Pot, Kettle, Black: WND's Farah Frets Over 'Prima Facie Libelous' Claims (Not Published By WND) Topic: WorldNetDaily
Joseph Farah oozes concern about getting facts straight in his Jan. 29 WorldNetDaily column:
What do you suppose would happen if an author known for making up and embellishing stories, quotes and admitting that he can’t say for sure if what he wrote in his latest best-selling attack book on Donald Trump’s White House told a comedy show on HBO that U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley and the president are having an affair?
Would an interview that incendiary and prima facie libelous be aired?
Would the media advance the rumor by asking Haley about it?
Would the media, after realizing there is no evidence to support the charge, denounce the rumor-mongering author and question all he had previously reported in his book?
And what about Bill Maher and HBO? Do they have any responsibility at all for airing such a defamatory and salacious interview with no evidence to support the accusation?
Yes, but only if Nikki Haley files a very expensive lawsuit. That’s essentially her only legal recourse. And the standard in First Amendment juris prudence is extremely high for public figures to get a fair hearing on the facts.
Farah seems to have forgotten that his WND has published numerous incendiary and prima facie libelous claims about the Clintons and Obamas. And that we've caught WND tellinglieafterlie, not to mention Farah himself telling lie after lie.
For instance: In 2016, WND published a claim by Sally Miller, who claims to be a former mistress of Bill Clinton, that Hillary Clinton "is a lesbian" who wants to kill her. WND offered no verification of the claim, despite the fact that Miller has long been considered to be an unreliable source even in Arkansas. In other words, WND has published a prima facie libelous claim without performing due diligence as to its veracity. Would Farah want Clinton to sue him and WND over this? Or does he feel safe in his knowledge that the "extremely high" bar for public figures to sue over libelous claims he laments for Haley will keep WND out of the courtroom over this and other similar claims against politicians Farah despises?
Another example: WND has repeatedly claimed without evidence that yogurt maker Chobani and its CEO, Hamdi Ulukaya, have a secret agenda to flood America with Muslims that it would employ at its manufacturing plants. It corrected the claim on its website months after the fact, though without public apology, presumably after contact from Chobani's lawyers. Should Chobani have gone ahead and sued WND for its prima facie libelous claim?
And one more example: In 2000, WND libeled Tennessee car dealer Clark Jones by falsely portraying him as a "suspected drug dealer." It stood by the claim for seven years as it fought a defamation suit Jones filed against WND over the claim. Then, just before the case was to go to trial in 2008, WND abruptly reversed course and settled with Jones, the terms of which remain secret to this day. The press release about the settlement laughably claimed that "WorldNetDaily.com and its editors never intended any harm to Clark Jones," which is simply not true -- Jones had a connection to Al Gore, whose presidential candidacy WND was trying to destroy when it made the false claim, so Jones had to be part of the destruction as well. It's noteworthy that WND never apologized to Gore for publishing false claims that it claimed played a role in Gore losing the election.
Of course, the difference between Jones and Gore, Clinton or Obama is that Jones was never a public figure who would have to meet a higher burden of defamation.
Farah might want to be careful what he wishes for. If Wolff, Maher and HBO can be sued over Haley, WND can be sued for all the libelous claims it has published about the Clintons, Gore and Obama. And that would definitely put WND out of business.
MRC Misses the Point On Both Ends of the Cross-Dressing Spectrum Topic: Media Research Center
We know the Media Research Center hates transgender people, so it's probably not a surprise that it also freaks out about a much milder variant of that in the form of cross-dressing.
First, it hates cross-dressing as played for laughs (even though it's been a comic trope since forever). When the Disney XD cartoon "Star vs. The Forces of Evil" has the main character cross-dress for an episode, NewsBusters blogger Matt Norcross could not find the humor in it:
Maybe the episode was done as a joke, similar to the cross-dressing jokes seen in the classic Looney Tunes cartoons. If that’s the case, so be it.
However, there is no doubt that this cartoon has been used by creator Daron Nefsy to push a progressive point of view. Keep in mind, this is the same show that has had multiple gay and lesbian couples kiss at once.
All of this is thanks to Disney-ABC Television Group chief Ben Sherwood and Disney Channel’s chief creative officer Gary Marsh (the latter being a Hillary Clinton supporter). Both of whom have completely destroyed the television division by using it to push a left-wing agenda.
There is no excuse to socially engineer very young children of both Disney XD and the Disney Channel. There’s nothing wrong with LGBT-themed content, as we’ve had to accept to the results of the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodgescase at the U.S. Supreme Court. But, when it goes as far as jamming this way of life in front of an audience as young as 10, that’s where things go too far.
On the other end of the spectrum, Lindsay Kornick watched an episode of the miniseries "The Alienist" and missed the point of the "several uncomfortable minutes of underage boys (some played by underage actors) wearing dresses with makeup and offering themselves for sexual pleasure":
It’s honestly hard to imagine that in a time where complimenting women can be seen as harassment, dressing boys up like female prostitutes, having them act and speak like girls, can somehow be considered good television. The show clearly paints the act as sad and pathetic, but apparently it’s fine when it’s done for art. That is, if degrading young boys can still be considered art. Somehow, I doubt there will be any Twitter movements regarding this unsightly treatment. After all, that would have to acknowledge two things modern-day feminists refuse to consider. One, that boys can be mistreated, and two, that boys can be (way too) oversexualized.
Kornick was apparently too busy hate-watching the show to figure out that the scene was supposed to be uncomfortable. As an actual reviewer points out, the miniseries is set in late 19th century New York City around the murder of a transgender prostitute, and the cross-dressing boys selling themselves is emblematic of the bleak existence of the immigrant underclass doing what they had (or were forced) to do to provide for their families.
If Kornick is squicked out by this, good. That's the whole point -- prostitution of this sort is supposed to be rather squicky.
WND Columnist: 'Feminism Is the Second-Greatest Seminal Threat to American Independence' Topic: WorldNetDaily
Next to illegal immigration, feminism is the second-greatest seminal threat to American independence.
Upon election, President Obama quickly gave interdisciplinary Cabinet-level control of all departments to lesbians running the National Organization for Women, who dictated Cabinet policy from the White House Office on Women and Girls (WOWG). The feminist sexual revolution agenda was broadly forced upon other departments, most notably the military and education, sometimes enhanced by destructive presidential orders and letters that are still operative today.
Fake rape statistics were used to take over college campuses. “Star Chamber” administrative campus tribunals now apply phony definitions of sex abuse to kick men out college, while women have carte-blanche rights to slam down beer, do drugs and sleep with anybody they want with no risk of repercussion. “Microaggressions” established an unintelligible encyclopedia of punishable “patriarchal crimes”.
Feminists are well on the way to forcing everyone to live according to radical feminist dicta under phony “Yes Means Yes” laws requiring men (even married men) to get permission to hold a woman’s hand (and everything beyond that) or be presumed guilty of a sexual offense. This law was sponsored by radical feminist Sen. Claire McCaskill and reflects her demand that men “shut the hell up” on a broad range of issues that are the sole domain of feminist Supremacists to manage.
Feminist harangues about sexual violence are as phony as Al Gore’s global warming agitprop.
Harvey Weinstein went way overboard and was quickly declared guilty. Men who did nothing worth sneezing at often end up fired or pariahed because they are the same sex as Harvey Weinstein. The feminist meat grinder wins because spitting out volumes of false allegations costs nearly nothing, while it is very expensive and perhaps impossible to prove innocence.
Feminists never mention how Elizabeth Taylor and other screen sirens wore out their casting couches. They never talk about the epidemic of female teachers sexually abusing children in our public schools.
The vast majority of men destroyed by feminists did nothing women were not happily doing alongside them at parties, in dressing rooms, offices and every place else imaginable. The results are vastly unequal: Men get sacked while women get payoffs, a book deal and pandering appearances on talk television.
Sex crimes are horrid life-destructive crimes – and so are false sex crime allegations. Both should be punished with equal vigor. But they are not. Amidst the howling roar of the feminist rape riot, nobody dares mention serious collateral damage done to innocent men. Everyone runs, ducks, capitulates, or hides – which is exactly what feminists want them to do.
Liberals are experts at emotionally leveraging conservative principles against us. Feminists hijacked the election from Judge Roy Moore. Phony allegations of pedophilia froze conservative voters into staying home on election day because rational thinking dies when conservatives hear the serotonin-inhibiting words “sexual abuse.” Spineless snowflakes running the RNC quickly abandoned Moore. The Democrat turnout was 95 percent of 2016, but the Republican turnout a dismal 50 percent.
The sacking of Judge Roy Moore guarantees that political races in 2018 and beyond will be panopticons of sex allegations against men.
I suggest it is time for Rush Limbaugh to update his original definition of feminism: “Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of pop culture.” It should be “Feminism was invented to empower Marxist sacrifice of nations before a pink pedestal of predatory chivalry.”
The new year is off to a strong start on the employment front.
The Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Friday that a record 154,430,000 people were employed in January, a gain of 309,000 from December.
The number of employed Americans has broken seven records since Donald Trump took office.
Jones waited until the 10th paragraph of her article to mention that only about 200,000 jobs were created in January, but added revised numbers from November and December to come up with her pumped-uup 309,000 number.
However, in a rare bit of honest reporting in her pro-Trump rah-rah piece, Jones did concede that "the number of Americans not in the labor force also set a new record at 95,665,000 – the fourth such record since Trump took office."
It was up to CNS managing editor Michael W. Chapman to spin tha hardest regarding the most negative number: the spike in black unemployment from 6.8 percent in December -- a figure Trump was heavily touting over the past month -- to 7.7 percent in January, a huge increase CNS would be repeatedly highlighting if a Democratic president was in office. Instead, Chapman buried the spike and insisted that the high number is still pretty darn good, under the headline "Black Unemployment Still Low at 7.7%":
Although the black unemployment rate in December of 6.8% was the lowest ever recorded, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data, the black unemployment rate of 7.7% in January was still among some of the lowest rates moving downward since last April.
As the numbers show, the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate nationwide for black Americans, 16 years and over, was 7.7% in January 2018.
In April 2017 it was 7.9%; May, 7.6%; June, 7.1%; July, 7.4%; August, 7.6%; September, 7.0%; October, 7.3%; November, 7.2%; and December, 6.8%.
We hope Chapman got a bonus for his valiant effort to spin such bad news on behalf of the Trump administration.
CNS editor in chief Terry Jeffrey contributed his usual pieces on government employment and manufacturing jobs. But even he couldn't resist the siren song of dishonesty, writing in the manufacturing-jobs piece:
The last time the United States had more than 12,555,000 employed in manufacturing was in January 2009, the month President Barack Obama was inaugurated. In that month, there were 12,561,000 employed in manufacturing. But in February 2009, the month after Obama's inauguration, manufacturing employment dropped to 12,380,000, according to the BLS.
Jeffrey convenient omits the inconvenient fact that the country was free-falling into recession when Obama took office. And the chart accompanying Jeffrey's article makese it clear that manufacturing jobs have been on an upward trajectory since about 2011, which undercuts Jeffrey's implicit credit to Trump for the increase over the past year that is simply continuing past trends.
WND Ever-So-Slowly Pulling Away From Paul Nehlen Topic: WorldNetDaily
On Jan. 26, we documented how WorldNetDaily has refused to publicly disassociate itself from Paul Nehlen -- a right-wing political candidate whose book WND published last summer -- after his turn to explicit white nationalism and anti-Semitism.
WND is still not saying anything publicly, but it has quietly made one significant step: it pulled that book, "Wage the Battle" from its own online store. Both the book and its e-book edition now return "page not found" errors. A few weeks earlier, WND had discontinued Nehlen's anti-Muslim film "Hijrah" from its online store.
Meanwhile, our speculation about the status of WND's book division having slipped into dormancy apears to have some merit. A Feb. 4 WND article announced the naming of a new editorial director for WND Books: Felicia Dionisio, who spent the past 15 years as a WND news editor. Now that someone's actually in charge of WND Books, perhaps Dionisio can make a definitive public statement about its current relationship with Nehlen -- and maybe address the fact that a promo for Nehlen's book and an author bio still remain live on the WND Books website.
Surely WND can't be so cash-strapped that it can't take a couple minutes to formally and publicly distance itself from Nehlen -- if that is indeed what it wants to do.
MRC Denies Russian Bots' Influence on #ReleaseTheMemo Campaign Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center really, really, doesn't want you to believe that the who #ReleaseTheMemo Twitter meme had no connection whatsoever to the Russian-linked Twitter bots that promoted it.
In a Jan. 20 NewsBusters post, P.J. Gladnick dismisses a Rolling Stone story about how Russian-controlled Twitter accounts heavily promoted the hashtag as nothing but a "Boris & Natasha bot fantasy," adding: "Even if there were 500 'Russia-influenced' Twitter accounts posting that hashtag, it would only be an infinitesimally small number of the total. Of course, [Rolling Stone writer Bob] Moser could do what I did and check out at random the authenticity of those posting the hashtag but it would ruin the premise of his fantasy."
Gladnick concluded: "So go ahead Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Investigate these supposed Russian bots tweeting on Twitter for evidence of collusion. Somehow I think he would be just as lucky proving Russian bot collusion as he has so far for proving Russian collusion in general."
Tom Blumer followed up in a Jan. 26 NesBusters post, attacking the Rolling Stone article as "a bogus report from the far-left media fever swamp." He highlighted a Daily Beast report citing "a knowledgeable source" about Twitter's internal analysis who claimed that "authentic American accounts, and not Russian imposters or automated bots, are driving #ReleaseTheMemo."
Blumer admitted that the Daily Beast noted "skepticism" about the finding, but he downplayed the extent that skepticism was stated. The Daily Beast pointed out that "Russian troll farms use cutout accounts to launder their message in order to appear authentically American" and that "Measuring engagement on a hashtag shows influence that may indeed be authentically American – but can simultaneously obscure the origin of that message." It also admitted that "Russian influence accounts did, in fact, send an outsize number of tweets about #ReleaseTheMemo—simply not enough for those accounts to reach the top of Twitter's internal analysis."
Further, as Politico has since reported, the second Twitter account to retweet the #ReleaseTheMemo hashtag is an apparent bot of undetermined origin, and the third account to retweet it as a suspected Russian bot. It also references an earlier Politico article about "Twitter rooms" in which pro-Trump activists coordinate messages and then retweet each other, creating an online groundswell that doesn't really exist. Politico makes it clear that, in its words, "#releasethememo is carried forward by automated accounts overnight after it begins to trend. It continued to do so from its appearance until the memo was released," adding that the bots target "key influencers with these messaging campaigns—media personalities, far-right brand names, and elected officials who might pick up the info or hashtag and legitimize it by repeating it."
The Politico article concludes:
Regardless of how much of the campaign was American and how much was Russian, it’s clear there was a massive effort to game social media and put the Nunes memo squarely on the national agenda—and it worked to an astonishing degree. The bottom line is that the goals of the two overlapped, so the origin—human, machine or otherwise—doesn’t actually matter. What matters is that someone is trying to manipulate us, tech companies are proving hopelessly unable or unwilling to police the bad actors manipulating their platforms, and politicians are either clueless about what to do about computational propaganda or—in the case of #releasethememo—are using it to achieve their goals. Americans are on their own.
This is the truth Gladnick and Blumer -- and the rest of the MRC -- want to deny.
WND's Farah Embarrasses Himself Praising Trump, Promoting His Thank-Trump Website Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah's love for President Trump knows no bounds, as demonstrated by his thank-Trump e-card campaign. Farah's sycophancy reached new levels of embarrassing in his Jan. 31 column on Trump's State of the Union address:
OK, was that a great speech or what?
For me, I can only say it was the greatest State of the Union delivered in my lifetime – and I LOVED every one Ronald Reagan gave.
But this was remarkable, a triumph, it brought tears to my eyes, it sent chills down my spine.
Donald Trump has drawn a line in the sand: If you don’t think it’s not too much to expect your fellow Americans to stand silently and respectfully when the national anthem is played, you’re on the right side. And we witnessed nearly half the House chamber in the Capitol on the wrong side.
He gave the speech, but they showed their true colors.
They despise America and everything it stands for.
So much for Trump reaching across the aisle. He showed them up, without even trying.
And that’s what you have to love about this guy. He’s plain spoken and sincere. He’s a true believer in this country.
I couldn’t write this column last night because my hands were shaking, my eyes were teary and I was too busy tweeting!
This, of course, turned into a more emphatic than usual appeal for readers to partake of WND's thank-Trump campaign:
So, let me ask you this: Are you now ready to THANK HIM for what he has achieved in his first year and for that triumphant speech?
Then make your way over to THANKTRUMP.us and DO IT! Do it now!
You will hate yourself a few years from now if you don’t.
I should know. I’ve been around a long time. I started on the wrong side. Ronald Reagan showed me the way back home. And Trump is doing it again – for a new generation.
I tell you this sincerely. I believe he could be responsible for a political, cultural and social realignment of unprecedented proportions. But we need to get behind him – all of us.
Put aside your minor differences. He’s a phenomenon. He’s a rock star. He’s a natural. This kind of person comes along once in a lifetime at the most, if you’re lucky.
Encourage him. Thank him – at ThankTrump.us.
I’m not sure there is anything more important for you to do today than to spread the word about the ThankTrump.us campaign. If you can think of something, I’m all ears. If you have a better idea, let me know. In the meantime, this is what we have. So, if you’re as excited as I am, get on board.
Go to ThankTrump.us and express your gratitude.
Send your friends there – everyone you know.
Make it go so viral that the Democrats start a new conspiracy tale about Russian collusion being behind the campaign.
Doesn't Farah have anything better to do -- like, you know, revenue-generating activities that will help pull WND out of its current downward spiral toward nonexistence?
Walmart announced Thursday that it will raise its hourly starting wage, give bonuses to eligible employees, expand maternity leave and provide adoption aid – thanks to the passage of President Donald Trump’s tax reform plan.
The combined wage and benefit changes will benefit its more than one million U.S. hourly associates at Walmart, Sam’s Club and other related enterprises, the company says.
Notice that Bannister is relying on nothing but a statement from Walmart itself (which we can't access because the link he embedded is broken).
It also means that Bannister doesn't tell readers that, on the same day those Trump-linked pay raises were announced, Walmart also closed 63 Sam's Club warehouse stores, eliminating thousands of jobs -- which would seem to undercut the message.
But Bannister's mission isn't to report the full truth; it's to be a Trump suck-up and to ignore the truth when it conflicts with that mission.
Where Are They Now? Working At Breitbart And Buying Twitter Followers Topic: WorldNetDaily
We haven't heard much from Aaron Klein around these parts since he departed WorldNetDaily for Breitbart in 2015. We did notice he got shipped to Alabama last fall to pull a Weinstein on the women who accused Roy Moore of perving on them as teenagers by trying to dig up dirt on them, but that's about it.
It turns out, however, that this wasn't the only shameful behavior Klein has engaged in. The New York Times recently reported on companies who sell Twitter followers -- at least some of which are stolen identities -- to clients willing to pay them for the privilege of pumping up their follower count, with particular focus on a company called Devumi. And guess who is among those clients?
The Times reports that "Aaron Klein, a radio talk show host and the Jerusalem bureau chief for Breitbart News, bought at least 35,000 followers from Devumi, according to records. A Times analysis found that the majority of his followers were bots." The Times also charts the "unusual patterns" in how he accumulated his followers, particularly the presence of a known fake follower that appears in numerous accounts.
As we noted when Breitbart hired him (without, apparently, looking very closely into his work for WND), Klein has a bad habit of playing fast and loose with the facts. It seems some things haven't changed.
With Its SOTU Coverage, CNS Is A Total Trump Suck-Up Topic: CNSNews.com
Being the loyal Trump stenographers they are, the crew at CNSNews.com turned the sycophancy on full-blast for its coverage of President Trump's State of the Union address.
First, in a combination of padding and ego-stroking, CNS cranked out a whopping seven articles on the speech itself and things directly related to it when they could have been combined into one or two:
From there, CNS goes into attack mode, courtesy of a couple of sneering opinion pieces presented as "news" by Susan Jones, who's prone to this sort of thing. In the first, Jones takes a shot at the ACLU because "The American Civil Liberties Union -- note the word 'American' in its title -- complained Tuesday night about President Trump's repeated use of the word "America" in his State of the Union speech" because Trump's vision of America is dramartically different from that of most people. Jones' idea of a response is to rehash Trump's proposed immigration policy. This was accompanied by a reposting of a 2014 article by editor Terry Jeffrey complaining that President Obama "used the first person singular--including the pronouns 'I' and 'me' and the adjective 'my'--199 times" in a speech. (CNS had a thing about counting Obama's words.)
In the second, Jones recounts a Fox News segment in which Tucker Carlson bashed a Democratic congressman who left the chair next to him at the speech empty in honor of an Ohio resident who was deported, cheering how Carlson was "cutting off [the congressman] with the video equivalent of a mic drop."
That's the way "journalism" works at CNS these days.
WND's Farah: Evangelicals Will Ignore Trump's Personal Life As Long As He Delivers The Goods Topic: WorldNetDaily
We previously pointed out that WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah effectively abdicated any moral authority to pass judgment on the personal behavior of others by giving a pass to President Trump's alleged affair with a porn star. He doubled down on that position in his Jan. 23 column, effectively saying he doesn't care about Trump's sleazy personal life because he's delivering the political goods:
The Washington Post Sunday called evangelicals “moral relativists” for supporting President Trump, but unless you subscribe to that fake news outlet, you can’t read the story.
I would not suggest doing so, but, instead, read it for free here. Or, just take my word for it.
Is that assertion true?
No, it is wholly a lie.
That’s not to say some evangelicals are not moral relativists.
But people like Franklin Graham and Jerry Falwell Jr. and Tony Perkins are not.
In American politics, we have choices to make. When “candidate A” supports 99 percent of what you believe and his or her opponent, “candidate B,” supports none of it, the morally responsible thing to do is to vote for “candidate A.” And when “candidate A” is elected president of the United States and fulfills his promises in record time, as President Trump has, you praise him, thank him, pray for his safety and continued good health and thank God for the blessing He is pouring out on your country.
It’s really that simple.
But, you know, there are some people who call themselves “evangelicals” who don’t see it that way. I would suggest to you that if they are truly supportive of life, liberty, religious rights, Israel’s self-determination and security, national sovereignty, the Constitution, the sanctity of marriage and the rule of law, that they should be as supportive of President Trump as I am in his dedication to those issues to date. If he falters in his second year or third year of fourth year, we should criticize him for doing so. Right now, however, there is very little to criticize. It’s quite simply, from an evangelical worldview, the best start to a presidency in modern history.
And here, we get to the part where Farah once again gives Trump a mulligan on his past, something he has never done for anyone named Clinton:
Those who attack evangelicals for supporting Trump are being disingenuous at best. Why shouldn’t they? He listened to them. He’s doing what they asked him to do. This is not a mystery. And it’s certainly not moral relativism. They didn’t change their positions. Trump changed his.
The Washington Post story, in making its case for evangelical moral relativism, cited one of its own columnists, Michael Gerson, described by the piece as “a leading evangelical.” Gerson wrote, according to the piece, “At the Family Research Council’s recent Values Voter Summit, the religious right effectively declared its conversion to Trumpism.”
That’s a lie and an insult.
When one “converts” to something, it suggests leaving behind one’s previous beliefs.
If anyone “converted” from his previous political beliefs, it is clearly Trump. From the perspective of the evangelical majority, that’s a good thing. We love converts to life, liberty, religious rights, Israel’s self-determination and security, national sovereignty, the Constitution, the sanctity of marriage and the rule of law. We make no apologies for that. We love it even more when people embrace God. And, whatever his past suggests, President Trump has demonstrated at least a public respect and reverence for the Creator of the universe and His ways.
In the world of politics, that is reason for praise, enthusiasm and thanksgiving.
Just as Farah provided no evidence in his previous column for his claim that Trump "was a very different Donald Trump" when he had his alleged porn-star fling, he provides no evidence for his new claim that Trtump has "converted" from his previous views.
Farah betrays a little skepticism by acknowleding that "whatever his past suggests, President Trump has demonstrated at least a public respect and reverence for the Creator of the universe and His ways" -- indicating that he at least suspects Trump is being insincere. But, again, Farah doesn't care Trump's personal life the way he cared about, say, Bill Clinton's, at least as long as Trump continues to do Farah's bidding.
And that was the whole point of the Washington Post article Farah is attacking -- that evangelicals are placing access to power before character. Not only does Farah avoid actually engaging in that argument beyond saying, "Damn straight we're putting power before character!" he attacks anyone who makes it as a "Trump hater."
Spoken like a true believer. That dogmatic attitude shows that Farah really is a Trump convert after all.
CNS Tries to Credit Trump for Fewer Suicides Aat Golden Gate Bridge, Or Something Topic: CNSNews.com
How deeply is CNSNews.com in the pocket of the Trump administration? It seems to want to credit Trump for fewer successful suicides at the Golden Gate Bridge.
A Jan. 22 CNS blog post by Craig Bannister carries the baffling headline "Golden Gate Bridge Suicide Attempts Set Record in Trump’s First Year, But Police Ensure Fewer Succeed." Baffling because the article itself doesn't mention Trump, and also because we're not sure exactly what Bannister is trying to credit Trump with. Is he blaming the higher suicide attempts on Trump, or thanking him for fewer successful ones?
Bannister notes that "In May of last year, construction began on a $211 million project to build a suicide deterrent system," but he offers no evidence that Trump had any role in that. In the press release to which Bannister links as part of that statement highlights the commemoration ceremony to start contruction of the deterrent system featured Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Reps. Nancy Pelosi and Jared Huffman -- all Democrats. Bannister clearly could not give them any credit.
So, it appears that all we have here is an attempt by Bannister to create some clickbait by putting Trump in the headline for no reason at all. Is this what CNS has come to?
I almost forgot how surreal it was for eight years when [Barack Obama] was in the White House. The arrogance, the smugness, the effete snobbiness, the petulant know-it-all-ness. I realized how liberating it has been over the last year. To think so many people would prefer to return being led like lambs to the slaughter of liberty is astonishing to me.
Amazing. Stunning. I’m almost speechless. Notice I said “almost.”
I wonder how many hurricanes and natural disasters he thinks he prevented in the eight years of his presidency.
He thinks he’s a god! But, what’s worse is too many others still fawn over this kind of gobbledygook.
All I can say is: Thank you Donald Trump for delivering us from this kind of superciliousness.
A top-secret memo that has been released to members of Congress, but still is being withheld from the American public, characterizes Barack Obama as “the vengeful narcissist” and alleges surveillance abuses by his administration that one representative likened to the work of Russia’s KGB.
Author, former Secret Service agent and former congressional candidate Dan Bongino tweeted: “Take it to the bank, the FBI/FISA docs are devastating for the Dems. The whole image of a benevolent Barack Obama they’ve disingenuously tried to portray is about to be destroyed. The real Obama, the vengeful narcissist, is going to be exposed.”
And now let’s examine the myth that Hitler’s great Luftwaffe, the Nazi air force, metamorphosed from the crop-dusters and glider clubs still permitted under the Versailles Treaty that banned military aviation after Germany’s surrender in World War I. Barack Obama’s birth certificate may not be the only one in error as to place of birth.
Nixon’s White House plumbers included five men, a few of whom once shifted to Nixon’s re-election campaign, who bugged the opposition Democratic National Committee headquarters with the listening devices of that day.
Barack Obama’s efforts were orders of magnitude larger, more sophisticated and damaging. He very nearly succeeded. Based on their reporting, the mainlining media seem to think that a permanent Obama-offspring government would have been just fine.
Obama employed the United States’ secret security apparatus, which is surely in the hundred-thousand-plus employee range, its budget unimaginable, to spy on his enemies and accumulate blackmail evidence on those who would someday be political opponents of himself or his party successors.
Leading Democrats know this. They’ve seen the same evidence as the Republicans on these committees. The mistake the Democrats have made is the same mistake Nixon made. Cover-up.
MRC Pushes Bogus Attack on 'Jerry Springer: The Opera' Production Topic: Media Research Center
Apropos of apparently nothing, the Media Research Center published a curiously worded Jan. 23 press release:
Media Research Center President Brent Bozell delivered remarks at the National Press Club on Tuesday calling on the National Endowment of the Arts to withdraw its funding of the "gleefully profane"Jerry Springer: The Operain New York City. He issued the following statement at the conclusion of the press conference:
“The NEA must withdraw its funding of the wildly anti-Christian, especially anti-Catholic, hate-filled production entitledJerry Springer: The Opera.As Bill Donohue of the Catholic League has pointed out, this so-called ‘opera’ receives the majority of its funding from public sources, including the NEA. This is an outrage which must end.
The play is ugly, unadulterated hate. The current tenure of the NEA chair ends in April and President Trump must appoint a new chairman who will once and for all put an end to taxpayer funding for anti-Christian ‘art’ such as this piece of garbage.”
You have to follow the embedded link to fingure out what, exactly, Bozell is so worked up about. It's a production of "Jerry Springer: The Opera" put on by a theater company called The New Group.
Bozell's mention of Donohue obscures the fact that this whole kerfuffle is spearheaded by Donohue and his right-wing Catholic League. Bozell fails to disclose that he's a member of the Catholic League's board of advisers, which would seem to be important and relevant.
Beyond that, however, the whole thing starts to fall apart. Donohue is attacking the musical and its producers because, according to his own press release, "the New Group receives most of its funding from public sources, led by the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA)." But he doesn't identify exactly how much funding its gets from the NEA, nor does he identify whether any of that NEA funding went toward this production.
Donohue has since been trying to milk this evidence-free story -- with the MRC's help, of course. Donohue sent a letter to President Trump about it, but again he offered no proof to back up his claim, vaguely stating only that "The New Group is funded by the National Endowment for the Arts."
A Jan. 25 CNSNews.com blog post by Craig Bannister regurgitates another letter Donohue sent to a House committee claiming "potential guideline violations by the NEA." This is all Donohue has to offer:
The nexus between NEA and the New Group is more than disturbing: it is so incestuous that it is in violation of NEA’s own strictures. In 2009, the NEA gave the New Group $50,000, "To support the preservation of jobs that are threatened by declines in philanthropic and other support during the current economic downturn." Yet under NEA guidelines, "General operating or seasonal support" is explicitly prohibited.
That's apparently the only "evidence" Donohue has -- a small donation nearly a decade ago that has nothing whatsoever to do with the group's current production. That's the opposite of "incestuous."
But the MRC will never admit that emperor Donohue has no clothes here -- he's just a hateful old man with some money to throw around to push his right-wing agenda and a few friends in the media (and on his board) who will help him spread his bogus claims.
Farah Admits Issues In Trying To Save WND, Still Won't Admit Its Bad-Content Issues Topic: WorldNetDaily
As WorldNetDaily tries to save itself from going out of business, it's been sending out regular fund-raising appeals from editor Joseph Farah -- part of its current campaign to raise $200,000 to get it through March -- that, on occasion, offer insight into how WND has been run over the years.
Some of it has been dishonest, of course, as one would expect from Farah and WND. Farah has previously blamed Google for stealing ad dollars away from WND (actually, WND is a Google AdSense client, and it remained so even after Google forced WND to abandon its Colin Flaherty-fueled obsession with "black mob violence" by threatening to cut off that particular avenue of revenue) and "Amazon, the owners of the Washington Post" for hurting its e-commerce operation (no, Amazon doesn't own the Post; Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos does, about whom Farah has spun a factually challenged conspiracy theory).
WND has always been undercapitalized compared not just with the big corporate media, but even with our friends in the independent media. I’ll share some amazing stats with you. No more than $5 million has ever been invested in WND over 20 years. With that meager investment, WND has brought in hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue over two decades.
Sounds like a gravy train, doesn’t it?
But it’s not. Because when we bring in revenue, we pay our bills, try new things, and invest the rest back into the company. That’s what we have always done.
Well, if you generated "hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue" but only spent $5 on the operation, it's not unreasonable to ask where all that money went and why it's not helping WND now. (Not to mention how much of that went to the Tennessee car dealer it falsely defamed during the 2000 election.)
Farah then added a little surprising insight about how its revenue patterns align with who the president is:
Political years are generally good for WND. Non-political years, not so much. In addition, when you feel danger from your elected officials, we’re like your best friend in the media. But, conversely, when you feel like your best friend is in power, some of you don’t think you need us so much anymore. It’s ironic, but the Clinton years were a boom for WND – the Bush years, not so much. The Obama years were good for WND, the first year of Trump, not so much.
I’ll leave it to you to draw your own conclusions about that phenomenon.
Remember, WND was founded in order to attack President Clinton. And this explains why it fought so hard (and failed miserably) to destroy Obama -- its revenue depended on being always on attack, regardless of whether any of those attacks were true. It also raises the question of why Farah felt the need to start a "thank Trump" campaign when WND's finances were so precarious.
In his Jan. 30 letter, Farah made another admission, in the midst of announcing that WND's online store would take payment through PayPal for the first time in several years (he admits dropping the PayPal option may have been "really stupid"):
The WND Superstore was once WND’s No. 1 source of revenue – for years! It was reliable. It was steady. But because of the “Amazonization” of our culture, fewer people think of any other place to go for their books, Bibles, movies, gifts, preparedness needs and even unique products not carried at Amazon.
Yes, merchandising has tended to be the savior of other operations whose main content loses money. Yet on Jan. 31 WND sent out a promotion for Farah's book "The Restitution of All Things" which reprints favorable reviews of it from ... Amazon. So Farah is clearly not entirely displeased with how Amazon does business if he's trying to ride its coattails.
But throughout all of this, none of Farah's letters has mentioned the elephant in the room, the real reason why Google ranks WND so low in its searches: it's not credlble because of its fake-news-riddledcontent.
Instead of teasing us with possible site redesigns and secret projects, Farah should be talking about WND's biggest issue -- its bad content -- and telling us what he will do to fix it.