So-called conservative media outlet Washington Free Beacon via its billionaire open borders underwriter Paul Singer initially funded Fusion GPS Anti Trump Oppo-Research. The stench of Paul Singer's status with Washington Free Beacon had previously been undisclosed

.
"Singer was a major financial force behind the Rubio-Obama amnesty and immigration expansion push in 2013."

10/27/17, "Washington Free Beacon Via Billionaire Paul Singer Initially Funded Fusion GPS Anti Trump Oppo-Research," tcth, sundance 

"A few media reports are all confirming the initial funding for the Fusion GPS opposition research against candidate Donald Trump came from The Washington Free Beacon and the previously undisclosed underwriter for the WFB, billionaire Paul Singer.

This makes sense because WFB was the primary conservative media advocate for candidate Marco Rubio who was also backed by billionaire Paul Singer. The primary editor of WFB Matthew Continetti is married to the daughter of notorious NeverTrumper Bill Kristol: 

WASHINGTON – Lawyers for the conservative publication Washington Free Beacon informed the House Intelligence Committee Friday that the organization was the original funder for the anti-Trump opposition research project with Fusion GPS. (10/27/17, Washington Examiner, link) 

The Washington Free Beacon did not reveal their ownership, however both Breitbart and Daily Caller are confirming the financial underwriting for WFB comes from Paul Singer. The WFB is now attempting to explain their opposition research HERE. 

It’s a rather odd dynamic to discover that a media outlet would be purchasing a contract for opposition research, no? Then again, the majority of the electorate have no idea how the right-side of the political continuum is engaged in pushing an ideological agenda – they are not just reporting facts. WFB should lose all journalistic credibility; they won’t, but they should.

It should also be noted, despite the conflation by the democrats, the initial commissioned opposition research had nothing to do with the Clinton and DNC contract with Christopher Steele who wrote the ‘Russian Dossier’.

However, in the larger picture, billionaire Paul Singer’s confirmed activity only adds weight to our discussions in 2015 and 2016 about how billionaires influence conservative politics through their purchase of media to drive their ideology and self-interest.  If you know the billionaire behind the media enterprise you can predict the policy advocacy of the content therein.

Billionaire Robert Mercer owns Breitbart and originally supported Ted Cruz through the GOP primary.

Billionaire Farris Wilkes owns Daily Wire (Ben Shapiro) and supported Ted Cruz through the GOP primary.

Billionaire Cary Katz owns Conservative Review and CRTV (Mark Levin) and supported Ted Cruz through the GOP primary.

Billionaire Paul Singer owns Washington Free Beacon and supported Marco Rubio through the GOP primary.

 
In each instance the ideological worldview of the owner establishes the foundational building block for the political policy advancement promoted by the central figureheads within the media organization.  If you know the billionaire behind the organization you can predict the direction of the articles written by the media. 

Just like Carlos Slim (New York Times), Ted Turner (CNN) and Jeff Bezos (Washington Post), the same entrenched ideology applies to the billionaires and corporate media on the other side of the political spectrum.  Sinclair Media (Sara Carter – Circa) and Salem Media (Hot Air, Twitchy, Human Events, Red State, etc.) can all be guaranteed to express a very specific narrow policy and worldview -based on ideology- in each of their publications and broadcasts.

In the 2016 election presidential candidate Donald Trump did not have support from any billionaire or corporate owned media enterprise. When you look at the expressed worldview of the billionaire media and compare it to Trump’s “America First” compass heading you realize why this is not accidental. 

Billionaires like Wilbur Ross, Steve Mnuchin, Carl Icahn, Steve Wynn, Peter Thiel, Thomas Barrack and Woody Johnson all supported Trump, but they were outside media; and like Trump himself, focused more on the economic side of the policy spectrum. Billionaires, and Billionaire owned corporations, on the right side who own media are engaged more heavily in social transformations, cultural/social issues, religion and foreign policy advocacy for the nation state of Israel.

Billionaires on the right side who don’t purchase media are more focused on business and economics; those are Trump-type billionaires. As you might remember from earlier discussion threads:

"It is critical to understand nuanced DC perspectives within all of this because the same lobbying activity stems across a broad stream of “conservative media” outlets, and has an interest in influencing our opinion. Breitbart, Washington Free Beacon, Conservative Review, and a host of other media entities are aligned in purpose/ideology with strong religious, Pro-Israel lobbying positions.

This can sometimes create a challenging hypocrisy to reconcile, and is never more evident that on the subject of Iran.

Example: Steve Bannon will argue against military intervention from one side of his mouth, yet when it comes to Iran he will happily align with the need for a declaration of war or militaristic activity. Bannon’s connection with lobbying groups is also why he will never stop supporting Senator Ted Cruz.  It’s not simply a matter of U.S. policy, it’s an agenda aspect to supporting the lobby; and ultimately Israel’s best interests.

[Ted Cruz supported TPP and actually constructed Trade Promotion Authority, the vehicle for TPP passage. This would make one think Steve Bannon, who claims “Economic Nationalism” as a priority in 2017, would therefore abandon Cruz.  He doesn’t because of the larger interests of aligned and connected lobbyists and their influence on media.]

Senator Tom Cotton is an ally in America-First economically and on immigration; however, when it comes to foreign policy the filter of the pro-Israel lobby overlays his militaristic positions. This ideological alignment, and donor-rewarded advocacy within the GOPe, is a common DC influence agent for foreign policy.

 

Some christian and far-right (orthodox) media are also part of this advocacy. It becomes increasingly evident when we see Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro, Joel Pollak, et al, attacking Trump administration officials depending on the perception of policy risk to pro-Israel media positions.

Additionally, some attacks on Trump cabinet members by the “NeverTrump” community are driven by a concern the member’s support for Israel is not paramount in the policy.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has been, and will be, openly skewered for positions that do not align with accepted conservative religious media orthodoxy. So too will Secretary of Defense James Mattis; or, as history has evidenced, Trump National Security Adviser HR McMaster....

Understanding the prism and world-view writers and pundits place upon their discussion of foreign policy helps everyone better evaluate content."

 
CTH was with Trump from 2012 yet we didn’t even know him. CTH knew we needed someone from outside the entire apparatus of politics, but we didn’t know who would ultimately come down that escalator and take point position for common sense. We are blessed and thankful."...(image above from CTH)


..........