Staff Reports
The time has come to call out the rampant dishonesty and failure at the heart of the British Broadcasting Corporation. The recent resignation of the BBC director general and CEO over a falsified Trump documentary proves yet again that mainstream media cannot be trusted to deliver the objective truth. Cutting and pasting Trump’s words to falsely convey an incitement to riot on January 6 is not just a small misstep; it’s a malicious attempt to deceive the public and rewrite history.
This fiasco is a textbook case of what left-wing pundits love to call “fake but true.” They say, sure, the facts are wrong, but it represents a “deeper truth.” It’s the same old excuse trotted out to justify their blatant misdeeds. Whether it’s conjuring up non-existent computer fonts to tarnish President George W. Bush or peddling climate fears with Al Gore’s doomsday scenarios riddled with errors, we see a pattern here. Liberals manipulate facts when it suits them and serve them up as objective truth to fit their globalist narratives.
Belmont Club: When You Can't Take the High Handhttps://t.co/ww9MPMI76X
— PJ Media (@PJMedia_com) November 11, 2025
Rich liberals in media and academia might embrace the idea that truth is a flexible concept, but real people do not. The real world has consequences. When the media fabricates their so-called “truths,” they run head-on into reality’s brick wall, and the BBC just smashed into it full speed. Collapsing trust is a direct result of their arrogance and incompetence.
Now, the British Broadcasting Corporation hides behind its cultured persona, as if sipping tea and engaging in gentleman’s chat excuses its reckless journalism. But make no mistake, distorting the events of January 6 is playing with fire. It was, and still is, a divisive moment in American history. By choosing to alter reality, they’ve turned legitimate political debate into chaos, fueled by biased smoke and mirrors.
But here’s the kicker: perhaps the BBC didn’t even see their error because the lie fit too neatly into their worldview. They claim innocence while clinging to their fragile house of cards, built on selective facts and partisan narratives. The great director cannot claim ignorance when he has aided and abetted in such shoddy storytelling. Are we to believe that ignorance is an acceptable defense in the forum of public trust now? Not on our watch.
