The MRC's Hitler Hypocrisy Strikes Again Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has a badhabit of getting mad about others using Hitler comparisons when it does so on a regular basis, and it apparently has no intention of stopping its hypocrisy.
Teirin-Rose Mandelberg groused on Jan. 25 that director Spike Lee stated that Trump "will go down in history with the likes of Hitler," then played whataboutism: "The Capitol riots were disgraceful. But anyone who excused the summer’s race violence is in no position to dole out blame. Lee is blind to his own hypocrisy." The same day, Alexa Moutevelis channeled her inner Rush Limbaugh and used an article to smear abortion-rights supporters as "feminazis."
Talk about throwing Godwin’s Law out the window. This latest op-ed from the Philadelphia Inquirer goes so far as to compare Donald Trump to Hitler on Holocaust Remembrance Day. National unity is looking more and more like a pipe dream by the day.
On January 27, retired Inquirer editor David Lee Preston did his part in remembering one of the worst atrocities in humanity by, what else, comparing President Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler. His piece, aptly-titled “Is it wrong to compare Trump to Hitler? No,” dives straight to the point that yes, it is now okay to connect a former U.S. president to the Nazi dictator.
The last thing this nation needs is more lying, fearmongering, and division. And the last thing this solemn Holocaust Remembrance Day needed was a sideshow of more whiny Trump comparisons to Hitler.
Kornick then downplayed the Jan. 6 right-wing riot at the Capitol by complaining about the writer's compaison of it to Kristallnacht: "Absolutely, yes, they are different! Once again, the Capitol Hill attack was reprehensible. What it wasn’t was a night of widespread slaughter and destruction targeting an oppressed minority. Any comparison of the two is disgusting, especially during a time when we’re supposed to honor the 11 million lives lost to the Holocaust, including six million Jewish people."
On Feb. 11, Tim Graham noted that ABC correspondent Terry Moran said of Trump's grip on the Republican Party: "He has the Republican party as a personalized power like we haven't seen. It's a caudillo, it’s a Caesar, it's a Fuhrer, we don't see that in this country. We do now." He huffed in response: "It's a little strange considering some rogue Republicans are voting and speaking out against Trump, which doesn't sound much like Hitler's Germany in action. But the media insist: you either agree with our plot, or you're like a Nazi."
If GOP criticism of Trump is a normal thing these days, where is that to be found on the MRC network of websites? Graham pointed to no examples, and we've seen no space on any MRC website where conservatives are permitted to criticize Trump with impunity.
To kick off Sunday’sGlobal Public Square, CNN host Fareed Zakaria, praised a “brilliant scholarly work” comparing British and German conservative parties in the early 20th century. The point was to suggest that America was on its way to emulate Germany with the modern Republican Party and News Corp. owner Rupert Murdoch marching to create a new Nazi Party to destroy our democracy.
But fear not, Zakaria reassured would-be critics he wasn’t saying Republicans WERE Nazis. He was only saying they’re LIKE Nazis. He said this while the chyron said " Republicans need an exorcism."
Fondacaro then baselessly claimed that "Zakaria betrayed his own disgust for democracy and the will of the governed." That's a rather rich complaint given that his employer is still peddling the Big Lie that the election was stolen from Trump.
None of these complaints about others going Godwin noted that their boss, Brent Bozell, declared of Twitter removing Trump's account and Amazon Web Services canceling its hosting deal with Parler over the hate and violence Parler permitted: "Stalin censored speech. So did Mao. So did Hitler. It’s what tyrants do."
None of these MRC employees was fretting about Bozell spreading "lying, fearmongering, and division." None of these employees accused Bozell of being blind to his own hypocrisy. They're just loyal MRC drones being paid to not hold themselves to the same standards they demand of others.
CNS Piles On AOC Over Remarks About Cruz Topic: CNSNews.com
The Media Research Center wasn't alone in trashing Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for expressing her sincere fears about her fellow members of Congress who supported the attempt to overturn the presidential election that culminated in the Capitol riot. Its "news" division, CNSNews.com, joined in as well.
In a Jan. 22 article, Susan Jones seemed offended that Ocasio-Cortez didn't attend President Biden's inauguration in part because "we still don't yet feel safe around other members of Congress," specifically citing Republican Sens. Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley. Jones made sure to call Ocasio-Cortez a "non-senator" and tried to whitewash what the senators tried to do:
For the record, neither Sen. Hawley nor Cruz advocated “insurrection” or overturning the results of the 2020 election.
Hawley said he would vote against certification of the Electoral College tally because it was the only way to air his and his constituents' concerns about problems with the election and have a chance to debate it, as the law and Constitution allow.
Cruz and other Republican senators advocated a 10-day delayin congressional certification to make time for an audit of the results in swing states.
When Ocasio-Cortez explicitly claiming that Cruz was trying to get her killed through his support of overtunring the election (and he did effectively do that no matter what Jones thinks), CNS was quick to rush out Republicans demanding an apology in similarly headlined items, all by Craig Bannister:
Bannister let the Republicans claim that Ocasio-Cortez was making a false accusation without providing the context for it. In the Roy item, he wrote: "On January 6 of this year, when a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol while votes electing Joe Biden as president were being certified, Sen. Cruz was 'simply engaging in speech and debate regarding electors,' not threatening Ocasio-Cortez, Roy says" -- but he didn't tell readers that the attempt to overturn the election Cruz supported help instigate the riot.
Bannister comes off as doing PR for Republicans instead of being a reporter.
MRC Complains Once Again That Fictional (And Real) People Advocating For Abortion Are Not Shamed Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has longcomplained that woman who seek abortions -- even fictional characters -- are not shamed for doing so and that they and abortions providers are not smeared as Nazis. Well, the're on that kick again. Teirin-Rose Mandelberg complained in a Jan. 22 post ofering up a bizarre caricature of abortion-rights supporters:
Today’s a high holy day for lefties. On this date, January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade and mass infanticide became the law of the land.
Abortion clinic volunteer Lauren Rankin marked the occasion by complaining that “We Still Have a Long Way to Go.” Forty-eight years and 63 million lives later, the left still isn’t satisfied. What’s new?
Rankin wants laws updated so women can have access to dangerous abortion drugs via mail without a doctor's visit. Ostensibly, she’s worried about women being too nervous about COVID to go to an abortion clinic. But social distancing is a pretext so women can abort even more conveniently -- another leftist attempt to overstep and gain control.
Hollywood tries to "normalize" abortion and celebrities use it as a “dedicated to my craft” badge of honor. Having an abortion constitutes popularity.
Alexa Moutevelis used a Jan. 25 article to smear abortion-rights supporters as "feminazis" (looks like somebody's been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh!). And Rebecca Downs ranted on Jan. 29:
Not only have media outlets been ignoring the hundreds of thousands of pro-life Americans who participate in the March for Life, but they've been promoting and normalizing abortion on television. This has been going on for years, and 2020 was no different from 2019 and 2018.
Despite coronavirus canceling and postponing tv production for several months, they still managed to squeeze in several abortion storylines. Here's how abortion was portrayed on television last year.
In order for abortion to seem normal, viewers have to be bombarded that it’s no big deal.
Downs also pushed the dubious claim -- citing only an anti-abortion website -- that a chemically induced abortion can be reversed. And while she huffed at "leftist propaganda" on abortion, she was not above inserting some propaganda of her own:
It’s a biological fact that life begins at conception, meaning it's a child, the whole time. Not only is it a child, even going by the pro-abortion logic that it isn't a child until a later stage, it "would be" a child.
For an “honest abortion story” that is “diverse,” rather than just the one pro-abortion perspective television wants us to see, it would also include women experiencing not just the loss of their children, but suffering from psychological and physical effects, and from regret.
Moutevelis returned in a Feb. 24 post to complain some more about "abortion propaganda" on TV -- unironically sounding a lot like a propagandist herself:
Pro-abortion columns are notorious for lacking facts and building bad faith strawmen to knock down, but I think this is the first time I’ve seen such a poorly constructed argument in a major paper like The Washington Post. If you're going to call for more baby slaughter on entertainment TV, put some thought into it.
Even the premise of the article is ridiculous. Apparently, the author just happened to be watching a show from 2019 that had an unexpectedly pregnant character and so she decided to rant about there not being enough abortions on TV. What editor authorizes an op-ed based on an obscure show that’s years old and includes no research to back up its hypothesis or make it relevant to today?
Somehow, on Friday afternoon, the WaPo powers that be allowed a Kate Cohen article to be published online complaining that the 2019 Netflix series Atypical did not include the preborn baby slaughter she’d wanted.
In fact, if she had made any attempt at research, she would have found that in 2019, The New York Times said abortions were “unapologetically” on TV “at record levels.” If she is still stuck in the past consuming media from 2019, I can also offer her the news that in that year, actress, director, and producer Elizabeth Banks joined the Creative Council at the pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) to “help destigmatize abortion by sharing and supporting women's stories” in the entertainment industry. Or maybe she could read her own outlet’s The Washington Post Magazine piece that same year about “abortion rights…winning in Hollywood” because of Planned Parenthood consultants.
But Cohen, who wrote this column based on her own outdated anecdotes, with no statistics, facts or interviews to back her up, had the audacity to lecture, “Those who contribute to the cultural space have a responsibility to consider the historical and political context into which their work will land.” Maybe she should look in the mirror.
Written like a true propagandist for the cause, where opposing arguments must be obliterated and the people who make them must be stripped of their humanity.
WND Columnists Refuse To Take Biden's Election Well Topic: WorldNetDaily
COVID-19 was more than just a pretext for crashing the U.S. economy to take down Trump. It served to justify repressive police-state controls across the globe. The election-fraud campaign was about more than stealing the presidency. It produced the stunning abandonment of any pretense of fairness or due-process in the vicious enforcement of Marxist narratives by all the power players of the elites: a result that will likely not be reversed despite the coup being completed. The dystopian jack-booted surrealism of Baghdad Biden's pending "inauguration" is more likely a glimpse at the "new normal" than just an historical aberration.
That's the soberingly pessimistic view we must include in our contingency planning, even as we hope – and work – for the best.
In October, Joe Biden told us America is headed into a "dark winter" and repeated that phrase Wednesday in his Inaugural Address. As America and Western nations head into a new Dark Age, ordinary citizens have increasingly little say over their own nations' political decisions. And when voters do exert their preferences over the objection of globalist elites, the political establishment uses their control of the bureaucracy to hamstring and block every change until they can reassert control.
It is frankly disturbing, and more than a little terrifying, therefore, that more than a few Democrats and left-leaning pundits are calling for Republicans and conservatives, including Christian Republicans, conservatives and supporters of President Trump, to be deprived of their rights to free speech and freedom to assemble peaceably, as guaranteed by the First Amendment in the United States Constitution. In fact, some of them are even calling for the establishment of reeducation camps for those who reject the political and economic talking points put forth by the Democratic Party and its echo chambers, Big Tech, the mainstream media and the teachers unions. This is a real concern. Look at how many Democrat-appointed judges who are willing to go along with such totalitarian nonsense. If Democrat-appointed judges can force a Christian baker to bake a cake supporting same-sex marriage, or pay a big fine that destroys his business, why wouldn't Democratic elected officials force people to publicly support a taxpayer-funded government program to burn books they don't like, including a program to imprison the authors of those books? After all, we've already seen some elected Democrats refuse to stop or prosecute "protesters" trying to remove statues of Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant from the public square.
It's beginning to occur to me that when Joe Biden talks about "unity," he's not talking about we deplorables, or loyalist Trump backers, or even just plain old Republicans.
Remember, Trump supporters are the ones he has called by such vicious names as "extremists," "white supremacists" and "domestic terrorists."<
In fact, as we have learned in the last few days, we are considered his enemies – worse than the Iranian regime, worse than al-Qaida, needing deprogramming – and prompting the announcement of a brand new domestic terror program aimed at us.
As far as Biden is concerned, he's coming after all of us – he's approving of it in advance, he's celebrating it. Why do you think his inauguration had 25,000 National Guardsmen? To protect a couple hundred people? To add an audience to the proceedings? Come on, man. This was a show of force – nothing less.
Having successfully circumvented the will of the American people to an extent never before realized, look for the Biden administration, its surrogates, congressional Democrats and radical socialists at large to become emboldened to an exponential degree – far more than when Barack Obama occupied the White House. The majority of Americans simply have no advocate at this juncture, save for a paltry handful of Republicans in Congress. The socialists have won.
I could project what the weeks and months ahead might hold for us, but I obviously don't know for sure. As it stands, my past prognostications – accurate though they may have been – didn't count for much, save for the edification of those who were pretty well clued-in to start with.
I wrote a while back about what Ernest Hemingway described as a writer's most important tool: it's called "a built in, shock proof s–- detector." Mine has been blaring loud and clear since the campaign attorneys did not cite the U.S. Supreme Court's 1997 Foster v. Love 9-0 decision, which ruled that Election Day means Election DAY. Ballot counting stops at midnight. That's when it's over.
States never considered this when they counted their ballots and certified their election and ballot counting that went on for days. The Senate and House ignored it when they accepted those flawed results. You can work out for yourself where the end of Election Day left the two candidates last November. Maybe that is part of what is giving me this unfinished-story feeling.
Is it possible this coup is really directed against Almighty God and His government? The usurpers would be many: governments, our own as well as others, with cameo appearances by big media and big tech.
As such, would it be so surprising to see such an insurrection addressed by Almighty God? As the momentarily former President Trump likes to say, "I guess we'll see what happens."
Maybe you're not there yet. I understand. But I think we are going to see a divine response to what is in reality a coup against our Creator and His Laws.
Remember the old New Orleans Saints coach Jim Mora, who went nuts at a press conference? "Playoffs? Are you kidding me? Playoffs?" he said.
You can quote me today: "Unity? Are you freakin' kidding me? Unity? There's no unity. President Joe Biden can mouth the word 'unity' all he wants. It's a lie. Democrats don't want unity. They want to censor us, ban us, purge us, wipe away American history like it never happened and then intimidate us into meekly going along with it all. They want us to kneel and say thank you while they destroy America and the American way of life. That's what they mean by 'unity.' So, you can take your unity and shove it where the sun don't shine."
Biden is not a "moderate." He is either a radical Marxist out to destroy America or a feeble old man with dementia being used as a puppet by George Soros, former President Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rep. Ilhan Omar and other radical, extreme, crazed America haters to destroy this country. But it really doesn't matter. Either way, he's leading us down the road to disaster, ruin, misery and poverty. He is going to turn America into Venezuela.
This isn't "unity." It's the destruction of America and everything that ever made it great. I'm not in unity. Are you?
MRC's Houck Uses Space Force Quip To Attack Psaki Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's Curtis Houck has made it claear that -- in a reversal of his obsequious fawning over Trump press secretary Kayleigh McEnany and wild attacks on any reporter who asked her a challenging question -- Biden press secretary Jen Psaki would be a target and any reporter who asked her a challenging question would be virtuous.
Houck is reviewing Psaki's press briefings as a "performance," looking for ways to attack. Thus, he declared in a Feb. 2 post because she was not sufficiently reverent of the Space Force that was created under President Trump:
Tuesday’s White House press briefing was perhaps Press Secretary Jen Psaki’s most combative one yet, facing tough questions on China, coronavirus relief, illegal immigration, Israel, and schools but also softballs on topics like COVID and impeachment.
It was the Space Force question that raised the most eyebrows as Bloomberg’s Josh Wingrove simply wanted to know if President Biden “has made a decision on keeping or keeping the scope of the Space Force.”
Psaki interjected and chuckled, making a reference to a question about Air Force One from the inaugural briefing: “Wow, Space Force. It's the plane of today.”
Wingrove pushed back that this matters and Psaki further beclowned herself: “It is an interesting question. I'm happy to check with our Space Force point of contact. I'm not sure who that is and find out and see if we have any update on that.”
Hours later, Psaki tweeted in a piece of damage control that the administration “look[s] forward to the continuing work of Space Force.”
We don't recall Houck ever saying that McEnany "beclowned herself" -- he was much to enamored by her allegedly sick burns and scripted insults of the media she was supposed to be briefing (thought she did, indeed, beclownherselfregularly).
The next day, Houck got more mileage out of the Space Force kerfuffle while adding in a couple other pedantic attacks:
On Thursday’s episode of the White House press briefing, Press Secretary Jen Psaki refused to apologize for having mocked the Space Force a day earlier and skimped on funding schools that teachers unions have kept shuttered, and falsely claimed that Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was the first openly gay cabinet secretary.
The daughter of astronauts, the Fox News Channel’s Kristin Fisher brought up the Bloomberg reporter Josh Wingrove’s Space Force question: “The top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee is asking you to apologize for the comments made yesterday in the briefing room about the space force. Will you apologize?”
Psaki declined, only alluding to a tweet she sent “invite members of Space Force here to provide an update to all of you on all the important work they're doing and we certainly look forward to seeing continued updates from there — from their team.”
But before the above quote, she worked in another dig at the Space Force: “I did send a tweet last night. You may not all be on Twitter. Maybe they’re not on Twitter.”
Houck then complained that "Psaki memory-holed former acting DNI Richard Grenell as having been the first openly-gay cabinet official when she boasted that the Senate had 'just confirmed as the first LGBTQ secretary in a cabinet.'" But he didn't mention that Grenell was only an acting cabinet official; Buttigieg is the first gay official to be confirmed by the Senate, nor did he mention all the falsehoods McEnany from the podium.
Houck also grumbled: "And yet, no one stepped up to the plate to ask Psaki about a 2020 tweet of hers calling “LadyG,” specifically). After expressing interest in past statements from Kayleigh McEnany, the press corps doesn’t seem to care about Psaki’s record." Houck didn't care about McEnany's record, and he certainly didn't mention the MRC's proud anti-LGBT record -- which included the MRC's Dan Gainor working to get Grenell fired from Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign simply because he was gay.
CNS Columnist Still Whining About Minorities Getting COVID Vaccine Topic: CNSNews.com
Back in December, CNSNews.com columnist Hans Bader argued (badly) that Blacks and Hispanics don't deserve early acceess to a coronavirus vaccine because they are "not inherently at greater risk of contracting the virus" (which is not true) and that it's their fault they tend to work in jobs that expose them to greater risk of catching the virus. Apparently that argument didn't gain any traction, for he tried it again in a Jan. 21 column:
Oregon plans to give minorities preference over whites in access to the coronavirus vaccine, which is unconstitutional.
After vaccinating healthcare workers, teachers, and seniors, Oregon plans to vaccinate "people in communities of color, specifically those most impacted by the pandemic: 'Black, African-American, Hispanic/Latino/Latinx, indigenous peoples, tribal and urban-based native communities, and Pacific Islanders.'”
The racial differences in disease rates aren't based on genetic susceptibility. Hispanics, who have a lot of white DNA, are the most disproportionately impacted: they account for 36% of COVID-19 cases in Oregon, despite being only 13% of Oregon's population. People who have looked at similar or larger disparities in other states have concluded that they are not due to racism, but rather due to other factors, such as Hispanics being a disproportionate share of the essential workforce exempt from government lockdowns, or their living in densely-populated apartment buildings.
There is nothing special about their genes that puts them in danger. It is just that their jobs, neighborhoods, and backgrounds tend to put them in more frequent contact with people who already carry COVID-19. As medical school professor Sally Satel observes, the risks of exposure for blacks and Hispanics "are increased because they are more likely than whites to work lower-paying jobs that require interaction with the public and to travel to those jobs by public transportation. Blacks and Hispanics are also more likely to live in homes with many family members sharing close quarters."
So it is those characteristics -- not race -- that Oregon can legally consider in handing out the vaccine to individuals.
It might be argued that blacks live in densely-populated areas plagued by coronavirus partly due to discrimination, such as redlining by banks, or discrimination by landlords. But the Supreme Court has ruled that "societal discrimination" against a minority group is not a valid reason for giving priority to members of that group. (See Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co. (1989)). So even if black and Hispanic people experience discrimination that shunts them into lower-paying jobs with increased risk of catching the coronavirus, that wouldn't be reason enough for Oregon to give them a racial preference.
It seems that Bader is just searching for legal loopholes to keep Blacks and Hispanics from getting the vaccine ahead of him. And, strangely, he doesn't seem all that eager to give vaccines to those essential workers whose jobs put them more at risk.
MRC Pushes Bogus Anti-Transgender Angle On Biden Executive Order Topic: Media Research Center
Tierin-Rose Mandelberg's Jan. 22 Media Research Center post was dramatically headlined "Biden’s Title IX Order Erased Women on His First Day. Twitter Noticed." In fact, Mandelberg was a woman before Biden's order, and she remained one afterward. Mandelberg then served upher definition of what President Biden's executive order to cover gender identity and sexual orientation under the Title IX guidelines governing women's sports:
Essentially, Biden’s trans-friendly order expanded the nondiscrimination protections of the LGBTQ community, prohibiting all workplace and educational discrimination against gender identity and sexual orientation. But, in addition to at least recognizing the existence of a right of association, Trump’s policy supported the difference between biological women and confused men.
Title IX was originally intended to ensure equal access and academic experience for women in higher education. But it has since progressed to locker rooms, bedrooms, and bathrooms, creating plenty of potentially uncomfortable (at the minimum) situations for women.
But the liberal overreach does real harm. In sports, for example, a biological male identifying as a “female” is inevitably going to beat out a real female if allowed to compete against her. As this situation gets more common (and the Trans industry very much wants it to) it will start depriving women athletes of scholarships, advancement opportunities, and honest victories. Biological men will dominate a sphere constructed solely for women.
Liberals claim to fight against male dominance --- ironic. This isn’t about inequality or being transphobic. It’s about taking away the honor of being born a woman.
Notice how quick she was to define Biden's order as "liberal" and smears transgender women as "confused."
The executive order does not address athletics beyond the mention of discrimination in "school sports." Further, transgender amateur athletes already have policies they must follow in order to compete.
According to the National Collegiate Athletic Association, which oversees 24 sports at over 1,000 colleges and universities, gender confirming surgery or legal recognition of a player's transitioned sex is not required in order for transgender players to participate on a team.
When hormones are used, the NCAA requires one year of hormone treatment for trans female athletes prior to competing on a women's team, and trans male athletes remain eligible to compete in women's sports until the athlete begins a physical transition using testosterone.
For K-12, according to Transathlete.com, policies vary by state and and school district, with 16 states having policies in place that facilitate the full inclusion of transgender, nonbinary and gender nonconforming students in high school athletics. There are 14 states that require medical proof, and 10 states that did not issue statewide practices but allow schools to create their own policies on a case-by-case basis.
So Biden's executive order barely mentions school sports, but Mandelberg falsely tried to portray the order as mostly about it. That's a mischaracterization that, unsprurpisingly, occurred across right-wing media.Nevertherless, Mandelberg concluded by ranting: "Do they not realize they take the special part of womanhood away by allowing anyone and everyone to identify as one at any time? Where does women’s empowerment go if anybody can just decide to be a woman? Obviously, it doesn’t take strength or power. Tomorrow, you can identify as a woman, too, and then go back again the next day, if you'd like."
No, Tierin-Rose, that's not how being transgender works.
WND's Farah Recycles A Column Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily editor Josephy Farah devoted his Jan. 19 column to ranting about Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnel and his wife, former Trump transportation secretary Elaine Chao. He complained that "McConnell congratulated Joe Biden for being president-elect on Dec. 15, while President Trump was still trying to 'Stop the Steal,'" while bashing Chao's "ties to Chinese business" and her father, who allegedly "had a cozy relationship with then-Communist Party leader Jiang Zemin and owned a shipping company that does business with the Chinese government." He concluded, "While we're working on cleaning out the dead-wood RINOs like Rep. Liz Cheney, we had better take a long look at Mitch and Elaine too."
If Farah's Feb. 17 column resulted in a sense of deja vu, there's a reason -- it's mostly the exact same column, right down to the headline. Without telling readers, Farah recycled the column.
The main difference is that he appended Donald Trump's petulant attack on McConnell in its apparent entirety, then added a few lines perpetuating the Big Lie about election fraud:
Let's remember, Donald J. Trump got more votes than any other president – including Biden!
He's going to get even more if the next presidential election is not rigged.
Mitch McConnell doesn't have a future in the Republican Party. We're tired of being the party of good losers.
Farah is the guy who spearheaded WND's years-long birther lie against Barack Obama, so we already know he's a sore loser. Apparently, election fraud is the new birtherism (which, in turn, was the new Vince Foster).
NEW ARTICLE: The MRC vs. Twitter, Part 2 Topic: Media Research Center
After Twitter suspended President Trump for his repeated violations of the company's terms of service, the Media Research Center couldn't wait to portray Trump as an innocent victim -- and Twitter as irredeemably evil. Read more >>
CNS Touted -- Then Deleted -- Extremist GOP Rep Mocking Her Critics Topic: CNSNews.com
In our overview of how CNSNews.com reacted to the mass condemnation of the extreme views of Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene that CNS had been hiding from its readers for months, we overlooked an article -- but there's a good reason.
In a Feb. 5 article written after the House had stripped Greene of her committee assignments for her extreme-right views, Susan Jones was letting her have a little victory lap, -- under the headline "Rep. Greene tweets: 'I Woke Up...Laughing, Thinking About What a Bunch of Morons the Democrats...Are'" -- while also trying to enforce the new narrative of CNS' owner, the Media Research Center, that Greene's views don't reflect those of the Republican Party:
Stripped of her two committee assignments, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene nevertheless tweeted on Friday that she woke up "laughing" about Democrat "morons" who are giving someone like her "free" publicity.
On Thursday, the House voted 230-199 -- with eleven Republicans joining Democrats -- to remove Greene from both the Education and Budget Committees, after Republican leaders declined to do so.
Greene's critics, including many Republicans, have condemned her espousal and apparent endorsement of kooky conspiracy theories and implied violence. Democrats and their media allies have painted Greene as representative of the entire Republican Party.
On Friday, Greene tweeted: "I woke up early this morning literally laughing thinking about what a bunch of morons the Democrats (+11) are for giving some one like me free time. In this Democrat tyrannical government, Conservative Republicans have no say on committees anyway."
Speaking on the House floor during Thursday's debate, House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy said the Democrat resolution to punish Greene "sets a dangerous new standard that will only deepen divisions within this House."
McCarthy said Democrats are declaring that "the majority has veto power over the minority members' selections for committee." He called it an unprecedented abuse of power by Democrats who are "blinded by partisanship and politics."
McCarthy said Rep. Greene's past comments and posts as private citizen do not represent the values of the Republican Party: "As a Republican, as a conservative, s an American, I condemned those views unequivocally. I condemned them when they first surfaced, and I condemn them today."
McCarthy said Greene has apologized for her past comments and acknowledged that House members have a responsibility to hold themselves to a "higher standard."
"I will hold her to her word and her actions going forward," he said.
Well apparently someone at CNS thought better of this article, because it was deleted sometime after its publication. The original link goes to an empty page, and the article is no longer listed in Jones' article archive. CNS has not explained why it deleted Jones' article; perhaps it decided after the fact that it was a bad look to cheer on Greene's sick burn of the Dems when it's trying to distance itself and the entire conservative movement from her.
But because the internet is forever, Jones' article remains for perpetuity at the Internet Archive.
MRC Changes Its Victimization Narrative On Extremist GOP Rep. Topic: Media Research Center
The last time we checked in, the Media Research Center was still aggressively portraying Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene as a victim of "censorship" by social media over her extreme and crazy views -- all while censoring any mention of what those extreme and crazy views are to its readers. But when Greene's views became so extreme (and so publicized in non-right-wing media) that the couldn't be ignored, the MRC switched tactics.
Alex Christy firmly threw Greene under the bus in a Jan. 30 post demonstrating the MRC's new narrative, insisting that Greene's views don't represent Republicans and conservatives as a whole:
Are you opposed to massive job killing climate regulations? Do you believe that the Laffer Curve has some basis in reality? If so, CNN's John Harwood said on Friday that the rise of Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and her history of insane and bigoted conspiracy theory beliefsthat include 9/11 trutherism, Parkland trutherism, and anti-Semitic claims that Jewish space lasers caused California's wildfires in 2018 is the logical conclusion of your beliefs.
Harwood's remarks came after days of the media trying to make Greene the face of the Republican Party. CNN Tonight host Don Lemon asked, "John, President Biden is trying to get Republicans on board with the COVID relief deal but how is he suppose work with a party standing by the likes of Marjorie Taylor Greene?"
Marjorie Taylor Greene is a blot on the Republican Party, but if the media truly wants to see her marginalized, blaming people who just want lower taxes is not going to bring about those results.
Unsurprisingly, Christy failed to discuss the issue of why the MRC spent months defending Greene if her views were "extreme and crazy" and she "is a blot on the Republican Party."
In a Feb. 2 post, Scott Whitlock echoed the under-bus-throwing by noting "the repellant actions and comments from freshman Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene," making sure to add that "Mitch McConnell has condemned her conspiracy theories."In his Feb. 3 column, Tim Graham referenced "nutty extremists like new Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene," then attacked a "liberal" New York Times columnist who he claimed wanted to "shut down the opposition’s media outlets" in order to stanch such extremism.
Mark Finkelstein didn't take it well when MSNBC's Joe Scarborough shot down efforts by Republicans to pretend that Greene is simply the Republican version of GOP-loathed Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez by pointing out that unlike Greene, AOC "never actually threatened to kill" anyone:
Scarborough made his remark for purposes of contrasting Ocasio-Cortez with unhinged, bizarre conspiracy-supporting Marjorie Taylor Greene. Scarborough noted that Greene liked a tweet calling for the assassination of Nany Pelosi, and spoke of strategies for hanging Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. That's when Scarborough offered his backhanded compliment about AOC never having actually threatened to kill a Republican.
According to Scarborough, it was unfair of Republicans to try to attach Ocasio-Cortez's politics to Pelosi and Biden. Scarborough cited the fact that, soon after AOC was elected, Pelosi mocked her and her Squad on 60 Minutes, saying "your caucus is like five people."
But, argued Scarborough, it is fair to stick the Republican House with Greene, since they "won’t criticize her, won’t take away her committee assignments, won’t rebuke her."
That remains to be seen. And on the Senate side a number of Republicans have voiced forceful condemnations of Taylor Greene.
Kristine Marsh, meanwhile, defended comparisons of "nutty, fringe" Greene to another Democratic House member right-wingers loathe, Ilhan Omar, declaring her to be a "radical Democrat" and attacking NBC's Seth Meyers because he "left out every similarly offensive comment made by the Democrat rep. He constructs a straw man, scoffing that “Medicare for All” is what Omar’s biggest controversy is; not her repeated patterns of anti-Semitism, anti-Americanism, anti-Israel hate or her sick comments downplaying 9/11."
Nicholas Fondacaro whined on Feb. 4 that "The liberal media were making a full-court press in an effort to try to make freshman Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and her loony conspiracy theories the face of the entire Republican Party," allegedly ignoring "a new government report detailing excessive levels of toxins and heavy metals found in multiple baby food brands" to do so. He concluded, "It’s a shame that ABC and NBC were willing to put toxic baby food in the backseat as they accelerated their efforts to divide America further." In another post the same day, Fondacaro complained that CNN's Chris Cuomo "was desperately trying to use the craziness of freshman Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) to smear the entire Republican Party."
Christy returned to labor once more to turn the spotlight away from Greene, complaining that Omar appeared on CNN "to attempt to debunk Republican comparisons between her and Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene," adding that "And while the media has spent the past week trying to make Greene and her crazy conspiracy theories the face of the Republican Party, despite three separate polls showing a majority of Republicans do not even have an opinion of her, back then the media covered for Omar, either ignoring her comments or even defending her.
Christy came back once more to huff that a former Republican congressman "pleased CNN by trying to portray conspiracy theorist and Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene as& more popular than she really is." Christy ignored the inconvenient fact that she was obviously popular enough to get elected in the first place.
And, again, Christy -- like his fellow MRC writers -- failed to mention that Greene was the same person they had been painting as a victim because that very same extremism they now admit is "nutty" and "fringe" got her "censored" by social media, which feeds into a separate (and bogus) MRC narrative.
The MRC has to always forward a victim narrative, and the case of Marjorie Taylor Greene shows how cynical and calculated that strategy is.
Newsmax Columnist Touts (Bogus) Fox News Coronavirus Conspiracy Theory Topic: Newsmax
In a Feb. 11 Newsmax column bashing Dr. Anthony Fauci, Tom Borelli writes:
Finally, it’s also possible that Fauci was in denial because the NIH funded research on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) where an enhanced virus could have accidentally escaped.
Fauci discounted the possibility that COVID-19 was a result of a lab accident from the WIV, but the lab origin hypothesis is getting more attention.
Fox News's "The Next Revolution" host Steve Hilton’s investigative reports on the possible lab origin of COVID-19 raise some very compelling information leading to the possibility that Fauci could potentially be indirectly responsible for the pandemic.
Hilton reveals Fauci as an early advocate of gain of function research where scientists tinker with naturally occurring viruses and deliberately give them traits, such as the ability to infect human cells and/or give the virus the capability to spread through the air.
The goal of such research is not nefarious.
The objective is to make viruses more dangerous in the laboratory so scientists could find cures and vaccines if humans were to encounter naturally occurring viruses with lethal traits.
Hilton isn’t the first to raise the possibility COVID-19 was the result of a lab accident of an enhanced virus but he did an excellent job in summarizing abundant circumstantial evidence pointing to it with the added twist of showing details of Fauci’s NIAID funding research on bat coronaviruses at the WIV.
NIH denied it funded gain of function research but the major point is researchers at the WIV genetically altered naturally occurring bat viruses to study them, according to Hiildton.
It’s unknown what other types of experiments were conducted including the possible development of deadly viruses.
Hilton's work has been discredtied -- as noted above when WorldNetDailiy had to walk back these claims, experts agree there's no evidence that the coronavirus was bioengineered, and thus, his claim that Fauci's agency funded creation of the coronavirus is utterly bogus. As an actual fact-checker found, there's no evidence that U.S. money funded gain-of-function research.
Will Borelli and Newsmax do the same walkback that WND did? We shall see.
Ouch: WND Has To Walk Back Yet Another Bogus Article Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily continues to have a seriousproblem with the whole journalism thing, still insisting on publishing bogus claims that it's forced to walk back later. This time, it's a Feb. 1 article by Art Moore:
China, the World Health Organization and the U.S. National Institutes of Health have dimissed the theory that the virus causing the global pandemic that has killed more than 2 million people and devastated economies worldwide escaped from the Wuhan, China, lab funded by the United States.
But there's no disputing the fact, as Newsweek reported in April 2020, that NIH executive Dr. Anthony Fauci promoted a highly controversial type of research involving the manipulation of viruses to explore their potential for infecting humans. And it's known that more than 200 scientists pressured the Obama administration in 2014 to temporarily halt U.S. funding for that research because of the risk of a manipulated virus accidentally escaping a lab and igniting a pandemic. Nevertheless, under Fauci's direction, the dangerous virus engineering resumed in 2017 and continued until April 2020.
Now, documentary evidence makes it a "near certainty" that the coronavirus pandemic originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China, where so-called "gain-of-function" research was funded by Fauci's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, according to Steve Hilton, who is leading a special investigation for his Fox News show "The Next Revolution."
Politifact subtly dragged WND in a fact-check: "WorldNetDaily has since dialed back on many of its claims, issuing three separate corrections, all of which cite scientists pushing back on the notion that SARS-CoV-2 was manmade. It has also placed a question mark at the end of the original headline. However, the bulk of the article text has not been updated."
Indeed, the original headline, 'New evidence ties COVID-19 creation to research funded by Fauci," now ends with a question mark, and Moore's article is topped with a massive correction that was added a week later:
UPDATED Feb. 8, 2021: A fact check by USA Today from March and April 2020 indicated the coronavirus is not man-made or engineered, but its origin remains unclear. It said, "There is no evidence to suggest that the virus was created in a Chinese laboratory. "It is probable, likely, that the virus is of animal origin," WHO spokeswoman Fadela Chaib said.
The Scripps Research Institute released a study that rejects the notion that the virus was man-made. Researchers concluded that if the virus were engineered, its genome sequence would more closely resemble earlier and more serious versions of the coronavirus.
FactCheck.org stated on Feb. 7, 2020, "There is no evidence that the new virus was bioengineered, and every indication it came from an animal. ... All lines of evidence point to the virus coming from an animal. That's consistent with what scientists have learned about the ecology of coronaviruses in the last 20 years," according to Timothy Sheahan, a virologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. It fits with the fact that the virus shares 96% of its genome with a bat virus.
"The genetic data is pointing to this virus coming from a bat reservoir," he said, "not a lab."
While publishing false information does not inspire confidence in WND's product, having to issue massive corrections doesn't either, especially when you're trying to get other websites to publish your content, as the WND News Center is trying to do -- not to mention getting people to donate money to fund the nonprofit effort.
There's clearly a fundamental dysfunction in WND's editorial process that no "news" organization in existence for 23 years should have. The continual walkbacks -- while a refreshing change from its usual practice of refusing to correct false claims unless someone threatens to sue -- make us wonder if, even after finally making concrete efforts to save itself from its ongoing financial crisis, WND deserves to live.
MRC Defends Trump's Barely Existent COVID Vaccine Distribution Plan Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center -- in apparent excersing of its pro-Trump defense reflex -- strangely went all in on defending the Trump administration's coronavirus vaccine distribution plan, even though there really wasn't much of one.
On Thursday morning, CNN White House correspondent MJ Lee filed an anonymously-sourced story on behalf of her fellow lefties that set the agenda for Zuckerville and like-minded outlets (which our friend Drew Holden chronicled in another legendary thread): “Biden inheriting nonexistent coronavirus vaccine distribution plan and must start ‘from scratch,’ sources say.”
But as we would learn hours later from Dr. Tony Fauci of NIH, the Biden administration “certainly [is] not starting from scratch because there is activity going on in the distribution.”
Huh. So, in other words, Lee’s story was nothing more than pants-on-fire fake news. Trump should ask Bernie Sanders how it felt to be on the receiving end of Lee’s propaganda.
If the plan was nonexistent, how come there have been 18.4 million shots given, according to Bloomberg?
Because, as others have pointedout, the plan, such as it was, wasn't a very good one -- it was concerned only with shipping the vaccines to states, which were then on their own in figuring out distribution. PolitiFact summarized: "There are many criticisms of this process, including that it took too long to give states money to implement their plans and a lack of communication from the top about how the rollout would work. But that was the plan they drew up." The Biden administration has said it will help the states much more closely than the Trump administration did.
But the MRC had its narrative -- Trump had a rock-solid plan, CNN was lying -- and it was running with it.
Nonexistent? If the Trump administration had a “nonexistent” vaccine strategy, how was the vaccine distributed across the country? This is self-evidently false. CNN somehow didn’t have the talent or intelligence to Google the 11-page HHS document on their Operation Warp Speed vaccine strategy. Instead, CNN reporter MJ Lee was relying on anonymous Trump-trashing sources for her dishonest spin.
Trump is easily portrayed as saying any strategy he unveiled was the best strategy ever. The CNN/Biden approach is the exact opposite, a wild and boastful exaggeration that there was zero planning, zip, nothing. You could argue Trump’s plans were insufficient. But that wasn’t enough: they had to lie for effect.
MRC chief Brent Bozell ranted in a Fox Business appearance: "The plan called, had it all set up for distribution in every state, in every territory, tribal distribution, even local distribution. You're entitled to your opinion. You're not entitled to lie. And CNN flat-out lied to its viewers. Its viewers need to understand it is not biased, they're not spinning it, they're flat out lying. That just wasn't true.”
Isn't it fascinating that the liberal media lecture us about all the dangers of misinformation about the coronavirus, but now the Biden-Harris team just keeps repeating nonsense about how they had to start "from scratch" on the vaccine? That there was "no plan"?
Even after CNN fell on its face running this claim from an anonymous source, only to be corrected by media darling Anthony Fauci, Vice President Kamala Harris said it out loud to Axios reporter and co-founder Mike Allen for the website's HBO show. Allen just accepted this garbage.
Can we expect ANY "independent fact-checkers" to locate this obvious misinformation, just lying there?
Of course, we can't expect Graham to tell his readers that whatever plan Trump had was wholly inadequate to the task.
On Feb. 17, Joseph Vazquez cheered how Fox Business host Larry Kudlow was eager to rip apart a lie Vice President Kamala Harris told Axios about the vaccine rollout effort of former President Donald Trump’s administration," even happier that "Kudlow shot back over a hot mic: 'Bullshit! Bullshit! Bullshit!'"
The same day, Kristine Marsh accused Fauci of "backtracking from his own prior statements so he could defend Vice President Kamala Harris’s “starting from scratch” lie" by saying (accurately, not that Marsh or the MRC will admit it) that "the actual plan of getting the vaccine doses into people's arms was really rather vague."
Kyle Drennen groused that a later interviewer of Harris "ignored Harris lying in a recent interview about the Biden administration having to 'start from scratch' in its COVID response after President Trump left office," claiming that the questions that were asked "conveniently took the place of any attempt to hold Harris accountable for lying in a recent Axios interview about the Biden administration supposedly having to 'start from scratch' in its COVID response, as if the Trump administration had not done anything to combat the pandemic. Something even Dr. Anthony Fauci said was false."
Graham harped on it again in a Feb. 20 post, pretending to be outraged that the Washington Post gave Harris only two Pinocchios for Harris' statement, trying to split hairs in offering a defense:
In this case, Kessler thinks it's fair game to say there was "no national strategy" since it was "state-centric." You can't have a "state-centric national strategy"? He did think it was "trouble" to say "starting from stratch," even though he elastically allowed they have "fill in the blanks" a bit.
"Starting from scratch" is not "trouble." It's non-factual. There is no evidence of such a claim, if we may use the liberal-media argot. For people who lecture about the importance of facts and truth, they seem to be extremely willing to sculpt falsehoods into all kinds of puzzling shapes and then pronounce they're well, half-true.
Remember: For the MRC, narrative is everything. The truth -- that Trump's plan was apparently only marginally better than no plan at all when it came to the end goal of vaccines in people's arms -- is secondary.
WND Columnist Thinks Trump Is John Wick Topic: WorldNetDaily
What? Another movie analogy? Yep. It's life imitating art, or art imitating life, or something like that. It works – that's all I know.
In the "John Wick" trilogy of movies, Wick (Keanu Reeves) is the world's most feared assassin. But as feared as he is, even amongst his peers, there is another, even more menacing. It is the body that controls all underworld/criminal activity worldwide. It's called the High Table. In short, the High Table is a council of the highest-level crime lords, which governs and oversees the underworld's most powerful criminal organizations.
There are strict rules that must be followed to "serve under the High Table," and one must pledge his absolute loyalty to the Table.
As the trilogy progresses, John Wick runs afoul of these rules. For this the consequence is his elimination. An "Open Contract" is placed on his head, and his peers get to work to try to fulfill the contract.
Does any of this sound familiar? It should.
Donald Trump is John Wick, and all those who oppose his policies are officials on the High Table council.
For the crime of not pledging his undying loyalty, for non-adherence to Deep State dogma and attempting to undermine the authority of this criminal enterprise, an "Open Contract" of sorts has been placed on "Don" Wick's head.
The American High Table is the merger of Democrats, deep state Republicans, Big Tech, media and finance. They have a full-court press on to ruin Donald Trump. They are literally hitting him from all sides, working toward this common end.
Trump has been the bane of their existence since he announced he was running for president in 2015. And like John Wick, Trump, to them, is the most dangerous man in America.