MRC's Jean-Pierre-Bashing, Doocy-Fluffing Watch, Non-Doocy Edition Topic: Media Research Center
It was Gabriela Pariesau's turn to take a whack at White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre over her Sept. 8 briefing:
When in doubt, point to the Trump administration! That’s what White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre did Wednesday when she dodged a question about alleged collusion between the Biden administration and social media companies to suppress free speech.
When asked about the allegations Jean-Pierre said, ”[t]here has been ongoing work dating to the Trump administration to provide accurate COVID information where folks get their news.”
Her comments came in response to Fox Business reporter Edward Lawrence who asked Jean-Pierre about a pending lawsuit. Attorneys general Eric Schmitt of Missouri and Jeff Landry of Louisiana brought a lawsuit against members of the Biden administration for allegedly colluding with Big Tech to censor so-called “misinformation.”
Pretending that misinformation is subjective and deserves scare quotes is an MRC narrative to protect right-wing misleaders and liars from suffering the consequences of their behavior.
The MRC's resident Karine-hater, Curtis Houck, returned to do his usual dirty work out hyping right-wing reporters' biased attacks on the Sept. 9 briefing:
Prior to White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre using Thursday afternoon’s breaking news of Queen Elizabeth II’s death to end that day’s briefing, she was asked by reporters from two ends of the political spectrum how President Biden and his family have been affected by record-high inflation and gas prices and whether they’ve cut back on anything. Of course, the stammering, yammering Jean-Pierre had nothing to offer.
Fox Business Network’s Edward Lawrence noted that, seeing as how Jean-Pierre has “talked about trying to get costs down,” “a new Gallup poll show[ed] that” Americans have been forced to do so with 24 percent of the country revealing they’re“spending less” and “17 percent traveled less or canceled vacations” due to the high living costs.
Despite that, Lawrence noted that Biden “has been to his beach house six times” and gone on vacations to the Carolinas. “Is he considering any spending cuts for the administration or for himself personally because of inflation,” he asked.
We don't recall Houck or anyone else at the MRC demanding that the Trump family act and spend like the "real Americans" he reference in his headline. The right-woing stenography continued:
Real Clear Politics’ Philip Wegmann had a series of probing questions about leaks from the Mar-a-Lago raid, Energy Secretary Granholm praising California’s energy policies days ahead of concerns it could fail, and why has it been over 200 days since President Biden last gave a (television) interview.
On that last one, Jean-Pierre responded in much the same way Psaki did when similar questions were raised: “The President loves talking to you all. He takes your questions all the time...He is happy to talk to you all. As you know, he does it multiple times during the week.”
We recall when the MRC was unbothered that Trump press secretary Stephanie Grisham gave no press briefings at all during her tenure.
Houck lashed out at the Sept. 15 briefing under the nasty headline "KJP Rides Struggle Bus Through Basic Questions from Heinrich, Welker on the Border":
Amid the left’s collective meltdown over Governor Ron DeSantis (R-FL) sending illegal immigrants to far-left, rich, white Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre struggled with questions from both her allies in the press corps and actual reporters about the move, including a Kamala Harris-like answer and a general attitude painting Martha’s Vineyard as some sort of Third World outpost.
After Jean-Pierre had worked her way around the room a few times, it was finally Jacqui Time. Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich started a short, probing question in the mold of her colleague, Peter Doocy: “Do you think that Americans believe that the border is secure?”
Jean-Pierre kept to her binder (which earlier had her referring to Ted Cruz as the governor of Texas) about there being a “process” the Biden regime has followed “to secure the border” and “fix[ing] a broken system” is not like “flipping a light switch”
Heinrich then fired off this fastball about whether there’s “risk...that voters might feel like they’re being lied to” about the porous border and whether border conditions are “humane”[.]
Remember, Houck cares only that right-wing reporters play gotcha, not that their questions are fair or informative -- and,apparently, that Heinrich is just as biased as Doocy.
CNS Continues To Complain About Mar-a-Lago Raid On Trump's Behalf Topic: CNSNews.com
More than a week after the FBI search of Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago comaound for stolen classified documents, CNSNews was still largelyserving up biased "news" defending Trump and attacking law enforcement. One of the few execptions to that is an Aug. 19 article by Susan Jones throwing shade at Trump's legal team for not being aggressive enough in countering the raid:
The Trump legal team did not file a motion of its own, nor did it join another motion arguing for the full release of the affidavit underlying the search warrant for Donald Trump's Palm Beach home.
Why not? Fox News's Laura Ingraham asked Trump attorney Christina Bobb Thursday night:
"We believed that Judicial Watch and some of the other parties actually had argued it quite well," Bobb responded, "and we believe it was very interesting and somewhat encouraging that you had parties from both sides of the aisle -- of course, liberal media outlets coupled with conservative watchdog groups really together on the same side.
"And so we were curious to see how that played out, of course, you know, reserving our rights to try something else in the future if we want to, but we really just chose to see how it will play out."
Bobb disagreed that the Trump team has now waived its right to dispute anticipated Justice Department redactions to the affidavit.
CNS did find its way back to being a Trump propagandist. Craig Bannister declared in an Aug. 25 article:
Tea Party Patriots Action (TPPA) has filed a complaint against the judge who approved the warrant to raid former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, seeking the magistrate’s dismissal from the case and removal from the bench.
The complaint, filed with the Judicial Council of the Eleventh Circuit, accuses Florida-based Judge Bruce E. Reinhart of “unethical and prejudicial conduct” and of having a “conflict of interest and a pattern and history of hostility to President Trump.”
An anonymously written Aug. 26 article seemed to complain that "The affidavit that the Biden Justice Department presented to a federal court in Florida in order to get a “warrant to search and seize” at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home cites as part of the legal authority for this action an Executive Order issued by President Barack Obama." Another article that day by Bannister hyped a right-wing writer (whose ideology he did not identify) mocking redactions:
“Transparency is one of DOJ’s and FBI’s passions,” Sean Davis, co-founder and CEO of “The Federalist” sarcastically tweeted Friday, after the release of a heavily-redacted copy of the affidavit used to justify a warrant to raid former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.
In a series of tweets, Davis razzed the FBI and DOJ for its lack of transparency regarding its unprecedented raid of a former president’s home.
Bannister made no mention of the fact that purloined classified documents are at the heart of the Mar-a-Lago search, meaning that it's absolutely prudent to redact certain information because, you know, it's classified.
Jones served up more uncritical whining in an Aug. 29 article from a Republican senator, Roy Blunt, complaining that he hadn't been tipped off to the search, though she did highlight how evasive Blunt was in refusing to directly answer the simple question of whether it was right for Trump to take classified documents that were not his. Then it was more right-wing fearmongering courtesy of Bannister:
The FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago wasn’t just an attempt to get former President Donald Trump – it was also meant to frighten and intimidate the American people, Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) warned Tuesday.
“Here is just another example of ‘The rules don't apply in this particular case, because it's Donald Trump,’ Rep. Jackson said, calling the raid nothing more than a “fishing expedition” in an interview on Fox & Friends First.
“It should infuriate every single American and it should make us all scared, because this was done for two reasons,” Jackson said. While the raid was intended to hurt Trump politically, it had an even more sinister purpose – to send a threatening message to all Americans:
“No one trusts the FBI or the DOJ anymore. I don't trust them any further than I can throw that entire building,” Rep. Jackson said.
Since the vast majority of American have never stolen classified government documents, they likely have nothing to worry about from the FBI or DOJ.
An anonymously written Sept. 5 article hyped a pro-Trump judicial ruling:
Federal District Judge Aileen M. Cannon issued an order today requiring that a “special master” be appointed to review what the Justice Department seized from former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home when it was raided last month by the FBI.
In the order, the judge said that the FBI had seized “medical documents” from Mar-a-Lago.
The judge also said in the order that Trump faces “potential harm by way of improper disclosure of sensitive information to the public,” and “risk of suffering injury from the Government’s retention and potential use of privileged materials in the course of a process that, thus far, has been closed off to Plaintiff and that has raised at least some concerns as to its efficacy, even if inadvertently so.”
Unlike with Reinhart, CNS did not mention that Cannon was appointed by Trump, which raises questions of bias regarding her pro-Trump rulings.
WND's Farah Still Pushing Election Fraud Lies Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah just loves pushing discredited claims about purported election fraud, and he hasn't stopped. He ranted in his Aug. 15 column:
Think about it.
It makes all the sense in the world.
"Disqualifying" Donald Trump from the 2024 presidential race – or something worse – gets us no closer to being a free nation.
I know it's unthinkable, but think as if our country is depending on Trump, as though our very lives depended on him – because maybe they do.
We're not likely to figure out all the ways the 2020 election was stolen.
We're not likely to "prove" it was stolen – to the satisfaction of Trump's enemies.
We're not even likely to hold Big Tech responsible for the vast conspiracy of 2020 – or dismantle it before the next election.
We can't even have the one "conservative" cable network in the U.S. MENTION the possibility of grand theft of our election – let alone all the many ways it was carried out.
We can't even have debate or dialogue about the recent film "2000 Mules." It's unmentionable.
Perhaps that's because there was, in fact, no "grand theft of our election" -- certainly none has ever been definitively proven -- and "2000 Mules has been thoroughly discredited, to the point that even the True the Vote subjects of Dinesh D'Souza's fraudulent film are desperate to move on.
Farah used his Aug. 22 column to do a bit of word-twisting to claim that Joe Biden "tipped" that he would steal the 2020 election:
But I will never forget something Biden said June 10, 2020.
He may have tipped off that this election would be rigged.
It was in a letter the campaign wrote so Biden couldn't botch it up.
It was the first time the topic of "election disinformation" came up.
"Tens of millions of Americans rely on Facebook as a news source," the letter quoted Biden. "But the company continues to amplify misinformation and lets candidates pay to target and confuse voters with lies."
Now get this. The letter had these specifics for Facebook, which surprised CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who probably thought he was doing enough for Biden in terms of millions of dollars going to Democratic voter outreach in swing states, like Wisconsin's famous nursing-home scam in which caretakers cast votes 99% for Biden without even asking their charges – some of them were comatose.
But no sir. This is what the Biden campaign was asking:
Promoting authoritative and trustworthy sources of election information, rather than the rants of bad actors and conspiracy theorists;
Promptly removing false, viral information;
Preventing political candidates and PACs from using paid advertising to spread lies and misinformation – especially within two weeks of election day;
Having clear rules – applied universally, with no exceptions for the president – that prohibit threats and lies about how to participate in the election.
Five months after the Biden letter, it was clear what happened. We all had our suspicions about why. Let's just say the nation was in shock. It would take many months for people to see the movie "2000 Mules" that showed us just how the election was stolen.
Of course, WND has more than proven itself to be a less-than-trustworthy source of information on election or pretty much anything else, so it's easy to see why Farah might feel threatened by that. He went on to huff:
A post-election poll conducted by McLaughlin & Associates showed that 36% of Biden voters were not aware of the evidence linking Joe Biden to corrupt financial dealings with China through his son Hunter. Thirteen percent of these voters (or 4.6% of Biden's total vote) said that had they known these facts, they would not have voted for Biden.
Such a shift away from Biden would have meant President Trump would have won reelection with 289 electoral votes.
That, of course, is a poll that the Media Research Center bought from McLaughlin -- who was Trump's pollster, so its objectivity is very much in question -- to prove its version of Trump's Big Lie.
I figure most Democrats never bothered to see the documentary "2000 Mules." Perhaps, they didn't even know about it because it was kept quiet by even Fox News, and that is a shame. After all, Fox was involved in an important role in the fix – the calling of Arizona way too early. (Of course, they fired all their crack "experts" immediately after the call.)
Almost two years later, I think it's worth a shot urging Democrats to see the film.
But that's a long shot.
Why would anyone want to see a film that's been so thoroughly discredited? Farah didn't explain. Instead, he doubled down:
It's understandable that the polls were out of whack in 2020. Joe Biden was never expected to get anything like the astonishing vote toll he got. Like I said, it was IMPOSSIBLE. The fix was in. Biden would get whatever he needed – especially in the five states of Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and Wisconsin.
It's possible that the vote for Trump was much stronger than predicted and that Trump not only won all five but several others as well.
"2000 Mules" proves that Trump won those five states hands down. If you're curious enough to see why Biden's vote total was hyped beyond any reasonable tally pollsters were expecting, maybe you should see "2000 Mules," just for the mathematics of it.
I know. There aren't that many Democrats convinced of voter fraud. But if you're just a little concerned with the unanimity from Republicans and independents, maybe this is worth your attention.
And aren't you a little concerned about why it's verboten to say what's on so many minds?
Isn't it still OK as a free American to say what seems obvious?
Never mind how weird and fascist Democrats seem to acting. Never mind that Democratic leadership seems to be actively suppressing a real movement among MAGA folks. And never mind how they have are actively courted Big Tech to repress that movement.
Instead, open your mind and seek the truth.
The fact that Farah is so desperately cling to this discredited film shows us that he won't "seek the truth" -- he has a narrative to push, and he isn't about to let pesky things like facts get in the way.
Farah did some more twisting the next day, insisting that Biden clearly misspeaking was an admission he was stealing the election:
He can't stop telling us about 2020, in no uncertain terms, or hinting about it openly when he's around the right crowd – his fans.
We first heard him say it when it was very much on his mind Oct. 24, 2020, on the eve of the election. You remember?
He said, when it was very much on his mind before his election against Donald Trump, "We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
It wasn't a hate crime yet to say what he said, odd though it was – maybe even a little creepy.
But if Biden can't stop talking out of both sides of his mouth, there will more outrage about his candor than his performance as an illegitimate "president," a stand-in, a "fill-in meant to fool some of the people" to get the job done until he completes it, as he explained just days ago.
Biden is clearly his own worst enemy – the worst "president" in history bar none.
He's a laughingstock internationally for what he's done to the country. And a comfort to its enemies.
Vote accordingly, and it just might bring the Deep State down – if we're lucky.
Just take a look at what comes up when you choose any search engine besides Google and type in the words, "Is Biden his own worst enemy?" or "Biden sticks his foot in his mouth."
He can't help himself. He's so hopelessly cognitively challenged.
Farah has not questioned the cognitive skills of Trump for repeatedly insisting he won an election that all credible evidence shows that he lost. Perhaps that same behavior should raise questions about Farah's cognitive skills as well.
NEW ARTICLE: The MRC vs. Jeff Zucker Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center regularly hurled the anti-Semitic "puppetmaster" slur at the (Jewish) former CNN chief -- then childishly gloated when a personal scandal cost him his job, despite having given Roger Ailes a pass for his behavior. Read more >>
MRC Still Raging That Liz Cheney Got Praise For Standing Up To Trump Topic: Media Research Center
Even as Liz Cheney lost her Wyoming House seat in the primary to a Trump-endorsed opponent, the Media Research Center continued to be upset she was being portrayed as standing up for the principle of holding Donald Trump accountable (something the MRC has no interest in doing). Mark Finkelstein complained in an Aug. 17 post:
Not exactly the people you need to win a Republican presidential primary . . .
Given Liz Cheney's overwhelming defeat in yesterday's Wyoming Republican congressional primary, it would be a very uphill slog for her to win a national GOP presidential primary, should that be her goal for 2024. In a mark of just how steep that climb would be, on today's New Day, CNN cast the two legs of Cheney's base of support as . . . Democrats, and the Beltway media!
Scott Whitlock similarly complained in a post later that day:
NBC on Wednesday repeatedly lobbied Liz Cheney to run for president after she lost her renomination bid for Congress. Today co-host Savannah Guthrie also repeated the media-created comparison that Cheney is Obi-Wan Kenobi from Star Wars and Trump is Darth Vader.
Guthrie deemed “64 percent” of Republicans to be election deniers (without citing a source) and then lobbied for Cheney to outright call for Democratic victory in 2022: “That is your red line. That is who is coming to Congress if Republicans prevail and get control of Congress. Given that state of affairs, do you think it would be better for the country if Democrats retained control?”
Neither Whitlock nor Finkelstein didn't explain where the nobility is in defending Trump's attempted insurrection.
Graham whined about this yet again in his Aug. 17 podcast:
Rep. Liz Cheney was clobbered by 37 points in her Wyoming Republican primary, but the media broke out their praises as she gaudily compared herself to Lincoln and Ulysses Grant. She's a savior of the Republic!
After the landslide, they asked Cheney if she would run for president in 2024, ignoring all proof that she drove her political car off a cliff. Savannah Guthrie repeatedly pressured Cheney to proclaim the Democrats should keep their majority power in Congress. They want her to sound fully like a Democrat. Democracy is only authentic and safe when Democrats win.
None of them seemed to figure out Republicans don't want to vote for Cheney when she's being painted as a hero by Dan Rather.
He too failed to explain why it's preferable to take Trump's side of corruption over Cheney's side of accountability.
Kevin Tober took up the complaining about praise of Cheney in an Aug. 18 post:
In news that will shock nobody, MSNBC’s The ReidOut turned into another Republican bashing segment where a guest referred to the GOP as supporters of Fascism and the Democrats as supporters of democracy. Never mind the fact that the network spent much of Wednesday and Thursday wringing their hands over the defeat of Never Trump Republican Liz Cheney’s landslide defeat for renomination. The leftist media only reveres democracy so long as their preferred candidates win.
Graham whined in an Aug. 20 post that it was pointed out that Cheney was effectively "disappeared" Soviet-style by her fellow Republicans for the sin of not loving Trump enough:
We know that liberal journalists have descended into a nasty habit of associating the Democrats with democracy and the Republicans with authoritarianism. But Time magazine took it its illogical dead end: Liz Cheney getting trounced in an election was some sort of Stalinist liquidation.
The headline was "The GOP Just Borrowed a Soviet Skill and Disappeared Liz Cheney." If you've been around a while, you know why this spin is funny. Time magazine made Mikhail Gorbachev the "Man of the Decade" and honored him as the "communist Pope and the Soviet Martin Luther." So maybe Liz Cheney is their Gorbachev now. Don't send her to Lithuania.
Except she wasn't executed! She didn't actually disappear! The liberals can't stop spotlighting her! Trump has a Politburo, like America is a one-party state. At least Elliott acknowledged "Her performance made her a darling of liberals who not that long ago thought the Cheney clan to be some of the worst people in America."
Graham again failed to explain why Republicans must jettison Cheney to cling to the corrupt Trump.
Days after recently ousted anti-Trump Congresswoman Liz Cheney laughably compared herself to former Republican President Abraham Lincoln, ABC’s This Week co-moderator Jonathan Karl took it a step further and compared Cheney to former President Theodore Roosevelt. The ahistorical idol worship didn’t end there, USA Today bureau chief Susan Page suggested Cheney could have the same long-term ideological impact on the GOP that socialist Senator Bernie Sanders had on the Democrat Party [sic].
After first declaring Cheney the face of the “opposition to Donald Trump in this country,” Karl turned to Page who happily noted how Cheney told Karl during an exclusive interview that “she’ll be campaigning for some Democrats, who are running against election deniers” and gushed that Cheney “has the statute and the ability to raise money to have an influence on some of those races.”
Grham spent his Aug. 24 column contradictorally whining that Cheney was being lionized for her crusade to hold Trump accountable while also insisting that Trump doesn't have a death grip onthe Republican Party:
Liz Cheney lost her Wyoming primary election by 37 points. But the concession speech didn't so much concede as announce a new crusade, a quixotic campaign to drag down Donald Trump in any way possible before the 2024 election.
When she lost, CNN analyst Nia-Malika Henderson accurately explained that her base was no longer in Wyoming. It's the “Beltway media.” It's more than that — it inspires the Left from New York to Hollywood. They want to portray it as both impossible and irresistible.
Cheney's been raising millions from Democrats who want to stir up this campaign as another goad to Trump. Many Republicans would like to try a different flavor than Trump the next time around, but it's time to imagine that just as they've been doing in the midterm primaries, the Democrats deeply desire another run by Trump -- this time, the Trump that goaded on a riot and refused to concede defeat. They want him, damaged and angry.
The Democrats and their media partners like the narrative that Trump has a “death grip” on the Republican Party, because death is what they seek. They boast about how they are the saviors of democracy when what they really want is to shut the “ignorant” half of America up.
Cheney's defeat did not underline that Trump has full control of the Republican Party. It did show that Republicans have control of the Republican Party, no matter how much the liberal media and the Democrats want to run it.
Note that Graham isn't exactly running away from Trump -- his criticism is tepid at best because he knows that Trump does, in fact, control the Republican Party. He will sheepishly go with the GOP crowd and continue to support Trump, making a full public break only if his boss, Brent Bozell, orders him and the rest of the MRC to do so -- his paycheck depends on it, after all. But that's not coming anytime soon because Trump serves the MRC as a victim and because his views are those of the conservative movement.
Cheney has guts. Graham doesn't, nor does the rest of the MRC. And they know it.
WND's Kupelian Warns Of Liberals Redefining Things -- As He Insists 1/6 Insurrection Was A 'Demonstration' Topic: WorldNetDaily
The August issue of WorldNetDaily's sparsely read Whistleblower magazine is themed "Newspeak 2022," which dedicated to complaining that liberals are redefining evil things to make them good. As usual, it's based around a rant-filled essay by managing editor David Kupelian:
The elites are changing America’s language itself, so that people’s words – and therefore, their very thoughts – inevitably come under the control of the ruling class. It’s a way of bending reality in real time, so that what is actually illusion appears to be true, while what is real and true can readily be discredited as lies, misinformation, “extremist rhetoric” and “conspiracy theories.”
Thus, the unprecedented, banana-republic-style raid on the home of former President Donald Trump by dozens of armed FBI agents was not, you see, a raid at all, insists the Ministry of Truth (i.e., virtually the entire elite media). “The execution of a search warrant isn’t a raid,” Americans were told condescendingly. “It’s a judicially overseen process!”
Oh. So the massive, unannounced, armed police raid on a U.S. president’s home wasn’t a “raid.” But the Jan. 6, 2021, demonstration in the U.S. Capitol by that same president’s supporters, who had every reason to suspect the 2020 election had been stolen – was an “armed insurrection,” even though not one protestor was armed nor did their actions in any way amount to an “insurrection.” Nevertheless, Vice President Kamala Harris insisted the Jan. 6 “insurrection” was every bit as infamous and awful as the raid on Pearl Harbor and the 9-11 terror attacks, each of which killed thousands of Americans. Change the definitions of words and you change everything.
Of course, Kupelian's the one redefining things, pretending that an attempt to overthrow the government because Donald Trump can't mentally handle the fact that he lost an election -- in which numerous law enforcement officers were injured, some so badly they cojmmitted suicide later -- was just a "demonstration."
There's a COVID rant too:
Well, at least the COVID pandemic seems to be waning, thanks to the vaccines, right? Wrong. In reality, the experimental shots the government forced on virtually everyone in the country do not work, as even its key salespeople like Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx now openly admit. But wait: All vaccines prevent people from contracting and transmitting a particular disease – that’s literally what vaccines have always done! How, then, can these shots, which we now know do not work as vaccines, and which have become irrefutably associated with many deaths and serious side effects, possibly be called “vaccines”? That’s easy: The CDC quietly changed its official definition of “vaccine”! And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how you turn an untested, unproven, experimental gene therapy into a "vaccine"; simply change the definition of something everybody in the world has trusted and revered for more than two centuries, since the first smallpox vaccine, and re-tool the "official" definition of that almost sacred word to apply to whatever your flawed, unproven shot actually does.
All of this Orwellian tampering with language might not be quite as necessary in a nation that has never known freedom. But in the United States of America, where tens of millions of citizens are very well acquainted with genuine, God-blessed liberty – indeed, where so many have fought, bled and died to preserve it – the ruling elites find it necessary to redefine, and thereby corrupt the meaning of, everything in order to enable actual violent extremists, domestic terrorists, racists and fascists to implement the real insurrection. Theirs.
Says the guy who spreads lies and misinformation to WND readers on a daily basis. No wonder legitimate businesses want nothing to do with WND and Joseph Farah was continually beg for money to keep his dishonest website alive.
MRC Refuses To Blame Trump For Census Errors Under His Watch Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's Bill D'Agostino huffed in an Aug. 24 post:
There has been near-total silence across leftwing broadcast (ABC, CBS, NBC) and cable (CNN, MSNBC) networks about a 2020 post-enumeration survey by the Census Bureau, which found errors made in the 2020 census heavily benefited Democrats and hurt Republicans. As of August 23, the only coverage any of these networks any of these networks have given the report was a fleeting 4 a.m. mention on CBS.
The post-enumeration survey on undercount and overcount rates, which the Census Bureau conducts to measure the accuracy of their initial count, found that errors made in 2020 resulted in the misallocation of at least six congressional seats and billions of dollars in federal funding. This incorrect apportionment of House seats uniformly benefited Democrats.
One can only imagine the bloodcurdling shrieks we’d be hearing on CNN and MSNBC if census errors had set Democrats back by even a single congressional seat, let alone six. Instead, neither they nor ABC or CBS have spent even a second of airtime on this disastrous mishap by Census Bureau.
D'Agostino, of course, went on to cheer how Fox News covered this story. But he did forget to mention one pertinent fact: the census that contained all these alleged undercounts and overcounts took place during the Trump administration -- meaning that it happened under Republican oversight -- and that Trump cut the census short, which may have hindered accurate counting. He also failed to mention how the census was also hindered by the COVID pandemic.
Later that day, Nicholas Fondacaro and Curtis Houck rehashed this story on the MRC podcast -- but like D'Agostino, they didn't mention that the census took place iunder Trump so that's where the blame for the errors ought to be placed, though Houck did concede that the census "was a huge challenge because of COVID." He didn't lay any blame at Trump's feet, of course.
CNS Cherry-Picks More Biden Statements To Mock Him Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com reverted to an old, dishonest trick to maximize negative coverage of President Biden: cherry-picking out-of-context statements by him that look weird or ridiculous when isolated in order to further its narrative that Biden is cognitively challenged.
Instead of making the core of a Aug. 30 speech Biden gave in Pennsylvania that one CNS writer did concede was about "his plan for increased police funding, training and accountability," CNS made sure not to put that in the headlines of any of the five articles it churned out on the speech, and when the points of the speech do get reported, they are undercut with partisan attacks, something CNS rarely did whwen reporting on remarks by the previous president, Donald Trump. Here are the stories:
President Biden on Tuesday called for the hiring of more police officers as part of his "Safer America Plan."
"And as we hire more police officers, there should be more training, more help, and more accountability. Without public trust, law enforcement can’t do its job serving and protecting all the communities," Biden said in his speech in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
Then the president went off-script, describing "tough" neighborhoods, "where the best basketball in the state is." Making his point clear, Biden added that "I was the only white guy that worked as a lifeguard down in that area," and he even mentioned “gangs” and the “liquor store.”
Since Biden became president, crime has moved to the forefront of Americans’ concerns, with brazen attacks and carjackings at all times of the day in the nation’s big cities, and thieves clearing out store shelves with impunity.
And while Biden advocated more policing as a way to reduce crime, he did not address the poverty and living conditions that give rise to crime.
President Joe Biden delivered a speech at Wilkes University in Wilkes-Barre, Pa., on Tuesday in which he insisted nine times that what he had just said was “not a joke” or that he was “not joking."
“I want to thank your outstanding governor, Tom Wolf. Tom and I have been friends a long time,” said Biden. “He’s truly one of the best governors in the United States of America. Not a joke. Not a joke.”
I mean, we expect you [police officers] to do everything,” Biden said. “I’m not joking. Everything.”
“My dad used to love to hunt in the Poconos when we lived in Scranton,” Biden said. “How many deer or bear are wearing Kevlar vests, huh? Not a joke.”
“When we disagreed, we disagreed on principle, but we then went and had lunch together,” Biden said. “Not a joke.”
“And for those brave, right-wing Americans who say it’s all about keeping America—keeping America as independent and safe: If you want to fight against a country, you need an F-15. You need something a little more than a gun,” said Biden. “No, I’m not joking.
“DNA to say, ‘That’s my baby.’ What the hell is the matter with us?” said Biden. “No, I’m not joking.”
“Folks, when it comes to fighting crime, we know what works: officers on the street who know the neighborhood—not a joke,”said Biden.
“And the crime rate began to drop,” said Biden. “For real. Not a joke.”
None of these CNS writers explained why they decided that taking partisan and personal shots at the president was more newsworthy than fairly reporting the subject of his speech.
Posted by Terry K.
at 1:17 AM EDT
Updated: Thursday, September 29, 2022 10:30 AM EDT
MRC Rages That Non-Right-Wing Media Doesn't Hate Liz Cheney Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center raged that a House committee was seeking accountability for the Capitol riot and the events leading up to it, so it's unsurprising that the MRC made a particular target of Republican Rep. Liz Cheney for serving as the committee's vice chairman -- because Republicans are apparently supposed to ride and die with Donald Trump and the MRC will tolerate no criticism of him, especially from a fellow Republican.
Last year, the MRC tried to insist that Cheney's ouster from House leadership for being insufficiently pro-Trump wasn't news at all and demanded that non-right-wing media stop covering it. In a September 2021 post, Nicholas Fondacaro complained that a CBS report on partisan Republican hearings on the U.S. withdrawal on Afghanistan noted that Cheney came to the defense of Joint Chiefs Chairman General Mark Milley. Her presence on the 1/6 committee drew specific attacks from the MRC:
An April 11 post by Tim Graham grumbled that Cheney did an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, who "ended the interview by tossing a softball. Tell us, Liz, how much has House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy failed democracy?" Graham went on to whine that "Tapper is demonstrating again that he favors "CNN's kind of Republican" instead of any Republican who would dare to criticize the partisanship of the 1/6 Committee." And Graham is demonstrating again that theMRC is little more than an arm of the Republican Party that tries to keep their fellow partisans in ideological lockstep.
A June 7 video by Bill D'Agostino served up "a little guessing game for viewers to see how well they can distinguish between two prominent committee members from opposing parties: Nancy Pelosi, and Liz Cheney (R-WY)." D'Agostino didn't explain why Republicans should automatically support an attempted insurrection if Pelosi and Cheney oppose it.
A June 10 item by Curtis Houck grumbled that an ABC report on the hearings "went full shill when talking about Cheney, boasting she was made for this."
Elizabeth Buckley whined in a June 11 post that "Morning Joe" "glorified Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) as the new Winston Churchill of our time," and that "Joe Scarborough thought that it would be a fantastic move to compare Congresswoman Cheney to the likes of Sir Winston Churchill and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy."
But as Cheney faced a Republican primary challenge for her Wyoming seat from a Trump-endorsed opponent, the MRC was happy to make her a target.In a June 30 post, Kevin Tober complained that CNNM's Don Lemon "ma[d]e his case for why Democrats should vote for Liz Cheney in a Republican primary for the sole reason that she hates former President Donald Trump just as much as they do," going the whataboutism route:
Lemon is now using CNN's airwaves to lobby for Democrats to sabotage the Republican primaries in Wyoming. Keep in mind the leftist media melted down when conservative talk radio legend Rush Limbaugh launched "Operation Chaos" and encouraged his listeners to switch parties and vote for Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic Primaries to prolong the process.
Tober didn't mention that the MRC had no problem with "Operation Chaos," making him a hypocrite trying to deny the same opportunity with the political stakes reversed.
Graham spent his July 25 podcast whining that the non-right-wing media doesn't hate Cheney -- who he tried to loosely tie to Al Gore -- as much as he does:
Then there were the Liz Cheney interviews. On CNN, Jake Tapper offered a series of softball questions about how the Pelosi-picked January 6 panel would proceed, and then in a second segment, underlined how Cheney would probably lose her congressional primary in Wyoming because she's for "the truth." Then Tapper asked her if she would run for president. As with Al Gore, this was more a compliment than a serious question. Which state would Liz Cheney win when she's dramatically unpopular among Republicans?
Graham whined further in an Aug. 7 post about non-right-wing non-hatred of Cheney:
On Friday's PBS NewsHour, liberal MSNBC Sunday host andWashington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart made a Star Warsanalogy, comparing Liz Cheney to Obi-Wan Kenobi (and Trump to Darth Vader).
Anchor Judy Woodruff played a Liz Cheney campaign ad, with her dad, former vice president Dick Cheney, attacking Trump as a “coward.” Woodruff said “They don't come much more conservative than Dick Cheney.”
Graham's Aug. 10 column groused that Cheney was getting praise for likely losing her seat because she stood up for principle:
As the Wyoming primaries approach, The New York Times is already preparing the post-election spin boosting the post-congressional exploits of Liz Cheney. The August 8 front-page headline was “Cheney Ready to Lose a Race, But Not a Fight.”
Times reporter Jonathan Martin laid it on thick: “She has used the Aug. 16 contest as a sort of a high-profile stage for her martyrdom – and a proving ground for her new crusade.” Martyrdom? She’s not being burned at the stake like Joan of Arc, even if that’s the kind of moral high ground the liberal media coverage suggests.
She’s losing her race “in part because of death threats, her office said.”
Her new crusade is the media’s old crusade. The pull quote on the back of the front section read: “If the cost of standing up for the Constitution is losing the House seat, then that’s a price I’m willing to pay.” Martin also insisted “she has become arguably the most consequential rank-and-file member of Congress in modern times.”
She will be “consequential” if the January 6 Committee somehow helps ruin Donald Trump before 2024. Cheney is only “rank-and-file” because she was tossed out of the House Republican leadership for seeking an entirely new constituency: The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the alphabet of liberal TV networks.
Liz Cheney proves that no politician can be both the biggest darling of the liberal media and a viable candidate for Republican leadership.
Graham didn't epxlain why holding those responsible for the Capitol riot accountable for their actions is a principle no Republican should embrace.
Scott Whitlock then served up a series of flashback whataboutism posts:
Now that journalists see Liz Cheney as a heroic Joan of Arc, willing to be burned at the political stake, it’s good to sometimes remind everyone of the seething hatred many in the liberal media had for the daughter of Dick Cheney. -- Aug. 13
NBC journalists need to decide who Darth Vader is in their tortured political analogies. On Tuesday’s Today, Hallie Jackson said to an on-screen colleague, “[Let me] raise you a Star Wars analogy.” But back in 2011, Dick Cheney was the evil Vader. -- Aug. 16
Journalists have been eagerly cheering Cheney 2.0 as the GOP’s Joan of Arc, willing to be burned at the political stake for principles. ... But a simple look into history shows that journalistic love for a Republican is entirely dependent on how useful that person is to liberal press. In the past, the news and entertainment media despised the “toxic” “daughter of Dracula,” freely using sexist language to mock the child of Dick Cheney. -- Aug. 17
Whitlock didn't tell his readers that Cheney has ceased to be useful to Republicans because she is holding Trump accountable for his actions or why the GOP should put party before honor and responsibility. And he's done this before; he complainined in a May 2021 post that "While NBC’s Today show was eager to hail Wyoming Congresswoman Liz Cheney for bashing fellow Republicans during an exclusive interview on Thursday, back in 2012, the broadcast questioned whether her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney, deserved a life-saving heart transplant."
Posted by Terry K.
at 9:04 PM EDT
Updated: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 9:08 PM EDT
Newsmax Continued Massive Pro-Trump Defense After Mar-a-Lago Raid Topic: Newsmax
Newsmax's blanketdefense of Donald Trump following the raid on Mar-a-Lago to retrieve the classified documents he took from the White House continued apace well beyond a week after the raid took place -- and largely devoid of any balancing viewpoint from law enforcement. Let's look at how Newsmax did that since we last checked.
To sum up: From Aug. 8, the day of the raid, through Aug. 20, Newsmax published by our count a whopping 92 articles defending Trump -- and there are likely a few we didn't catch. The number of article Newsmax published offering balanced viewpoints was much lower. Then again, Newsmax has positioned itself as a pro-Trump channel, so the bias is baked in.
WND Keeps Giving Platforms To COVID Misinformers Topic: WorldNetDaily
Chief WorldNetDaily COVID misinformer Art Moore found a new COVID misinformer to promote in a July 20 article:
A video PSA by the Health and Human Services Department suggesting loving parents will want to get their young children vaccinated with the experimental COVID-19 MRNA shot amounts to "shameless propaganda," says a prominent epidemiologist at the University of California at San Francisco.
Dr. Vinay Prasad argues there is "no randomized data, nor even a single observational study that has shown a reduction in severe disease in this age group," referring to children from 6 months to 4 years old.
HHS posted the PSA with the message: "Nothing matters more than keeping them safe. If your child is 6 months or older, you can now help protect them from severe COVID illness by getting them a COVID vaccine. Talk to your child’s doctor about vaccines and visit http://vaccines.gov."
But Prasad, writing on Twitter, said the Food and Drug Administration "should fine HHS for false advertising."
"It's really shameless propaganda to disguise the cold reality that there will be very poor uptake for this vaccine that was pushed through for political purposes," he said.
Prasad called the ad "government-sponsored misinformation from the administration seeking to police misinformation."
Moore used an Aug. 29 article to give a platform to another COVID misinformer:
Alleging fraudulent data was used to create COVID-19 guidance, a student is suing Massachusetts officials after he was kicked out of law school for refusing to be vaccinated for the disease.
John Paul Beaudoin Sr. has named Republican Gov. Charlie Baker, the state public health commissioner and medical examiners in his suit, charging they submitted fraudulent data to the federal government, which then devised COVID guidance that was adopted by his school, the private Massachusetts School of Law.
Significantly, Just the News reported, Beaudoin alleges that many Massachusetts death certificates "wrongly list 'COVID-19' as a cause of death."
One of the examples he cites is that of 7-year-old Cassidy Baracka, whose Jan. 18 death was blamed on COVID complications. Beaudoin points, however, to a Jan. 15 report in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, or VAERS, which is run by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
The VAERS report states the child first became seriously ill "5 min post vaccination," or five minutes after receiving a COVID-19 shot.
The complaint states that the "fraudulent misrepresentations aggregate to support a false narrative" that has harmed Beaudoin and society by "convincing institutions to coerce people under color of law to take an experimental biological product."
Actually, there's more to the story of Baracka's death. The cause of the girl's apparently had not been officially determined at the time of her death -- making Beaudoin's citing of her more than a little dishonest -- but one week before her death, a Massachusetts Department of Children and Families representative visited her house and found "unsanitary and unsafe hoarding conditions,: bu the child died before a DCF social worker could visit the house. Also, our litigant appears to be using the ol' anti-vaxxer strategy of plucking numbers from the VAERS database while censoring the fact that nothing in it has been verified.
Speaking of our litigant: calling him merely a "student" is a touch misleading. Beaudoin is actually well into middle age; the ruling tossing out a previous lawsuit he filed to stop mask mandates in Massachusetts noted that he "purportedly suffers from a hearing impairment caused by an adverse reaction to a prophylactic treatment he received during the 'Hong Kong flu' outbreak in 1968." Moore didn't mention that one of his demands in the lawsuit is "a workspace in a state office and a robust computer with Excel" so he can rummage through state records and spend who knows how much time figuring out who actually died of COVID.
In short, a nuisance lawsuit filed by a right-wing crank -- you know, WND's readership.
NEW ARTICLE: Accountability Makes The MRC Mad Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center spent the summer raging against the House committee hearings on the events leading up to the Capitol riot and parroting right-wing talking points, attacks and distractions. Read more >>
MRC Keeps Up The Musk-Fluffing, Embrances Anti-Twitter Whistleblower Topic: Media Research Center
The last time we checked in on the Media Research Center's hero worship of Elon Musk for trying to buy Twitter, it was getting over its disappointment over Musk pulling out of the Twitter deal and parroting his narrative that Twitter is lying about the number of bot accounts it has. But it has sinced found a new ally to champion in the form of a former Twitter employee. Joseph Vazquez gushed in an Aug. 23 post:
A former Twitter executive just blew the whistle against the Big Tech platform for allegedly ignoring serious cybersecurity problems and apparently misleading prospective owner Elon Musk on spam bots.
Both CNN and The Washington Post released stories documenting explosive allegations by former Twitter head of security Peiter “Mudge” Zatko.
Zatko’s whistleblower complaint, which both outlets reported was sent to Congress and other federal agencies, warned about “‘extreme, egregious deficiencies’ in its defenses against hackers, as well as its meager efforts to fight spam,” The Post summarized.
The complaint itself alleges that Twitter was “Lying about Bots to Elon Musk.” The Tesla CEO has been in a back-and-forth legal battle with Twitter over his announced intent to abandon his $44 billion acquisition bid after claiming the platform misled him about the amount of spam bots on the platform.
Unusually for the MRC, Vazquez did surprisingly report both sides of the story:
A Twitter spokesperson lashed back at Zatko in comments to CNN, in an apparent attempt to cover the company by painting him as an incompetent employee. “‘Mr. Zatko was fired from his senior executive role at Twitter for poor performance and ineffective leadership over six months ago,” the spokesperson said.
The company also added Zatko’s complaint was part of a “‘false narrative’” and was “‘riddled with inconsistencies and inaccuracies, and lacks important context.’”
The same day, a post by Jeffrey Clark cheered that "Tesla CEO Elon Musk subpoenaed former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, intensifying his ongoing legal battle with the social media giant over his intent to bail on his initial $44 billion acquisition offer," touting the whistleblower as"another possible boon for Musk’s case against Twitter" and gushing that "Musk seemingly referencedthe whistleblower news with a photo of Disney character Jiminy Cricket whistling: 'Give a Little Whistle.'"
Clark returned for an Aug. 26 item complaining that CNBC wasn't taking Zatko seriouesly enough for purposes of Musk and its own right-wing anti-"big tech" narratives:
Just one day after whistleblower Peiter “Mudge” Zatko made bombshell claims that Twitter has been “lying” about its security practices, CNBC appeared to downplay Zatko’s complaint in an interview. The outlet gave a platform to a law professor who absurdly claimed Zatko “basically” agreed with Twitter on how it counts users.
Squawk Box co-anchor Andrew Sorkin framed Zatko’s Twitter bashing as an inflated crisis: “This, in some ways, seemed like a bombshell,” Sorkin hedged. “Do we need to look at the bots the way Elon Musk is asking, or don’t we?”
Sorkin editorialized despite Zatko making several apparent revelations earlier this week about how Twitter calculates the percentage of spam accounts versus regular accounts on its platform. Zatko directly stated in a letter to Congress that Twitter was “Lying about Bots to Elon Musk.”
Sorkin’s guest, Tulane law professor Ann Lipton, argued on the Aug. 24 Squawk Box that Zatko’s Twitter bashing was actually “good for Twitter.”
Lipton seems to have cherry-picked a single phrase from Zatko’s redacted whistleblower complaint: “Twitter is already doing a decent job excluding spam bots and other worthless accounts from its calculation of mDAU.” But Lipton omitted the fact that Twitter’s mDAU calculation is designed to exclude spam bots.
Then it was time for more hero worship; an Aug. 29 post by Clark drooled over how Musk "called for more oil and gas production in order to maintain stability around the world as Europe and the United States suffer through the worst energy crisis in years" and how they "buck an ongoing liberal media obsession over climate change and Biden’s war against fossil fuels."
An Aug. 30 post by Autumn Johnson hyped that Musk "sent yet another letter giving Twitter notice that he intends to cancel the deal," adding that "Musk has long questioned the accuracy of the number of 'bot' accounts disclosed by Twitter."
A Sept. 13 post by Brian Bradley hyped Zatko's "BOMBSHELL Testimony!" befor a Senate committee, in which he alleged that "Twitter may have employed at least three foreign intelligence agents and kept Chinese Communist Party-linked advertising accounts on the platform despite employee objections." Bradley also made sure to note that "The whistleblower hearing comes amid increased outside scrutiny over the percentage of bots on the platform, as Tesla CEO Elon Musk has moved to exit a planned $44 billion acquisition of the company."
Johnson took Musk's side yet again in a Sept. 14 post on Twitter shareholders approving the deal whether Musk wants to or not:
Despite contentious legal battles, Twitter’s shareholders approved Elon Musk’s deal to purchase the platform for $44 billion.
The Verge reported Tuesday that the company confirmed it has enough votes to approve the purchase. Musk, however, shows no signs of backing down amid a protracted legal battle with Twitter.
NewsBusters reported in August that the Tesla CEO said the deal will go through if Twitter provides proof that its reported numbers of “real” accounts on the platform are accurate.
“If Twitter simply provides their method of sampling 100 accounts and how they’re confirmed to be real, the deal should proceed on original terms," Musk tweeted. "However, if it turns out that their SEC filings are materially false, then it should not.”
The next day, Vazquez cheered a right-wing author who praised Musk:
Woke Inc. author Vivek Ramaswamy didn’t mince words about the impact the world’s richest man had in giving shareholders a voice to fight the censors at Twitter.
The Strive Asset Management executive chairman joined the Sept. 14 edition of Fox News’s America’s Newsroom and said that even if Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s $44 billion acquisition of Twitter doesn’t go through, his bid opened new ground for Americans to fight back against Big Tech censorship.
“He has paved the way for shareholders exercising their voice in the boardrooms of these companies,” Ramswamy told Fox News anchor Bill Hemmer.
“Most of the owners of these public companies, including Twitter, are the everyday citizens of this country through other funds managed by [left-wing hedge funds] BlackRock and State Street and Vanguard that together, historically, have exercised the vote.”
Johnson returend for a Sept. 20 post on Dorsey's deposition, calling it "the latest news in the contentious legal battle that will determine whether the Tesla CEO will be forced to go through with the original $44 billion deal." She then rehashed a lot of anti-Twitter content the MRC has previously published.
No, Really: WND Used Stock Photo Of Watermelons To Illustrate Story On Black Farmers Topic: WorldNetDaily
Doesn't anyone double-check anything at WorldNetDaily?
WND republished a Sept. 26 Daily Caller News Foundation story on how "The Democrats’ massive climate spending and tax bill gave the Department of Agriculture (USDA) $2.2 billion in loans to pay farmers, many of whom are black, who have previously been denied USDA loans due to discrimination." That's not an issue: The issue is that WND chose to illustrate the story with a stock phot of watermelons. No, really -- here's a screenshot:
Tying black people to watermelons to black people is, of course, a horribly racist stereotype. And you can't blame the Daily Caller for this; there is no photo linked to the story on its website and the story itself does not even mention watermelons, let alone black farmers growing them.
That's the kind of unforeced error that keeps people from taking WND seriously as a "news" organization, no matter how fervently Joseph Farah wants us to believe otherwise.
Newsmax Columnists Rage Against Mar-a-Lago Raid Topic: Newsmax
Newsmax's coverage of the FBI raid at Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago has been relentlesslypro-Trump and anti-authority, so it stands to reason that its commentary about the raid would be even more so. Michael Grimm used his Aug. 9 column to call for the death of the FBI:
When I became an employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, more than 31 years ago, I was overjoyed. I was proud to have graduated from Quantico, becoming a newly appointed special agent — that was in 1995.
Sadly, over the years and decades, I have witnessed (first-hand) what amounts to the death of the FBI. My sadness now overshadows the treasured, fond memories of working good cases with fellow patriots, as most street agents were.
Now as I write this (and for quite some time) I can’t help but be embarrassed about my association with the agency. The bureau of today has morphed — and degenerated into — nothing more than a political cudgel to bludgeon opponents, deceive the American public, and win elections.
Jumping to the present day, when the FBI/Department of Justice (DOJ) executed the search warrant on Mar-a-Lago, the home of former President Trump and his family, it was a death-knell for any and all credibility barely remaining in both institutions.
It was one small step for liberals that fear Trump’s return and one giant leap for the banana republic America is very rapidly transforming itself into.
To be certain, there are still some great, brave field agents, but the bureau, as a whole, is no more.
May it rest in peace.
Grimm's defense of Trump is that his hoarding of classified documents and refusal to return them to their rightful owners, the U.S. government, was a "technicality."
The unbridled abuse of power by the Justice Department, coming just three months before a midterm election is unlikely to have the effect on voters that Democrats and the Biden administration think it will.
The intention may be to demonstrate to voters that Trump and Republicans are corrupt. But voters will see where the real corruption lies — in the White House, the Democratic Party, and the Justice Department headed by Attorney General Garland.
As Thomas Jefferson noted, "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."
Dorstewitz also repeated the right-wing lie that the DOJ was "Labeling concerned parents who speak out at school board meetings as domestic terrorists." As we've documented,only parents who threatened school board members were labeled as such. Is Dorstewitz saying that violent threats are protected speech?
Larry Bell ranted about the purportedly "weaponized" FBI in an Aug. 11 column, going on to play the ol' Clinton Equivocation:
Launching a police state assault on a leading political figure just three months before critical midterm elections is a politically partisan outrage of third world banana republic proportions which will discredit public trust in the FBI for decades to come.
There was also no comparable DOJ or FBI interest in pursuing clear evidence that Hillary Clinton had deleted 33,000 emails — many containing national security-sensitive classified information subpoenaed by Congress following her term as Secretary of State — going so far as having some records “wiped with BleachBit,&rdquo and cellphones destroyed with hammers.
Any thought of the FBI invading the Clinton’s Chappaqua home to seize documents would have been unthinkable, even though they might possibly also have investigated any Clinton Foundation influence in a 2010 deal which allowed the Russian nuclear energy agency Rosatom to acquire a controlling stake in Uranium One, a Canadian-based company with mining operations in the Western United States.
First: Hillary's classified email controversy was much different than Trump's hoarding of classified documents. Second: There's no credible evidence that Hillary ever engaged in such a scheme, and a total of nine federal agencies signed off on the Rosatom-Uranium One deal, not just Hillary.
Bell returned for an Aug. 15 column to whine some more about the raid ahd portray it as a distraction from Hunter Biden:
Many have legitimate reasons to suspect that political and media pressures on Merrick Garland to indict Donald Trump on anything ahead of 2024 presidential elections may tie the raid on his quarters as part of a House committee investigation fishing expedition for evidence.
Unless Trump’s charged offense is proven to present a serious risk to national security, at least half of the nation is likely to see the raid only as blatant proof of unequal two-tier justice.
The Mar-a-Lago invasion came at a particularly perilous political time for Joe Biden and his administration as the U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware reportedly nears a decision on whether to charge Hunter Biden with alleged criminal tax evasion and money laundering.
In his Aug. 19 column, Dorstewitz declared that "there’s no evidence to suggest that either the former president or his lawyers were in any manner uncooperative with federal authorities." That didn't age well; it was revealed a couple weeks later that Trump's lawyers claimed -- falsely, it appears -- that they had returned all classified documents ac ouple months before the raid. He continued to rant, spouting the right-wing talking points du jour:
The search warrant was executed by the same FBI that lied on four applications for FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. This was also the same FBI that pushed the legitimacy of the Steele dossier, knowing full well that it was little more than a work of fiction.
DOJ lawyers argued Thursday that release of the affidavit would compromise the investigation into Trump’s mishandling of classified material.
Would that be the same “ mishandling of classified material,” for example, as using a private, nonsecure email server to send and receive classified State Department information and deleting 33,000 emails?
Dorstewitz's Aug. 22 column brought up the completely unrelated case of how "In 2012 the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit to compel the National Archives and Records Administration to seize hours of audio tapes former President Bill Clinton kept in his sock drawer." Dorstewitz obscured the fact that the tapes were made by historian Taylor Branch, not Clinton, and that they have largely been in Branch's c ustody ever sincel.