ConWebBlog: The Weblog of ConWebWatch

your New Media watchdog

ConWebWatch: home | archive/search | about | primer | shop

Wednesday, May 20, 2015
When Klayman Is Losing, He Smears Judges
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Whenever Larry Klayman doesn't get his way in the courtroom -- which is frequently given how terrible a lawyer he is -- he throws temper tantrums at the judges who rule against him, typically hurling personal insults at them. He does this yet again in his May 15 WorldNetDaily column.

Klayman starts off in his usual style by continuing his two-decade-old grudge against judge William Keller, whom he slanders as "both a drunk and an anti-Semite, among other vices and prejudices," whining that he "had fined me $25,000 for standing up for my clients and moving to disqualify him from the case."

As you'd expect, Klayman is hiding the truth about what happened. As the appellate court ruling upholding the sanctions against Klayman detail, Keller was more than justified in issuing them. noting that Klayman was "failing to provide advanced written notice of the prior art appellants intended to use during trial, as required by 35 U.S.C. § 282;  failing to have [his client] appear in court on the appointed day after the trial court had granted an extension of time to allow for [his client's] travel from Taiwan and preparation by counsel;  and lodging a late request for a jury trial on the patent issues in the case after admittedly waiving a jury trial for such issues at a pretrial status conference," not to mention "Mr. Klayman's practice of continuing to speak after the trial judge requested silence." As a result, Keller barred Klayman from representing anyone in his courtroom ever again. The ruling also notes that Klayman "rejected an opportunity to have a magistrate judge rather than Judge Keller try the case" because he felt Keller had "a good sense of humor. That's important."

Regarding Klayman's unsubstantiated anti-Semitism smear against Keller, the ruling notes that Klayman did not carry "the heavy burden necessary to substantiate" his claim during his appeal, and   that Klayman built his bias case against Keller "largely on sources entirely unrelated to the proceedings" due to his refusal to pay for a transcript of the court proceedings in question. The appeals court called Klayman's refusal to spring for acopy of the trial transcript, even to help his own case, "poor practice," which tells us that Klayman has been a terrible lawyer for a very long time.

Anyway, back to the matter at hand. Klayman's newest anti-judge tirade is against G. Murray Snow, who's presiding over a case involving Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whom Klayman is representing. Klayman calls Snow "unethical, unhinged and rabid," even though he can much more easily apply those words to himself. Klayman rants:

You see, Judge Snow is the federal judge who has been conducting a civil and potentially criminal contempt proceeding against “America’s sheriff,” Joe Arpaio, of Maricopa County, Arizona. Arpaio had been accused by none other than the ultra-leftist, communist-inspired group the ACLU of violating Snow’s order in a civil suit enjoining Arpaio and his office from ethnically profiling (illegal) immigrants at places like day-worker sites. Importantly, during the course of the contempt proceeding, it was reported that Judge Snow’s wife had said to her friends at a public restaurant that her husband was going to use the case to destroy Sheriff Arpaio to prevent him from being re-elected.

These statements are now confirmed. Despite his conflict of interest and obvious prejudice against Sheriff Arpaio, just in the last week or so, during the course of the trial, Judge Snow called the sheriff to the witness stand and, asking leading questions, interrogated him and later his chief deputy, Jerry Sheridan, about investigating the judge over his wife’s prejudicial comments. Judge Snow was thus strategically using a judicial proceeding upon which he was presiding, for his own personal reasons, to cover up the admissions made by his wife, unethically creating a clear conflict of interest. As bad, during the course of the questioning, Snow used the opportunity to go off on an irrelevant witch-hunt regarding what the sheriff and his deputies were allegedly doing with informant Dennis Montgomery, also my client. Montgomery is a whistleblower who has the goods on illegal surveillance by the NSA and CIA.

The Phoenix New Times, an ultra-left pro-illegal-immigrant rag – which hates Sheriff Arpaio because he is conservative and opposes illegal immigration – had published defamatory postings claiming that Montgomery was assisting Arpaio in investigating Judge Snow. While this was false, Judge Snow used this Internet rag to then justify his ordering up the production of all documents from the sheriff’s office concerning Montgomery. Of course, Montgomery has nothing to do with the reason for the contempt trial, which is over the ACLU’s charges of the sheriff violating a court order prohibiting profiling. The judge then ordered the ACLU’s lawyers and other counsel to contact the CIA about the sheriff and Montgomery, falsely attempting to implicate them in wrongdoing with the federal government.

Klayman lacks the guts to link to the Phoenix New Times articles in question. It's unclear where Klayman gets his claim that it reported Montgomery investigated Snow; a June 2014 article exposed Montomery's links to Arpaio but states only that Montgomery "convinced Arapio of this paranoid fantasy" that Snow was out to get him.

And far from being "a whistleblower who has the goods on illegal surveillance by the NSA and CIA," Montgomery is a notorious scammer. That New Times article reported how Montgomery "snookered the CIA, the White House, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Air Force into believing he had software that could decode secret messages to terrorists, supposedly embedded in broadcasts of the Al Jazeera Media Network." It was a lie, but it was not discovered until after Montgomery's firm had acquired multi-million-dollar contracts with the government.

And as Dr. Conspiracy notes, Montgomery has also been feeding information to Arpaio's "cold case posse" on Obama's "eligibility," resulting in allegedly "earth shattering" information that the posse has yet to release.

While Klayman rails against Snow's questioning of Arpaio, the one thing he can't do is claim it was illegal, because it wasn't. And as the New Times detailed, it did expose that Arpaio had an attorney secretly investigate Snow's wife, and also exposed the extent to which Montgomery is involved with Arpaio's office. These are things Klayman, as Arpaio's attorney, would presumably would not want to have made public.

If the New Times got any information wrong, it's because Klayman's client refused to tell the truth, not because it's an "Internet rag."

Klayman then declared his intention to follow in Arpaiio's footsteps and harrass the judge for showing him up:

I am not finished using the legal system to remove this scourge of a federal judge. In the end, he undoubtedly will not only be forced to get off the case, but will be a top candidate for impeachment. In this regard, an ethics complaint, which Montgomery was forced to file, is also pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit and is being sent to the House Judiciary Committee, which oversees impeachment of federal judges.

Judges and the courts can be our most important public servants. If they do their job ethically, they can protect us from the tyranny of the other two branches of government. But when they act in an unethical and illegal fashion, as Judge Snow has in trying to destroy a fine law enforcement official like Sheriff Arpaio and a courageous whistleblower like Dennis Montgomery, they are the biggest current threat (along with President Barack Hussein Obama, himself, who not coincidentally was behind the initial federal investigation of the sheriff along with his comrades at the ACLU) to a healthy and functioning constitutional republic!

Klayman apparently still hasn't learned the lesson that the system also has recourse against attorneys who abuse the system and file frivolous lawsuits.

Indeed, WND, publisher of Klayman's column and user of Klayman's so-called legal services in the past, is apparently so tired of Klayman's incompetence that it went with Judicial Watch -- the organization Klayman founded and left, and then sued --  to sue the government for documents in the Miriam Carey case.

That's gotta hurt, but Klayman brought it on himself with his incompetence and his serial judge-smearing.


Posted by Terry K. at 7:08 PM EDT
Tuesday, May 19, 2015
CNS-Mark Levin (Paid) Lovefest Watch
Topic: CNSNews.com

You'd think that with all the squawking the Media Research Center has done about George Stephanopoulos' conflict of interest that it would be more forthcoming (or simply forthcoming, period) about its own conflicts of interest -- like its cross-promotional business relationship with right-wing radio host Mark Levin -- particularly at its "news" division, CNSNews.com.

Well, you'd be wrong. A May 14 CNS blog post by Levin fanboy Michael Morris reads like a press release, touting how Levin "continues to gain syndication steam" and lists the new stations broadcasting his radio show. Morris fawningly notes that Sean Hannity has dubbed Levin "The Great One."

Needless to say, Morris makes no mention of Levin's business deal with the MRC.

And in an apparent bid to keep his fanboy status up-to-date, Morris wrote a May 15 post transcribing Levin's comments on Stephanopoulos' conflict of interest -- which, ironically, again fails to mention his employer's conflict of interest with Levin but does note that Levin mentioned the "Media Research Center’s wonderful NewsBusters."

Apparently, the MRC wants to make its attacks on Stephanopoulos as hypocritical as possible.


Posted by Terry K. at 10:48 PM EDT
Monday, May 18, 2015
MRC Rides Stephanopoulos Controversy To Boost Anti-Hillary Book
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center has been getting a lot of mileage out of the revelation that ABC's George Stephanopoulos donated $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation; one fundraising email declared Stephanopoulos "corrupt" while begging for money. As Paul Waldman at the Washington Post pointed out, Stephanopoulos' conflict of interest plays into conservatives' anti-media agenda, and that "From now through next November, conservatives will claim that every story that reflects poorly on Hillary Clinton is just accurate reporting, while every story that reflects well on her (or poorly on Republicans) demonstrates the media’s pernicious liberal pro-Clinton bias."

To do all that, of course, the MRC has to studiously ignore all the times that Fox News personalities advocated for causes they had personal or financial connections to, as well as all the conservatives who have donated to the Clinton Foundation, like Newsmax's Christopher Ruddy.

The MRC's anti-Stephanopoulos propaganda campaign extends to its "news"division, where a a May 15 article by Susan Jones quotes Peter Schweizer, author of an anti-Hillary attack book, wanting a do-over on his interview with Stephanopoulos. Jones claimed that during the interview, "Stephanopoulos repeatedly questioned the accuracy of 'Clinton Cash,' insisted that there was no evidence of criminality on the part of the Clintons, and suggested that Schweizer was conducting a partisan attack."

But as we noted, Schweizer admitted during his interview with Stephanopoulos that he had no evidence to back up the allegations in his book.

Jones doesn't mention that the accuracy of Schweizer's book has been justifiably question because it does, in fact, contain numerous errors -- more than 20, according to one count. The fact that several of those inaccurate claims have been corrected or deleted in an e-book version would seem to be an admission of guilt on that count.

Further, Schweizer is on record as apparently lying about his purported bipartisanship. After Schweizer claimed that he was working on something about the finances of Jeb Bush, his publisher denied that any book by Schweizer about Bush similar to "Clinton Cash" was in the offing. Further, the think tank Schweizer runs, the Government Accountability Institute, has funding ties with the Koch brothers and right-wing billionaire Robert Mercer, who you might remember as the sugar daddy financing the increasingly quixotic campaigns by Oregon right-winger Art Robinson for Peter DeFazio's congressional seat (the other main booster of which has been WorldNetDaily managing editor David Kupelian). 

So, yeah, Schweizer is an inaccurate reporter driven by partisanship. But the MRC doesn't want you to know that.


Posted by Terry K. at 7:51 PM EDT
Sunday, May 17, 2015
CNS Anti-Gay Watch
Topic: CNSNews.com

On a day designed to fight homophobia, the notoriously homophobic CNSNews.com is determined to perpetuate it.

A May 16 CNS article notes that President is marking the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia. Look at the picture CNS chose to illustrate the article with:

Apparently, CNS believes all gays dress scantily and march down streets in parades, since it considers this photo to be representative of all gays and transgenders.

As per usual in such CNS articles, the comment thread is thousands of comments long and filled to the brim with anti-gay attacks -- which seems to be the entire point of posting such an article.


Posted by Terry K. at 9:09 PM EDT
Updated: Sunday, May 17, 2015 9:12 PM EDT
WND Columnist Takes Coolidge Out of Context
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Bill Federer has a thing he does called the "American Minute," which his website tells us is "broadcast daily across America and by the Internet." WorldNetDaily republishes his "American Minute" things, which is why we have gotten involved.

Federer's May 15 "American Minute," as republished at WND, begins this way:

President Calvin Coolidge warned in a speech given May 15, 1926, at the College of William and Mary, in Williamsburg, Virginia: “But there is another … recent development … the greatly disproportionate influence of organized minorities. Artificial propaganda, paid agitators, selfish interests, all impinge upon members of legislative bodies to force them to represent special elements rather than the great body of their constituency. When they are successful, minority rule is established. … The result is an extravagance on the part of the Government which is ruinous to the people and a multiplicity of regulations and restrictions for the conduct of all kinds of necessary business, which becomes little less than oppressive. …”

All those ellipses should set off warning bells that something is being left out. Indeed, if you look at Coolidge's original speech, you'll find what that is:

But there is another element of recent development. Direct primaries and direct elections bring to bear upon the political fortunes of public officials the greatly disproportionate influence of organized minorities. Artificial propaganda, paid agitators, selfish interests, all impinge upon members of legislative bodies to force them to represent special elements rather than the great body of their constituency. When they are successful minority rules is established, and the result is an extravagance on the part of the Government which is ruinous to the people and a multiplicity of regulations and restrictions for the conduct of all kinds of necessary business, which becomes little less than oppressive. Not only is this one country, but we must keep all its different parts in harmony by refusing to adopt legislation which is not for the general welfare.

So Coolidge is actually specifically referring to "direct primaries and direct elections" as resulting in "paid agitators," not making some sort of sweeping statement. But what does that mean?

The 1926 book "American Labor and American Democracy" provides some context, explaining that Coolidge is actually railing against the direct election of U.S. senators, enacted a decade earlier, and the practice of allowing voters to select party candidates in a primary election instead of party officials doing it.

In other words, Coolidge is complaining about the effects of what he saw as too much democracy -- as if letting party officials or state legislatures control the process was ever free of propaganda, paid agitators, and selfish interests. And WND itself is nothing if not a font of artificial propaganda, paid agitators, and selfish interests.

You can see why Federer edited all that stuff out about taking away the voice of voters and insisting that a small cadre of party officials knows better than the general public.


Posted by Terry K. at 12:10 AM EDT
Friday, May 15, 2015
CNS Just Can't Stop Bashing John Holdren
Topic: CNSNews.com

For years, CNSNews.com has been bizarrely obsessed with Obama administration science adviser John Holdren, plucking 40-year-old quotes out of context in order to attack him as an extremist. CNS editor in chief Terry Jeffrey -- apparently feeling it's been way too long since he's bashed Holdren -- resumes his jihad once more in his May 13 column, desperatelhy stretching to claim that Albert Einstein has proven Holdren's 40-year-old questions about sustainability wrong. Because you cannot see all the stars in the sky as Einstein claimed, Jeffrey theorizes that this somehow also means the Earth is infinitely sustainable:

Would it have been better, as Obama's future science adviser argued, to halt such net additional human beings from coming into existence in the first place?

Did God truly fail to provide sufficient material resources for the human beings He created and to whom He gave sovereignty over the material world?

The answer to the second question is found in the stars above: We cannot count them all yet, let alone survey them, so we have no idea how vast are the material resources our Creator has put within our potential reach.

The answer to the former question is found by looking back across the extraordinary and sometimes unanticipated improvements in the material well-being of the human race that have occurred just since Obama's science adviser called for inducing "the United States government to assume its responsibility to halt the growth of the American population."

Jeffrey seems to have missed the famines throughout history (Somalia, for example) that were at least in part the result of insufficient material resources for a given area.

Jeffrey has been so obessed with Holdren's purported views from 40 years ago -- from books he co-authored that may or may not reflect his actual views -- that he nor anyone else at CNS has ever bothered to ask Holdren in a thoughtful manner about whether he still holds those views. Instead, CNS cared only about ambushing Holdren with gotcha questions -- something that generates lots of clicks to the CNS website but does nothing for journalism or civilized debate.

But then, getting clicks and attacking anyone who doesn't adhere to the Media Research Center's right-wing views -- not engaging in journalism or civilized debate -- is how CNS rolls.


Posted by Terry K. at 8:15 PM EDT
Thursday, May 14, 2015
Obama Derangement Syndrome Watch, Erik Rush 'First Sasquatch' Edition
Topic: WorldNetDaily

The president has been catching flak for having honored Freddie Gray by sending three White House representatives to his funeral, and similarly honoring Michael Brown last year, while neglecting to send anyone to the funerals of several police officers killed in the line of duty in recent months. One would have to be profoundly gullible to believe that these instances of “careless disregard” were oversights.

So, the White House loves thugs, hates cops, and no one seems to care. What else is new, right?

Well, now I’m wondering precisely what the Obama White House working protocol is relating to these funerals: Is it four White House representatives if you were a real bada– black thug, three if you were an “average” black thug, maybe two for a dead white thug of some repute, one for a black cop, whereas white cops slain in the line of duty get nothing?

[...]

I’ll have to admit that First Sasquatch Michelle Obama outdid her husband concerning racialist gaffes in one fell swoop over the weekend, when she bloviated at length before a lectern at Tuskegee University. Her so-called commencement address was largely a stream of self-pitying, self-righteous, bitter, paranoid racialist propaganda.

-- Erik Rush, May 13 WorldNetDaily column


Posted by Terry K. at 7:04 PM EDT
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
The MRC's 'Affirmative Action' Hypocrisy
Topic: Media Research Center

Last week, the Media Research Center's Ken Shepherd got all huffy when MSNBC pundit Michelle Bernard "savaged newly-announced GOP presidential aspirant Dr. Ben Carson tonight by alleging his success is all owed to 'affirmative action.'"

Fast forward to this week, when Fox News guest Angela McGlowan asserted that Michelle Obama owed her entry into Princeton and her job at a prestigious law firm to "affirmative action." 

The reaction from Shepherd and the MRC? Crickets.

If Shepherd and the MRC want to be taken seriously as an actual media watchdog, they might want to try being offended at all baseless attacks on blacks instead of just the ones on conservatives.


Posted by Terry K. at 9:43 PM EDT
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
WND Whitewashes Another Troubled Homeschool Family
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily has a sad tradition of defending homeschoolers no matter how horrible and dysfunctional they are, and of hiding the reality of that horribleness from its readers.

That tradition continues in a May 10 WND article by Leo Hohmann, who does his whitewashing best to kick things off:

A homeschooling couple was arrested and had all 10 of their children taken by the state Thursday after a local sheriff acted on a tip about alleged poor living conditions at their 26-acre homestead where they live “off the grid.”

The Naugler family lives a “back to basics” lifestyle that few would choose, but it makes them happy, says a family friend. The couple has been married almost 20 years and are expecting their 11th child in four months. They have six dogs, two cats and a few farm animals on their “Blessed Little Homestead” in rural southwest Kentucky, according to their Facebook site.

But the Breckinridge County Sheriff’s Office has charged homeschool dad Joe Naugler with the misdemeanor crime of “menacing” and child welfare agents are investigating allegations of unfit living conditions for the couple’s children.

Hohmann then ups the drama:

Sheriff Todd Pate showed up at the homestead Wednesday evening with at least one other deputy. When Naugler’s wife, Nicole, saw the police cars she got in her vehicle and drove off with her two oldest sons. The other eight children were off site with their dad. Nicole, who is five months pregnant, was stopped not far from the homestead and reported being slammed belly-first against the police cruiser. She suffered bruises to both arms, according to her account and photos placed on the family’s Facebook page.

[...]

Sheriff Todd Pate showed up at the homestead Wednesday evening with at least one other deputy. When Naugler’s wife, Nicole, saw the police cars she got in her vehicle and drove off with her two oldest sons. The other eight children were off site with their dad. Nicole, who is five months pregnant, was stopped not far from the homestead and reported being slammed belly-first against the police cruiser. She suffered bruises to both arms, according to her account and photos placed on the family’s Facebook page.

Hohmann leaves out the part where audio recordings show that Nicole Naugler did, in fact, resist arrest, ultimately resulting the woman daring police to shoot her.

Hohmann then does his best to romanticize the Naugler's "off-the-grid" lifestyle:

The family’s Facebook page, shows a small, wood-frame shack of 280 square feet with an extended porch area covered by a tarp. They have a generator for power and are in the process of seeking donated materials to enlarge the wood cabin, according to their Facebook site.

A family friend, Pace Ellsworth, told WND the Nauglers and their 10 children were a happy family that chose to live outside of modern systems.

The family subscribed to a method of homeschooling called “unschooling” in which children learn through experience rather than from textbooks and they focus on subjects that interest them.
“They chose to live off grid and chose to live as homeschoolers with no curriculum, and they just chose to live that way and to have their children have a more eclectic experience, a way of life that most people don’t experience anymore,” Ellsworth said. “It’s become sort of a thing in the world to go off grid. And going off grid doesn’t mean Davy Crockett anymore, it means having solar panels, or a wind farm and having a little more freedom, more freedom as opposed to living with a corporation, or the state.”

The Nauglers’ tiny cabin has no running water. They use an outhouse with a latrine and have a working septic system, Ellsworth said. They cook on a wood stove.

Hohmann doesn't mention the implications of two parents and 10 children living in a shack of a mere 280 square feet. Also, the facts are a little different than the story Hohmann tells.

The Nauglers posted the state Child Protective Services report to their Facebook page (which seems to belie the whole off-the-grid thing), and it reports questionable aspects of the Nauglers' poperty -- “numerous piles of garbage, broken glass and nails were also scattered about the property,” while the family lived in “two makeshift tents,” and a shed (also of the “makeshift” variety) housed several animals; the report also noted that the property had no running water or septic system.

Hohmann also didn't report the fact that, as Nicole Naugler admitted on Facebook, at least some of her children don't have birth certificates or Social Security numbers.

Hohmann also ignored the fact that even other homeschoolers disapprove of the Nauglers' lifestyle. Raw Story highlighted one homeschooling parent writing, "I home school my children, (and) my children are taught the things they need to know to be successful. What the Naugler’s (sic) do is simply call it home schooling when in fact they are too lazy to actually home school them.”

It appears  Hohmann is either a lazy reporter who can't be bothered to seek all the facts before reporting a story, or he knows the facts but is dishonestly hiding those inconvenient to the Nauglers and WND's homeschooling agenda.

Consider this just another reason why nobody believes WND.


Posted by Terry K. at 10:29 PM EDT
Sunday, May 10, 2015
WND's Klayman Likens McCain To His North Vietnamese Captors
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Oh, Larry Klayman. It's a good thing nobody takes you or your publisher, WorldNetDaily, seriously these days, or otherwise someone would care about the enormously stupid thing you said about John McCain in your May 8 WND column about Republicans who support NSA metadata collection:

It is thus clear that the problem today is not just the self-described Emperor Obama, who like King George III, governs by executive fiat and not the will of the people, but also those establishment Republican leaders, like McCain, Graham, Rubio, Christie and other lackies of omni-powerful government who believe in the words of their now-deceased soul brother, Alexander Hamilton, that the people are a great beast. These disgraceful and compromised politicians think that they can decide for the rest of us what is necessary and right – in this case wholesale violation of privacy rights in what Judge Leon calls in his 2013 order “almost Orwellian.” (See www.freedomwatchusa.org.)

Well, I have news for McCain and the establishment wing of the Republican Party: If he thinks that what the NSA (and also the CIA) have been doing is peachy keen, then perhaps he has more kinship to Ho Chi Minh and the senator’s dictatorial former North Vietnamese jailers at the Hanoi Hilton than our Founding Fathers.

But since you are a failed lawyer associated with an extremist website with no credibility, you will continue to be ignored. As you should be.


Posted by Terry K. at 9:11 PM EDT
CNS Unemployment Numbers Distortion Watch
Topic: CNSNews.com

The April unemployment numbers were good enough that CNSNews.com's Ali Meyer had to at least acknowledge them before burying them in cherry-picked bad news, as is the CNS mandate.

Meyer's May 8 CNS article grumbled that "The unemployment rate dropped from 5.5 percent in March to 5.4 percent in April even as the number of people in the labor force increased from 156,906,000 to 157,072,000 and the labor force participation rate increased from 62.7 percent to 62.8 percent."

Mayer complained that unemployment rates for blacks "showed little or no change in April," but she's downplaying the situation. In fact, black unemployment dropped 0.5 percent, falling under 10 percent for the first time in nearly seven years.

Even though CNS has previously highlighted higher African American unemployment rates, this decrease did not merit its own article from Meyer. Instead, she cherry-picked a different number more favorable to CNS' anti-Obama agenda and dedicated an entire article to how "A record 56,167,000 women, age 16 years and over, were not in the labor force in April."

Just another reminder that CNS isn't really into "news" -- it has fully become the propaganda arm of the Media Research Center.


Posted by Terry K. at 12:07 AM EDT
Friday, May 8, 2015
CNS' Chapman Finds A Franklin Graham Utterance He Won't Repeat
Topic: CNSNews.com

We've documented how CNSNews.com managing editor Michael Chapman has a peculiar obsession with documenting every last word right-wing evangelical Franklin Graham says. But it turns out Chapman's fixation with Graham has its limits -- when his words conflict with the agenda of Chapman's employer.

On the May 6 edition of "Fox & Friends," Graham denounced the Muhamma-cartoon exhibit in Texas where two would-be gunmen were killed, saying the attendees "were wrong" to mock Muslims:

"As a Christian, I don’t like it when people mock my Lord and savior, Jesus Christ, and what this event in Garland, Texas, was doing was mocking the Muslims. And I disagree with Islam, I don’t believe in Islam, but I’m not going to mock them and make fun of them," Graham said on "Fox and Friends."

Graham said that the cartoon contest, organized by Pam Geller's anti-Islam group, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, was offensive.

"I’m discouraged that people would do this. We live in a society now where there’s no civility, there’s no respect, we don’t honor people who have differences. We only attack each other. And so I agree that the folks in Garland, Texas, were wrong," he said. "They had the right to speak. I have free speech, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to go around and cuss people just because I have the freedom to do that."

He later added that even though he did not approve of the event, responding with violence was "wrong."

Even though Chapman has devoted dozens of articles in the past several months to Graham's various utterings over the past several months, he has yet to report this one, according to his article archive

Why? Presumably because  it runs counter to the expressed agenda of the Media Resarch Center, which own CNS, to support Geller.

The same day Graham made his remarks, CNS published a column by Chapman's boss, Brent Bozell, and Tim Graham expressing their support for the "exercise of free speech" at the Muhammad cartoon contest, insisting that while it was "provocative... it wasn't meant to result in two Islamic extremists showing up with assault rifles."

They don't know that, of course; it's entirely possible Geller wanted to provoke a violent response in order to  justify her anti-Muslim agenda. Instead, Bozell and Graham complain that some in the media described Geller as "relentlessly shrill and coarse in her broad-brush denunciations of Islam." They don't dispute the accuracy of the claim, however.

Bozell and Graham go on to blame the Southern Poverty Law Center for an "assassin using their "hate map" to go to FRC's building and open fire, seriously wounding a security guard, with the intent to kill as many staff as possible, before being subdued." They add: "The leftist media know that. And still use SPLC as their source."

Funny, we don't recall Bozell or Graham running away from the anti-abortion group Operation Rescue after Scott Roeder had contacts with the group and later murdered abortion doctor George Tiller. In fact, the MRC has pretended there was no link at all between Roeder and the anti-abortion movement, and Bozell himself effectively endorsed Tiller's murder, calling him "a monster who personally murdered 60,000 babies."

If the MRC can't be bothered to unequivocally denounce a group for its links to a murder, Chapman certainly isn't going to challenge that sort of agenda.

UPDATE: Chapman added a post quoting Graham bashing ISIS. He's still ignoring Graham's statement denouncing Geller.


Posted by Terry K. at 10:24 AM EDT
Updated: Friday, May 8, 2015 10:08 PM EDT
Thursday, May 7, 2015
WND Columnist Pushes Obama-Baltimore Conspiracy Theory
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Remember how WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah was nattering on about how his website employs "the most rigorous standards of fact-checking, multiple sourcing, the seeking out of primary sources and old-fashioned reporting and editing techniques," despite all the evidence WND does the exact opposite?

There is no evidence that WND columnist Morgan Brittany employed any of the rigorous standards Farah purports to advocate to come to her conclusion in her May 5 column that the unrest in Baltimore is part of President Obama's grand plan to institute martial law and cancel the 2016 elections:

Ever since the election of Barack Obama, racial tensions have ramped up. He was supposed to be the one to unite all Americans and heal the divide, but instead, he did everything he could to turn the heat up and make sure the divide became wider. He surrounded himself with racially divisive people in his administration like Attorney General Eric Holder. He inserted himself into every controversy that had a racial component, like the incident in July of 2009 with the Cambridge police, the Trayvon Martin case, Ferguson and more. And whether right or wrong, even before evidence was presented, he always took the side of the African-American. It became obvious that his concern was not for all Americans but a select few. In an attempt to show “African-Americans” that he cared, he instead succeeded in tearing off the scab of old wounds from the 1960s and fanning the flames of hate for the police.

Once the seeds were planted again, he teamed up with Al Sharpton who became a regular at the White House. Certainly their meetings were not about how to heal the divide after each racial crisis, because the rhetoric Sharpton spewed was a call to war!

[...]

From now until the verdict in this trial, the agitators will continue to travel and communicate city to city, town to town, stirring up unrest and hate, keeping people on edge waiting to see the result of this cliff-hanger. If the verdict is not what they want, perhaps Obama will have to institute martial law to preserve order, form a national police force and postpone the 2016 elections.

Crazy? Maybe, but we are on the edge in this country. Attacks are coming from all sides, from inside and outside of our borders, and we are becoming overwhelmed. What happens when Baltimore spreads across the country and our television screens show four or five cities burning at once? Who will we turn to at that point? “One Nation under God” – we need Him now more than ever.

Good luck, Mr. Farah, trying to convince the world that, against all evidence, WND is the "reputable and responsible journalism venture" you would have us think it is.


Posted by Terry K. at 11:22 AM EDT
Wednesday, May 6, 2015
WND Marks 18th Birthday By Telling Lies, Pretending It's A Real News Organization
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily has been spending the past several days celebrating its 18th birthday -- a number more appropriate for a teenager attaining new age-related privileges, not a "news" organization. As can be expected, much of it is self-aggrandizing and circular self-promotion, i.e., the people quoted as saying nice things about WND in an April 30 article are mosly WND columnists.

But there are other clues that point to an ulterior motive behind this odd-anniversary promotion. For instance, an April 27 article by Cheryl Chumley recounting WND's self-proclaimed "firsts," which she insists proves that WND is "a reputable and responsible journalism venture."

WND editor Joseph Farah followed that up with a May 3 column that at first engaged in his usual manhood-measuring by insisting that "no other founder of any other online news agency boasts that kind of resume" that he has (he did this to us in 2008 when we dared point out WND's many faults, as a way to deflect any criticism of his work). Farah then states this:

In an Internet environment heavy on commentary, unedited blogging and unverified claims, WND stands virtually alone in pioneering the most rigorous standards of fact-checking, multiple sourcing, the seeking out of primary sources and old-fashioned reporting and editing techniques.

That, as ConWebWatch readers know all too well, is a a huge sack of lying crap. To name just one example proving Farah a liar: Jerome Corsi's utterly discredited claim that President Obama wears a ring that reads in Arabic "There is no god except Allah." Corsi sought no "primary sources" for this claim; he regurgitated from the even more discredited anti-Obama filmmaker Joel Gilbert. Corsi and Gilbert's story was so wrong that Corsi's fellow birthers were moved to push back.

Yet Corsi's ring stories remain live on the WND website, intact and uncorrected, as does Farah's column insisting that this was "an important story – maybe one of the biggest of the presidential election year."

On top of that, a few days before Farah's nattering about how WND employs "most rigorous standards of fact-checking," it ran a story repeating a claim we first corrected seven years ago -- that Obama's reference to a "civilian national security force" in a speech meant that he wanted to create a police state.

And we haven't even gotten to WND's fact-free birther crusade, about which it has yet to admit fault, let along correct the reams of false reporting it engaged in.

But Farah wasn't done lying, adding this things he claims WND engages in:

While WND strives for “fair and balanced” news coverage, it believes a higher value not emphasized strongly enough by competitors is the pursuit of the truth.

In our work, WND reporters and editors are always encouraged and required to seek out multiple sources and contrary viewpoints in news articles.

More lies. Just take a look at the work of WND news editor Bob Unruh, which frequently tells only one side of the story and lets that side misleadingly frame the argument of the other side, which often never even bothering to contact anyone from that other side.

What makes Farah's declared commitment to telling the truth even more of a laugher is that a few years back, he proudly admitted that WND publishes misinformation.

Farah can't even keep logically consistent. He claims "WND is truly independent from party lines, pressure groups and political entanglements," then a few paragraphs later boasts about "the Judeo-Christian worldview we bring to our mission." Farah seems not to be aware that if a certain "worldview" is imposed as editorial policy, you are no longer "fair and balanced" or "truly independent from party lines, pressure groups and political entanglements."

All of this self-aggrandizing appears to be the result of WND finally realizing that its hypocritical birther crusade -- it won't hold Ted Cruz to the same "eligibility" standards it held Obama, which is why WND has gone almost completely silent on the issue -- and its singleminded zeal to destroy Obama has utterly destroyed any claim WND might have to be taken seriously as a "news" organization.

If WND genuinely wants to be taken seriously, it needs to walk the walk, not just engage in empty boasting. Here's a list of handy tips that Farah isn't apparently aware of despite all the media experience he likes to beat his critics with:

  • Act like the "fair and balanced" news org you claim you are. Present both sides of the story, and don't present one side as the "correct" one.
  • Correct your errors.
  • Tell your readers the truth you've hidden from them all these years -- that the birther crusade was never based in reality and was nothing more than pandering to the anti-Obama base.
  • Don't be spiteful to your critics. We've been blocked from following Farah and WND on Twitter, which shows just how thin-skinned they are.

That's just for starters. Any basic journalism textbook will have more. Farah professes to follow them, but his fruits tell a much different story.

Perhaps WND made a point of celebrating its 18th anniversary because it's in an adolescent state of mind -- defying authority and rules, paying lip service to tradition and Christianity but doing the exact opposite in reality.

If Farah wants to be taken seriously ever again, he needs to stop BSing WND's readers and start acting like a real journalist. That means telling the truth -- something with which he has so far been shockingly unfamiliar.


Posted by Terry K. at 1:32 AM EDT
Updated: Tuesday, September 1, 2015 7:12 PM EDT
Tuesday, May 5, 2015
WND Zombie Lie Watch
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Back in 2008, ConWebWatch dismantled WorldNetDaily's claim that then-presidential candidate Barack Obama's reference to a "civilian national security force" in a speech meant that he wanted to create a police state. In fact, Obama explained at the time he was referring to "soft power" diplomacy through the State Department and the Agency for International Development, not any further militarization.

WND made the same claim again in 2012, and we shot it down again.

It's now 2015, and guess what WND is writing about now? Take it away, Bob Unruh:

Back in 2008, Barack Obama, then a presidential candidate, called for a “civilian national security force.” And he wanted it wanted it as big as all of the nation’s military branches.

Combined.

Now black activist Al Sharpton is suggesting a path that probably would accomplish that: nationalize America’s police forces.

Obama never advocated nationalizing the police, and WND knows it. But why should the facts get in the way of a good story?

Unruh even rehashes how his WND boss, Joseph Farah, "raised the obvious questions about Obama’s plans for a civilian army after the [2008] speech." Of course, Farah never bothered to tell the truth about Obama's statement -- which is why it continues to flog this story to this day despite the utter lack of factual basis behind it.

Just consider another one of the many, many reasons why nobody believes WND.


Posted by Terry K. at 9:26 AM EDT

Newer | Latest | Older

Bookmark and Share

Get the WorldNetDaily Lies sticker!

Find more neat stuff at the ConWebWatch store!

Buy through this Amazon link and support ConWebWatch!

Support This Site

« May 2015 »
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31

Bloggers' Rights at EFF
Support Bloggers' Rights!

News Media Blog Network

Add to Google