Propaganda is a powerful tool that is adeptly used by Democrats. Republicans would probably use it too if they had the same control over mainstream media, but they do not. They’re stuck with a handful of friendly hosts at Fox News and the occasional centrist position at WSJ. Otherwise, Democrats have the American Pravda market cornered.
Rarely do you see a more clear-cut case of this than what Washington Governor Jay Inslee and his army of media people are doing to former Washington State University football coach Nick Rolovich. An article that ran yesterday in the Seattle Times is rife with manipulation, half-truths, and outright lies. It’s pure gaslighting to help them win both the PR and legal battle against the coach.
Let’s break it down briefly. It starts off by establishing that Rolovich had requested a religious exemption:
Rolovich, who was hired in January 2020, claimed Chun denied the request after WSU Human Resource Services indicated the former coach was entitled to a religious exemption. According to the appeal, Rolovich objected to the vaccine partly because of his opposition to medical research based on aborted fetal tissue.
This is where the twisting starts. In the appeal filed by Rolovich, he notes that the Governor took exception to Rolovich filing a “personal or religious” exemption. This was poorly worded on the part of Rolovich’s attorneys, but it can be assumed since they already established that Rolovich had filed for a religious exemption, the context of Inslee’s own perspectives needed no further explanation. Both the media and Inslee’s people pounced on the use of the word “personal.”
The letter outlines several meetings that reportedly took place between Rolovich, Chun and, at times, Bryan Blair, deputy director of athletics.
That included an Aug. 19 conversation that reportedly saw Chun, with Blair present, give Rolovich four options — get the vaccine, get fired, claim an exemption or resign — in light of Inslee’s vaccine mandate for higher education workers.
During the conversation, Chun allegedly stated the governor “‘did this’ just to come after Coach Rolovich and WSU.”
“Based on the context of Mr. Chun’s statement, Coach Rolovich understood ‘did this’ to mean that Governor Inslee was trying to force Coach Rolovich’s hand with his new mandate,” the appeal stated, “because he was angry that the highest paid and one of the highest profile state employees had asserted personal or religious objections to his vaccine mandate.”
From this point on, the article and Inslee’s team refer to Rolovich’s exemption as “personal or philosophical,” completely ignoring the fact that he filed for a religious exemption. He backed that religious exemption with examples of why he must not be forced to inject the drugs into his body as a condition of employment. Nevertheless, gaslighting requires the rebuking of facts for the sake or forcing their own narrative, which is exactly what Inslee and the media are doing.
They then go on to establish precedent by pointing out other vaccines are required for employment by the state in an educational setting, which is true. The problem is the Covid-19 “vaccines” pose exponentially higher risks than all of the vaccines they mentioned combined. Moreover, the other vaccines do not pose the same religious implications; they were not developed using the fetal tissue of aborted babies like the Covid-19 “vaccines” were.
This really does come down to optics for Inslee. Rolovich represented a problem for his beloved mandates. If word spread that Rolovich had been able to get a pass by successfully securing a religious exemption, it would have prompted others to follow suit. Firing Rolovich and then gaslighting the entire state about their reasoning is their best path to successfully injecting every man, woman, and child with their experimental drug.
Nick Rolovich’s fight is one that affects millions who face or will be facing similar mandates that do not allow for religious exemptions. Defeating Governor Inslee in this battle is one of the most important fights for all who believe in medical and religious freedoms.
