The left-wing elites and their running dogs in the enemedia are in one of their fictional publicity campaigns that they masquerade as urgent news. Their latest terror is “fake news sites.”

The New York Times reported shortly after the election that Google and Facebook “have faced mounting criticism over how fake news on their sites may have influenced the presidential election’s outcome.”

That was fake news in itself: “fake news” didn’t influence the presidential election’s outcome, all too real news about the wrong direction in which our nation was headed under Barack Obama did. Nevertheless, the Times said that “those companies responded by making it clear that they would not tolerate such misinformation by taking pointed aim at fake news sites’ revenue sources.”

How would they do that? “Google kicked off the action on Monday afternoon when the Silicon Valley search giant said it would ban websites that peddle fake news from using its online advertising service. Hours later, Facebook, the social network, updated the language in its Facebook Audience Network policy, which already says it will not display ads in sites that show misleading or illegal content, to include fake news sites.”

A Facebook spokesman explained: “We have updated the policy to explicitly clarify that this applies to fake news. Our team will continue to closely vet all prospective publishers and monitor existing ones to ensure compliance.”

The “fake news” controversy has become a huge international story, with the Los Angeles Times among those leading the charge with headlines such as “Want to keep fake news out of your newsfeed? College professor creates list of sites to avoid”; “Fake news writers: ‘Hillary Clinton, here are your deplorables’”; and “Fake news writers abuse the 1st Amendment and endanger democracy for personal profit.”

There is conspiracy theory and there is conspiracy fact, and what we have on our hands is one mother of a left-wing conspiracy parading as a right wing conspiracy. You can’t make this stuff up. It’s diabolical. In the run-up to the election, I reported on a number of fake conservative new sites created by left-wing operatives in order to discredit the conservatives’ news sites. If you have a bogus conservative site, it makes a conservative site look questionable. “News sites” like the Baltimore Gazette and the National Report were dropping hoaxes for months to discredit conservatives who might pick up the story.

I always understood that the objective was to taint the conservative newssphere. Sites were created to spread disinformation and shame the right-wingers who jumped on it. This is classic disinformation. It’s always games, games, games… from the people who brought you Soros’ rent-a-mob — rioting, looting and destruction in cities, etc. even going so far as to risk a few deaths all for the cause. But what I didn’t see coming is their ultimate goal: the shut-down of free speech. The left wants to crush free speech, which has been in their cross-hairs for some time now.

The left is always preaching about true democracy, but they seize power as fast and as ruthlessly as they can. And they’re always harping about “controversial” matters that either don’t exist or are fabricated, or are of little import.

If a blogger or news writer gets a story wrong, does that designate him or her, or his or her site, as “fake news”? If that’s the case, they’ll have to shut down the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Boston Globe, ABC News, NBC News, CBS News, CNN, etc. They get things wrong all the time. Every article written about my colleagues, my work, or myself is fake. Most of what they wrote and didn’t write about the Orlando mass slaughter at the gay nightclub was disinformation and deception.

If you issue a correction, does that somehow remove the fake news scarlet letter? This is all a big fat lie — it is an end-run around the First Amendment, and it’s disastrous. It is indeed true that Facebook has too much power, but banning “fake news” sites is hardly the solution. That’s Zuckerberg’s fix-it? It would be funny if it weren’t so Hitlerian. Facebook has too much power. Its news curators, mini-Goebbelians — are more frightening than Kafka’s antagonists. Facebook should be broken up like Ma Bell was. Facebook doesn’t decide what’s good and what’s forbidden. Left-wing fascists do not and must not decide what news people can and cannot see. But that’s exactly what we are seeing on Facebook.