International
‘Americans Don’t Trust The News Media’: Bezos Speaks Out After WaPo Chose Not To Endorse Harris

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Amazon founder and Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos said Monday that the Post’s decision not to endorse Vice President Kamala Harris is in response to a larger issue of media credibility being eroded.
Bezos pointed to the recent surveys on trust and public reputation, with media institutions consistently ranking near the bottom, in the article titled “The Hard Truth: Americans Don’t Trust the News Media,” published in the opinion section of the Post. This year, however, Gallup reports an even more dire verdict that journalism now holds the lowest spot in American trust, with Bezos arguing media credibility has eroded not only because of perceived biases but also due to an industry tendency to ignore public perception.
Bezos further explained that the most recent backlash surrounding the Post’s decision not to endorse Harris only highlights a growing issue that trust in the press depends on two pillars — the coverage being accurate, and it must be broadly trusted to be accurate. The choice not to endorse provoked outrage across liberal circles, but as Bezos stated in a rare public response, the decision is rooted not in partisanship but in a commitment to genuine independence.
🚨BREAKING: Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos speaks out after his paper refused to endorse Kamala Harris for President
“The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media” pic.twitter.com/3Dl8OaY4kj
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) October 29, 2024
“Presidential endorsements do nothing to tip the scales of an election. No undecided voters in Pennsylvania are going to say, ‘I’m going with Newspaper A’s endorsement.’ None. What presidential endorsements actually do is create a perception of bias. A perception of non-independence. Ending them is a principled decision, and it’s the right one,” Bezos wrote.
Bezos acknowledged that this choice might appear strategically timed to favor one candidate over another, especially given a coincidental meeting between a top executive from Blue Origin, a company which Bezos also owns, and former President Donald Trump on the same day.
“I would also like to be clear that no quid pro quo of any kind is at work here. Neither campaign nor candidate was consulted or informed at any level or in any way about this decision,” he wrote to clarify that the decision was made internally.
Even so, Bezos is acutely aware of the larger challenges facing his newspaper and the industry at large, as the media’s credibility problem is neither isolated nor new. “Increasingly, we talk only to a certain elite,” Bezos reflected, contrasting today’s diminished public reach to the 80% household penetration WaPo achieved in the D.C. metro area during the 1990s.
“Now more than ever the world needs a credible, trusted, independent voice, and where better for that voice to originate than the capital city of the most important country in the world? To win this fight, we will have to exercise new muscles,” Bezos added.
WaPo reportedly saw a drop of over 200,000 subscriptions after CEO and Publisher William Lewis announced that, for the first time in decades, the paper’s editorial board will not endorse a presidential candidate, NPR reported. Following the decision, several staff members who supported Harris reportedly resigned in protest.
2025 Federal Election
Election Security Briefing Confirms CCP-Linked Operation Boosted Carney

Dan Knight
While Beijing boosts Mark Carney on WeChat, federal officials downplay foreign interference, dodge accountability, and protect the very narrative propped up by the CCP.
As Canadians prepare to head to the polls on April 28, 2025, the federal government is working overtime to project an image of preparedness in the face of growing foreign interference, digital disinformation, and mounting public skepticism.
This week’s National Election Security Briefing—one in a series leading up to the vote—was framed as a gesture of transparency and reassurance. Led by Lauren Kempton, the session brought together senior bureaucrats from Canada’s intelligence, cybersecurity, and diplomatic corps. Among them: Allan Sutherland from the Privy Council Office, Vanessa Lloyd of the SITE Task Force, Bridget Walsh from the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, and Larissa Galarza from Global Affairs.
They were joined virtually by officials from the RCMP, CSIS, and other federal agencies, forming what was presented as a united front against threats to Canada’s democratic process.
This briefing follows last week’s announcement of a new Candidate Security Program, offering private, unarmed security details to protect political candidates from intimidation. It’s a telling sign of the times—when running for office in Canada now comes with real, documented threats from foreign powers.
And if you thought foreign interference was yesterday’s problem, what came next confirmed: it’s not just back—it’s more sophisticated, more aggressive, and more deeply embedded than ever.
The WeChat Election: CCP Bots, Mark Carney, and the Digital Hijacking of Canadian Democracy
The latest federal election security briefing confirmed what many suspected but few in government are willing to say out loud: the Chinese Communist Party is actively trying to shape Canadian politics—and their current project of interest is Mark Carney.
Intelligence services revealed that a state-linked WeChat account called Youli-Youmian, tied directly to the CCP’s Central Political and Legal Affairs Commission, launched an information operation targeting Chinese-Canadian communities. The timing was not subtle. Two major spikes in activity occurred—on March 10 and again on March 25, right in the heart of the federal election campaign. The platform used was WeChat, a messaging app with over a billion users and a long record of CCP censorship, surveillance, and narrative control.
The operation focused on Mark Carney. He was the centerpiece. The content wasn’t one-sided, but it was manipulative. It praised him for being “tough” on the United States—exactly the kind of posture the CCP likes to see in Western leaders. At the same time, it seeded doubts about his experience and readiness to lead. The strategy is transparent: elevate the figure they believe will be most useful, then control the temperature of public perception around him.
The operation was not organic. Intelligence officials described it as “coordinated inauthentic behavior”—mass posting of identical headlines across outlets, bot-driven sharing, engineered engagement. This wasn’t a handful of users with strong opinions. It was algorithmic warfare.
The bureaucrats behind the briefing bent over backwards to downplay the impact. They said the campaign was “contained to one platform” and argued that Canadians have access to diverse information, so the overall electoral process remains “free and fair.” But that’s not the point. The CCP doesn’t need to control the entire media ecosystem. It only needs to shape perception where it counts—and in targeted communities, with targeted narratives, it’s clearly trying to do just that.
The Liberal Party was only briefed on the situation on April 6—after the second spike in activity. That’s weeks after the operation had already gained traction. What happened during that time? Carney’s campaign moved forward without addressing any of it. And now we know why. Whether he’s aware of it or not, the CCP sees value in propping him up—at least in the right communities, with the right messaging. If that doesn’t send alarm bells ringing, it should.
This isn’t speculation. It’s documented. It’s active. And it’s part of a larger pattern. The same interference networks have previously targeted Conservative MPs like Michael Chong, Erin O’Toole, and Kenny Chiu. They’ve gone after Chrystia Freeland too. But the recent attention to Carney marks something new—not just an attempt to tear down opponents, but to sculpt the image of a candidate who just might serve certain foreign interests, directly or indirectly.
The Chinese Communist Party doesn’t operate on party loyalty. It operates on leverage. And this operation—whether Carney asked for it or not—is a sign that Beijing believes his leadership could be shaped to their advantage.
The Canadian government can claim “no impact” all it wants. But influence isn’t always measured by votes—it’s measured by narrative, tone, and who ends up in the spotlight looking just a little more “strong” or “stable” through the right lens. Beijing’s lens.
The CCP’s Safe Bet: Mark Carney
And now, after days of playing cleanup behind a polished podium, the government rolls out a Q&A session to assure us that “nothing’s wrong,” “everything’s under control,” and that the CCP’s operation to shape the election isn’t a big deal because—get this—it only ran on one platform.
Let’s be blunt: the CCP isn’t playing to win headlines on Twitter. They’re not interested in going viral on Facebook. They’re targeting WeChat—because that’s where Chinese-Canadian voters live, talk, and form political opinions. And in that space, Beijing amplified Mark Carney—not because he’s “tough,” not because he’s competent, but because he’s good for China.
Canada has become a proxy battleground in a new Cold War between the West and the Chinese Communist Party. And Carney? He’s the CCP’s safe bet. Let’s not forget: this is the man whose financial career includes a quarter-billion-dollar loan from the Bank of China while chairing Brookfield Asset Management. The same man who’s never disclosed his full assets, despite now leading a party that’s still pretending foreign interference is just noise on the margins.
And now, in classic bureaucratic fashion, SITE and the government tell us they “don’t speculate on intent.” They claim the CCP is just sowing discord. That their approach is “party-agnostic.” That they weren’t trying to help Carney, just “pollute the digital environment.”
Give me a break. You don’t call someone a “tough opponent” to the U.S. and a “rock star” in a state-linked campaign unless you’re trying to boost their image. You don’t run coordinated bot amplification to spread content about one candidate because you’re bored and trying to “confuse people.” This wasn’t confusion. This was elevation.
And what did the government do? They flagged the content. They told Tencent about it. And then they backed off—because they don’t require any action. The PRC is running soft propaganda on a Canadian election platform, and Ottawa’s solution is: “Well, we told them. Hopefully they fix it.”
What’s worse? When asked about it directly, the government refused to name Carney as the beneficiary. They said they don’t want to “amplify the content” by repeating it. So let’s get this straight: Beijing gets to run a pro-Carney campaign, but Canadians aren’t even allowed to know the details?
That’s not protecting democracy. That’s protecting a narrative.
The truth is, Mark Carney is not being elevated because he’s good for Canadians. He’s being elevated because he’s safe for Beijing. The Liberals know it. The bureaucrats know it. And so far, no one in power has had the spine to stop it—because China’s interference benefits the very political class that claims to oppose it.
So when they talk about “safeguarding our democracy,” ask yourself: who are they really safeguarding it from? Because right now, it’s not from foreign influence—it’s from accountability.
Invite your friends and earn rewards
Business
Trump eyes end of capital gains tax in 2025

MxM News
Quick Hit:
In a historic announcement that rattled markets and reignited debate over tax policy, President Donald Trump revealed plans to eliminate the capital gains tax starting in 2025. The unprecedented move would allow Americans to retain all profits from asset sales—whether in stocks, real estate, or other investments. Supporters tout it as a bold pro-growth measure, while critics warn it may cause budget strain and market instability.
Key Details:
-
President Trump announced the elimination of capital gains tax effective 2025, describing it as a move to reward success and promote wealth-building.
-
Currently, capital gains are taxed at rates up to 20%, with additional surcharges for high earners.
-
The announcement caused a major rally across financial markets, though critics claim the change favors the wealthy and could disrupt the economy.
Diving Deeper:
At a press conference on Monday, President Trump laid out a sweeping proposal to eliminate the capital gains tax in its entirety, calling it a “long-overdue correction” to what he described as a punitive tax on prosperity. “Why should you be punished for building wealth?” he asked. “This is America—we reward success.” If enacted, the change would allow investors to retain 100% of profits from the sale of assets such as stocks, homes, and businesses, with zero tax liability.
This proposal marks a sharp departure from decades of entrenched U.S. tax policy. Currently, long-term capital gains are taxed at rates ranging from 0% to 20%, with potential surcharges including the 3.8% Net Investment Income Tax for high earners. Trump’s plan would zero out those liabilities entirely starting in the 2025 tax year.
Conservative economists and market analysts have lauded the move as potentially the most transformative supply-side reform since the Reagan era. They argue that removing the tax will unshackle trillions of dollars currently locked in unrealized gains, spurring investment, entrepreneurship, and broader economic dynamism. “This is a game-changer,” said one pro-growth advocate. “It sends a clear message that America is back to being the most investment-friendly nation on Earth.”
Predictably, left-wing critics erupted. One Democratic senator labeled the measure a “grenade” that would detonate the federal budget and widen the wealth gap. Others warned of asset bubbles and increased volatility as investors rush to dump assets ahead of the reform’s implementation. These concerns, however, do not seem to have spooked the markets—at least not yet.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average jumped nearly 600 points following the announcement, while cryptocurrencies surged on expectations of tax-free gains. Real estate portals and trading platforms like Robinhood and E*TRADE saw surges in activity as users began strategizing around the policy’s timing. Online, the announcement triggered a wave of memes and commentary. The hashtag #NoCapGains began trending on X (formerly Twitter), with some calling it a “wealth liberation act” and others denouncing it as “Robin Hood in reverse.”
Legislation to formalize the proposal is expected to hit Congress within weeks. While Republicans have largely expressed support, Democrats are preparing for a fierce battle. It’s unclear whether some establishment Republicans—many of whom have been resistant to bold reform under Trump—will help move the bill forward or slow-walk it in favor of more moderate compromises.
Until the law is officially passed, financial advisors are urging caution. “The promise of zero capital gains tax is tempting,” one planner said, “but don’t bet the farm until it’s signed, sealed, and delivered.”
Still, with the 2025 tax season approaching fast, the stakes are enormous. If passed, Trump’s plan would not only mark one of the most dramatic tax overhauls in modern history—it would redefine the very incentives that drive American investment and wealth accumulation.
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Liberals Replace Candidate Embroiled in Election Interference Scandal with Board Member of School Flagged in Canada’s Election Interference Inquiry
-
Business15 hours ago
Trump threatens additional 50% tariffs on China, urges ‘patience’
-
Alberta15 hours ago
Province introducing “Patient-Focused Funding Model” to fund acute care in Alberta
-
Business1 day ago
Jury verdict against oil industry worries critics, could drive up energy costs
-
MacDonald Laurier Institute13 hours ago
Rushing to death in Canada’s MAiD regime
-
Alberta2 days ago
Is Canada’s Federation Fair?
-
2025 Federal Election17 hours ago
Mark Carney Comes to B.C. and Delivers a Masterclass in Liberal Arrogance
-
International14 hours ago
UN committee urges Canada to repeal euthanasia for non-terminally ill patients