Newsmax's Fleitz Denounces Investigation Into CIA Abuses As "Unnecessary" Topic: Newsmax
In a March 21 Newsmax column, Fred Fleitz is unhappy that Senate Democrats are still investigating CIA abuse allegations the Bush administration:
First, why in 2014 is Congress still investigating the Bush administration and preparing a $50 million, 4,200-page report on the enhanced interrogation program?
Waterboarding, the controversial technique of this program that led to numerous calls to end it, was last used in 2003. President Barack Obama shut down the enhanced interrogation program shortly after he was inaugurated. House Intelligence Committee Democrats completed their report on the enhanced interrogation program in 2010.
Shouldn't the Senate Intelligence Committee be using its resources to address the challenges of today and not alleged misdeeds by the Bush administration that took place 10 years ago? To borrow a Democratic phrase from the Clinton era, it's time to move on.
The fight over the Senate Intelligence Committee's report of the $50 million Bush-era enhanced interrogation report is distracting the CIA and the Senate Intelligence Committee from their work and recently caused the committee to cancel hearings on Syria and Iran.
It is imperative that Feinstein and the CIA quickly put this unnecessary partisan report behind them so they can focus on the serious security threats facing this country today instead of the problems and misdeeds of the last administration.
Fleitz did not say whether he considers current ongoing Republican investigations of the Obama administration to be "partisan" and "unnecessary."
WND's Unruh Censors Parents' Behavior In Child-Custody Case Topic: WorldNetDaily
Reporter-turned-stenographer Bob Unruh strikes again in a March 25 WorldNetDaily article citing only "a report from officials with Liberty Counsel" to relay a decision in a child custody battle involved a 15-year-old girl with medical problems, Justina Pelletier.
By "report," Unruh actually means "press release." That's right -- Unruh simply rewrote a press release. Unruh was so lazy on this story, in fact, that he couldn't even be bothered to obtain a copy of the judge's ruling.
Because Unruh simply rewrote a press release, many relevant details were omitted. Meanwhile, an actual news organization, the Boston Globe, reports what Unruh won't -- specifically, the abusive and counterproductive behavior of Pelletier's parents:
he judge’s four-page decision, which was provided to the Globe, was remarkable for its detail and forcefulness. Johnston faulted Connecticut’s child protection agency for its failure to get involved in a case involving a child from its state, and faulted Pelletier’s parents for their verbally abusive manner and haphazard decision-making that he says has sabotaged plans to move their daughter closer to home.
Johnston wrote that the parents called Boston Children’s Hospital personnel Nazis “and claimed the hospital was punishing and killing Justina. Efforts by hospital clinicians to work with the parents were futile and never went anywhere.”
More recently, he wrote, “there has not been any progress by the parents. Rather, the parents . . . continue to engage in very concerning conduct that does not give this court any confidence they will comply with conditions of custody.” He noted that because of allegations that Justina’s father, Lou Pelletier, threatened a state social worker assigned to the case, the worker had to be reassigned.
Johnston wrote that the parents had repeatedly “impeded progress” in resolving the case. “Instead of engaging in quality visits with Justina, the parents use profanity directed at MA DCF personnel in Justina’s presence,” he said. “There is absolutely no meaningful dialogue by the parents to work towards reunification.”
Back in December, the judge suspended a decision over permanent custody while hoping to broker a compromise. He appointed a court investigator to advise him and come up with possible solutions.
At a hearing in February, the judge wrote, the parents agreed to a deal where Justina would be moved to a Connecticut program under the temporary custody of that state’s child-protection agency. But a month later, through Staver, they informed another lawyer in the case that they would accept no state oversight and would agree only to their daughter’s returning home.
Previous efforts to find a residential treatment center for Justina in Connecticut have failed, largely due to the reluctance of many providers to get involved in a high-profile controversy. One facility in Connecticut that had tentatively agreed to accept Justina last year balked after her father threatened to sue it.
Why didn't Unruh tell his readers the rest of the story? Probably because of something else the Globe reported: "several conservative Christian organizations" have become involved in the issue, "seeing the case as an example of government interference in the sanctity of parental rights, and have instigated massive phone and letter-writing campaigns to the judge and other state officials."
CNS' Starr Still Pushing Myth That Plan B Causes Abortions Topic: CNSNews.com
Penny Starr writes in a March 25 CNSNews.com article:
In a conference call last week ahead of the Supreme Court hearing oral arguments on the lawsuits challenging the Affordable Care Act’s mandate that employers provide contraceptives to employees, including abortifacients, Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards said the owners of the corporations suing the government “wrongly believe that some birth control methods are a form of abortion.”
However, according to the packaging on Plan B “emergency contraceptive,” the information states: “This product works mainly by preventing ovulation (egg release). It may also prevent fertilization of a released egg (joining of sperm and egg) or attachment of a fertilized egg to the uterus (implantation).”
But as we documented the last time Starr claimed this, preventing implantation -- which, despite the package information, has not been documented that Plan B actually does -- does not equal abortion, which is medically defined as taking place after implantation. In fact, most fertilized eggs fail to implant, which means that most women have committed abortions by Starr's definition -- perhaps even Starr herself.
NEW ARTICLE: The Putin-Lovers At WorldNetDaily Topic: WorldNetDaily
From crackdowns on gays and dissent to invading Ukraine, WND's writers have found themselves a new favorite authoritarian dictator. Read more >>
MRC Channels Limbaugh, Goes Slut-Shaming On Birth Control Topic: Media Research Center
For a March 25 Media Research Center Culture & Media Insititute piece, Kristine Marsh channels the MRC's favorite slut-shamer, Rush Limbaugh:
Out: First Amendment protections guaranteeing religious liberty. Oh, and the right to free association. In: The inalienable right to have strangers pony up for your sex life.
Welcome to our new constitutional order, if some major American newspapers and left-leaning sites have their way.
If you'll recall, the MRC effectivelyendorsed Limbaugh's three-day tirade of misoygyny against Sandra Fluke -- in which he, among many other vile things, claimed that because Fluke argued for coverage of contraception, she "wants to be paid to have sex"-- to the point where it started an "I Stand With Rush" website.
Marsh seems to be unaware that there are legitimate medical reasons to take contraceptives that have nothing to do with birth control.
Not everyone agrees with the left-wing media, however. The Becket Fund, who’s representing The Greens, the owners of Hobby Lobby in their case against the Obama Administration, have argued:
“In Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby, 84 amicus briefs were filed – among the largest amicus efforts ever. By an almost three- to-one margin, these briefs favored Hobby Lobby, demonstrating the breadth and depth of support for the Green family, Hobby Lobby, and religious freedom.”
The number of amicus briefs has no relation whatsoever to the legal legitimacy of the views argued in them.
Colin Flaherty Race-Baiting Watch Topic: WorldNetDaily
America's favorite race-baiter, Colin Flaherty of WorldNetDaily, checks in:
Just when the Knockout Game is declared dead, a week of heightened bloodshed proves reports of its demise to be greatly exaggerated.
Five months after the New York Times said this spontaneous racial violence was an urban myth; four months after NPR admitted it happened once in a while but race had nothing to do with it; three months after CBS News said maybe it was happening after all; two months after a Philadelphia family court judge said racial violence exists because white people deserve it; and one month after CNN said the Knockout Game fad was over, victims and videos and witnesses and suspects just keep piling up.
Just in the last 10 days, there have been several reports, but many in the media still refuse to connect the dots and report the central organizing feature of the Knockout Game: The perpetrators are black. The victims are not.
Got that, folks? Black people are violent! They engage in "spontaneous racial violence"! They don't need any provocation whatsoever to be violent! And blacks are the only people ever to have perpetrated the knockout game!
MRC's Graham Resurrects Old Bashing of Iran-Contra Prosecutor Topic: NewsBusters
It's apparently "I Hate The '90s" week at the Media Research Center.
On the heels of baselessly attacking Anita Hill, Tim Graham uses a March 21 NewsBusters post to unleash a tirade against Iran-contra special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh, who died last week:
Iran-Contra special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh died Thursday at the age of 102. A quick quiz of the millennials around our office showed no one had the slightest idea who he was. A search of our network news/cable news database also turned up nothing in the last news cycle.
Here's how middle-aged conservative media critics remember Walsh: On the last Friday night before the 1992 election, Walsh indicted Reagan defense secretary Caspar Weinberger. President Bush was scheduled that night for a live sit-down on Larry King Live. CNN allowed then-Clinton campaign staffer George Stephanopoulos called in to fight with him about his alleged lying on Iran-Contra. That was dirty trick piled on dirty trick, as I wrote in my book Pattern of Deception.
Graham can sure hold a grudge, can't he? And this is from the same guy who was outraged that the media would dare examine what Mitt Romney did in high school.
WND Thinks We Care What Kathleen Willey Has To Say Topic: WorldNetDaily
Kathleen Willey is a professional victim with a history of telling tall tales in an attempt to extend the 15 minutes that clocked out on her when she accused Bill Clinton of sexually assaulting her. For WorldNetDaily -- where Clinton derangement is trumped only by Obama derangement and the truth doesn't really matter -- tall tales are good enough.
So WND is more than happy to grant Willey's request to cling to the spotlight by publishing her March 23 column filled with recycled Hillary-bashing. She complains that Hillary Clinton's "word means nothing," which is rich coming from a woman who has repeatedlyflip-flopped on the details of her purported Clinton encounters.
Willey concludes: "We have all become weary of the Clintons and their dysfunctional family drama. We deserve better." Coming from someone whose own dysfunctional family drama led her to beg WND readers to help pay off her house, the irony is almost painful.
WND, meanwhile, is all too willing to let Willey debase herself so it can feed off her Obama derangement -- though the nutritional value from that particular teat-sucking has long ago dissipated.
Mark Finkelstein writes in a March 20 NewsBusters post:
You're MSNBC. That hurts I know, but work with me. So, what would you like to feature: President Obama getting Putinized? Syria flouting the WMD agreement? Iran's inexorable march toward nukes? The ongoing Obamacare debacle?
Not so much. Say: why not make like CNN and go all in on MH-370? Which is precisely what Morning Joe did today. The first 103 minutes were devoted exclusively to the story of the missing plane, as an endless series of experts and panelists speculated to no particular avail.
Finkelstein is echoing right-wingers like those on Fox News who complain that there's some kind of conspiracy to report on the missingplane so they wouldn't have to report on negative things about Obama.
WND Editor's Hatchet Job on Valerie Jarrett Topic: WorldNetDaily
The latest issue of WorldNetDaily's Whistleblower Magazine is one long hatchet job on Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, and David Kupelian's essay on her encapsulates the smears.
Kupelian repeats his earlier denigration of President Obama as "a pathological narcissist with an absurdly grandiose view of yourself and almost no tolerance for criticism and disagreement" and further insults him by calling him "a mixed-race child abandoned by his drunk, bigamist, communist father, and who later also lost his Muslim Indonesian stepfather to divorce."
But the article is about Jarrett, and Kupelian saves most of his venom for her. He repeats WND's earlier libel of her as "the night stalker" -- thus likening her to notorious serial killer Richard Ramirez, whose "Night Stalker" moniker was devised by Kupelian's boss, Joseph Farah -- and even goes on to call her "Obama's Rasputin," adding, "we are confronted with another breed of out-of-touch czar."
Funny thing about Kupelian's diatribe, though -- none of the claims he makes about Jarrett can be traced to an on-the-record sources. Kupelian cites several writers who in turn cite unnamed or anonymous sources. Chief among them is Edward Klein, for whom Kupelian tries to construct a patina of legitimacy by describing him as a former "foreign editor of Newsweek and editor in chief of the New York Times Magazine." In fact, he's a right-winger who has written a hatchet job on Hillary Clinton and co-wrote an embarrassing self-published novel treating every crazy Obama conspiracy as fact.
By passing this screed off as some sort of investigative journalism, Kupelian is demonstrating why nobody believes WND.
MRC Wants You To Think Anita Hill Did It For The Money Topic: Media Research Center
Two decades later, the Media Research Center is still mad at Anita Hill.
Scott Whitlock devotes a March 19 MRC item to bashing a Hill appearance on ABC's "The View," grumbling that host Barbara Walters "allowed no tough questions of Hill, just queries about the "cost" of speaking out. " Whitlock then huffed:
A tough journalist might have pointed out that Hill has since written a book, become a professor at Brandeis University and has starred in a documentary. The book deal came with a reported $1 million payday. If the cost of the hearings on her life is fair game, what about Hill's enrichment?
Yes, Whitlock is suggesting that Hill came forward with her criticism of Clarence Thomas for "enrichment" purposes. Never mind that Hill has never changed her story over the years, nor has she been proven wrong.
Further, Hill's book on the Thomas hearings wasn't published until 1997 -- six years after her testimony -- which makes Whitlock's portrayal of her as someone trying to cash in on fame even more ridiculous.
In 2011, Whitlock ludicrously cited a 20-year-old poll to suggest that Hill was a liar. The MRC's Tim Graham has also baselessly portrayed Hill as a liar without providing any evidence to back it up.
That we have sadly become a nation of men and not of laws is best seen in the context of the legal challenges to the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to be president of the United States. Clearly, even if Obama were born in Hawaii and not Kenya to an anti-American, Muslim, anti-Semitic father – and his being born in the United States is doubtful given all that we know (see “Where’s the Real Birth Certificate?”) – he is not a natural born citizen – that is born to two citizen parents – as required by the U.S. Constitution.
Over the last five years, many court challenges have been filed concerning Obama’s eligibility. Indeed, I have filed three in Florida and one in Alabama. In every instance, and I am not just referencing the cases that I filed, these court challenges have been dismissed. (They are currently on appeal.) But what is more troubling than the dismissals is that the judges presiding over these cases have generally refused to even explain the reasons for their dismissals. Apparently, they are so afraid of taking on this issue that they don’t want to go on record for their actions. That is because these dismissals are not legally justified.
Klayman is lying when he claims that Constitution requires that a president be the child of "two citizen parents." As we've pointed out when he has told this lie before, the Constitution does not define "natural born citizen," and no American court has issued a definition.
Klayman is also lying about his court filings. As Dr. Conspiracy notes, the judges have, in fact, explained their reasoning, either in their rulings or in upheld rulings.
And because Klayman has been stricken with a particularly virulent strain of Obama derangement, he cannot help but libel and smear the president:
We cannot quit. The imposter in the White House must be held accountable, and he should indeed be told to get up off his knees and come out with his hands up.
The boy just can't help himself. He must lie and smear in order to make his own pathetic life (in which he threatens to sue anyone who tells the truth about him) have some sort of meaning. Yet despite his demonstrated incompetence, he remains WND's house lawyer. Sad, really.
NewsBusters Can't Stop Portraying Discrimination Against Gays As 'Religious Liberty' Topic: NewsBusters
Ken Shepherd grumbles in a March 21 NewsBusters post:
MSNBC is at it yet again, slandering conservatives wishing to protect the religious liberties of business owners as "anti-gay" bigots.
The latest example comes with the headline for Adam Serwer's March 21 story, "Georgia Republicans tack anti-gay amendments onto unrelated bills."
As we've pointedout when Shepherd and his Media Research Center buddies have previously advanced this idea, there's a good reason such "religious liberty" bills are seen -- and accurately portrayed -- as anti-gay: The impetus for introducing them was to keep business owners from being forced to do anything that could possibly be considered support for gay marriage, like baking a cake or taking photos, allowing to skirt federal public-accomodation mandates.
Shepherd has previously framed the anti-gay discrimination that such laws would make possible as a "free-market remedy."
One Hollywood marriage was so disastrous that when she (Ethel Merman) wrote her autobiography, she left the chapter about her marriage to him (Ernest Borgnine) completely blank!
Pretend I’m doing that now to President Obama’s speech of Friday, Feb. 28, about Russian troop movements against Ukraine. I was wildly excited when I heard he was going to speak. I could see no reason for him to speak at all except to interrupt his Niagara of flaccid, empty, even cowardly foreign policy speeches and get rough, tough and real for a change. What a loser! This was the most flaccid, empty and cowardly ever. Forget it. Pretend this is all blank space until now!
The Obama administration has without fail, since day one, stood in direct contradiction to what the president and his minions appear to be advocating.
For example, just last week, Time reported, “Obama looks to boost young minorities,” while behind the back of young minorities he advocates their eradication through Planned Parenthood (concerning the topic of abortion).
Despite this, Obama publicly puts on a front that he is “his brother’s keeper” and wants to protect America’s youth by educating them.
One of the many things Obama says that annoys me no end is when he makes reference to the international community and pretends, one, that it actually exists and, two, that it possesses moral authority. Until he got the house key to the White House, one could argue that whatever morality existed in the world was mainly possessed by the United States. But he has seen to it that when he said that America was no more exceptional than any other nation, he fully intended to prove it by transforming it in his own repulsive image.
One has to look no further than those who support this administration to find that Obama’s allies are America’s enemies, which by definition is treason.
For example, Obama enjoys support from Cuba, China, Russia (all of which are communist nations) and the Muslim Brotherhood, America’s sworn enemy. In fact, Obama has the audacity to entertain America’s sworn enemies right within the White House in Washington, D.C.
This administration stands guilty as charged. No debate, no argument and no compromise through corrupt deliberation and/or interpretations.
This president has already identified himself as an enemy of the Constitution of the United States by his intentions and actions, through which he has violated it time and time again.
Today, We the People are confronted by a tyrant far worse than Bill Clinton. Obama is a socialist who has shown disdain and enmity not just for the birthplace of Judaism and Christianity, Israel, but the Judeo-Christian heritage in general. He has attempted to further the interests of his ultra-leftist agenda at the expense of those he perceives are part of the rich white establishment, preferentially elevating “his people” over others who are not of his ilk and liking; turning upside down the discrimination he seeks to right for those dear to him.
In so doing, President Barack Hussein Obama has used every dirty and lawless trick in the book to try to achieve his distorted and perverse mission, giving rise to what he has coined and dismisses as “phony scandals.” And to thus far cover up these scandals, he and his minions have used the traditional means of which I speak to keep truth and justice from the American people.
The current occupant of the Oval Office seems to think that just because it works with his daughters, a time out is all it takes to make Putin toe the line. What Barack fails to grasp is that when Putin looks at his Obama Christmas card, he sees four females, not three, and he realizes that in a fight, Michelle is the only one he might have reason to worry about.
The White House says the president’s National Security Council has had almost daily meetings about the Ukrainian crisis, but it hasn’t said how many of those meetings had Obama in attendance. Of course, given modern technology, he can easily follow the action from the 17th tee at the Congressional Country Club golf course. Has “leading from behind” been replaced by hiding in the short rough?
Folks, it’s hard to take this man seriously as a “world leader,” and his approval rating has now fallen below 40 percent. Coming on top of the domestic policy disaster called Obamacare, this foreign-policy tailspin is undoubtedly contributing to the collapse of those poll numbers. Would you hire this man to run your pizza franchise?
I have a feeling even Barack Obama is surprised by how much he has been able to accomplish in tearing America down in less than six years. It’s because he had a lot of help before that six years began.
America was ripe for the taking.
But I’ll just bet he is surprised sometimes how easy it all was.
I have no doubt he wonders some days why he doesn’t have more real opposition – whether he is being set up.
But most days he is probably more inclined, as a narcissist and ego-maniac, to believe he’s invincible, a man of destiny, maybe even anointed by some force for a time such as this.
He may think he can do whatever he wants and get away with it.
Wouldn’t you think like that if you had lived his life?
You'd think that the MRC reports all news and doesn't ignore incidents that don't conform to its right-wing agenda. That, of course, would be wrong.
Case in point: The MRC has had a friendly relationship with Austin Ruse of the right-wing Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM). He has been a signatory to two MRC-circulated open letters -- one demanding that President Obama fire Harry Knox as a member of the Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships for alleged "anti-Catholic" remarks (which were actually just criticism of the Catholic Church's stance on homosexuality), and a letter to the broadcast networks demanding that they "stop censoring coverage of the trial of Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell."
Ruse has also been regularly quoted at CNSNews.com, opining on such issues as the United Nations and gender identity. So you'd think that if Ruse makes the news, it would be news to the MRC.
Earlier this month, while serving as guest host for fellow right-wing Sandy Rios' radio show, Ruse said that “the hard left, human-hating people that run modern universities” should “all be taken out and shot.” Ruse initially responded to criticism of his remarks by calling his critics “dumb,” “stupid” and “idiots.”
But then Ruse started feeling real heat: The American Family Association, which runs Rios' show, cut ties with him, and one Catholic leader resigned from C-FAM over the remarks. That prompted to issue a more abject apology, insisting that his death threat "was not intended to be taken literally" and hypocritically claiming that "I have dedicated my life and career to ending violence."
Despite this controversy, no MRC site has reported on it, not even its purported "news" organization, CNS.
Given that the MRC's first instinct when Rush Limbaugh went on a three-day misognystic tirade against Sandra Fluke was to start an "I Stand With Rush" website, this censorship really isn't a surprise. And given theprominence of Catholics such as Brent Bozell and Terry Jeffrey in running the MRC, their silence is nothing more than cowardice.