Have you ever noticed the preponderance of apologies that occurs only after the guilty party gets caught? Sure you have, as have we all. From politicians to the media to common criminals to public school systems to cheating partners to search engines named Google. Speaking of Google, this one’s a whopper.

Google’s most recent reason for pretending to apologize, as reported by the Washington Examiner, came as the result of a search result generated by a search for “Jew.” (Yep, the evil Jooos, again, folks.) And the offensive result of the search?

verb: bargain with someone in a miserly or petty way.

The word’s origin was “in reference to old stereotypes associating Jewish people with trading and money lending,” explained the search result, which was available on Google until Tuesday afternoon.

Google "apologized" for the "mistake." 🙄 pic.twitter.com/cS2GntaKBO

— MikesRight (@RealLibSmacker) December 28, 2022

Google of course apologized” for the “mistake” — sort of. “Our apologies,” Google Search Liaison Danny Sullivan tweeted.

Our apologies. Google licenses definitions from third-party dictionary experts. We only display offensive definitions by default if they are the main meaning of a term. As this is not the case here, we have blocked this & passed along feedback to the partner for further review.

Uh-huh, nonsense.

Our apologies. Google licenses definitions from third-party dictionary experts. We only display offensive definitions by default if they are the main meaning of a term. As this is not the case here, we have blocked this & passed along feedback to the partner for further review.

— Google SearchLiaison (@searchliaison) December 27, 2022

Let’s pretend we searched for the N-word. Does anyone not a leftist believe an offensive definition would’ve been displayed — “mistakenly,” of course — and only taken down after Google received complaints? The question is rhetorical — of course, not.

While we’re pretending, let’s also pretend Google really was caught unaware, for which it was genuinely apologetic. Shouldn’t the search engine giant be expected to do a better job vetting “third-party dictionary experts” before allowing their responses to display?

Finally, this question:

Given the innumerable cases that continue to emerge of Google, Facebook, and Twitter 1.0 suppressing or banning conservative content, all the while promoting the left’s agenda, is it unreasonable that the rational among us are skeptical of not only Google’s excuses but of its “apology,” as well?

Of course it’s not unreasonable, or will it be until (if) Big Tech proves it’s out of the left-wing-lapdog business.