RUSH: Yeah, we got an audio clip of Natasha Lennard, who is a stringer -- she's a freelancer -- for the New York Times, but she is an active and proud member of Occupy Wall Street. This is at BigGovernment.com, Andrew Breitbart's series of very effective websites. "A newly-discovered video -- filmed by Occupy Wall Street supporters themselves -- reveals that New York Times reporter Natasha Lennard is not merely covering the protests, but is also apparently taking part in planning and executing them. In the video, Lennard is seen participating as a featured speaker in a discussion among anarchists, communists, and other radicals as they examine the theory, strategy and tactics of the Occupy protests.
"Lennard, who has also written for Politico and Salon, is identified in the video by the panel’s moderator as a freelancer for the Times, and also as the Times reporter who was arrested along with seven hundred activists on the Brooklyn Bridge on Oct. 1. ... In the video of the panel discussion, Lennard reveals herself to be a passionate Occupy supporter, and appears to have personal knowledge of its planned future activities, including illegal occupations of banks in New York City."
We have just a little blurb here about 20 seconds back on October 14th. This was at the Blue Stockings bookstore during the panel discussion about Occupy Wall Street protests. This is Natasha Lennard, who's the freelancer for the New York Times, talking about their strategy.
LENNARD: Being an outright anti-authoritarian or an anarchist is not really something that people like to be live-streamed across the world with a f-king (bleeped) police pen around you. So there is a silencing that’s sort of gone on without much addressing, because to address it would be to out oneself.
RUSH: And we can't out ourselves because it would do great, great damage. We don't want to live-stream that we are anarchists or anti-authoritarians. We want to do this under the cover of darkness, so to speak. Now, the clip goes longer and longer. She rambles. She's incoherent in this thing. The lingo is so bizarre in some places it's tough to figure out what she's saying, but she ought to be removed from the New York Times, even though she's only a freelancer because she's allowed herself to become part of the story, obviously beyond biased. But that doesn't matter. I mean this is what it's come down to now. What do you think the odds the New York Times will stop using her still? I can't imagine.
Now, Breitbart sent me a note that says that the public editor at the New York Times is now looking into this, so we shall see. But what's the difference in what this babe does and any other mainstream reporter? They're all out there advancing the agenda of the regime to one degree or another.
This is from the New York Post: "Occupy Wall Street’s Finance Committee has nearly $500,000 in the bank, and donations continue to pour in -- but its reluctance to share the wealth with other protesters is fraying tempers." Yes, my friends, they've got a stash. They got 500 grand but they're not redistributing the money to all the protesters. That's right, the top 1% of the protesters have the money, and you know what they did with it? They put it in a bank. (gasping) They put it in a bank. Banks are what they are protesting. In fact, I'll bet it's even collecting interest in the bank. So with a half million dollars in the bank, isn't Occupy Wall Street part of the 1% now? Yeah.
"Some drummers -- incensed they got no money to replace or safeguard their drums after a midnight vandal destroyed their instruments Wednesday -- are threatening to splinter off." Are these people playing that Todd Rundgren song? "I don't want to work. I just want to bang on the drum all day"? That used to be a theme song for the Green Bay Packers. The Green Bay Packers score a touchdown two or three years ago, and that's what they played, "I don't want to work. I just want to bang on the drum all day." Well, I know, probably residents went down there and vandalized the drums because they're playing all night and keeping people awake.
One of the Occupy Wall Streeters said, "'F--k Finance. I hope Mayor Bloomberg gets an injunction and demands to see the movement’s books. We need to know how much money we really have and where it’s going,' said a frustrated Bryan Smith, 45, who joined OWS in Lower Manhattan nearly three weeks ago from Los Angeles, where he works in TV production." So it's hilarious, the things they are protesting are now happening within their own group. They got 500 grand, and it's not being distributed. It's not being divvied up equally among all the protesters. The organizers have put it in the bank.
This is the most fun and most telling article from over the weekend on this children's crusade known as Occupy Wall Street. They're putting their money in an evil bank, probably collecting interest. And with more than a half million dollars in the bank, aren't they now part of the evil 1%? Yeah, wait 'til they have to pay taxes on this. I'd like to see 'em open their books, too, you know, along with their protesters who are unhappy. Like who is going to pay the IRS the taxes on these $500,000 donations? And note, ladies and gentlemen, how these people could afford to buy their own underwear. Yeah. They'd rather beg on the street for new underwear than get a job, but they've got 500 grand, they could go out and buy their own sleeping bags now, they wouldn't have to make them. (interruption) I don't know how they've -- no, you wouldn't necessarily have to file as a corporation. You could file as a nonprofit. You could file just as an individual.
It might have been one guy went down there and opened an account or they could have a tax ID, they could go sub-S, they could go C Corp, they could go nonprofit. We don't know how they've organized themselves. But I'll lay you ten to one they've organized themselves in such a way as to have to pay as little in taxes as possible. You want to bet on that? You want to bet these people are not lining up and signing up for the 35% bracket? No, these people are gonna be part of the same crowd not paying their fair share. What they did it, they had the 500 grand, they have splurged. The story in the New York Post points out that they've splurged, they bought a flat screen TV and popcorn for their pajama party movie nights. (interruption) They didn't knit their own flat screen TV. They bought it from a corporation.
They bought it from a store, which sells the TV. The store bought it from the corporation that makes the TV. And now they're gonna show movies from corporations on the flat screen TV that was made by a corporation and sold by another corporation. Maybe they're just gonna play Michael Moore anti-capitalism documentaries or something. But the funny thing is they're squabbling now over money that was given to them, there's vandalism taking place, their drums have been destroyed. And of course they're whining and crying and they want everybody else to do something for them. They're squabbling over money that was given to them. Imagine how angry they would be if they had worked for this money.