a-half minute tape and how that brought down the president. This is a hundred times bigger than that. So you would expect nonstop media coverage of this. You would expect them not just to be covering the story, but investigating the story. Look how they investigated Donald Trump for four years nonstop on hoaxes that didn’t exist. So what was the coverage? For the next two weeks, the networks devoted 113 hours to news coverage. Within that 113 hours, the total amount of coverage given to the laptop — are you ready — 21 minutes.

Levin: That is shocking.

Bozell: It didn’t exist. Now let’s take it to the next step. Thursday, Oct. 28, Thursday night, Oct. 28, on the eve right before the second presidential debate, Tony Bobulinski appears on the Tucker Carlson show. For one hour, he corroborates the laptop as being honest, he corroborates the emails that went back and forth between he and Hunter Biden. He talks about all the phone conversations that were had. He talks about the meetings he had with the Biden family, including Joe Biden. That one-hour interview is absolutely explosive. The next day, what was the coverage of it? Absolutely nothing from the network news, nothing other than to dismiss the president for bringing it up during the debate. So, it never existed. Now, why is all this important? It’s just two examples we’re giving here. Why is all this important? We took a survey after the elections, on the night of the elections, and asked Democrats if they knew about the Hunter Biden story. A full 36% of Democrats knew nothing about the Hunter Biden story.

Levin: Amazing.

Bozell: Democrats, remember, they rely on these networks for their news. Thirty-six percent of Democrats knew nothing about the Hunter Biden story. Further, 4.6% of Democrats said they would not have voted for Joe Biden had they known this story. We then took that 4.6% and we spread it across the electoral landscape. Guess what? Had they known this story, Joe Biden would not have carried Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and the Trump lead would have been definitive in North Carolina. Meaning what? Meaning that Donald Trump would have won 289 electoral votes and would be the re-elect president of the United States.

Levin: That’s amazing. And you make an incredibly compelling case. And they knew exactly — they knew what they were doing, didn’t they, Brent?

Bozell: This isn’t, Mark, this isn’t a one-and-done. This isn’t somebody at some network missing something one night, this is something that has been going on night after night after night for four years. This is the flip side to what everyone talks about when they talk about the 92%, the 93%, the 94% monthly negative coverage of the President. We’ve done those reports every single month. That’s the bias by commission where they have been attacking the president. 92, 93, 94% of the time. But when you’re doing that, you’re also engaging in the politics of the bias by omission, where you’re not reporting that which would be helpful to the president, either something good that he did, or something bad that his opponent did. This is the bias by omission which I think is so much more dangerous. And we see it with this one issue alone. I can tell you now, we’re going to be, we’re tabulating the numbers still so I don’t have the numbers to give, but we will have them, I think, on Monday. We’re going to show this wasn’t the only issue. There were, in fact, a handful of issues, each of which had the media reported them, Donald Trump would be getting ready —

Levin: We really do not have anything close to free press in this country, do we? We have a bunch of left wing Democrat ideologues?

Bozell: Yeah, they made no bones about what they want us to do this time around. You know, in times past, there has been bias, distortions, and that sort of stuff. But this has been nonstop since he came down the escalator in May of 2015.

Levin: How long has MRC been around?

Bozell: Since the fall of 1987.

Levin: 1987. So, 33 years by my fast math here. Have you ever in your life, in the 33 years of your organization, seen anything like this?

Bozell: No, no. And I suspect that if we went further than our 33 years, nobody living today, could point to another time in anyone’s lifetime where the media has behaved this way. Never, never. I never, you know, Mark, I never thought that I would rue the good old days of Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw.

Levin: Well, listen, you guys do a tremendous job. Please keep it up, now more than ever given what’s going on in this country, the lies about the Constitution. I only have about a minute. Let me ask you, when you see Joe Biden standing in front of their own sign saying President-Elect Biden or President-to-Be Biden, does this look like it’s sort of a tyranny? I mean, the guy, does he not know how the system works? I got 30 seconds.

Bozell: He knows exactly what he’s doing. But even worse than that, he knows what he can get away with. And he knows that the media wouldn’t dare bring up the fact that this is fraudulent advertising on his part. They do these things because they can.

Levin: Brent Bozell, thank you, my friend. Check out the Media Research Center, ladies and gentlemen and I’ll see you next time. We’ll be right back.

Reprinted with Permission from - CNS by - Lucy Collins

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Read more articles by Outside Contributor
0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
7 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
CharlieSeattle
2 months ago

Had They Known, being the operable phrase.
The MSM is responsible for that.

Joy Martin
Reply to  CharlieSeattle
2 months ago

Yes, the real enemy of the people!

FORGETBIDEN
2 months ago

Any voter did not know that Biden is a criminal they should not be allowed to vote.
Voting should be limited to the informed. The ignorant should be excluded.

PaulE
2 months ago

So the takeaway from this whole story is that the media’s intentional suppression of the Hunter Biden acting as Joe Biden’s bagman story worked exactly as anticipated for the Democrats. Duh! No kidding! This is exactly why the media does this sort of stuff on a regular basis in order to manipulate a large portion of the American public that just seems to sit around waiting to be spoon fed information. So obviously the media is only going to give the public what it deems will be beneficial to the Democrat party and suppress all the rest. That’s what a good propaganda arm does. There was absolutely nothing stopping the general public from learning about the Hunter Biden story on-line, if they only had made a small effort.

As for the Hunter Biden story, if this election fraud of November 3rd is allowed to stick, both the DOJ and FBI will sweep it all under the rug and the story will fade from the public’s short attention span memory. Meanwhile, I’m sure Hunter will return to making a lot of lucrative new “business deals” on behalf of the family business.

Rik
2 months ago

We the People MUST NEVER ACCEPT Jackass Joe Biden as President Elect! There is NO WAY Jackass Joe could WIN WITHOUT CHEATING even without the Mainstream Media NOT REPORTING Hunter/Joe Biden criminal behavior. Why waste time allowing the recount of these phony mail-in votes when all that is needed is to have a 1 day new inperson only election in the States of major question: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada and Arizona? I have no doubt that if so, President Trump would win ALL of these states! No need for costly, time consuming, neverending courtroom battles. The American voters should decide and with only allowing inperson voters, the outcome cannot be questioned! But of course, the Progressively Communist Democrats would never agree to what I have offered as a solution because they know that in a “fair” election Jackass Joe Biden gets clobbered! We the People MUST DEMAND Justice be Served!

Kim
Reply to  Rik
2 months ago

I agree with you, Rik, that an in-person re-vote would give us cleaner results. As it stands now, lawsuits left and right bring cost, suspicion of poll workers (and their machines) and the post office, and mistrust of the elections process.

The weary state of a Covid population screams out for fairness and finality. Social justice! We won’t get it, I believe, with heavy litigation. The dems have already scrambled to cover their…mistakes. Still, both sides and the states would have to agree, and that’s not likely because Biden knows he probably wouldn’t survive it. But I’m all for it.

PaulE
Reply to  Rik
2 months ago

There is NO provision in the Constitution for a do-over election for the presidency. The path the president is pursing is the ONLY means to potentially alter the outcome of the election. The Founders never envisioned nor wanted our elections to be conducted by mail in ballots. They could have opted for mail-in voting since the postal service existed back then, but they rightly concluded that voting must produce a quick outcome by a uniform, one day process. Which is why they set aside a specific timeline to ensure that uniform, in-person voting to be done by all states.

Remember, absentee voting, the more secure and traceable means of mail-in voting, normally amounts to a small percentage of the overall voter base and is usually reserved for overseas military and the medically infirm unable to vote in person. The mass mail-in ballot process we just went through lacked both the more rigid security and tracing features of conventional absentee voting in the states in question.

The Democrats knew when they started pushing for mail-in voting, that it would provide many options for committing voter fraud. That is why they wanted it so bad and why we have the outcome they jbew they could engineer. Now it is up the president and his legal team to gather as much evidence as possible of wide-spread fraud and present it the the courts. It’s a very tough path, as the courts aregenerally NOT usually in favor of reversing elections, but that is the ONLY OPTION on the table.

None of us want Joe Biden or the Democrats to win, because we all lknow what that means for the country. We especially don’t want Biden or the Democrats to win by wide-spread fraud, because then they will use this means over and over again in all future elections. So we have keep a close on on the process and hope Trump’s legal team can uncovered enough of the fraud before the Democrats have a chance to destroy all evidence of it.