MRC Labors To Dismiss BYU Racism Incident As A 'Hoax' Topic: Media Research Center
When Rachel Richardson, a player for the Duke volleyball team ,claimed she she heard racist taunts coming from the student section of her opponent, Brigham Young University, the Media Research Center worked hard to dismiss it and tried to frame it as a hoax -- armed only with denials from BYU.John Simmons spent an Aug. 31 post repeating a claim from the right-wing sports blog Outkick "suggests that this whole story might be a hoax" because... BYU police claimed they couldn't find anything:
Despite these accusations, BYU campus police and witnesses at the event are telling a different story.
After reviewing footage of the game and the people around where the incident took place, BYU Police Lt. George Besendorfer told the Salt Lake Tribune “When we watched the video, we did not observe that behavior from him (the unnamed student).”
Another police officer who reviewed the footage of the scene in question said “There was nothing seen on the game film that led me to believe” that the man “was the person who was making comments to the player who complained about being called the N-word.”
Furthermore, multiple students interviewed by The Cougar Chronicle, a school paper that operates independently from BYU, reported that they do not remember that word being said or anyone acting in a derogatory way towards Richardson.
“There is zero evidence of a slur being said. Not a single witness, besides Ms. Richardson, has come forth. Not a single cell phone video,” an anonymous source said who attended the volleyball game.
So for now, it looks like Richardson’s case is pretty insignificant, and yet ESPN and other left-leaning outlets have yet to comment on this half of the story because they are too busy hyping up Richardson as their next victim of racism. More details may emerge that prove Richardson right, but for now it seems like she made an error on how she served her story.
Simmons failed to identify Outkick's right-wing bias.
Simmons' fellow MRC sports blogger, Jay Maxson, complained in a Sept. 2 post that BYU is reacting to allegations of racism in an appropriate manner:
Never mind the darn facts, Brigham Young University is way over-reacting to a racism hoax and punishing the innocent. One man falsely accused of racially taunting a black Duke University volleyball player in a game at Provo earlier this week has been banned from BYU’s campus for life. A fan section at BYU’s volleyball venue has also been moved further away from the court.
John Nolte of Breitbart called it fascism displayed by sniveling cowards.
This whole sorry saga is just another example of how, even when fake hate crimes are exposed, the whole university machine goes into overdrive to manufacture fake concern over non-problems. Just so they can feel good about themselves.
Macson didn't explain why universities should not respond to racist incidents, nor did he (or she) point outthe right-wing bias of Nolte and Breitbart.
Brad Wilmouth spent a Sept. 4 post complaining the incident was being covered and insisting it has been "discredited," citing only "university staff" who arguably have a bias to protect their employer:
Earlier this week, CNN, ABC, PBS and ESPN all promoted another racism story that appears to be a hoax, this time in response to claims that a black Duke University student was harassed with racial epithets as she played volleyball at Brigham Young University in Utah over the weekend.
Between last Sunday and Monday, five different shows on CNN devoted segments to the controversy, totaling almost 24 full minutes, but have so far not updated the story as more details have cast doubt on whether the incident actually happened.
It has since been reported not only that a police officer who was on scene observed no evidence that the harassment happened, but analysis of video footage by university staff found no evidence that the activity occurred. Furthermore, the student's godmother who helped spread the accusations is an aspiring politician in Fort Worth who has a history of using her Twitter page to make incendiary attacks on white people.
Wilmouth went on to gush that "Fox's The Ingraham Angle notably did a segment on the revelations that the case appears to be a hoax in spite of all the media coverage it received."
A Sept. 8 post by Maxson complained that USA Today called out right-wingers for desperately denying the incident:
Rachel Richardson’s false race accusations against Brigham Young volleyball fans have been debunked by police investigators, but USA Today race writer Mike Freeman says the Duke athlete is now the victim of a “right-wing conspiracy theory.” Just like QAnon or mass voter fraud.
Freeman’s idea of “proof” that Richardson’s recent claims of racial taunts and threats from BYU fans comes in the form of a post-match phone call to her dad. His logic is that she didn’t seem her normal self, so the right-wing doubters and the police could not possibly be correct in their opposition. “After the game, she called, and this was a different call,” her father, Marvin, told CNN. Not exactly compelling enough to overturn a thorough police investigation of what turned out to be Richardson reporting a fake hate crime.
Maxson offered no proof of the police investigation being "thorough," nor did he (or she) mention that the police are employees of the university so they would likely have an interest in downplaying the incident.Nevertheless, Maxson went on to whine that "The race-baiting sports writing beat has indeed slowed down since the Black Lives Matter madness of 2020. Freeman is trying to resuscitate it with this hard-hitting and off-target race blast" -- though, again, he has no solid, independent proof that the story is fraudulent.
Clay Waters embraced the "hoax" narrative in a Sept. 11 post:
An August 26 women’s college volleyball match between Duke University and Brigham Young University in Utah was allegedly marred by a racist BYU fan yelling racist slurs at a black Duke player, according to her father.
The only problem: It evidently didn’t happen, though that didn’t stop BYU from banning a fan falsely accused of shouting the slurs. Now Brigham Young’s comprehensive investigation uncovered no evidence that the incident ever happened. (None of the 5,500 spectators in attendance heard anything either.)
Yet the Times, so sensitive to right-wing “misinformation” during the Trump era and beyond, wasted no time jumping on the original allegations, not bothering to confirm the story on its own before spouting it off as truth in a breathless piece bylined from Vimal Patel, assuming the truth of the nasty accusation with no evidence.
Waters didn't mention the accusation that itis a "hoax" lacks solid evidence as well.
Maxson found another "thorough investigation" to promote in a Sept. 12 post -- a Fox News "reporter":
A Fox News report concerning the left-stream media’s performance on the Rachel Richardson story reveals an ugly bias, not to mention pathetic examples of “journalism.” Richardson is the black Duke volleyball player who, on Aug. 26, claimed she was the victim of racial taunting and threats in a match at Brigham Young. Police investigators found no evidence to corroborate her story, and the establishment media has not reported this inconvenient truth.
BYU Police Lt. George Besendorfer reviewed surveillance video of the alleged racist fan from the game, and he concluded "we did not observe that behavior from him." Will Cain reported on Fox News television that black BYU students in the arena heard no racial slurs either.
In a Fox News web story, reporter Joseph Wolfsohn released the results of his thorough investigation of media coverage. His findings are appalling.
Maxson didn't explain why the BYU police report should be trusted without question even thought, again, they are university employees and arguably biased.
Nobody at the MRC mentioned a statement by the West Coast Conference, of which BYU is a member, pointing out that "BYU's inability to locate perpetrator(s) does not mean the remarks were not said," nor have they mentioned that Duke officials are standing by Richardson. Still, the MRC has a narrative to push, and Curtis Houck did his part in another Sept. 12 post, insisting the claim has been "debunked" and a "hoax" while attacking a CNN update on the story:
CNN offered another clue Monday morning into how a properly-run CNN under Discovery and boss Chris Licht might look as New Day introduced a new segment called “Upon Further Review” to reexamine stories that, once facts emerged, showed something was different than the initial narrative. With the ever-pompous John Avlon at the helm, the first installment touched on the debunked claims of racist taunts from Brigham Young University fans to a Duke women’s volleyball player.
What Avlon wouldn’t admit was those defending Richardson indeed wanted the racist slurs to be true in order to further their preferred narratives about humanity or, more specifically, those that lean conservative (such as Mormons).
“Now, we need to note that the investigation does not call Rachel Richardson a liar or a fabricator. It leaves open the possibility that she sincerely believed that she heard repeated racial heckling and that some sort of misunderstanding occurred,” he added, as if to offer an olive branch.
Houck is being paid to push a narrative, not be fair and balanced, so he'll never admit that the sources he uses to proclaim this a "hoax" are biased.
Newsmax Joined Rest Of ConWeb In Hating Biden's Speech Topic: Newsmax
Like the Media Research Center, its "news" division CNSNews.com and WorldNetDaily, Newsmax did what it could to attack President Biden's Sept. 1 speech calling out right-wing extremism embodied by Donald Trump and his supporters. A "news" article, apparently a Reuters piece that was "contributed" to by Newsmax, led off its coverage under the headline "Divider-in-Chief?":
President Joe Biden charged Republican allies of Donald Trump with undermining the country's democratic foundations and urged voters on Thursday to reject extremism ahead of midterm elections in November.
His attack, detailed in a draft speech released earlier in the day, was speedily and forcefully rebuked by GOP leaders who have accused "divider-in-chief" Biden and his supporters of dispensing their own brand of damaging, dangerous rhetoric.
Newsmax also devoted an article by Charles Kim complaining that "Progressives appear to be very happy with President Joe Biden's speech."
Jeffrey Rodack served as the servile pro-Trump stenographer of Trump's rage-posting in a Sept. 2 article:
Former President Donald Trump is blasting Joe Biden's prime-time speech, calling it "awkward and angry," and saying the president "must be insane or suffering from late stage dementia."
Trump made his remarks in posts on his Truth Social platform after Biden's Thursday night speech.
He wrote: "Someone should explain to Joe Biden, slowly but passionately, that MAGA means, as powerfully as mere words can get, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! If he doesn't want to Make America Great Again, which through words, action, and thought, he doesn't, then he certainly should not be representing the United States of America!"
He also posted: "If you look at the words and meaning of the awkward and angry Biden speech tonight, he threatened America, including with the possible use of military force. He must be insane, or suffering from late stage dementia!"
In another post, Trump showed side-by-side photos of Biden with both arms raised while making his prime-time speech and of himself kissing the American flag.
Sandy Fitzgerald transcribed a Newsmax TV appearance by right-wing activist Matt Schlapp, who claimed that Biden's speech "shows he is a president "who hates half of America" and wants to deprive them of their rights." Apparently, Schlapp believes that trying to overthrow the government on behalf of a mentally unstable man is a "right."
President Joe Biden's "hypocrisy" was on display Thursday with his anti-MAGA speech at Independence Hill in Philadelphia, especially considering he campaigned on a promise to heal and unite the nation, Rep. Scott Fitzgerald said on Newsmax Friday.
"I think what you're seeing is with 67 days left until the election that somebody at the White House has polling that says what they need to do is divide the Republicans and somehow cast out a specific percentage of them and alienate them and hopefully they won't show up and vote in the midterms," the Wisconsin Republican said on Newsmax's "National Report." "A partisan message is a political message and it's outrageous, the way it was presented yesterday."
Yet another Rpeublican appeared on Newsmax TV to attack Biden, which Fitzgerald also dutifully transcribed:
President Joe Biden and the Democrats have given up on attracting people who are undecided or in the middle of the political spectrum based on any achievements, so he had to be divisive in his speech Thursday night in Philadelphia to drum up support among the base to get them out to vote in November, Rep. Guy Reschenthaler said on Newsmax Friday.
"[He was]talking about Jan. 6, for example, calling out MAGA Republicans, which, by the way, are basically Republicans," said the Pennsylvania Republican on Newsmax's "John Bachman Now. "The irony and the hypocrisy are rich when he starts talking about extremism.
"Instead, it's the Democrats who are extreme," Reschenthaler said. "It's extreme to suggest that we should pack the Supreme Court. It's extreme to weaponize the DOJ and the FBI. It's extreme to raid the home of a former president on incredibly flimsy evidence.
Rep. Jody Hice, R-Ga., told Newsmax Friday that President Joe Biden's speech at Independence Hall in Philadelphia last night was "political" and "creepy," despite White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre saying otherwise.
"It was purely political and the shameful part of it is that he's using the military to politicize his own radical left-wing agenda that continues to wreak havoc on this country," Hice said, during an appearance on Newsmax's "Spicer & Co." "The blood red background was just creepy, the whole thing was creepy, and the use of the military was just inappropriate for this politically driven speech."
Newsmax's own resident Trump toady, Dick Morris, chimed in as well:
President Joe Biden's dark and divisive Thursday speech was not about America, but more about former President Donald Trump to try to turn the attention of the midterm voters to the past president rather than the struggles of the sitting one, according to presidential adviser Dick Morris on Newsmax.
"The question is, why would Biden take these hits — take the risk of giving so incendiary and unpresidential and intemperate of a speech as president — and the answer is because he's essentially falling on his sword to bring the issue to Trump and making this issue all about Donald Trump," Morris told "Saturday Report."
Morris noted the persistent attacks on Trump are going to fail to keep him from running in 2024, as he wrote in his book.
"Now the only issue will be Trump and the archives, and it's a trivial issue: literally overdue library books; here's no national security implications," Morris told host Rita Cosby.
As we've noted, the faulty library-book excuses comes straight from Trump's lawyers.
Newsmax columnists unsurprisingly hated the speech as well. Michael Dorstewitz issued a litany of complaints, only some of which had to do with the speech::
President Joe Biden pointed his finger in the wrong direction during last night’s prime-time speech when he purported to describe an "ongoing attack on democracy."
There’s no questions but that America’s rights and freedoms are under attack. But they’re under attack by the Democratic Party, not what he calls "MAGA Republicans."
And on the subject of identity politics, Rachel Levine was chosen as the first transgender assistant secretary of Health, Sam Brinton as the first nonbinary deputy assistant secretary of Energy, and Karine Jean-Pierre as the first Black and openly LGBTQ female White House press secretary.
Continuing the definition, under "severe economic and social regimentation," Biden implemented onerous COVID restrictions, making vaccination of an experimental drug a prerequisite to continued employment.
The administration also pushed to severely limit in-person learning.
Dorstewitz didn't explain why it was a bad thing to do what needed to be done to try and limit the spread of a deadly virus, and he failed to mention that the COVID vaccine was developed under Trump (and is not "experimental").
Newsmax was still attacking the speech days later. A Sept. 6 article transcribed a Newsmax TV appearance by Republican Rep. markwayne Mullin, who declared that ''I think President Biden owes every patriot American out there that's from a red state that voted for President Trump an apology, and he should do it now,'' and another article gave space to GOP Rep. Ralph Norman to whine that "Joe Biden did what he always does, which is use his voice to basically lambaste anybody that voted for President Trump. His hatred is that big."
WND Falsely Fearmongers About 'Child Bride' Laws Topic: WorldNetDaily
Bob Unruh wrote in a Sept. 8 WorldNetDaily article:
Sen. Chuck Schumer, a Democrat who is known for endorsing the debunked "Russiagate" collusion conspiracy theory Democrats launched against President Trump as well as verbally threatening the justices on the Supreme Court, by name, is demanding that "child bride" laws be instituted nationwide.
That's part of an analysis from Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, which fights for religious and civil rights.
He was addressing Schumer's stated plan to push HR 8404 through Congress within weeks.
That plan, called the "Respect for Marriage Act," although it essentially destroys the historic and traditional concepts of marriage, is one of the congressional Democrats' top priorities.
"In addition to same-sex marriage, California will be able to force its pedophilia-enabling child bride laws on every other state ... and every other state will be forced to honor those insane laws!" Staver explained.
The Respect for Marriage Act has nothing to do with California "child brides" -- that's just a fearmongering attack from Liberty Coiunsel that Unruh doesn't botther to fact-check or challenge because's a stenographer, not a reporter. If Unruh had bothered to do any research before writing his article, he would have learned two things.
The first, as a reputable news outlet reported, is that several states -- not just California -- have no minimum age for marriage, which makes it nonsensical for Staver to put solely blame California. Mississippi is also among the 12 states that has no minimum marriage age, but Staver and Unruh can't manufacture any right-wing outrage invoking that state the way the can by invoking California and Schumer.
The second is that one key opponent of states raising minimum marriage age is Republicans and conservatives, who are actually invoking the "sanctity of family" in opposing that. Interestingly, these conservatives are working with civil liberties groups like the American Civil Liberties Union to fight higher minimum ages for marriage, which led to the defeat of a California effort in 2017 to set a minimum age of 18. A bill passed in the state thte next year "placed strict guidelines on judges who approve such marriages, requiring them to interview the parties, gain consent from parents, and report any suspicious circumstances, and also mandated counties collect data on child brides."
All of this is window-dressing to obscure their usual hate of same-sex marriage, which is actually what the Respect for Marriage Act is designed to enshrine into law. Indeed, Unruh approvingly quoted Staver ranting that "some children, if the plan is adopted, will be 'placed in danger of pedophilic 'grooming.'"
Again, Unruh did nothing except rewrite Staver's press release, so he's nothing but a lazy stenographer who can't be bothered to do even the most rudimentary fact-checking. And Joseph Farah wants his readers to keep funding this laziness.
NEW ARTICLE: The MRC's Anti-Abortion Extremists Topic: Media Research Center
State surveillance of women lest they cross state lines for an abortion? Smearing companies who offer abortion benefits to workers as servants of Moloch? That's how the Media Research Center attacks anyone who doesn't hate abortion like it does. Read more >>
MRC Suffers A Flare-Up of Hillary Derangement Syndrome Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has been suffering from Hillary Derangement Syndrome for a good 30 years now -- but it's been experiencing a flare-up of the condition over the past month or so. It kicked off in a Sept. 1 post by sports blogger Jay Maxson, who was upset that sports commentator Stephen A. Smith argued that Hillary would have been a good president, whining that Hillary was accused of "using a personal server for classified documents. Thanks to former FBI director/stooge James Comey, she escaped prosecution on that and a few other scandals, too."
Kevin Tober spent a Sept. 4 post huffing that Hillary -- and Chelsea! -- were allowed to appear on TV to promote a new project:
On CBS Sunday Morning, anchor Jane Pauley and Norah O’Donnell gushed over former First Lady, Secretary of State, and two-time failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and touted her new documentary on Apple TV Plus called “Gutsy”. Clinton’s documentary was supposedly made to highlight women that Clinton believes are gutsy. Despite Hillary Clinton being one of the least gutsy people in public life, CBS still took this new publicity stunt by Clinton seriously.
Tober went on to attack Hillary for not divorcing her husband, Bill Clinton, after he notoriously had an affair with Monica Lewinsky:
A real reporter would’ve pointed out that Hillary Clinton only stayed with Bill Clinton because she knew her political career would’ve been over if she left. There would’ve been no run for the Senate in New York, a presidential run in 2008 or 2016, and certainly no nomination as Secretary of State.
That is the opposite of gutsy. Her decision was pure political calculation, which is why Norah O’Donnell ignored that fact and played along like the Democrat propagandist that she is.
Tober provided no evidence whatsoever that this was the "real" reason Hillary stayed with Bill, and it's not something he cannmotknow otherwise. Besides, we thought conservatives were against divorce and all for keeping families intact.
Alex Christy served up his own Hillary-hating complaint in a Sept. 7 post:
The late night comedy shows returned for their new season on Tuesday and for NBC The Tonight Show host Jimmy Fallon that meant welcoming Hillary and Chelsea Clinton to promote their new Apple TV show. It also meant asking Hillary, of all people, about document security and the war in Ukraine.
In jest, Fallon asked, “How easy is it to walk out with boxes of classified documents?”
Both Clintons and the studio audience thought that was the funniest thing they’ve ever heard. As Hillary cracked herself up, Chelsea explained, “But also, wait, Jimmy, it's the--it's the-- plural that kills me, right? ...You’re like, not just one box…or one document—boxes and thousands of documents.”
Fallon, also finding the whole thing hilarious and not at all ironic given Hillary’s private server and Bill’s national security advisor stuffing documents down his pants, wondered, “Does he know what he's doing, does he-- what would you do with that? I mean, is it for -- is it for--is it for-- the presidential library?”
BleachBit’s most famous customer explained, “Well, usually when it comes to presidential libraries, everything is in the Archives. We have a National Archive and Record[s] Administration where everything goes and then it gets transferred to a presidential library. At least that's the way it used to happen.”
Christy did not offer any evidence to prove that anything Hillary had allegedly done with classified documents was exponentially worse than what Trump has done by literally stealing them from the White House.
Tim Graham devoted his Sept. 9 podcast to whining about Hillary -- and, of course, rehashing old right-wing attacks on Bill:
To publicize their new eight-part Apple TV series titled Gutsy, Hillary Clinton and her daughter Chelsea Clinton did a tour of fawning, flattering interviews, because that's what the liberal media can be counted on to provide. The show's based on their 2019 book titled The Book of Gutsy Women: Favorite Stories of Courage and Resilience.
In the promos for the Gutsy book, they defined gutsy women as "leaders with the courage to stand up to the status quo, ask hard questions, and get the job done." Hillary Clinton is one of American history’s greatest doormats. She arrived at the summit of American politics by tolerating her husband nailing any woman who would have him…and several who would not!
Ironic coming from a guy who has spent the previous five years, along with his employer, tolerating anything and everything Trump did -- including the incitement of an insurrection because he's mentally incapable of dealing with the fact that he lost an election.
Bill D'Agostino served up his own whataboutism effort in a Sept. 13 post:
Since the August 8 FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, outraged TV journalists on CNN and MSNBC have slammed former President Trump for storing once-classified documents at his private residence. Yet back in 2015, those same networks were maniacally defensive of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she was under investigation for storing highly sensitive material on a private server.
During the 2016 election cycle, the establishment media felt Clinton’s alleged mishandling of classified information was no big deal. Reporters frequently lamented that the issue was “distracting” from her presidential campaign, and wondered at length when it would all finally “go away.”
Fast-forward to 2022, and suddenly the media are deeply concerned about the proper protocols for storing classified information.
D'Agostino didn't explain why he has suddenly stopped being concerned about the handling of classified information now that his favorite president has been credibly accused of mishandling it.
Tierin-Rose Mandelburg found a decidedly different reason to engage in Hillary-bashing in another Sept. 13 post:
In all of my existence, I never thought I’d have to write a piece about a former first lady and her daughter discussing a song that talks about a “Wet Ass P***y."
Hillary Clinton and her daughter Chelsea sat down with none other than Megan Thee Stallion where the trio painted canvases and had a chit-chat for the Clinton’s new Apple TV+ series, “Gutsy.”
Naturally, mom and daughter had high praise for Megan Thee Stallion’s song, “Wet Ass P**y.”
“Chelsea follows rap music, ever since she was a little girl,” mamma Clinton told MTS. “But I kind of came to awareness of you with the Cardi B WAP.”
Chelsea added her two-sense to the WAP song as well.
“It’s great to see women be so kind of fierce,” she said.
Fierce is now defined as women shaking their butts in thongs for cameras and screaming about their leaky lower bits.
I suppose Merriam-Webster should update his dictionary.
I am unsure what the Clinton’s were thinking, first by allowing MTS on their show and second by talking about a song with such disgusting lyrics.
Her prostestations to the contrary, Mandelburg didn't "have to write" this piece -- nobody's forcing her to do so (as far as we know). If she's so offended, she can simply quit the MRC and find something more her speed. But the fact that she cranked this piece out anyway tells us that her outrage is performative and she's getting paid too good for said performative outrage for her to ever willingly quit (unless, of course, Fox News is hiring).
Christy lashed out at another Hillary-Chelsea media appearance in a Sept. 16 post:
Hillary Clinton took her Apple TV Gutsy promotional tour to the Thursday-taped edition Late Night with Seth Meyerson NBC where Meyers wondered why Republicans are such hypocrites on classified materials. The routine repeated itself on MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Friday morning with host Willie Geist wondering the same thing.
Meyers, who isn’t the first NBC late night host to recently ask Hillary about document storage, portrayed Hillary as the victim of the worst sort of hypocrisy, “I'd be remiss if I didn't ask you about this. I don't know if you've noticed in the news, but there's been an issue about handling classified materials…we've had some fun here because we can't help but find a certain level of hypocrisy from certain people, including the fella who handled this classified material because back in the day…I don't know if you've ever heard this, he thought you should be arrested.”
For her part, Hillary naturally accused Republicans of being not only hypocritical, but also uninformed about her own scandal, “Yeah. And, you know, let me start by saying just for the history books, do you know how many classified documents I had: zero, zero and so, you know, you can't make this up. I mean, the lies they told, the -- you know, heated rhetoric, "Lock her up," all that nonsense. It was totally political, divorced from reality.”
Even PolitiFact has recently ruled that the zero classified documents talking point obscures the truth, but Meyers didn’t care.
Huh -- we thought that the MRC hated PolitiFact because they never fact-check liberals. Christy might want to have a chat with boss Tim Graham about that.
Yes, the MRC continues to be so triggered by Hillary that it will abandon its own cherished narratives just to take any kind of shot at her.
WND Rehashed Old, Irrelevant Story To Fearmonger About Vaccine, Censors Relevant Facts Topic: WorldNetDaily
Apropos of nothing, Bob Unruh fearmongered in a Sept. 8 WorldNetDaily article:
One of the first patients to take the AstraZeneca COVID-19 shot was Megi Brakadze, 27, a nurse in Georgia, just over the border from Russia.
A day later, she was in a coma, her heart stopped, and physicians were unable to revive her.
hey blamed anaphylactic shock.
She had made a video at the time of her shot, explaining, "Vaccines are needed. We are powerless against the virus, we must vaccinate ourselves to avoid diseases or not get seri0usly ill. Although people are afraid, there is nothing dangerous about getting vaccinated. I urge everyone to get vaccinated."
Unruh omitted a couple of facts here. First, the AstraZeneca vaccine has not been approved in the U.S., where much of WND's (dwindling) audience resides, meaning that the story is irrelevant to much of its audience. Second, this incident happened in March 2021 -- more than a year and a half earlier. Thus, it cannot be considered to be "news."
Unruh made the mistake of getting his information for this alleged story from the highly discrtedited Gateway Pundit, which also hid the date the incident occurred. Unruh went on to uncritically quote from this discredited source:
The report said, "Doctors tried to restart her heart but were not able to revive her completely. For some reason, Megi's story did not make the headlines. It was not allowed."
The video explained the doctor's concluded her death was from anaphylactic shock.
It was confirmed by the Georgian Ministry of Health.
Netiher Unruh nor the Gateway Pundit offered any evidence to counter the report of the cause of Brakadze's death. But Unruh somehow did manage to avoid repeating the GP's false claim that "For some reason, Megi’s story did not make the headlines. It was not allowed." In fact, as a reputable news organization reported, "Megi Bakradze's death and the investigation that followed has been headline news in Georgia for months, widely discussed in public and on social media" -- to the point that her death hindered vaccine campaigns in the country.
But both Unruh and GP omit the fact that -- as that reputable news organization also reported -- there's still a dispute over what link there is, if any, between the vaccine and Brakadze's death. One review found no link between the vaccine and her death, and there is a dispute over whether the woman was properly and quickly treated with epinephrine as her allergic reaction became clear.
But Unruh doesn't care about facts that contradict the narrative he's being (sporadically) paid to push. His job -- as is that of every other WND employee -- is to spread fear about COVID vaccines.
After Mar-a-Lago Raid, Newsmax's Morris Gets Stuck In Trump Defense Mode Topic: Newsmax
Notoriously wrong Newsmax pundit Dick Morris had to shift his pro-Trump groveling in his Newsmax TV appearances from selling his new pro-Trump book to defending Trump following the FBI raid on his Mar-a-Lago compound in search of purloined classified documents. More than two weeks after the raid, Morris was still in post-raid defense mode:
Morris claimed in an Aug. 26 appearance that "claims of a search for archives was a "pretext' to find evidence that could be used to keep him off the 2024 ballot," adding that "they waited a year and a half to go after him. So how vital could these security issues be?"
In another TV hit the same day, he complained that "the Mar-a-Lago raid affidavit was heavily redacted, with the Justice Department's real motives still "buried beneath black ink," insisting that the Justice Department "saw [a] fabulous political opportunity to embarrass Trump, and they raided Mar-a-Lago."
In an Aug. 29 appearance, Morris asserted that <"I think the Democrats realized [they can't beat Trump at the polls] and they decided to abstain from the political process and just use the control of the FBI and the IRS, and the various government agencies, to hound Trump out of office, and hopefully indict him, and make it illegal for him to run."
Morris was still spinning the raid in a Sept.5 appearance:
''The strategy here by [President Joe Biden's] people is to get off the presidential record and attack Trump personally, and the key element was raiding Mar-a-Lago. That is just creating an issue for Trump that's terribly effective for him,'' Morris said on ''Spicer & Co.''
''The next step will be, I think, that they're going to indict Trump on a records violation about the [National] Archives. That's a little bit like indicting someone for having an overdue library book because the archivist is in, the last analysis, a librarian.
''Basically, their nose is out of joint that all the books haven't come in yet. The only thing that would make it serious is if there's a credible accusation that Trump leaked our secrets to the Russians or the Chinese, and he didn't for four years as president, and he hasn't for two years as a former president.''
Morris still couldn't stop talking about the raid a month later. He ranted in a Sept. 10 TV appearane:
The raid of former President Donald Trump's private residence at Mar-a-Lago might not be about securing an indictment as much as covering for the FBI's pursuit of Trump, according to presidential adviser Dick Morris on Newsmax.
"We need to go from defense to offense on this," Morris, who has advised former President Bill Clinton and former President Donald Trump, told "Saturday Report." "I think that one of the big reasons — if not the major reason — that the FBI seized those documents is that they incriminate not Trump, but the FBI in the Russia collusion scandal, in the scandal of spying on Trump's campaign, and in the scandal of fabricating evidence to the FISA court to lead to wiretaps on key Trump officials."
It got to the point that an article by Jay Clemons on a Sept. 12 appearance that seemed to mock Morris' relentless Trump-fluffing:
Political consultant Dick Morris, who's been busy touting "The Return," a New York Times best-selling book about former President Donald Trump, doesn't need much goading when it comes to making Trump-affiliated prognostications on Newsmax.
While appearing on "Rob Schmitt Tonight" Monday, Morris rattled off four sequential predictions involving Trump and his ongoing document dispute with the Justice Department (DOJ), regarding sensitive materials that allegedly contain "classified" or "top-secret" markings.
Morris' predictions include:
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon's decision to grant the Trumpteam's special master request will be sustained, after the DOJ appeal.
There won't be enough incriminating documents to formally indict Trump in a grand-jury setting.
The Republicans will claim the majority in the House and Senate chambers for the upcoming midterm elections (Nov. 8). Right now, the Democrats control the House and Senate.
Starting as early as January 2023, House GOP investigators will put the FBI and DOJ under further scrutiny, in terms of explaining or justifying the FBI's Aug. 8 raid< on Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort, along with the House hearings on the Jan. 6, 2021 unrest at the Capitol.
"And these Mar-a-Lago documents [that Trump possesses] will be Exhibits A, B, and C in the case against the FBI," quips Morris.
Clemons didn't disclose to readers that his employer published Morris' book.
Morris totally bought into a pro-Trump conspiracy theory in another Sept. 12 appearance:
Speculating to Newsmax on the documents the FBI took in its raid on Mar-a-Lago, Dick Morris tells "American Agenda" that the documents are a "smoking gun," illustrating collusion between the FBI and the Department of Justice.
"I believe that the primary motivation of the FBI in breaking in and seizing those documents" is that the agency is "trying to defend itself against Trump's condemnation," Morris says.
"I think," Morris continues, "Trump took those documents because he believed that they contain evidence of a smoking gun of FBI and DOJ collusion in the Russia-hoax scandal, in the tapping of his phone as president, and getting FISA warrants — on perjury grounds — to surveil his staff."
"I think the reason the FBI raided was to get those documents back before Trump made them public."
Morris wrapped failed right-wing prosecutor John Durham into his conspiracy theories in a Sept. 16 appearance:
Former President Donald Trump took boxes of documents to his Mar-a-Lago estate to "allow him to go after the FBI," not to keep himself from being investigated, Dick Morris, the author of the book "The Return: Trump's 2024 Comeback," told Newsmaxon Friday.
"The issue here is not the documents Trump took, but what's in them," Morris told "National Report." "I believe that the evidence will eventually show that it includes a smoking gun proving the allegations made by John Durham, the special prosecutor, three days ago."
Morris is nothing if not a slavishly loyal pro-Trump shill.
CNS Lets COVID Misinformer Complain About Attempt To Curtail COVID Misinformation Topic: CNSNews.com
MIcky Wootten wrote in a Sept. 12 CNSNews.com article:
As California’s COVID misinformation bill, AB 2098, awaits Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom’s signature, Green Bay Packers’ Quarterback Aaron Rodgers offered some criticisms of the legislation.
Appearing on liberal commentator Bill Maher’s podcast“Club Random” on Sunday, Rodgers discussed, among other things, the public’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and government measures to combat it.
Rodgers criticized California Assembly Bill AB 2098, which would grant the California Medical Board the authority to revoke the licenses of doctors who promote what it deems to be COVID “misinformation.”
Wootten failed to report that Rodgers is himself a notorious COVID misinformer. As we documnted, Rodgers lied to his tem last fall by insisting he had been "inoculated" against COVID -- in fact, he had not been vaccinated at all but was taking dubious, unproven medications like ivermectin.
Because Wootten censored that fact, it discredits his attempt to portray Rodgers as some kind of expert on COVID, give that Rodgers himself is a documented misinformer. It doesn't really bode well for fulfilling the "Investigative Journalism Fellow" title bestowed uponhim -- censoring inconvenient information is the polar opposite of being "investigative."
MRC Obsesses Over Political Party Of Man Accused Of Killing Reporter Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center doesn't care about the health and safety of journalists who aren't right-wing shills -- witness its whining about journalists being concerned about their safety in covering Donald Trump and cheering attacks on them by rabid Trump supporters and its deliberate ignoring of a non-Fox News journalist killed in covering Russia's invasion of Ukraine while fretting over a Fox News reporter who was injured. If the MRC expresses concern about the health and safety of a non-right-wing journalist at all, it's because it can be exploited to advance the MRC's partisan right-wing narratives.
And that's pretty much what happened with the death of journalist Jeff German. His death itself didn't move the MRC -- he worked for a "legacy media" outlet, the Las Vegas Review-Journal. But when it emerged that his alleged killer is a local official who just happened to be a Democrat, it was explotation time. Curtis Houck ranted in a Sept. 8 post:
On Wednesday afternoon, Clark County, Nevada Public Administrator and Democratic Party official Robert Telles was arrested in connection with the death of Las Vegas Review-Journal investigative reporter Jeff German following a series of stories German had penned about what sources told him was an abusive culture in Telles’s official and an inappropriate relationship with a colleague.
Of course, ABC, CBS, and NBC refused to mention Telles’s party ID in their Thursday morning news programs. If Telles had been a Republican, it’s a safe bet we would hear lectures about how the GOP had made reporting dangerous, democracy died in darkness, and that it was the latest example of right-wing violence after January 6.
HOuck didn't mention that the Jan. 6 violkence was done explicitly for the benefit of a Republican president who is mentally unable to accept that he lost an election, while no partisan political motive has been detected in Telles' alleged crime.
Kathleen Krumhansl similarly ranted the same day (needless bolding in original):
Univision and Telemundo gave a master class today on how to omit inconvenient news during their reports on the arrest of Las Vegas Clark County Public Administrator Robert Telles- taken into custody in connection with the murder of investigative journalist Jeff German. Both networks called him a politician, a civil servant, the suspect, and public administrator, WITHOUT mentioning once that he is an elected Democrat.
The decision to omit the key (D)detail from their reports of the murder confirms the lengths to which the main sources of news for Spanish-speaking audiences in the nation go in their shared mission of sanctifying Democrats.
It is hard to imagine Republicans getting the same deference from Latino-interest media. Such is the bias that passes for reporting at the nation's leading Spanish-speaking corporate media.
Krumhansl similarly failed to explain Telles' political affiliation to his alleged crime. Nevertheless, her post was translated into Spanish.
A favorite liberal-media theme is that Donald Trump and Republicans at large, by criticizing the media, have endangered the lives of journalists.
So imagine if a Republican elected official had actually been charged with murdering an investigative journalist who had exposed his wrongdoing! Entire special shows would be dedicated to the news! "Tonight on MSNBC: Journalism Under Murderous Republican Attack!"
But let a Democrat [sic] elected official be accused of murdering a journalist who had written stories exposing his misconduct, and MSNBC, in the case of Morning Joe, not only gives the story short shrift, but, incredibly, never discloses that the suspect is a Democrat.
Finkewlstein went on to attack CNN for not making Telles' political affilation prominent enough:
CNN would have been guilty of the worst kind of hypocrisy and double standard had it failed to identify Telles as a Democrat. As Kristine Marsh has noted, CNN's Jim Acosta, a raging Trump antagonist, warned of a coming day of "a dead journalist on the side of the highway, because of the rhetoric coming out of the White House from the President of the United States."
Acosta has also accused Trump of creating “an atmosphere where people can get hurt, where journalists can get murdered.”
Finkelstein didn't mention the difference between the two -- Trump encouraged violence against any and all journalists who criticized his consefvative-leaning polices (which, again, the MRC condoned), while Telles' apparent animus against German was personal and not based on political ideology.
The template was used again in a Sept. 11 post by Tim Graham:
On the terribly titled All Things Consideredon Saturday night, NPR weekend anchor Michel Martin explored threats to journalists and journalism with liberal Washington Post columnist Margaret Sullivan, who just left the paper. They began with the killing of Las Vegas Review-Journalreporter Jeff German by a Democrat...and they never mentioned the Democrat part.
Martin could explain "Clark County Public Administrator Robert Telles was arrested on suspicion of murdering German. Now, the authorities have not provided a specific motive, but German had previously reported on mismanagement and a hostile work environment in Telles's office. Telles denied the accusations and went after German on social media." But she couldn't identify Telles by party.
Instead, Martin alluded instead to "the prior American president" as a violent threat to journalism:
Like Finkelstein, Graham failed to mention that Telles' alleged killing of German wasn't ideological, unlike the threats Trump issued.
After five days of silence from the major broadcast networks, ABC’s Good Morning America broke ranks Tuesday to rediscover the brutal murder of longtime Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter Jeff German allegedly at the hands of Democratic Clark County, Nevada Public Administrator Robert Telles. And, beyond that, ABC broke the network-wide blackout in noting Telles’s party ID.
World News Tonight and Good Morning America on Tuesday broke their network's silence on the party of the brutal murder of longtime Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter Jeff German by Democrat Clark County, Nevada Public Administrator Robert Telles. While the network ran an almost identical news package on the story during their morning and evening newscasts, they were only able to manage one brief mention of Telles's party affiliation. Meanwhile, rival networks CBS & NBC have continued their censorship of the Telles's party ID.
Again, Houck and Tober didn't explain the relevance of Telles' political affiliation to his alleged crime.
Graham attacked Acosta for not conforming to his biased narratie in a Sept. 14 post:
A Nexis search of CNN transcripts confirms that weekend host Jim Acosta -- the man who repeatedly said Trump endangered the lives of reporters as he yelled at Trump in White House press conferences -- said zip, zilch, nada about a Democrat [sic] politician
Acosta's 2019 memoir was titled The Enemy of the People: A Dangerous Time to Tell the Truth in America. In a 2018 panel discussion, he turned to a T-shirt that joked about hanging reporters:
So as long as there's a dead journalist stabbed by a Democrat, we haven't become something less than America.
It's telling about the MRC's abject hatred of journalists who aren't right-wing toadies the Graham thinks threatening to murder journalists can be dismissed as a "joke."
Also, note that none of thiese MRC writer engaged in their usual dismissal of German as a "liberal" journalist. That's because his death serves the MRC's agenda.
NEW ARTICLE: Narrative Before News At CNS Topic: CNSNews.com
Rather than report what happened at the House hearings into the Capitol riot, CNSNews.com chose instead to not be the "news" organization it claims to be, attacking the committee and pushing right-wing conspiracy theories and narratives. Read more >>
MRC Keeps Up Bogus 'Secondhand Censorship' Narrative Topic: Media Research Center
Over the summer, the Media Research Center invented a "secondhand censorship" metric to manufacture absurdly high numbers in advancing its ridiculous, biased narrative that socia media companies trying to enforce their terms of service are guilt of "censorship" against conservatives. Brian Bradley and Gabriela Pariseau ruther that dishonest narrative -- and those ridiculous numbers -- again in an Aug. 16 post:
Big Tech sent a stark message to conservatives during the second quarter of this year that it will continue to fiercely protect President Joe Biden and censor viewpoints that differ from the left’s narrative on major political issues.
Throughout the first two quarters, MRC counted 309 total individual censorship cases that translated to no fewer than 195,251,589 times that Big Tech kept information from social media users through secondhand censorship.
Big Tech companies tirelessly worked to shackle the spread of content across several issue areas; most notably, elections, President Joe Biden and “transgenderism,” from April through June. This discriminatory information control was an attempt to strong-arm Americans to embrace leftist orthodoxy.
MRC defines secondhand censorship as the number of times that users on social media had information kept from them.
All this definition does is take an example of so-called "censorship" and multply it by the number of followers that account has, generating those ridiculous and meaningless number. And what does the MRC think is disturbing "censortship"? Pointing out that a discredited film has been discredited:
The platform spiked an election-related post by Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro in May, with the help of its fact-checking partner PolitiFact, according to a May 10 CensorTrack entry. The “fact-checker” flagged a Daily Wire article that cited political commentator Dinesh D’Souza ’s documentary “2000 Mules” calling the article “partly false,” as “the same information was checked in another post by independent fact-checkers.” The movie examined voter fraud in the 2020 election by using cell phones’ geolocation data. The secondhand censorship effect of the fact-check meant that Shapiro’s 8.5 million Facebook followers couldn’t see information linking potential voter fraud to the 2020 election.
Of course, "2000 Mules" has been repeatedly discredited, particularly on its claims about geolocation data. The MRC's CensorTrack database essentially acted as a PR agent for D'Souza's film, complaining that "The fact-checker also quoted several experts who said that D'Souza and True the Vote's evidence was incredible because geolocation data can be imprecise. But the fact-checker ignored the particular and targeted parameters for how the data was used in an investigation." CensorTrack didn't explain why readers of Shapiro's post shouldn't know that the film is discredited. One might call that, you know, "cemsorship."
Note that Bradley and Pariseau put "transgenderism" in scare quotes. They continued to do so in complaining that transphobic hate was being called out:
MRC counted 25 individual cases of censorship of content critical of so-called “transgenderism” in the second quarter. Secondhand censorship affected the followers of these accounts 8,111,001 times during the quarter.
Twitter perpetrated the most substantial suppression of so-called “transgender”-related content in the second quarter in June. The platform removed a post by renowned psychologist Jordan Peterson when he used “transgender” actor Elliot Page’s given name, Ellen Page.
“Remember when pride was a sin? And Ellen Page just had her breasts removed by a criminal physician,” Peterson purportedly tweeted according to screenshots tweeted by his daughter Mikhaila Peterson. Twitter apparently deemed the post to violate its rules against “hateful conduct.”
Peterson is a "renowned psychiatrist"? That's news to us -- we thought he was mostly a guy trying to justify right-wing anti-"woke" rage. Bradley and Pariseau didn't explain why it's OK to maliciously deadname a transgender person or falsely smear the doctor who operated on him as "criminal" -- and they certainly didn't explain their aggressive use of scare quotes.
Bradley and Pariseau concluded by ranting that "MRC continues to call on the American public to push tech companies to end their authoritarian suppression of opposing viewpoints." They didn't explain why hate and lies should be treatd as legitimate "opposing viewpoints" or why exposing them is "censorship."
WARNING: If you have had a COVID vaccine/booster shot, what this article presents may cause you stress and anxiety.
Two key recent medical research articles, one from Italy and one from Germany, have been used to document what may be the most important research finding during the entire COVID pandemic period.
Blood damage that has been detailed through sophisticated research methods is the "missing link" to explain many negative health conditions ranging from heart problems, cancers, reduced immunity and death. Blood damage is the key biologic explanation for harmful vaccine impacts. Note that I am using the word "vaccine" but fully recognize that COVID vaccines/boosters are not real vaccines, but a form of genetic treatment that, unlike real vaccines, do not actually and truly prevent or cure COVID.
As to deaths, data from Europe, New Zealand, Australia and Canada on total excess mortality countrywide in 2022, greater than in 2020 and 2021, are best explained by widespread COVID vaccine use in 2022 and not COVID infection deaths.
Please understand that ordinary blood testing you may get from your physician laboratory orders are not the same as the research techniques used to document vaccine induced blood damage. Do not let cognitive dissonance stand in the way of your acceptance of these frightening research results.
In both research publications, closely examine the many photographs given to prove blood damage; it is infeasible to reproduce them here. It will take time and patience to closely read these two studies, but there is no alternative if you truly want to understand how blood damage has been proven in a compelling way.
The first study Hirschhorn cited was published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research -- which, as we've previously noted, is an anti-vaxxer journal no credible medical researcher takes serioiusly. The second is titled ""German Researchers Examine Covid 'Vaccines' and Vaccinated People's Blood and Say Stop Vaccinations," and the fact that it puts "vaccines" in scare quotes should be enough to note its anti-vaxxer nature. It's also not a study in the sense that it was published in a respected peer-reviewed journal; it's a report from something called the "German Working Group for Covid-19 Vaccine Analysis," whatever that is, and it appeared on someone's Substack site.
Nevertheless, Hirschhorn thinks this is all serious, credible stuff -- and yet another excuse to indulge his weird obsession with Anthony Fauci:
The blood damage caused by COVID "vaccines" is best seen by the public as the key "missing link" that can explain what I and many others have been reporting on for many months – namely, the multitude of adverse health impacts and deaths from what the medical and public health establishment, the mainstream media and government agencies are still pushing on the public.
Eventually, history will show that all the powers forcing COVID "vaccines" on the public do not have the courage and integrity to admit that the "vaccines" were a dangerous and false pandemic solution that ultimately will explain millions of deaths. They can be seen as part of the biowar forced upon humanity – a true crime against humanity. The principal force that created the phony vaccine movement was Anthony Fauci, whose prosecution as a criminal is sorely needed.
Hirschhorn used his Oct. 4 column to try and gaslight his readers, blaming declining trust in doctors on anything but right-wing anti-vaxxer lise and falsey insist that he's the one who's doing the "truth telling":
Losing trust in doctors and the medical establishment is a sad consequence of the COVID pandemic. Doctors have not done all they should have to better serve their patients.
After truth telling in my writings for about two years, I remain saddened that the vast majority of the public remains victimized by propaganda in favor of vaccines and boosters while ignoring the many truths I and others have been shouting.
It now seems important for all of us who know the truth to put much of the blame on regular doctors people ordinarily see. The very sad fact is that nearly all of them are a combination of being ignorant (about COVID, vaccines and their alternatives), cowards for being unwilling to risk their jobs and prestige, and just plain biased – supporting what government agencies and medical establishment forces have hit the public with.
We need a public uprising against prevalent physician beliefs and behaviors.
When doctors are all wrong about COVID, then it is rational to doubt their overall performance in keeping their patients healthy by using the best medicines, tests and medical knowledge. Are they following medical research on many, many topics other than COVID?
Hirschhorn then served up "a series of questions (just examples) to ask your doctor," which he claimed are "structured to allow a simple answer so that minimal time is needed." Many of the questions try to advance anti=vaxxer conspiracy theories, like:
Are you aware that considerable data show many people are dying about five months after being vaccinated?
Have you stayed informed about proven alternatives to the vaccines that some doctors have been using with great success since the pandemic began?
Are you aware of high rates of excess mortality (that has only happened after wide vaccine use) all over the world, that they cannot be explained by COVID infection and that many believe result from COVID vaccines damaging immune systems and blood?
If I tested positive for COVID and begged you for a prescription for ivermectin, would you provide it?
f you are truly well-informed about the pandemic and COVID, then you should know what really good or bad answers are for these questions.
Similarly, if you had the opportunity to have time with one of the great doctors, like Peter McCullough in Texas or George Fareed in California, you can imagine how they would answer these questions.
Yes, we can. McCullough is a discredited COVID misinformer, while Fareed, as we noted the last time Hirschhorn brought him up, claims to have developed an ivermectin-centric treatment that normals doctors have disavowed.
Hirschhorn concluded by demanding that his fellow misinformers continue pushing that misinformation:
If you find this topic of great importance, then share all this with those you know who still are brainwashed by the propaganda from the many authoritarian forces pushing all the wrong information about COVID. Think of Anthony Fauci as the leader of those awful forces. Tell those people what good and correct answers are to the above questions.
Theonly person we see who has been "brainwashed" by "propaganda" is Hirschhorn.
How Is The MRC Fearmongering About Soros Now? Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's dirty war against George Soros has continued apace since the last time we checked in, cranking out posts with a heavy emphasis on his alleged support for countering disinformation (which you'd think the MRC would support) and freakouts over "Soros-funded prosecutors":
We've already noted how the MRC was blaming Soros for pointing out that two straight quarters of negative GDP may not be a completely reliable indicator of a recession and bizarrely accusing Soros of someone forcing Wikipedia to change the definition of a recession (showing that the MRC doesn't understand how Wikipedia works). But it also reserved ire for media-related claims. A June 4 post by Jorge Bonilla (also in Spanish) freaked out that a non-conservative owners with a tangental tie to Soros are buying several Spanish-language radio stations in Florida and elsewhere:
After years of whining about "Spanish-language disinformation" and watching the Democrats continue to lose Hispanic electoral share to the GOP, the left has had enough.
In what is clearly a panic move, a Soros-led investment group has backed the acquisition of 18 Univision radio stations by a media organization led by former Obama and Clinton operatives.
The deal fundamentally recreates the footprint of the failed Univision America talk radio network, with affiliates in: Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, McAllen, Miami, San Antonio, and Fresno. As a deal sweetener, Univision threw in WADO-NY, the Spanish-language home of the New York Yankees, and most importantly WAQI 710 in Miami- the iconic anti-communist Radio Mambí.
The latter is important because Mambí has long been a thorn on the side of an entitled left that demands absolute control over what media Hispanics consume.
Doesn't Bonilla's freakout over this business deal suggest that he's the one who doing the "panic move" here? Meanwhile, one observer pointed out that Radio Mambí is not just the "anti-communist" Bonilla describes it as; it's "anti-Democrat, anti-Biden, pro-Trump and spreads beliefs that Democrats stole the 2020 election and are conspiring to steal the 2022 midterms and the 2024 presidential election," and some hosts "have gone so far as to praise the militant far-right Proud Boys and speak favorably about violence as a way to combat 'a looming Democratic Party dictatorship.'"
But because Bonilla had a narrative to advance, he ignored inconvenient facts and pushed his storyline: "In sum, the move appears to be primarily fueled by panic over Democrats’ continued loss of influence over the Hispanic vote ahead of the 2024 presidential election. This is a significant development inasmuch as it lays a marker down, but not one that is permanently transformative or even a game-changer, given the left's current existing near-monopoly on Spanish-language media."
Meanwhile, the MRC was similarly appalled that Soros was being allowed to express opinions on a website he helped pay for. Jeffrey Clark ranted in a July 5 post:
iberal billionaire George Soros claimed that the greatest threat to the U.S. is “far-right extremists” on the U.S. Supreme Court and not dictators like China’s Xi Jinping or Russia’s Vladimir Putin.
But there was one thing the chair of Open Society Foundations neglected to mention in his tweet. A radical leftist opinion site — one Soros pays for, called Project Syndicate (PS) – published Soros’s article. PS delivers thousands of extremist, far-left op-eds to a global audience and boasts a membership of “over 600 media outlets” in 156 countries. Soros and wealthy leftist philanthropist and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates funded PS with $1,242,105 and $5,280,186, respectively, from 2012 to 2019, according to Foundation Directory Online.
Of course, any content that's even slightly to the left of the right-wing rants published by the MRC are "radical" and "extremist" in Clark's eyes. Indeed, so opposed is Clark to the mere idea of Soros being allowed to express an opinion that he bizarrely complained that "Soros then ridiculously suggested that because he is partisan, he can comment on nonpartisan issues." Clark has never applied that logic to any of his MRC co-workers.
An Aug. 1 post by Clark ranted that Soros "is pushing back big time against critics of woke prosecutors that he helped elect across the country. He claimed in a recent commentary that the 'agenda' of his 'reform-minded prosecutors' is both 'popular' and 'effective.'” But he hid the fact that the op-ed appeared in the Wall Street Journal -- hardly a "radical leftist opinion site." Clark apparently didn't want to admit that a Rupert Murdoch-owned publication bets known for its right-wing commentary deviated from that agenda to publish something written by Sorosl.
CNS Jim Jordan & Mark Levin Stenography Watch Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com still loves quoting Ted Cruz (likely because editor Terry Jeffrey's daughter works for him), but it has (at least temporarily) dialed down its stenography of another Republican representative, Jim Jordan. Here are the articles it devoted to him during July, August and September:
That's just six articles in the third quarter, for a total so far this year of 26 -- and, of course, continued censorship by CNS on his alleged failure to do anything about a doctor who had been accused of sexual abuse by wrestlers on a college team where Jordan was a coach.
Meanwhile, a onetime favorite of CNS, right-wing radio host Mark Levin, didn't fare much better, suffering a similar drop-off in stenography in the third quarter despite a full complement of summer interns:
MRC Laughably Attacks Outlets That Won't Push Anti-Hunter Narrative As 'Liberal Rags' Topic: Media Research Center
Lots to unpack in the lead of a Sept. 7 Media Research Center post by Brian Bradley:
Two liberal rags pooh-poohed a letter sent Thursday by House Republicans to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg that seeks more information from Facebook about its communication with the federal government that led to censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Headlines Thursday from both Bloomberg News and The Hill screeched that a letter from 35 House Republicans requesting records of communication between Zuckerberg and the FBI reflected a House GOP effort to “target” Facebook as part of a ploy to nab Hunter Biden.
It's a testament to just how far-right the MRC is that it thinks any media outlet not as right-wing as them is a "liberal rag."Indeed, Bradley labeling either of those outlet as "liberal rags" is utterly ridiculous. According to AllSides, the right-leaning checker that is apparently the only bias-checker the MRC trusts, The Hill is rated in the "center," though onecould make a case that it leans farther right given that its most prominent writer is right-wing "media critic" Joe Concha, whom the MRC loves so much he's a featured guest on their upcoming Mediterranean cruise. AllSides lists Bloomberg as "leans left," though given AllSides' bias, that means it's quite center. Further, given Republicans' (and the MRC's) obsession with Hunter Biden, it's entirely reasonable to believe that Repubicans targeting of Facebook is all about trying to "nab" Hunter.
Bradley's factually deficient tirade came in the wake of Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg stating on Joe Rogan's podcast that Facebook limited the spread of the New York Post story making claims about Hunter Biden's laptop because the FBI warned it to be aware of misinformation being spread online. Of course, the MRC had its own biased framing of this story, screeching that "Facebook censored the Hunter Biden laptop." This leaves out the important fact that, as we've noted, the New York Post refued to provide independent verification of the story in a way that would suggest it was anything other than an October surprise that had the hallmarks of Russian disinformation of the kind that was found to have happened in the 2016 presidential election.
Bradley eventally got to the nub of his attacks on Bloomberg and The Hill, complaining that they wouldn't push the right-wing narrative on this story:
Rather than focus on alleged corruption between Facebook and the government, Bloomberg focused on political ramifications of Republicans retaking the House next year. The rag warned the GOP would “focus heavily” on censorship, potentially by using its “subpoena power” and presenting a “risk” to tech companies “reviled by conservatives.”
The Hill wasn’t much better. That publication ignored the impact of Big Tech’s and Big Media’s censorship of the Hunter Biden scandals, which helped steal the 2020 election for Joe Biden. The Hill largely skirted the election issue, opting to portray the reduced distribution of the Hunter Biden story merely as being “argued” by House Republicans as preventing Americans from seeing the full picture of the Bidens’ alleged corruption.
Media Research Center revealed in November 2020 that Big Tech and Big Media’s censorship of the Biden family scandals helped steal the election for Joe Biden.
As we've documented, the only thing the the MRC "revealed" was that it used Trump's own pollster to further its own version of Trump's "Big Lie" about the election being stolen.
The fact that the MRC is still citing this ridiculously biased conspiracy theory -- and its silly dismissal of reputable publications who refuse to blindly push right-wing narratives as "liberal rags" -- shows just how unserious and untrustworthy the MRC has become in putting partisan attacks ahead of any sort of real "media research."