Topic: Media Research Center
Matt Palumbo has been a favorite of the Media Research Center over their shared hatred of both fact-checkers and George Soros. But as we've documented, Palumbo has spent the past few months discrediting himself by writing (paid, one would hope) propaganda on behalf of Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui, which were in turn published as paid content on websites like Newsmax and Gateway Pundit, taking time away from his day job working for right-wing radio host Dan Bongino. (Mother Jones has a new article examining some of this.)
Meanwhile, the MRC has promoting Palumbo's work for quite some time:
- An August 2020 post by Tim Graham touted how "Matt Palumbo at Bongino.com took issue with the extremely biased nature of PolitiFact's 'Truth-O-Meter' in assessing 'facts.'"
- An October 2020 post by Graham noted Palumbo defending his nominal boss, right-wing radio host Dan Bongino, over accusations he had been spreading unfounced misinformation that liberals planned to riot if Donald Trump won the election.
- A June 2021 post by Joseph Vazquez referenced Palumbo whining that Soros advocates higher taxes for the wealthy though he paid no income tacxes himself.
- In January, an MRC report obsessing over Soros' spending on causes he likes referenced an attack by Palumbo, followed by a post by Vazqueztouting how "Bongino Report Content Manager Matt Palumbo peeled back “the layers” of leftist billionaire George Soros’ global political and media influence during a recent interview with The Epoch Times."
- A Feb. 1 post by Vazquez hyped a New York Post editorial calling Soros "the mosdt dangerous man in America," approvingly citing attacks from Palumbo.
- An April 10 post by Vazquez noted Palumbo complaining about right-wingers being called out for trying to discredit Trump prosecutor Alvin Bragg by linking him to Soros.
As Palumbo ramped up his moonlighting propaganda for Guo -- which one would think is disqualifying -- the MRC continued to promote him. Curtis Houck gushed in an April 18 "editor's pick":
Writing in Tuesday’s print edition of the New York Post, our friend Matt Palumbo of the Bongino Report took a blowtorch to the liberal media-selected, so-called fact-checkers for their latest antics and lies in order to defend far-left Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg in his efforts to prosecute former President Trump.
“So-called fact-checkers know more about spinning the facts than checking them,” Palumbo began, citing Bragg as the latest proof they’ll go to any length “to circle the wagons and ‘debunk’ actual truths.”
[...]
Taken together, Palumbo argued that “[a]nyone can see exactly what happened here — yet the fact-checkers were more than happy to further demolish their credibility in arguing the contrary with pure semantics” and while one could argue these acts of mental gymnastics are comical, they’re actually disturbing as the intent is “to censor” dissent.
Houck did not mention how Palumbo was destroying his credibility by writing paid propaganda. A post three days later by Tom Olohan touted Bongino citing his employee in making the same argument.
A May 2 post by Olohan hyped Palumbo attacking a "George Soro lackey" for critiicizing right-wing attacks on prosecutors for allegedly having linksto Soros. A May 22 post by Vazquez cited Palumbo in promoting a right-wing Rasmussen poll claiming that a bare majority of Americans have an "unfavorable" view of Soros -- thus show how the millions of dollars spent by the likes of the MRC and Palumbo to spread anti-Soros hate are paying off.
Vazquez ran to Palumbo's defense in a June 15 post:
The George Soros-funded Southern Poverty Law Center threw a temper tantrum over Bongino Report Content Manager Matt Palumbo for his criticism of the group’s leftist financier.
The SPLC grumbled in a June 8 "Hatewatch" how Soros “has been that boogeyman for right-wing pundits, politicians and TV personalities.” SPLC then tried to launch nonsensical hyperbole in order to shield Soros from criticism and cast any opposition as being anti-Semitic in nature: “Soros has become the extreme right’s go-to antisemitic trope, and its ubiquity speaks to the mainstreaming of antisemitic rhetoric in the United States.” The SPLC then turned its sights on Palumbo and his book The Man Behind the Curtain: Inside the Secret Network of George Soros (2022) as an anecdote, and smeared his work as “antisemitic-trope laden” without citing any evidence to support the allegation.
SPLC, of course, omitted from the blog any disclosure that Soros’ organizations funneled at least $160,000 to its coffers between 2016 and 2019 alone. Palumbo mocked the SPLC for its absurdity in comments to MRC Business, stating: “I’m shocked that an organization funded by George Soros would resort to such absurd lies to defend him!” Palumbo is right on target.
Vazquez then tried to help Palumbo perpetuate the false anti-Semitic smear that Soros is a Nazi sympathizer:
The SPLC twisted the facts around an April interview of Palumbo with Daily Wire host Candace Owens. SPLC claimed: “[Owens] suggested that ‘because of his contempt for Americans,’ it was ‘plausible’ that George Soros, a Holocaust survivor, was actually ‘sympathetic to the Nazis.’” The leftist organization accused Palumbo of agreeing with the notion.
However, the SPLC characterization of the discussion was completely devoid of context. Owens cited Soros’ own apathetic admission, saying “No,” that he had no feeling of guilt for being even tacitly connected to the Nazi confiscation of property from the Jewish people as a young teenager during the former’s occupation of Hungary during World War II.
“It seems very bizarre that he has such hatred for — really — the people that liberated him. Right? If he believes that the Nazis were so backwards and were so awful, how could he then spend his life having such contempt for Americans,” Owens asked. She continued: “Why would he be trying to foster the end of America? Why would he be wanting the cities to be crime-filled and releasing criminals onto the streets via his district attorneys? It doesn’t make sense.”
Owens then asked: “Is it plausible that he was actually sympathetic to the Nazis because he was taken care of and he was protected and maybe he saw them through a different vein?” Palumbo correctly pointed out that the question surrounding Soros’ indifference and motivation against America is difficult. “The Occam’s Razor answer is the simplest one, which is: He’s just an evil guy. And what the exact, you know, reason was, we don’t exactly know.” But even broaching the topic in order to explain Soros’ creepy apathy is supposedly anti-Semitic, according to the SPLC’s logic.
Soros also happens to be notorious for using his fortune to fuel anti-Israel causes.
But Vazquez, Palumbo and Owens omitted important context as well: A teenage Soros was posing as the nephew of a Hungarian official who was inventorying property already seized from the Jews, and that the Nazis found out his Jewish identity, he would likely be sent to a concentration camp and killed. In other words, he was trying to survive, and Vazquez and Co. appear to be demanding that he feel guilty for surviving the Nazis.
As with many other right-wingers who similarly irrationally hate Soros, it seems that Vazquez, Palumbo and Owens wish that the Nazis had executed just one more Jew.
And, needless to say, Vazquez made no mention of Palumbo's side gig writing pro-Guo propaganda -- propaganda he is continuing to write. A June 20 article at Gateway Pundit -- paid content listed as a "sponsored post" by "NewNoah," presumably a Guo front group -- complained that Guo was "unjustly denied" a hearing related to the fraud charges he facees, "adding yet more evidence that the system is rigged against him." He ended the article in full propaganda mode:
In the interest of judicial fairness, it is essential that Guo be granted bail. By bestowing upon him the freedom to combat the baseless accusations hurled his way, we ensure the preservation of bedrock principles like due process and the right to mount a defense. The mistreatment suffered by Guo serves as a chilling reminder of the potential for power abuse within our judicial system. The time has come to prioritize truth, fairness, and the safeguarding of individual liberties, by granting Guo the opportunity to champion his innocence.
By the way, Palumbo's new (Bongino-published) book is out this week, which is dedicated to attacking fact-checkers as being too far "left." When you can't attack the facts, you attack the fact-checkers -- and why would anyone trust a paid propagandist to be honest about facts?
