MRC's Graham Defends Pro-Trump Commentator, Downplays His History of Offensive Remarks Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's Tim Graham is in reflexive CNN-bashing mode at the start of his Jan. 19 post:
CNN is beginning to look like it can’t abide paying a CNN contributor for pro-Trump analysis. Ed Martin, the Missouri GOP official who replaced Jeffrey Lord as the channel’s die-hard Trump analyst, was dumped on Thursday after a brief four-month stint.
CNN confirmed the move to The Hollywood Reporter.Lord told them in September that Martin was a "smart guy" who will "go against the grain" on the air....and "After a while, it will add up and there will surely be those pushing to get rid of him."
"CNN terminated me today for cause," Martin said in an emailed response to the St. Louis Post-DispatchThursday night. "Strange since they told me my ratings were great."
In a subsequent email, Martin said the network didn't say why he was fired. He hasn't appeared on the network since mid-December, when, on his radio show after a contentious night at CNN after Roy Moore was defeated in the special election in Alabama, he referred to fellow panelists as "racists" and "black racists." That would appear to be Ana Navarro and Symone Sanders.
Graham seems to have overlooked the "for cause" part of Martin's statement -- where he smeared his CNN colleagues as racists for disagreeing with him -- which seems to put the lie to Martin's subsequent claim that he doesn't know why he was fired. Further, Martin has a long history of offensive remarks that CNN should have perhaps looked into before hiring him in the first place.
Graham then whines:
Leftist sites like Right Wing Watch oppose the very idea of a paid pro-Trump contributor slot at CNN. It's awfully difficult to work for CNN and defend Trump when CNN wages 24/7 war on Trump, asserting it's "Facts First," so anyone defending Trump is apparently....Lies First? CNN loads the panels so that everyone mocks the Outlier...who they pay to be a target.
Funny, we don't remember Graham complaining about Fox News doing the exact same type of panel-stacking -- butr then, it's to promote a conservative agenda and mock liberals and the paid "outlier" (there's a reason "Fox News Democrat" is an actual thing).
Also: His link to Right Wing Watch that purportedly proves that liberals "oppose the very idea of a paid pro-Trump contributor slot at CNN" goes to a link roundup, and the only one of those links that relates to CNN is a Media Matters item detailing Martin's "black racists" smear. Graham also missed the part in the Hollywood Reporter report confirming Martin's departure in which Media Matters CEO Angelo Carusone explained that Martin, like Lord before him, cared only about "dishonesty and disruptions during on-air discussions," adding: "Hopefully now CNN will finally recognize that they'll better serve their audience by hiring an inclusive group of honest brokers representing a wide range of perspectives rather than someone dedicated to defending one person, Donald Trump, no matter what."
In other words, Graham is falsely framing the issue to advance his own conservative -- and pro-Trump right or wrong -- agenda. Not a surprise.
Disgraced Ex-Cop Kerik Now A Newsmax Columnist Topic: Newsmax
For some reason -- perhaps something having to do with serving as his image rehabconsultant after he was busted on corruption charges that sent him to prison -- Newsmax appears to have given Bernard Kerik a regular column. And he has ended up being probably the last thing Newsmax needs: yet another pro-Trump cheerleader.
In his Jan. 5 column, Kerik cited his own experience in railing against the Trump-Russia investigation:
As someone that has run the largest police department (NYPD) and jail system (Rikers Island) in our country with unparalleled successes and achievements, and has also been the target of a selective and political prosecution by the U.S. Justice Department, I cannot stress enough, the urgency for president Donald Trump to act and force the U.S. Attorney General to do the job he was sworn to do.
We would remind people that Kerik pleaded guilty to the several counts that sent him to prison -- mostly tax-related offenses -- which undercuts his argument that he was a victim of a "selective and political prosecution." Kerik of all people should know that those in law enforcement (Kerik was formerly the New York City police commissioner) face extra scrutiny when accused of wrongdoing.
Then, Kerik mounts a bizarre defense of, all people, Rod Blagojevich:
When you think of politically motivated and overzealous prosecutions, think for a moment of the case against Rod Blagojevich… conspiring to sell Barack Obama’s senate seat, an act that was never carried out. He gained nothing personally, professionally or financially… he just talked about it, and he was sent to prison for 14 years. We sent an American citizen to prison for 14 years for talking about something he didn’t do. He wasn’t talking about murder, a terror attack, or some violent act.
Blagojevich was talking about politics, like every member of Congress does every day of their career. They don’t pick their nose unless there’s some benefit to their office or career, yet we sent Blagojevich to prison for 14 years. Did the punishment fit the crime? Hell no! His case wasn’t about justice. His prosecution was as political as the investigation today, targeting the President of the United States and his family, by Robert Mueller, the Special Counsel.
But as one writer points out, that was far from the only thing Blagojevich did:
It's important to remember that it wasn't just his giddiness over having the statutory power to appoint someone to Barack Obama's Senate seat and his alleged plans to use that authority as leverage for himself that landed him in the clink. Federal prosecutors also documented how Blago tried to shake down an executive at then Children's Memorial Hospital for a $50,000 campaign contribution in exchange for his providing $8 million in state health funds. So not only was Obama's seat "golden," but apparently reimbursements for treating sick kids were as well.
In his Jan. 12 column, Kerik defended Trump over his reference to "shithole countries" like a good Trump lackey:
I received about 25 texts and calls yesterday concerning President Trump's comments relating to a "s***hole country."
I cannot speak for the president, but I'm pretty confident he's talking about dictatorships, countries with crime rates that make Chicago look like Disney, and countries that have corrupt governments that steal their international support, causing mass starvation. Countries that have no religious, economic, press freedoms, and/or support for human and women's rights. Countries in which there are mass slaughters of Christians, and no rule of law, where you can be jailed or imprisoned at the drop of a dime with no due process.
The left and the president's personal and political critics are trying to make this about race, and it's not. It's about countries that are so sub-standard to ours that most Americans couldn't even imagine their existence, and none in their right mind would ever consider living there.
That's what I think a "s***hole country" is.
What's most annoying about all of this, isn't what the president said, it's the slimy coward and disloyal piece of garbage that was in that room and ran to the press with this non-sense.
This is what every American hates about Washington, D.C., and our spineless political leadership that's doing everything in their power to make this country fail, and not succeed.
The swamp can't get drained fast enough!
Also of note: Kerik's Newsmax bio highlights how he "has been recognized in more than 100 awards for meritorious and heroic service," but makes no reference to his prison stint.
MRC's Bozell Still Mad That Jeff Flake Stole A Book Title From His Father Topic: Media Research Center
Last August, Media Research Center chief Brent Bozell turned his MRC, ostensibly a nonprofit operation, into a vehicle for his personal grievances by attacking Sen. Jeff Flake over the title his book "Conscience of a Conservative," which is the same title as the book Bozell's father ghost-wrote for Barry Goldwater in the 1960s.
When Flake delived a Senate floor speech arguing that some of President Trump's actions were akin to those undertaken by dictators such as Josef Stalin, Bozell ran to his favorite TV channel to level even more personal insults at Flake, as lovingly documentted in a Jan. 15 NewsBusters post:
Media Research Center President Brent Bozell was on fire ripping Republican Senator Jeff Flake (Ariz.) during Monday afternoon’s Cavuto: Coast to Coast, telling FBN host Neil Cavuto that Flake is an “intellectual fraud” “who is working overtime to curry favor with” the liberal media.
Bozell’s comments were directed at Flake in reaction to an upcoming speech in which Flake will compare President Trump to the evil, murderous, and communist Soviet leader Joseph Stalin.
“I think it's stunning. If this were anybody else saying this about the President of the United States, and I think he would be thrown out of his office...But this is a man, Jeff Flake, who is working overtime to curry favor with the national press corps that despise Donald Trump and they’re loving that he says it,” Bozell began.
He wasn’t done though, adding that Flake is not only “an intellectual” and “political fraud,” but someone who “stole the title of Conscience of a Conservative, the best-selling polemic in history and made it his own” despite having been “elected by the Tea Party and immediately stabbed them in the back.”
Cavuto took particular issue with Flake’s comparison, arguing that “I think you lose an audience of things at the Hitler comparison, I would say the Stalin comparison” because “[t]here’s no one to compare Hitler to except Hitler, no one to compare Stalin except Stalin, so stop it already.”
Yep, he's still abusing his own organization to deal with personal grievances.
Regarding Bozell's claim that "If this were anybody else saying this about the President of the United States, and I think he would be thrown out of his office": When Republican Rep. Randy Weber likened President Obama to Hitler in 2015, the MRC didn't not demand that Weber "be thrown out of his office"; rather, it attacked anyone who criticized the comparison by playing the whataboutismcard.
WND Still Selling Paul Nehlen's Book, Still Silent On His Anti-Semitism Topic: WorldNetDaily
As we've documented, WorldNetDaily has not been an enthusiastic promoter of Paul Nehlen's political campaign for Paul Ryan's congressional seat, but it also published his book "Wage the Battle." But that promotion seemed to fade away as Nehlen's rhetoric turned more white nationalist and anti-Semitic; it hasn't actively promoted Nehlen on its website since September, but it never said why.
Meanwhile, Nehlen has turned even more anti-Semitic, ranting about "Jewish media" and coordinating with alt-right supporters to attack it.
Throughout all of this, however, WND has continued selling Nehlen's book -- it's still for sale in WND's online store (as is its e-book version), and it still pops up in the italic-type promotions among the headlines on its front page. WND's store also sold Nehlen's anti-Muslim film "Hijrah" -- which it alsopromoted in WND "news" articles -- but that appears to no longer be available. The Internet Archive lists "Hijrah" as being available from the store as recently as Jan. 11.
And despite the growing disgust with Nehlen among conservatives -- heck, even the alt-right leaders at Breitbart have washed their hands of him -- WND has yet to issue a public statement regarding its relationship with Nehlen.
Why? One reason could be that WND's book division appears to have gone dormant. The WND Books Twitter account hasn't made a post since October, the "coming soon" page of its website features books that have been out for nearly a year, and its front page is still featuring, yes, Paul Nehlen's book (though the bottom of the front page lists "coming soon" titles with release dates for next month).
Still, even though WND is shedding personnel as it circles the train, you'd think Joseph Farah -- you know, the guy who runs the company -- would want to take a few minutes away from issuing pleas for money to say something about an author it published whose increasingly offensive and discrediting behavior is affecting WND's reputation and future business prospects (well, as much as it can be affected at this point, given that WND already has a well-earned reputation for fake news).
This is a public-relations crisis WND should be addressing, but it's not for some reason -- it can't possibly need money so badly as to continue to sell the book of an anti-Semite. Perhaps its inability to handle this is more evidence that WND doesn't deserve to live.
Sick: MRC Mocks CNN For Reacting To Death Threats Against It Topic: Media Research Center
How sick, cynical and hafe-filled is the Media Research Center? Its first reaction to the arrest of a man who issued death threats against employees at CNN was to mock CNN for reacting to it.
On Jan. 22, it was reported that a Michigan man was arrested for making 22 calls to CNN headquarters in Atlanta threating violence against its employees, stating at one point, "Fake news. I'm coming to gun you all down."
You'd think that the MRC -- despite hating CNN with the passion of a thousand suns -- would issue a statement that violence or threats of violence against the news media is frowned upon. But for two days it was silent -- even MRC officials Brent Bozell and Tim Graham said nothing.
Finally, a Jan. 24 NewsBusters post by Randy Hall addressed the issue -- but only through attacking CNN anchor Don Lemon for reacting to it. Lemon suggested that President Trump's repeated attacks on CNN as "fake news' may have spurred thte death threats, and Hall wasn't having it, declaring that Lemon was engaging in "a pathetic act of self-sanctimonious behavior" by raising the issue.
Hall quoted Lemon saying "When you tweet a doctored video of you body slamming CNN, people are watching," followed by political analyst Brian Karem stating to Trump, "You're complicit in any harm to any journalist anywhere in the United States by encouraging the violence that you encourage."Which you'd think would be self-explanatory, but apparently it wasn't toHall; instead, he retorted: "Wait, so Brian, would that mean that you'd agree that James Hodgkinson was inspired by Rachel Maddow and Bernie Sanders to try and murder Republican congressmen in June at a Virginia baseball field?"
Hall offered no evidence that Maddow or Sanders ever encouraged violence against any Republican congressman.
Meanwhile, Graham broke his silence on the CNN death threats by retweeting Hall's post with the embellishing insult of "SOUR Don Lemon." Yeah, well, when one's life has been threatened, it does tend to make one a bit sour.
This, by the way, is the same MRC that can'tstopblaming the Southern Poverty Law Center for a 2012 shooting at the right-wing Family Research Council, even though the SPLC never encouraged violence or had any personal contact with the shooter beforehand (he admitted looking at the SPLC's list of anti-gay hate groups, of which the FRC is one, before the shooting).
WND Serves Up Another Suck-Up Profile Of A Trump Staffer Topic: WorldNetDaily
As an unabashed, highly biased pro-Trump operation, WorldNetDaily is prone to the occasional sycophantic profile of Trump operatives; i,e, its embarassingly fawning article last year about then-White House press secretary Sean Spicer. WND has struck again in the form of a Jan. 11 article in which Bob Unruh sucks up to White House adviser Stephen Miller:
President Trump is not known for being a weak personality.
Many of his advisers have been cast in roughly the same mold: a little bit brash, certainly blunt, not inclined to use euphemisms.
One such personality was Stephen Bannon, the former chief strategist, whose bluntness eventually conflicted with the president’s own.
But now another blunt-speaking personality, who has a take-no-prisoners attitude with the media, is emerging as a power player for the president.
In the last week, he’s been “thrown out” of a television channel’s headquarters and has been the focus of complaints that his demands are holding up legislation.
He’s Stephen Miller, and McClatchy recently cited fretting by “even Republicans” in Congress that he was setting down requirements that were limiting their chances of passing an immigration deal.
Unruh's article appears to have been spurred by his combative interview with CNN's Jake Tapper. Unruh spun that "Tapper appeared to become flustered by Miller’s defense of the president and his refusal to answer some questions."
MRC Promotes Accused Sexual Harasser's Stock Picks To Its Readers Topic: Media Research Center
We'vedetailed how the Media Research Center has studiously overlooked allegations of sexual harassment against Fox Business host Charles Payne, as well as a subsequent lawsuit from a woman, onetime Fox News commentator Scottie Nell Hughes, who says he coerced her into having a sexual relationship with him.
Now, the MRC is actually taking money from Payne.
A Jan. 24 email sent to members of the MRC's mailing list from InvestorPlace, a financial news website that pays Payne for a branded newsletter containing stock picks as well as something called "Charles Payne's Smart Investing," described as "a once-in-a-lifetime, 12-month journey to help you reclaim your American Dream" open to "a small number of individual investors." The email touts "5 New Trump Trades" promoted by Payne in a very ribght-wing-friendly manner:
The fake news media is lying to you—again.
And this time, it could cost you a fortune.
In their desperate attempt to knock down President Trump at every turn, they want you to believe that his Make America Great Again agenda is floundering.
But you and I know better.
My name is Charles Payne, and you may know me from my show on Fox Business News or my regular appearances on Fox News.
And today I want to make sure you know the truth about President Trump’s progress and how to profit from it in 2018.
President Trump has quickly slashed regulations that were crushing businesses, killing jobs and holding back spending.
And now he’s about to push through the biggest tax reform our country has seen since Ronald Reagan.
His ambitious plans for America have unleashed corporate spending, fueled a raging bull market and sent consumer confidence soaring to 17-year highs.
And that is creating huge profits for smart investors.
The message includes a disclaimer: "Please note that the following message reflects the opinions and representations of our advertiser alone, and not necessarily the opinion or editorial positions of CNSNews.com or the Media Research Center." But given how (selectively) offended the MRC got over the sexual harassment issue, it's just not a good look when someone has rented its email list to promote an accused sexual harasser.
WND Cheers How Trump Insults His Critics, With Help From Lying Filmmaker Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily loves everything about Donald Trump -- even (or maybe especially) how he insults and belittles people. Which brings us to a Jan. 14 article touting a new doucmentary called "Trump: The Art of the Insult." The filmmaker, Joel Gilbert, effuses:
“Trump’s branding approach is actually a leftist tactic,” Gilbert argues. “A fan who watched my DVD wrote in an email, ‘Saul Alinsky works for us now!’ Donald Trump is the most media savvy person to enter politics, ever! He manipulates the media and controls the narrative with total ease by tweeting literally in his spare time in the early morning or just before bed. The Left is not in his league, they are still stuck on the losing narrative ‘Trump is not a nice guy’ and that’s all they’ve got.
“Trump’s tactics are about strength, taking a stand, and defending his turf and principles, and these things can only help him. Calling out opponents who behave badly, such as Sen. Diane Feinstein for illegally releasing committee transcripts, is a perfect example of Trump taking a stand and redirecting the narrative by branding Sen. Feinstein’s outrageous conduct of violating Senate rules. It’s also a warning to others to stay in line or you could be next!”
You might remember Joel Gilbert as the liar and charlatan behind the utterly discredited film "Dreams From My Real Father," which made the completely false claim that Barack Obama's mother posed nude for Frank Marshall Davis. (WND still sells that bogus film, by the way.)
Needless to say, WND doesn't mention Gilbert's factually challenged history. It does, however, quote Gilbert spouting the expected anti-Obama right-wing talking points:
“In 1840, French traveler Alexis Tocqueville wrote in his book, ‘Democracy In America’: ‘Everyone in America has the vote and thus is a contributor to law-making. Anyone wishing to attack the law is thus reduced to adopting one of two courses: they must either change the nation’s opinion or trample its wishes under foot.’ Obama did trample, he interfered in the 2012 Democratic election by unleashing the IRS against the tea party movement and conservative organizations. This prevented conservatives from organizing, while the Left was allowed to exercise free speech unhindered.
“There was no need for Russian interference in 2012, we had our own Bolshevik in the White House using the tools of state to maintain power. Next Obama interfered in the 2016 election by using the FBI and DOJ to spy on the Trump campaign. Trump inspired voters because they knew the Republican Party needed a fighter in order to defeat the radical left. The fighting spirit that got Trump elected continues and must continue for him to succeed in office.”
Gilbert's film also got a seal of approval from another Obama-hating conspiracy-monger, Jack Cashill, whose Jan. 17 WND column touts it as "a hilarious trip down memory lane, especially for early Trump backers. With minimal commentary, Gilbert shows Trump being Trump as he slices and dices his way through the Republican primaries and then somehow manages to outwit the deep state to beat Hillary Clinton in the general."
Like his WND colleagues, Cashill makes sure not to bring up Gilbert's fabulist past that would be disqualifying anywhere else -- which may be yet another reason WND is circling the drain right now.
CNS Again Privileges Alveda King With Bogus 'Dr.' Title Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com has a badhabit of privileging anti-abortion activist Alveda King with the "Dr." title even though her doctorate is honorary, not earned, and thus has no business being used in someone's title.
CNS managing editor Michael W. Chapman bestows this bogus title on King once again in a Jan. 17 article:
During a discussion about religious freedom in America, Dr. Alveda King, the niece of the late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., said that Facebook had "pulled down" ads for a movie about Roe v. Wade because the social media giant does not "want the message of the injustice of abortion broadcast," which, she added, is a "violation of religious freedom" and "very discriminatory."
Dr. King is one of the executive producers of the movie, which includes Hollywood actor Jon Voight. The fundraising website for the film can be viewed at Roevwademovie.com.
Dr. King made her remarks during a special edition of Washington Watch with Tony Perkins, who is the president of the Family Research Council (FRC). The live show on Tuesday was broadcast on the Facebook page of the FRC in honor of Religious Freedom Day. President Donald Trump proclaimed Jan. 16, 2018 as Religious Freedom Day on Tuesday.
While discussing religious liberty in America and abroad, both Tony Perkins and Dr. King praised the power of social media to spread information and especially the Gospel. However, as Dr. King explained, social media is not as freedom-loving as one might think.
And so on. It's a shame such misinformation is becoming a greater presence at CNS.
NEW ARTICLE: WND's Fake-News Failure Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily is facing another "existential threat" and begging for money again. Maybe if it didn't regularly publish fake news, WND wouldn't be in this predicament. Read more >>
Craig Bannister, a good Trump stenographer like the rest of his CNSNews.com colleagues, writes in a Jan. 16 blog post:
Three of four (73%) convicted international terrorists were foreign-born, a new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Justice (DOJ) study reveals.
On Tuesday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) released a reportdocumenting that three out of every four, or 402, individuals convicted of international terrorism-related charges in U.S. federal courts between September 11, 2001, and December 31, 2016 were foreign-born.
“This report is a clear reminder of why we cannot continue to rely on immigration policy based on pre-9/11 thinking that leaves us woefully vulnerable to foreign-born terrorists, Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said, announcing the report:
The report reveals that at least 549 individuals were convicted of international terrorism-related charges in U.S. federal courts between September 11, 2001, and December 31, 2016. An analysis conducted by DHS determined that approximately 73 percent (402 of these 549 individuals) were foreign-born.
Because Bannister made sure to stick to the Trump script, he didn't report the rest of the story. As actualreporters have pointed out, the report skews its numbers toward building up the foreign-born number by including people arrested overseas, including people convicted of charges not directly related to terrorism and excluding perpetrators of domestic terrorism.
If Bannister didn't stick to the script, he woludn't be the Trump stenographer CNS demands that he be.
Fake News: WND's 'New Scandal' Is A Very Old Non-Scandal Topic: WorldNetDaily
An anonymous WorldNetDaily writer really tries to ramp up the meaning in a Jan. 17 article headlined "New scandal in Obama's war against Netanyahu":
Democrats in Washington have expressed outrage over still-unproved allegations the Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 U.S. presidential election to defeat their candidate, Hillary Clinton.
But Democrats and their media allies have been virtually silent regarding evidence of interference by Democrat Barack Obama in Israel’s elections.
Last October, WND CEO Joseph Farah pointed out the Obama administration sent money in 2015 to a non-profit U.S. group that sought to prevent Benjamin Netanyahu from forming a coalition government to remain as prime minister.
A probe by the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations found that the Obama State Department gave $349,276 in U.S. taxpayer-funded grants to a political group in Israel called OneVoice to build a campaign operation that, subsequently, was used to try to persuade Israelis to vote against Netanyahu.
Now there’s new information, according to the American Center for Law and Justice, that the Obama administration’s intervention was even worse.
ACLJ said that in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, it “uncovered a startling revelation.”
“Yasser Mahmoud Abbas, son of Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of the terrorist-allied Palestinian Authority, was also a senior leader and advisor to OneVoice – and, as demonstrated by the contents of the documents themselves, the Obama administration knew this,” ACLJ said in a report Wednesday.
“In short, the Obama State Department gave U.S. taxpayer dollars to a terrorist-affiliated organization (the PA recently united with the terrorist group Hamas) to unseat the democratically elected leader of the only free democracy in the Middle East and a vital U.S. ally.”
Just one problem, and WND would have known it if it bothered to do a basic Google search, like we did: This isn't "new information" at all.
Abbas was publicly listed as a member of OneVoice as far back as 2003, when OneVoice was founded to encourage a negotiated settlement to Israeli-Palestinian violence. When someone tried to make an issue of this in 2015 -- more evidence that this is not "new information" and that ACLJ is lying -- OneVoice issued a statement:
"Mahmoud Abbas' son is a member of the Advisory Council of OneVoice in the Palestinian Authority, which is working toward a diplomatic agreement and two states for two peoples. Just as Michi Ratzon, who ran in the Likud primaries, served on the Advisory Council in Israel, and David Azoulay, Avraham Michaeli, Yitzhak Vaknin and Yitzhak Cohen from Shas serve in the movement's lobby in Knesset, as do MK Elazar Stern, MK Rabbi Dov Lipman and many others.
"Any attempt to tie his influence to the movement in Israel is foolish and untrue. We do not recall any such claims or complaints about the issue when OneVoice led a campaign in support of Prime Minister Netanyahu when he was considering the option of a diplomatic arrangement."
Likud is the political party to which Netanyahu belongs.
as we've previouslydocumented, there isn't a scandal here, despite Farah's fervent wish to create one. OneVoice received a $350,000 grant for a project unrelated to the Israeli election, and it was later revealed that OneVoice later used intrastructure that grant paid for in its campaign against Netanyahu in the election. A Senate subcommittee found that OneVoice fully complied with the terms of the original grant, no grant money was used in the election, and the State Department placed no limitations on the post-grant use of those resources.
In other words, WND is lying about the intent of the grant money because it has never been proven that it was given with the ultimate goal of being used against Netanyahu.
Despite that, Farah used his October 2017 column to insist that "The U.S. government, in the hands of Barack Obama, intervened in a foreign election with the express purpose of impacting the results."
With such reporting that credulously promotes false claims it could fact-check if it wanted to, is it any wonder WND is circling the drain right now?
MRC Is Mad The Media Accurately Quoted Trump's Vulgarity Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's Tim Graham huffs in a Jan. 15 post (bolding is his):
In the contest for Most Offended News Network after President Trump reportedly referred to African nations as “s***hole” countries, CNN wins hands down. NewsBusters staff combed through CNN transcripts on Nexis for the S-hole word in the 24 hours of January 12 – the first full day after The Washington Post reported the controversy – and found CNN staffers and CNN guests uncorked the profanity 195 times in one day.
That doesn't count Saturday, Sunday or Monday. They could be headed for 1,000 by now. It also doesn't count the amount of time they put the S-word on screen (sometimes twice, as you can see on Cuomo's temporary prime time show.)
Compare that to Fox News Channel. Their curse count was zero. FNC told staff and guests not to say it.
Missing from Graham's post: any criticism of Trump for saying the vulgar word in the first place, let alone any criticism of him for saying it about certain African countries. If Trump hadn't said it, CNN would not have needed to report it, and Fox News would not have to devise a way to dance around it.
In short, Graham is complaining that CNN reported Trump's word accurately.
In a companion piece at the MRC's "news" division, Craig Bannister touts how Republican Rep. Lamar Smith regurgitated Graham's post on the House floor, additionally complaining that "There was a time when the media would show some respect for family values. But no more." Bannister gives no indication that Smith also criticized Trump for saying the word in the first place or the context in which he said it, so we must assume that he did not.
WND's Farah Is Hypocritically Cool With Trump's Alleged Affair With Porn Star Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah has forwarded various reasons why his website has to beg for money -- none of which, strangely enough, have to do with the nature of WND's content, which you'd think would be central to why WND has trouble staying in business. But whether Farah wants to admit it or not, WND's biased, credibility-deprived content is an issue, especially when it's so biased as to be hypocritical.
Farah's own Jan. 16 column is a prime example.He declares that reports that President Trump had an affair with porn star Stormy Daniels are"just media’s latest desperate effort to trash Trump":
First of all, as an evangelical, Bible-believing Christian, I believe any sexual activity outside of marriage is sinful, a transgression of the law of God. I don’t approve of it. I don’t condone it. I don’t excuse it. I don’t rationalize it. I would tell Donald Trump the same thing if he sought my counsel, which he does not.
Yet, the very media institutions making so much of this would scoff at the biblical standard I follow. So, what exactly is their beef? Let’s say Trump had consensual sex with the porn star, which is far from certain. There is no allegation of harassment, which is how the major media seem to define sin these days. Would it be wrong because she was a porn star? Where is that law written in the gospel according to the media?
I have no idea what the facts of this encounter actually are, but I do know that people sometimes make allegations against famous people – especially when they are running for president. Democrats and their friends in the media knew that in 1992 and 1996 and defended a presidential candidate and a sitting president in those years against dozens and dozens of allegations, including at least one very serious and credible one of rape, others about sexual harassment, others about crude and lewd behavior.
How did the Democrats and their apparatchiks in the media respond? With a collective yawn, little reporting, no outrage, little concern, lectures about this being part of his “private life” and pleas to “move on.”
I would also note that Donald Trump and his attorney took care of this matter with his own money. There are currently dozens of secret allegations on file in Washington against members of the House and Senate for sexual harassment and other sex-related claims. They have all been silenced with payoffs by the taxpayers of the United States.
Lastly, I can only point out that the alleged “incident” between Trump and Clifford dates back to 2006 when Donald Trump was a private citizen, not seeking elective political office and, especially important, a registered Democrat, giving major contributions to officials and candidates of that party. He was also, interestingly, a media star. In other words, he was a very different Donald Trump then. His values were Democratic Party values. His values were media values.
It’s no wonder Trump would want to quash that story during his presidential campaign.
Lastly, with all the attention this incident has received in the last few days, nobody, except Trump and Clifford, probably know what happened. They both officially deny anything[.]
So, we all know what this is about – politics. It’s about the relentless character assassination of a private citizen who went to Washington to shake things up. He was duly elected as president and the media and Democrats can’t accept that reality. They can’t believe this guy actually beat them. And they will keep slinging the mud until he is out of the White House and they can get back to business as usual in the nation’s swampy capital.
Do I have that about right?
Remember that Farah also claims his website offers coverage from a "Judeo-Christian worldview." If that were actually true, Farah would be attacking Trump's numerous extramarital affairs and sexual harassment (and at least one very serious and credible one of rape) with the same vigor that he attacked Bill Clinton's. But he does not, because he does not believe that.
In dismissing criticism of Trump over his sexual dalliances as nothing but "politics" and "relentless character assassination," he is exposing the fact that all of his attacks against Clinton over the same thing were nothing but politics and character assassination as well. He's totally down with Trump's sexual deviancy because Trump is his guy. He cannot prove that Trump was "a very different Donald Trump then" -- all he knows is that Trump's in power now and claims to much more closely align to Farah's agenda. As long as Trump's political agenda meshes with Farah's, Farah will cast a blind eye to Trump's sex life because he doesn't want to endanger Trump's presidency.
Farah is exposing himself as being just as amoral as the "mainstream media" he loves to despise. If he actually cared about Judeo-Christiann morality, wouldn't WND have distanced itself from the book it published by anti-Semite and white nationalist Paul Nehlen? WND has had weeks to do so, but it has remained silent.
Farah's cynicism and hypocrisy here is breathtaking -- and the opposite of Christian. No wonder WND's circling the drain.
CNS Puts Pro-Trump Spin on Disastrous TV Interview With WH Adviser Topic: CNSNews.com
It was almost universally agreed that White House adviser Stephen Miller's Jan. 7 interview with CNN's Jake Tapper was a disaster for Miller, who refused to answer questions Tapper had asked him and instead serving up glowing tributes to President Trump as a "political genius."
But Trump tweeted that Miller "destroyed" the "flunky" Tapper in the interview. Thus, CNS' Melanie Arter had her marching orders to spin things in Miller's favor, and that's exactly what she does in her article on the interview. It was headlined "WH Adviser Stephen Miller Takes CNN to Task for Negative Trump News Coverage," and it only got more spin-tastic from there:
In an interview Sunday with CNN’s “State of the Union with Jake Tapper,” White House Senior Policy Adviser Stephen Miller took Tapper to task for his network’s negative coverage of President Donald Trump.
When asked to address Trump’s tweets Saturday defending himself against claims that he is not mentally fit to be president prompted by author Michael Wolff’s unflattering book, “Fire and Fury,” Miller said the president’s tweets help his cause in demonstrating that he is stable enough for the job.
Then Miller criticized CNN, saying it has “a real crisis of legitimacy.”
When Miller tried to steer the conversation back to the president’s experiences, Tapper ended the interview.
“Okay, you’re not answering the questions,” Tapper said.
“You have 24 hours a day of anti-Trump material. You’re not going to give three minutes for the American people to hear the real experience of Donald Trump,” Miller said.
“There’s one viewer that you care about right now, and you’re being obsequious,” Tapper said.
Oddly, Arter didn't include what Tapper said after the "obsequious" remark: "You’re being a factotum in order to please him." Perhaps she would have to explain to CNS' readers what "factotum" means.
Arter did, however, make sure to add that "Miller’s exchange with Tapper comes one day before the president planned to hold what he called 'the most dishonest and corrupt media awards of the year.'"