MRC Takes Potshots At Jeffries As Incoming House Dem Leader Topic: Media Research Center
Just as the Media Research Center took shots at Nancy Pelosi on her way out of House leadership, it took shots at her replacement as House Democratic leader, Hakeem Jeffries. A Nov. 30 post by Kevin Tober whined that the historic nature of Jeffries' tenure was described as such:
On Wednesday, House Democrats officially tapped New York Democrat Congressman Hakeem Jeffries to be the next Democrat minority leader when the party becomes the minority next year. Because Jeffries is African American, and no African American has ever served as minority leader in the House of Representatives, the networks were quick to point that fact out and tout him as "historic."
While all three networks gave brief reports, none of them bothered to mention Jeffries' uncle Leonard Jeffries who has a long and troubling past spewing anti-Semitic and racist comments about Jews and white people. According to Fox News Digital, he blamed "Jewish people for the transatlantic slave trade" and supported "black supremacist ideals, like the theory that higher melanin levels make black people inherently superior to white people."
If Jeffries was a Republican, all three networks would have at least gotten in a brief mention of this or made a snide comment about it.
Nicholas Fondacaro went on another Heathering tirade against "The View" co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, complaining in a Dec. 1 post that her refusal to spew irrational hate at Jeffries like he and his MRC buddies would disqualifies her from being a real Republican:
Alyssa Farah Griffin has been an utter disaster as the voice of Republicans and conservatives on ABC’s liberal viper pit, The View. No matter how many times she declares the GOP as “my party,” it’s clear that she harbors resentment for those who made her. And that was evident on Thursday’s show as she praised House Democrats for electing New York Congressman Hakeem Jeffries to be their leader and whined about GOP leadership.
“I think Hakeem Jeffries was a very wise call for Democrats,” she proclaimed. Recalling her time working for real Republicans in the House, Farah Griffin touted Jeffries as someone who has “credibility” with the growing progressive wing of the party and could supposedly work with Republicans.
Describing the GOP as “my party,” Farah Griffin lamented “their House leadership is a bit of a mess right now.” She liked that the leadership was relatively young, but hinted at racism within the party:
We have fairly young leadership with McCarthy, Stefanik, but we lack representation. I actually really was hoping Byron Donalds, a Florida member would’ve challenged Elise Stefanik for conference chair because we don't have minority representation in our leadership.
This is an example of how detached and out of the loop she is from “her party.”Donalds did runfor a leadership position, he just didn’t win and was considered a long-shot candidate.
It was also another example of Farah Griffin putting the Democratic Party over “her party.”
Only in the right-wing media bubble is saying something nice about a Democrat grounds for loyalty tests and expulsion from the Republican Party.
Tim Graham spent a Dec. 2 post being mad that right-wing attacks on Jeffries as being an "election denier" based on comments he made about Donald Trump's election in 2016 (in which he lost the popular vote) were being pointed out as dishonest:
The Congress certified the 2016 election -- despite the Democrat challenges to it -- so clearly Jeffries denied Trump's election. But Aguilera explains that somehow, Trump's denialism was more extreme and led to the January 6 riot, so somehow it's "misleading" to associate the term "election denier" with Democrats:
Graham was still complaining about all this a full month later, starting his Jan. 6 column by huffing about the "historic" nature of his position being noted:
On January 4, NPR’s All Things Considered did a story on McCarthy failing to win support alongside a story headlined "Looking back at a decade of GOP hard-liners in Congress." But they also spent almost three minutes touting Jeffries as the first black lawmaker nominated for Speaker of the House.
Co-host Juana Summers touted how “Jeffries repeatedly earned the support of every member of his caucus -- the first time a Democratic leader has done so since 2007. That's the year when they elected Nancy Pelosi.” Co-host Mary Louise Kelly added: “The symbolic torch-passing received a standing ovation from Democrats.”
Then came a parade of happy Democrat quotes.
Then he whined about the "election denier" debunking, citing no less than than full-blown Republican oppo research to bolster his argument:
Meanwhile, to represent the view NPR refuses to consider, Kyle Martinsen of the Republican Party’s messaging team sent around a memo on how all 212 Democrats voted for Jeffries despite the small problem that his “record of election denialism is well documented — and thoroughly unhinged.”
Martinsen summed up: “In total, Jeffries denied the legitimacy of the 2016 election at least 163 times.”
CNN host Jake Tapper proclaimed in 2021 that he wouldn’t book any “election liars” on his shows. That didn't include election-denying Democrats, because this is CNN.
Graham censored all mention of Trump -- presumably to avoid having to explain why Trump's incitement of a riot because he cannot mentally handle the fact he lost an election is exactly the same as Jeffries making political comments about Trump and doing absolutely nothing to keep Trump from taking office, let alone not inciting a violent insurrection against him.
As the new session of Congress began, the Jeffries-bashing began anew. Alex Christy complained that "Kevin McCarthy hadn’t even been Speaker for eight hours when MSNBC’s Ali Velshi welcomed Washington Post national politics reporter Eugene Scott onto his Saturday show eagerly anticipate his replacement by new minority leader and noted election denier Hakeem Jeffries." And Clay Waters played Jeffries whataboutism when a PBS show accurately pointed out how the House Republicans who led opposition to McCarthy's selection as House majority leader were election deniers: "Speaking of congressmen who deny election results, Hakeem Jeffries, who was just elected House Minority Leader, would also qualify, based on his fiery reaction to Donald Trump’s 2016 victory. But don’t wait for PBS to be troubled about that." Just like we shouldn't wait for Waters to be troubled the fact that Republicans' election denialism led to violence, unlike Jeffries'.
The Year In Newsmax 'Non-Clinician' Disclaimers Topic: Newsmax
One would think that if you are moved to put a disclaimer on a column, you should be thinking twice about publishing that column in the first place. But Newsmax does anyway, publishing columns it has to point out were "authored by a non-clinician" with surprising regularity, presumably to escape liability for publishing medical misinformation and falsehoods. We'velooked at a few from 2022 already, but it's time to compile some more.
Noted misinformer Mark Schulte -- who loves to toss around a blizzard of numbers to make his misinformation seem more credible -- earned yet another tag through spending a Aug. 3 column raging at monkeypox -- which actually got the double disclaimer that "The following article has been authored by a non-clinician and should not be interpreted in any way as the dispensing of medical advice":
But in a world with 8 billion people and 22,485 cases, the infection rate is an infinitesimal 3 per 1 million.
Moreover, 12 of the world's 14 most populous countries (excluding America and Brazil), have a combined 4.5 billion people, or 56% of humanity. They have a total of 200< monkeypox cases, or 1 per 22.5 million, according to the CDC as of Aug. 1.
They are: China, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Russia, Mexico, Japan, Ethiopia, Philippines and Egypt.
Finally, Americans should stay informed and use their own judgment in reviewing polls, and that includes polls on the subject of monkeypox. Dissecting monkeypox information, or information on other matters of health, should always be done calmly, and not with hysterics.
An Aug. 24 column by Ziva Dahl complained that the American Medical Association is trying to fight racial bias and discrimination in health care:
The traditionally conservative medical establishment has bought into the spurious claim that our health care system is "systemically racist" — that institutionalized racism is responsible for racial disparities in the demographics of the medical profession and in healthcare outcomes for people of color.
The medical profession has abandoned rational thought in favor of intolerant racist dogma in a misbegotten effort to right past wrongs, insisting that giving preference to people of color is a form of reparations for white racism and must be institutionalized across the medical field.
Common sense says that patients of all ethnicities will suffer.
The public’s trust in medical institutions, which has already fallen during the coronavirus pandemic, will decline as will the quality of medical care.
Among 38,818 COVID tests conducted in their 8.000 stores across the country last week, the group of Americans with the lowest positivity rate for the virus was the unvaccinated.
How can this be?
President Biden and Dr. Fauci repeatedly claimed that COVID was a "pandemic of the unvaccinated."
They used this warning to scare people into taking the vaccine.
These results clearly show that COVID is a virus impacting those who have been vaccinated more than those who are unvaccinated.
It has become a pandemic of the vaccinated.
An Oct. 24 column by Horace Cooper complained that YouTube bans people for spreading medical misinformation:
Ask Dan Bongino.
Bongino, host of the popular Fox News show "Unfiltered," was unceremoniously banned from YouTube last January.
His crime was telling his audience that the use of masks lacked scientific consensus as a valid means of stopping the spread of COVID-19.
Now the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has put out guidance in the last couple weeks announcing that masking is largely optional — even in hospitals and nursing homes. If you check, the CDC’s YouTube’s page is still working.
There are caveats to the CDC's guidance, but Cooper didn't mention that.
A Nov. 4 column by Crouere offered an armchair diagnosis of President Biden:
What is it going to take for the 25th Amendment to be utilized and for President Joe Biden to be removed from office? He is 79 years old and is suffering from significant mental incapacities. Biden needs rest, medical care, and treatment for his condition.
Due to his mental incompetence, Biden has been controlled by members of his administration and pushed in a far-left direction that has been disastrous to our nation. The report card for the first 21 months of his administration is a catastrophe. His grade is an F-, as nothing he has attempted has succeeded.
The Biden impeachment needs to happen. If Republicans refuse to do the right thing and give Biden a pass, at the very least, they should demand that he submit to a mental competency test.
Biden has not released the results of any mental competency test to the American people since he assumed the presidency. This test is crucial because almost every Biden speech is littered with gaffes and humiliating mistakes.
Crouere was back for a Dec. 6 column dangerously claiming that exposure to COVID is better than getting a vaccine against it:
There is no question that COVID has taken a tremendous toll on people from across the world. At least 650 million have been sickened and over 6.6 million have died from the deadly virus.
However, the best way to deal with COVID is through building up antibodies by exposure to the virus and effective treatment.
The best response is not forced measures such as mandatory vaccines, quarantines, lockdowns and mass testing. Fortunately, the unconstitutional lockdowns are over in this country, while they are still being used to torment citizens in the communist dictatorship of China.
Newsmax also put the "non-clinician" tag on a Dec. 7 column by John Cylc that endeavored to downplay the deaths caused by gun violence:
If you were to believe the hyperbole from the left, firearms are what make humans dangerous. They perpetrate a false narrative that firearms cause more deaths than any item ever invented.
Besides the occasional mass shooting (another mental health issue), most firearm homicides are inner-city shootings between gangs and thugs who battle for control of the Democrat strongholds that liberal/leftist politicians ignore once elected. (More here.)
These are the places where cops are few and outnumbered, and where district attorneys cut deals and downgrade charges to make statistics falsely show that crime is lower or dropping.
There is a simple and rational point that disproves holding the firearm responsible for these crimes. Conservatively, there are 100,000,000 U.S. gun owners, with a total of approximately 300,000,000 firearms.
If firearms were the problem, shouldn't the firearm deaths be in the hundreds of thousands, or even in the millions? Maybe the government should attempt disarming all the criminals and leave everyone else alone?
In another odd move, Newsmax stuck a "non-clinician" tag on a Dec. 7 column by Callista Gingrich touting research into developing a vaccine to counter the effects of fentanyl. But it got back to its usual tagging tactics when Michael Reagan and Michael Shannon spouted anti-vaccine rantings in a Dec. 17 column:
The COVID vaccines are the most dangerous substance Americans have ever been ordered to inject into their bodies.
The disabling and often deadly side effects from these vaccines outnumber all the total side effects from every other U.S. vaccine since record keeping began.
Vaccines were marketed in a false and deceptive fashion
Vaccines did not prevent the vaccinated from getting COVID
Vaccines did not prevent the vaxxed from transmitting COVID
Vaccines did not prevent being hospitalized with COVID
Vaccines did not prevent deaths from COVID
And — the side effects were hidden from the American public.
Actually, the vaccines do save lives, but that truth is not part of Reagan's misinformation narrative.
But Newsmax oddly stuck the "non-clinician" tag on a Nov. 14 column by token liberal writer Susan Estrich, who was imparting actual facts about COVID vaccines:
"I don't believe in vaccines," otherwise intelligent people will tell me with a straight face. Exactly what do you believe in, if not science? Are your children vaccinated? Of course.
Science is irrefutable on this one: It's better, safer, life-saving, even, to protect yourself against COVID and flu. People also die of flu. They die of hospital-acquired infections. They die of COVID. They do not die of flu shots or COVID boosters. Science is not a debate about which reasonable people can differ.
I'll survive if I get it, the naysayers tell me. Why get another shot? Because while it's true that you probably will survive, you might be miserably sick or, worse, struggle with the after-effects of long COVID. You might infect someone who won't survive. As opposed to the sting of a shot.
Estrich got the "non-clinician" tag again in a Dec. 27 column pointing out the fact that COVID is spreading again in part because people aren't wearing masks and that government officials won't mandate mask-wearing because it's politically unpopular. Again, no actual misinformation in her column.
WND Still Promoting COVID Misinformer Malone Topic: WorldNetDaily
Along with Peter McCullough, another one of WorldNetDaily's favorite COVID misinformers is Robert Malone, whose role in working with mRNA vaccines WND has helped to embellish. It has n't done as much late with Malone as it has with McCullough, but he still get favorable, uncritical press at WND. An Aug. 19 article by Art Moore touted how Malone was suing the Washington Post for exposing his COVID vaccine lies:
Dr. Robert Malone, a leading critic of the COVID-19 vaccines and an inventor of the mRNA technology platform on which they are based, filed a $50 million defamation lawsuit against the Washington Post on Friday for accusing him of spreading "dangerous lies" and "leading his followers on a journey to illness, suffering and possible death."
In an hour-long video interview Friday with WND (embedded below), Malone explained that many major news outlets, including the New York Times, have cast him in a similar light. But the Post's report Jan. 24 on his speech at the "Defeat the Mandates" rally in front of the Lincoln Memorial was "particularly egregious," he said.
After receiving a cease-and-desist letter from his lawyer, Malone said, the Post "put out another attack article in which they repeated the same defamatory statements."
"So that appears to show malice," he said.
But while Moore cites claims Malone says are defamatory, it's not explain how that it so. Moore also didn't mention that Malone is being represented in the lawsuit by Steven Biss, an attorney who loves to file dubious defamation lawsuits to silence the critics of his clients (Devin Nunes, for one, for whom Biss sued to silence a satirical Twitter account purporting to be Nunes' cow) to the point that he has gotten sanctioned. While the lawsuit seems to be ongoing -- few documents beyond Malone's complaint are public, though one paywalled document is the Post's request for dismissal due to "failure to state a claim" -- WND hasn't reported on it since.
(Malone has a history of retaliating against his critics, having once exposed the name and workplace of a doctor who reported him to a state medical board for spreading COVID misinformation, which then caused the doctor to receive threats, verbal attacks and retaliatory complaints.)
Moore devoted a Nov. 19 article to Malone's new book:
The coronavirus pandemic has been a revelation to many, not least to Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA technology platform used in the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines he vehemently opposes.
Malone sets the stage with an opening chapter intriguingly titled "How I Got Red-Pilled, and the Gradual Reveal."
The book – written with his wife, Jill Glasspool Malone – includes chapters by other outspoken physician scientists, Drs. Meryl Nass, Paul Marik and Pierre Kory. And there's one by Ed Dowd, the former Wall Street analyst who has compiled evidence from the insurance and funeral industries, and government databases showing a spike in excess deaths corresponding to the rollout of the COVID mRNA vaccines.
Moore wouldn't say it, but Malone has thrown in his lot with anti-vaxxers, given how the book's forward is written by prominent anti-vaxxer Robert Kennedy Jr. and the cover bears the logo of Kennedy's anti-vaxx group, Children's Health Defense.
Bob Unruh called on Malone to complain about the CDC's use of language in a Jan. 7 article:
Dr. Robert W. Malone, a renowned physician and biochemist whose worked has focused on the mRNA technology that was used in the COVID-19 shots, is chiding the U.S. Centers for Disease Control for wanting to rid the nation of "wrong-speak."
In a column that appeared at the Brownstone Institute, he cited the CDC's new "guide" that imposes requirements for "how we are all to speak and write."
The orders to America are found under the agency's "Preferred Terms for Select Population Groups & Communities."
"Now, how exactly this guide fits in with the CDC mission is beyond me," he noted, since the agency is "tasked with disease control and prevention …. not tasked with correcting wrong-speak."
Neither Malone nor Unruh explained why it's somehow a bad thing to not denigrate people through use of careless and stereotypical language, especially when you're trying to help them as the CDC is.
NEW ARTICLE: Flipping Over GDP At The MRC Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center rushed to proclaim that President Biden created a recession when GDP turned negative. But when quarterly GDP took a positive turn, the MRC desperately clung to its "Biden recession" narrative. Read more >>
MRC Relentlessly Hypes Democratic Links Of Fallen Crypto Billionaire Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has a bit ofan obsession with making sure that, when a person caught doing something bad who could be plausibly described as having links to Democrats or liberals, that link is screamed from the rooftops. We saw that again with Sam Bankman-Fried, the crypto billionaire who lost it all (as well as lots of money from other people) when his cryptocurrency exchange collapsed. Bankman-Fried wasn't even on the MRC's radar until last May, when Jeffrey Clark complained that he was planning to donate tons of money to help keep Donald Trump from getting elected in 2024:
A leftist crypto billionaire is hinting at throwing a billion dollars, give or take, to keep former President Donald Trump from winning the 2024 presidential election. Trump has not officially announced his bid for the presidency.
Sam Bankman-Fried has roommates, drives a Toyota Corolla and might seem like a pretty normal guy — except that he’s dedicating north of $1 billion, potentially, to preventing Trump from winning the next presidential election.
Cryptocurrency exchange platform FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried appeared on the May 24 edition of the podcast What’s Your Problem?” to discuss politics and “how to save humanity from extinction,” according to podcast host Jacob Goldstein.
The billionaire gave an estimate of just how much money he would plow into the next election to stop Trump from becoming president again: “I would guess north of 100 million.” Beyond that, Bankman-Fried said he would consider $1 billion “a soft ceiling” and might give more or less, depending on who runs in 2024.
And this wasn’t the billionaire’s first rodeo in Democratic politics. Bankman-Fried was “one of the biggest donors to President Biden’s 2020 campaign. More recently, he donated over $10 million to support a candidate in a Democratic primary for a congressional seat in Oregon.”
Ooooh, shades of George Soros! But after FTX collapsed in November amid fraud accusations, the MRC had adjust its narrative on Bankman-Fried. A Nov. 11 post by P.J. Gladnick began the shift of cheering that his fortune got wiped out and complaining he wanted to help Democrats:
On Friday, the Washington Free Beacon reported that Democrat megadonor and cryptocurrency scion Sam Bankman-Fried lost his entire $16 billion fortune.
If you are extremely wealthy and want to receive over-the-top praise from Politico, the answer is simple. Simply donate millions of dollars to Democrat candidates. Such was the case with Bankman-Fried, whose liberal largesse had Politico singing paeans to him a few months ago.
See this August love song written by Elena Schneider, "How the newest megadonor wants to change Washington."
The Politico tune about Bankman-Fried sharply changed just this week when it was discovered he was no longer useful for the Democrats, when his fortune vanished.
Tim Graham spent part of his Nov. 16 podcast whining that "the media didn't want to mention that ... Sam Bankman-Fried was the second largest donor to Democrats in this cycle, as well as a donor to liberal media groups.
A Nov. 17 post by Bill D'Agostino hyped a full-blown "STUDY":
Sam Bankman-Fried, the embattled CEO of failed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, was a massive donor to the Democratic Party. But you wouldn’t know it from the reporting on the big three broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC), who have so far almost completely hidden that salient detail from their audiences.
MRC analysts examined all FTX coverage between November 11 and November 17 on those broadcast networks’ flagship morning and evening news programs. We found that neither CBS nor NBC even mentioned Bankman-Fried’s status as a Democratic megadonor, while ABC spent only three seconds (a single mention) on it.
All told, discussion of Bankman-Fried’s extravagant bankrolling of the Democratic Party comprised just 0.2 percent of the combined 21 minutes and 17 seconds of FTX coverage across all three networks, and 0.5 percent of ABC’s 9 minutes and 7 seconds of coverage.
D'Agostino didn't explain how Bankman-Fried's politics are relevant to any possible criminal liability in FTX's collapse, other than to whine that "It goes without saying that, if a pivotal Republican donor were embroiled in a financial scandal of this magnitude, his political affiliation would be front and center in the media’s reporting." (Except at the MRC, of course.) And as usual, D'Agostino refused to include documentation of Fox News' coverage of Bankman-Fried for comparison purposes.
A Nov. 25 post by Gladnick seemed to be pleased that Bankman-Fried was admitting he suckered enough people with his claimed altruism that he got away with FTX's apparent fraud for so long:
During a Twitter DM interview by Kelsey Piper of Vox with FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried last week, something remarkable happened.
Bankman-Fried ditched his annoyingly sanctimonious "monk-like" mask and revealed his true self: a greedy cynic who is laughing at the world, including the gullible media, for believing his phony "effective altruism" shtick as you can see in the section of the interview below.
And among the suckers who completely bought into the "dumb games we woke westerners play" Bankman-Fried was the host of the video below who was lionizing the FTX CEO because he was saying "all the right shibboleths so everyone would like" him.
But as gullible as the video host was, it was no worse than the many many news sources that sung the praises of Bankman-Fried not only because he saying "all the right shilobeths" but especially because he was the second biggest donor to the Democrats this past year.
MRC boss Brent Bozell got into the act as well with a new angle to flog, as detailed in a Dec. 2 post by Brian Bradley:
As news outlets showed no indication Thursday that they planned to return millions of dollars in reported donations by disgraced FTX owner Sam Bankman-Fried, MRC founder and President Brent Bozell called for at least five media organizations to return those contributions.
"It's not just politicians who should be giving back donations from Sam-Bankman Fried,” Bozell said in a statement. “All of the media outlets that took his money should do the same."
The Daily Mail reported on Friday that Bankman-Fried dumped millions of collective dollars into at least five news companies through his cryptocurrency firm’s philanthropy arm. Any company’s retention of funds donated by Bankman-Fried could be ethically questionable amid open allegations that the cryptocurrency boss may have misusedFTX customer funds.
MRC Business asked those companies whether they plan to return the funds Bankman-Fried donated to them. At the time of publication, none had stated they intend to return the funds.
More than a month after the FTX collapse, the MRC was still ragging on Bankman-Fried, this time in a Dec. 16 column by Graham:
The collapse of the crypto-currency company FTX could be as massive a scandal for Democrats as the Democrats insisted the Enron debacle was for President George W. Bush. The man who took over the wreckage of Enron is now in charge of managing the end of FTX.
But our largest national media outlets are going to bury the point that FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried was the second largest donor to the Democratic Party in the 2022 election cycle, with over $40 million in contributions, second only to socialist agitator George Soros. The former crypto king made one of the largest donations to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign in 2020, a cool $5.2 million.
The most obvious evidence of journalistic skullduggery perpetually emerges in coverage of scandals. Republican scandals are hyped to the skies, and Democrat scandals are buried or carefully elided. The media elite’s transparent partisanship is at the center of why they’re not trusted by most Americans.
If Graham and the rest of the MRC had been even half as hard on Kanye West as they have been on Bankman-Fried, he might have a point.
WND Columnist Peddles False Narrative That Nazis Were Socialists Topic: WorldNetDaily
Hanne Nabintu Herland used Kanye West's anti-Semitism to try to reinforce a right-wing narrative in her Dec. 7 WorldNetDaily column:
The famous musician Kanye West recently declared his admiration for Adolf Hitler in an interview with Alex Jones. West said he sees "redeeming qualities" in the Nazi dictator. And of late, the entertainer has expressed anger toward Jewish Hollywood leaders and Jews in general.
So, what did Hitler stand for? Elitist nationalism coupled with socialism was the national socialism ideology that dominated the German democracy prior to World War II. NAZI is the abbreviation for "Nazionalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei," namely the National Socialist German Workers' Party. Thename itself declares it a socialist movement.
The Nazi party stood for strong centralization of government, a rigid culture of consensus, few individual liberties, strict media censorship and propaganda. Simply by observing the old photographs of the multitudes greeting Hitler with Nazi salutes, one gets a glimpse into the immense group-think social pressure. You were not allowed to keep your hand down. Everyone was to have the same political opinion; the only accepted view was that of the ruling Nazi elites.
Today, few seem to recall that the Nazi party was left-wing socialism. Among many, author Jonah Goldberg has pointed this out in his book "Liberal Fascism."
Yeah, no. Even though right-wingers insisting on portraying the Nazi movement as socialist as a way to own the libs, that's not even close to being historically accurate.As researcher Ronald Granieri pointed out:
Although the Nazis did pursue a level of government intervention in the economy that would shock doctrinaire free marketeers, their “socialism” was at best a secondary element in their appeal. Indeed, most supporters of Nazism embraced the party precisely because they saw it as an enemy of and an alternative to the political left. A closer look at the connection between Nazism and socialism can help us better understand both ideologies in their historical contexts and their significance for contemporary politics.
The Nazi regime had little to do with socialism, despite it being prominently included in the name of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. The NSDAP, from Hitler on down, struggled with the political implications of having socialism in the party name. Some early Nazi leaders, such as Gregor and Otto Strasser, appealed to working-class resentments, hoping to wean German workers away from their attachment to existing socialist and communist parties. The NSDAP’s 1920 party program, the 25 points, included passages denouncing banks, department stores and “interest slavery,” which suggested a quasi-Marxist rejection of free markets. But these were also typical criticisms in the anti-Semitic playbook, which provided a clue that the party’s overriding ideological goal wasn’t a fundamental challenge to private property.
Instead of controlling the means of production or redistributing wealth to build a utopian society, the Nazis focused on safeguarding a social and racial hierarchy. They promised solidarity for members of the Volksgemeinschaft (“racial community”) even as they denied rights to those outside the charmed circle.
Granieri went on to describe what Herland and others are doing in perpetuating this false claim "historical 'gotcha'" as well as "historical and political sophistry that attempts to turn effect into cause and victim into victimizer."
Oddly, even though West's anti-Semitism was the jumoing-off point for her column, Herland never actually criticizes West, referencing him again only at the end while trying to reinforce her bogus narrative: "It has been quite an accomplishment by the left to hide the fact that Hitler was socialist. Therefore, what exactly Kanye West means by offering his admiration for this man remains to be explained."
Newsmax's Hirsen Joins In Right-Wing Hero Worship Of Elon Musk Over Twitter Buy Topic: Newsmax
Like other right-wingers, Newsmax columnist James Hirsen has become a simp for Elon Musk over his purchase of Twitter. He gushed over Musk's long-delayed completion of his Twitter purchase in his Oct. 31 column:
Tesla founder Elon Musk currently owns the singular status of being the wealthiest person in world.
Back in April of 2022, amid a modest amount of fanfare, he purchased a 9.2% stake in Twitter. This caused the keepers of the predominant media narrative to come unglued.
Amusingly, he was able to explain his motives on the very platform that he was in the early stages of acquiring.
He had already secured a significant degree of celebrity status, having previously grabbed headlines numerous times over and had even taken to the iconic “Saturday Night Live” stage to perform host duties.
Now it looks as though he has become a historical figure of sorts, due in large part to his $44 billion purchase of the company he has characterized as “the de facto public town square.”
Along with the entire world he had watched as a small group of corporations worked hand-in-hand with the government, under the guise of eliminating “misinformation.”
It was a warped process at a minimum, one in which people were stripped of the ability to engage in the free exchange of ideas, something that Americans had previously enjoyed and had even taken for granted.
Although what Twitter will ultimately become still remains to be seen, the new chief has been using his account to celebrate the personal ownership of the platform.
A recent message posted by the entrepreneur perhaps best captures feelings on the part of a vast majority of Twitter users.
Elon tweeted the liberating song lyrics of the late great B.B. King, “Let the good times roll.”
Elon Musk just welcomed back to the Twitter-verse former President Donald J. Trump.
In the process, the social media site owner and self-described “Chief Twit” showed exactly what he’s made of, principles-wise.
The official reversal of Trump’s lifetime Twitter ban, along with the restoration of his more than 80 million followers, was implemented over the past weekend. The handle @realDonaldTrump was reactivated, and users on Twitter are once again able to tag the former president in posts.
As the present world’s most successful entrepreneur, Elon understands that business accomplishments are the fruits of a free-flow exchange of ideas.
When free expression is stifled, weeds of stagnation are able to take root. They have the capacity to choke off discussion, interaction, creativity and ultimately personal as well as collective achievement.
Rather than admit that Trump was kicked off Twitter for helping to incite the Capitol riot, Hirsen pretended that Trump actually tried to calm things down:
His tweet history stands as a testament to his social media mastery. The brevity and wit are unmatched by anyone, except perhaps the Chief Twit himself.
Two posts that Trump made just before he was banned illustrate the point.
At his January 6 rally, after he called on people to act “peacefully and patriotically,” he followed up with a plea for peace via his Twitter account.
“Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!” he posted.
This admonition was buttressed with another tweet.
“I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!”
Hirsen censored the fact that Trump did absolutely nothing for more than three hours as the riot raged choosing instead to watch TV (and he certainly wasn't going to mention that he himself spread lies about purported election fraud). Instead, Hirsen remained in gooey gush mode:
It took a lot of courage to do what Elon did in returning Trump to the Twitter platform.
It also took a whole lot of integrity, something society desperately needs yet too frequently gets in its civic and corporate leaders.
The man is a genuine free speech devotee who is determined to rebuild the digital town square.
For the sake of our country, pray that he succeeds.
Hirsen unsurprisingly latched onto Musk's release to hand-picked reporters of selective internal Twitter documents, trying to turn right-wing actor James Woods into a victim in his Dec. 5 column, doing the usual tell of srarting by reciting Woods' resume to enhance his victim status:
James Woods is well known for his accomplishments in the entertainment arts.
Consummate actor of stage and screen, he gained a considerable degree of fame for his role in the film adaptation of Joseph Wambaugh’s 1973 non-fiction book “The Onion Field,” a crime thriller extraordinaire.
Over the years James has had the opportunity to work with many a legendary Hollywood director, a distinguished roster that includes the names of David Cronenberg (“Videodrome”), Oliver Stone (“Salvador” and “Nixon”), Richard Attenborough (“Chaplin”), and Martin Scorsese (“Casino”).
In addition to the big-screen circuit, he has taken strolls down the TV road, playing characters the likes of America's Mayor in the film “Rudy: The Rudy Giuliani Story.”
Industry trophies stand as a testament to his achievements. Among other accolades, he has two Oscar nominations and two Emmy wins to his credit.
Most recently, James has become a focal point of the so-called Twitter Files, the first in a series of documents released to journalist Matt Taibbi by Twitter CEO Elon Musk.
The files detail the behind-the-scenes communications surrounding Twitter’s content moderation decision-making (under previous ownership), which involved, among other things, the suppression of a 2020 New York Post story about President Joe Biden’s son Hunter and Hunter’s notorious laptop.
Files also reveal that Twitter seemingly complied with the Democratic Party’s directives in suppressing the accounts of select celebrities, quite strikingly the account of James Woods.
In the words of Taibbi, “Celebrities and unknowns alike could be removed or reviewed at the behest of a political party.”
James has stepped forward to lead a class action lawsuit against the social media platform as well as the DNC over damage done to his personal civil rights, reputation and career.
Hirsen failed to mention that the thing that really got Woods in trouble with Twitter was that he tried to post pictures of Hunter Biden's penis allegedly taken from the laptop. Hirsen laughably headlined his c column "We're All James Woods Now," which is indisputably false because we all weren't depserately trying to post Hunter Biden's penis on Twitter.
Hirsn was back in full Musk hagiography mode for his Dec. 12 column, portraying Musk as a selfless hero for releasing internal Twitter documents:
The radically intolerable judgmental left is in full takedown mode, characterizing Elon’s actions as those of an ambitious billionaire who seeks ever more wealth and power.
But how does one even begin to evaluate the sincerity of the motives and/or actions of fellow human beings?
One of the ways is to ask the question, What’s in it for them? That is, What do they have to gain?
Equally or even more telling is the question, What do they have to lose?
When we look at Elon’s position in the business world, it’s fairly obvious that he has a whole lot to lose in terms of tangible things. After all, he’s the richest person on the planet.
There’s also the matter of his reputation, an immaterial possession that many value even more than all of the material combined.
Yes, it could easily be said that Elon has risked everything in order to bring this important story to light.
No exaggeration. Elon is risking his life, fortune and sacred honor.
Yes, it is a exageration. Hirsen is conveniently silent on how Musk's Twitter has suspended accounts that made fun of him as well as journalists who report on him -- which bolsters the case that his purchase of Twitter is driven by ego and not altruism. But those are acceptable targets who apparently need to be slienced, so Hirsen will continue to stay silent.
CNS Jim Jordan & Mark Levin Stenography Watch Topic: CNSNews.com
Along with Ted Cruz, CNSNews.com loves to give lots of free publilcity to another Republican congressman, JimJordan (though, unlike with Cruz, a child of editor Terry Jeffrey doesn't work for him). Here are the fitsd of stenography CNS has served up for Jordan in the final three months of 2022:
CNS pace of Jordan stenography slowed in the last half of the year despite a strong start; with these eight articles, he concluded 2022 with 34 articles dedicated to him. Of course, none of them mention 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 -- a scandal CNS has consistently censored.
Another CNS fave who saw diminishing stenographical love over the year is right-wing radio host Mark Levin. Here's his tally for the last three months of 2022:
With these 11 articles, Levin finished out 2022 with 45 articles dedicated uncritically repeating his rants. While that seems lie a lot, it's less than the 52 articles he got in 2021 and a far cry from 2018, when there were a whopping 135 articles devoted to him.
MRC Blames Media, Schools Refusing To Hate Transgender People For Existence Of More Of Them Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's Tierin-Rose Mandelburg continued her war on (and ignorance of) transgender people in an Oct. 7 post than embraced the social-contagion theory of transgenderism -- that because people are suddenly wanting to be transgender because media depictions of them aren't portraying them as evil the way Mandelburg demands:
In 2020, there were roughly 24,000 new diagnoses of gender dysphoria from kids aged 6-17 but in 2021, that number has nearly doubled in size to more than 42,000 cases. Reason being? The media and society recruiting today’s impressionable kids to force the leftist, progressive narrative and facilitate delusions of gender dysphoria.
Author David Marcus tweeted an image of a graph from Komodo Health analyzing the findings of an October 6 Reuters report. Reuters cited The National Institutes of Health -- the numbers are staggering. Again, in 2021 there were 42,167 new diagnoses of gender dysphoria. What's more, 17,683 children have started on puberty-blockers or hormones in the last five years, 5,063 of them in 2021. Reuters noted that “These numbers are probably a significant undercount since they don’t include children whose records did not specify a gender dysphoria diagnosis or whose treatment wasn’t covered by insurance.”
Oh great! Even more trans kids!
The Reuters article mentioned a quote from Dr. Rachel Levine the assistant secretary for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, oh and if you didn’t know, Levine is transgender. (And, in case you doubt the media complicity in creating this social contagion, note that Levine was named a USA Today "Woman of the Year" for 2022.)
"Gender-affirming care for transgender youth is essential and can be life-saving," Levine noted.
That’s exactly why we have an issue with this sudden surge of transgender youth. The current administration is not only enabling but encouraging its staff, Big Tech, legacy media and schools to push any and all narratives that promote this gender delusion to kids.
In other words: The media doesn't portray transgender people as freaks anymore, and Mandelburg absollutely hates that. She then cited "nine examples accumulated from various MRCTV articles from just the last 12 months that prove who is at fault for this attack on our kids," which, again, largely amount to complaining that the non-right-wing media and schools won't spew hate at transgender people of the kind Mandelburg is used to hearing (and sewing) in her right-wing bubble. Bullet points include:
School districts buy and push books emphasizing transgenderism
Other than books, schools present lessons on transgenderism
Children’s programing pushes the trans agenda
The media glorifies transgender youth
Mandelburg never expained what this "trans agenda" supposedly is, of course. Another bullet point was "Children’s hospitals provide puberty-blockers and hormone therapy," which mesh with her tacit approval of threats and violence against children's hospitals who provide gender-affirming care to transgender youth (based on a falsehood by homophobic Libs of TikTok operator Chaya Raichik).
Yet another bullet point is "Media is silent on many crises that arise as a result of gender dysphoria," citing a single case in which "transgender activist Eli Erlick was accused of sexually assaulting people after illegally distributing hormone pills. The media never blinked an eye." Mandelburg didn't explain why this person is apparently representative of all transgender people; her silence suggests she wants to dishonestly use this single case to smear all transgender people as perverts.
More bullet points followed:
Celebrities encourage transgenderism
Big Tech pushes transgender ideology (again, Mandelburg failed to explain what "transgender ideology" purportedly is)
Drag performers have become normal entertainment for kids
Ah, yes, drag performers (which is a completely different thing from transgenderism). Mandelburg used that point to whine that "As of late, a drag queen serves as a contestant on Dancing With The Stars which airs on Disney+." We've documented her hate-filled freakout over this.
I could go on all day with the dozens of example on how the left is pushing the transgender ideology. The takeaway is that all of these tactics are normalizing transgender youth. Kids see it on TV, at church, in their classrooms, and even from their doctors, so it’s no surprise that the numbers are on the rise. Furthermore, it's become more popular for woke parents to validate this delusion to "fit in" with the progressive crowd than be strong, rooted moms and dads.
Kids are being exploited by unscrupulous people for nefarious ends, and most of the nation couldn’t care less.
This is all performative outrage, of course -- the MRC pays Mandelburg to rant, so rant she does, speaking in right-wing code words she never has to explain to anyone outside her right-wing media bubble. Meanwhile, in the real world, actual researchers have not found a "social contagion" narrative to increasing numbers of transgender youth. The research did find that gender-diverse youth are bullied at much higher rates than other youths -- an outcome Mandelburg seems comfortable with, if not outright encouraging.
What Mandelburg won't tell you is that she is among those "unscrupulous people" exploiting ftransgender people -- but as enemies of the state who shouldn't even be considered human -- and her "nefarious ends" are to advance right-wing narratives that hate everything even remotely LGBTQ, with the goal of shame, censorship and destruction. In Mandelburg's view transgender people are more useful as dehumanized pawns to be beaten up than as actual people who deserve compassion or the right to live their lives as they see fit.
CNS Gives Tulsi Gabbard The Floor Again Topic: CNSNews.com
The Tulsi Gabbard fan club at CNSNews.com added even more gushing when she officially quit the Democratic Party (which hadn't been a loyal member of for years anyway, though it gave cover for CNS to dishonestly portray her views as potentially Democratic). Craig Bannister gave Gabbard the floor again to uncritically spew transphobia in a Nov. 30 article:
“Today’s fake feminists” are doing all they can to “erase women” by denying objective truth and forcing women to compete against men, former Democrat [sic] congresswoman and presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard says.
In particular, liberal fake feminists are negating the 50 years of progress women have enjoyed, courtesy of Title IV, Gabbard says in a video she posted on social media Tuesday:
“Today’s self-proclaimed feminists will not define what a woman is and are, unfortunately, actively seeking to erase the progress that Title IX has made over the last 50 years, by essentially trying to erase women as an entire category of people.”
“50 years ago, feminists fought to pass Title IX so women didn’t have to compete against men. Today’s fake-feminists are undoing Title IX so women are forced to compete against men. They deny objective truth, and are doing all they can to erase women,” Gabbard tweeted Wednesday, introducing video of her Tuesday night interview with Fox News Channel’s Tucker Carlson.
As usual, Bannister refused to let anyone counter her attacks.
MRC Stayed Bitter About Herschel Walker's Loss Topic: Media Research Center
Even days after Herschel Walker lost the Georgia Senate election (twice), the Media Research Center still couldn't let go of it. Gabriela Pariseau fed Walker into a pre-existing (and bogus) narrative in a Dec. 12 post:
Google once again tried to manipulate undecided voters with slanted search results.
This time the Big Tech company’s tactics seem to have benefited incumbent Democrat Senator Raphael Warnock in the hotly contested Georgia runoff Senate race against Republican candidate Herschel Walker. "Google at it again trying to swing the election,” MRC founder and President Brent Bozell said. “Google needs to be held accountable for interfering in elections."
MRC Free Speech America analyzed Google, Bing and DuckDuckGo search results from searches conducted on Dec. 3 in one majority Democrat precinct, one majority Republican precinct and one swing precinct in Coweta County, Georgia.
In a very telling revelation, MRC Free Speech America researchers found that Google’s results favored Warnock in the swing precinct where greater proportions of undecided voters likely reside. Warnock’s campaign website appeared third in Google search results, but the platform scrubbed Walker’s website from the first page of results altogether.
But as it has donebefore in trying to manufacture a right-wing narrative of Google search bias, the MRC's approach lacks a basis in reality. The serarch terms used -- "Herschel Walker Senate Race 2022" and "Raphael Warnock Senate Race 2022"-- are not ones normal people would use in seeking information about the race, no explanation was given as to why those terms were used or why they whould have returned the results the MRC demanded.
There's one other interesting twist. Pariseau noted that "MRC Free Speech America worked with David Carlson, executive director of American Virtue, who oversaw the search tests used in this analysis." American Virtue is a white nationalist-adjacent organization that has tried to tone that stuff down in a bid for mainstream respectability. Political Reserarch Associates reported on the group after a conference it held last summer:
From its beginnings, American Virtue has strained to distance itself from White nationalist Nick Fuentes and his Gen-Z America First/groyper movement. They have attempted this by toning down overtly racist, male supremacist, and antisemitic rhetoric in a bid for mainstream conservative respectability, even as they mimicked many aspects of groyper ideology and style.
While Fuentes’ unfiltered antisemitism, White nationalism, and incel-infused male supremacy has made him a liability for many conservative leaders, American Virtue continues to take a more circumspect route, flirting with groyper politics and aesthetics while carefully avoiding crossing red lines like antisemitism, positioning themselves within the bounds of mainstream conservative respectability. “We believe that America is a Christian nation,” proclaimed American Virtue Managing Director David Carlson during Friday’s conference, encapsulating the group’s militant Christian nationalism. “We believe that America has one culture, a shared identity, a shared heritage, and a shared tradition—and that people trying to supplant that tradition, trying to destroy what made us America, are fundamentally opposed to us in every single way, and they must be stopped.”
Pariseau didn't explain why the MRC considers an extremist like Carlson to be a credible person to collaborate with for this biased experiment.
Curtis Houck spent a Dec. 19 post whining that the the guy who beat Walker (twice), Raphael Warnock, was interview without being assaulted by Houck's favorite right-wing talking points:
Monday’s CBS Mornings didn’t cover part six of the Twitter Files released on Friday, but they did spend eight minutes and 22 seconds sucking up to Senator Raphael Warnock (D-GA) over his latest election victory, asking him to run for president in 2024, and pushing him from the left on “voter suppression,” prosecuting former President Trump, and the border.
Of course, nothing came up about his alleged violent behavior toward his ex-wife, allegations of missed child support, misconduct at a church camp he had helped oversee, and evictions from apartments owned by the church he pastors (which are in rancorous conditions).
Houck forgot to mention that he and his employer spentmonths insisting that similar scandals against Walker -- with the addition of purchasing multiple abortions for galpals -- were not newsworthy and attacked any non-right-wing media outlet that covered them.
NEW ARTICLE: WND's Ivermectin Chronicles, Part 3 Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily continues to cling to the discredited narrative that ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID, but it also had to say goodbye to one of its favorite ivermectin-hawking docs. Read more >>
MRC Gets Mad That Non-Right-Wing Media Won't Parrot Pro-Musk Narratives Topic: Media Research Center
After salivating over the first release from Elon Musk of internal "Twitter files," the Media Research Center eagerly anticipated the next installment of selective documents given to hand-picked reporters. Until then, an anonymous writer expressed glee in a Dec. 6 post attacking Twitter's now ex-lawyer for doing his job:
As a top lawyer for Twitter, Jim Baker had a duty to his client to put Twitter’s ethics above his own.
But he apparently failed.
Twitter had intended to publish its second batch of internal files on the company’s handling of the Hunter Biden laptop scandal last weekend but ultimately didn’t. That’s because former Twitter Deputy General Counsel Baker complicated their release, independent journalist Matt Taibbi tweeted Tuesday.
Twitter CEO Elon Musk fired Baker on Tuesday, Taibbi reported.
“I don’t see how Jim Baker could have represented his client and met his ethical obligation as a member of any state’s bar,” MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider said. “His state bar association should immediately investigate this matter to determine whether Baker’s license should be suspended or even revoked. Michael Avenatti is in prison today for taking advantage of his clients. Jim Baker should not be allowed to escape justice.”
Though news that Baker had been reviewing the “Twitter files” shocked everyone involved, “reporters resumed searches through Twitter files material – a lot of it – today,” Taibbi tweeted. The next installment of the Twitter files will appear on journalist Bari Weiss’s Twitter page, Taibbi wrote. “Stay tuned.”
Reviewing internal documents before public release sounds exactly like the thing a company's lawyer ought to be doing -- most normal people would call that a requirement for someone in his position, not someone who had "failed" -- which means Musk fired Baker for doing his job. Rather than explain how corporate lawyering works, our anonymous writer went into conspiracy mode:
Baker was FBI general counsel from 2014-2018. A controversial figure, he helped initiate the bureau’s investigation of former President Donald Trump’s supposed ties with Russia, helping to link his friend and Democratic operative Michael Sussmann with FBI investigators, according to The Washington Times. Other accusations included the propagation of claims that Trump had a secret communication channel with Alfa Bank, based in Russia, according to National Review.
The anonymous writer filed to mention that Sussmann was acquitted of any criminal wrongdoing despite facing a biased right-wing prosecutor in John Durham and the MRC's own cheerleading for his conviction. Also, the anonymous writer describing Taibbi as a "independent journalist" obscures the fact that he was hand-picked by Musk to peddle these documents, as well as his sleazy, misogynistic behavior toward women while working as a correspondent in Moscow (h/t Jill Filipovic).
Meanwhile, Tim Graham spent his Dec. 7 column whining that non-right-wing media outlets weren't marching in lockstep with the right-wing pro-Musk narrative:
At 3:39 on Friday afternoon, Elon Musk announced he’d release internal documents exposing how Twitter went about heavily suppressing the New York Post and its mid-October 2020 scoops from Hunter Biden's laptop.
Journalist Matt Taibbi began tweeting out documents three hours later, and not surprisingly, there was no time for it on the evening news shows, including the PBS NewsHour – which airs in Washington at 7 pm.
They also skipped it on PBS's reporter roundtable Washington Week at 8 pm. No one started preparing anything in the afternoon? Maybe these shows were recorded before 6:30?
Alex Christy served up some whining too, this time at MSNBC host Chris Hayes for advancinbg the entirely logical and rational idea that Musk bought Twitter to advance an ideological agenda -- though he had to admit Hayes is probably right, then cover up that admission with whataboutism:
Nobody who works at MSNBC should be accusing Elon Musk of purchasing Twitter as a vehicle to advance his ideological agenda, but All In host Chris Hayes did just that on Tuesday’s edition of Late Night with Seth Meyers on NBC.
Switching from sarcasm to seriousness, Hayes addressed Musk’s purchase of Twitter, “I mean, I'm not in the books, but I think pretty much-- sounds like pretty much -- no, it's been pretty disastrous. I mean, I -- I -- think the thing -- the thing that I actually have -- that has been clarifying for me, I think there was -- first of all, it felt a little bit like an impulse purchase.”
Hayes then added that there was more than an alleged midlife crisis at hand:
I think that what he's been doing with the platform now is actually very clarifying to me because it wasn't about the business and it wasn't an impulse purchase, it was an ideological purchase and as long as there have been rich people, and as long as there have been rich people and capitalism, plus a free press, there have been rich people who buy media outlets for ideological purposes. This is a story as old as time and once I sort of saw it as that, I was like, ‘Oh! That's what this is.’ He -- he wants to own Twitter because he wants to pursue his vision because he's the world's richest man.
Hayes isn’t entirely wrong. Musk does have an ideological commitment to free speech, but the type of ideologically driven media he is referencing is much more like MSNBC. Free speech means people, like Hayes and Meyers, are allowed to disagree with Musk, but good luck being a conservative and getting a show on MSNBC or a comedy show on NBC.
“[E]verything we find will be released,” new Twitter owner Elon Musk assured Americans, after co-founder and former CEO of Twitter Jack Dorsey, who oversaw the massive Hunter Biden laptop censorship scandal, called for the Twitter censorship files be made fully public.
Dorsey responded on Dec. 7 to Musk’s Dec. 3 announcement, “Looks like we will need another day or so” to release “Twitter Files” Episode 2. Dorsey tweeted, “If the goal is transparency to build trust, why not just release everything without filter and let people judge for themselves? Including all discussions around current and future actions? Make everything public now. #TwitterFiles.”
Musk replied, “Most important data was hidden (from you too) and some may have been deleted, but everything we find will be released.” Musk previously said that promoting “free speech” was one of the reasons he bought Twitter.
Journalist Matt Taibbi published a 10-tweet thread Tuesday afternoon as a supplement to last Friday’s first batch of the Twitter Files, explaining its rollout was hamstrung by meddling from Twitter Deputy General Counsel, former CNN analyst, and Swamp creature Jim Baker. In conjunction with the thread, Musk said Baker was fired upon being alerted to the fact that Baker had (somehow) stuck around.
Of course, the “big three” networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC remained fully engaged in censorship denialism with zero mention on their flagship morning and evening shows of this new revelation about Twitter’s 2020 censorship of the reporting on Hunter Biden. On Taibbi's initial thread from December 2, the networks have similarly been out to lunch with only 26 seconds on the December 5 CBS Mornings.
In contrast, actual newscasts such as the Fox News Channel’s Special Report and NewsNation’s Early Morning and Morning in America had full stories Wednesday on this new twist.
In the right-wing media bubble that Houck lives in, you're only an "actual newscast" if you uncritically parrot right-wing narratives.
Graham attacked Hayes anew in his Dec. 9 column, this time for poiinting out the rifght-0wing narrative being pushed by Musk (and the MRC):
Like almost everyone else in the leftist bubble, MSNBC host Chris Hayes has not been engaging in the “Twitter Files” revelations about how, in October 2020, Twitter squashed all references to the New York Post scoops about Hunter’s left-behind laptop. But on Twitter, he argued this is just another conservative schtick.
Hayes announced, “What’s become really clear in the last few weeks is that all the ‘Big Tech’ anger from the right is really just the latest iteration of the ‘liberal media’ critique that stretches back to Goldwater, and indeed New-Deal-Era right-wingers.”
He added: “There’s no new analysis or structural insight. It’s just ‘the media is run by libs!’ Story old as time.” Hayes allies tweeted along, that this is more “ref-working” and conservatives trying to “jerry-rig” Big Tech to their advantage.
The real bone to pick with Hayes is that there is no new “structural insight.” Hayes, who poses on television as a brainiac, can’t seem to distinguish between “news” media and social media. In “news” media, liberal outlets often brutalize conservatives and offer their targets little or no rebuttal. In social media, Big Tech has offered conservatives a forum for constant rebuttal, but after being torched by the Left for allowing “misinformation” (like the Hunter laptop), they ham-handedly squash the rebuttal.
In both cases, Hayes is attempting to deny that liberal bias exists, that the conservative tactic is a sham. It’s deeply silly, since anyone watching MSNBC for an hour isn’t going to discover an oasis of objectivity.
Meanwhile, Graham -- a longtime resident of the right-wing media bubble -- wants you to deny that Fox News and other right-wing outlets have any sort of bias. Remember, he's the boss of the guy who thinks only "actual newscasts" spout right-wing narratives.
CNS Less Hateful Toward Brittney Griner Than Its MRC Parent Topic: CNSNews.com
Unlike its Media Research Center parent, CNSNews.com largely ignored the first several months of WNBA star Brittney Griner's detention in a Russian prison on trump-up drugs charges; publishing only a few articles in that time, mostly in July and August:
At this point, CNS pretty much stayed clear of following its MRC parent's footsteps of cheering Griner's imprisonment because she's a black non-heterosexual who exercised her First Amendment rights of criticizing her country's flaws (which the MRC insists is "anti-American").
When Griner was released in early December, CNS finally got interested in the story. Susan Jones offered a relatively straight account of the release in a Dec. 8 article:
We'll keep negotiating in good faith for Paul's release," President Joe Biden said today, as he announced a prisoner swap -- a Russian arms dealer for a WNBA star -- that will bring Brittney Griner home to her wife, but leave American Paul Whelan in a Russian prison.
"This is a day we've worked toward for a long time," Biden said Thursday morning, announcing that with the help of the United Arab Emirates, Brittney is now on a flight to the United States.
"We never forgot about Britney, we've never forgotten about Paul Whelan who's been unjustly detained in Russia for years," Biden said.
"This was not a choice of which American to bring home. We brought home Trevor Reed when we had a chance, earlier this year. Sadly, for totally illegitimate reasons, Russia is treating Paul's case differently than Brittney's, and even though we have not yet succeeded in securing Paul's release, we're not giving up. We will never give up.
Susan Jones went there later in the day, however, uncritically quoting Republican Rep. Michael Waltz disparaging Griner and championing Whelan:
So my heart breaks for the Whelan family. I think, you know, a lot of people are asking, and rightly so, so what was his crime -- not being a celebrity? Not checking enough boxes for Hollywood? The fact that we left a U.S. Marine behind and made this choice. And I don't buy the Biden administration and President Biden saying we didn't have a choice.
Jones made sure to hype that Waltz is "the first Green Beret to be elected to Congress"-- but she censored, as her MRC colleagues did, that Whelan is a criminal who was kicked out of the Marines on a bad-conduct discharge following a court martial for attempted larceny, false statements and dereliction of duty, among other things. In other words, he actually committed crimes that were much worse the Russia accused Griner of doing (having a couple vape cartridges of cannabis oil).
Arter followed with an article proving Waltz wrong, with White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre again pointing out that Russia did not the U.S. an opportunity to free Whelan.
Patrick Goodenough kicked CNS' Dec. 9 coverage with a pair of articles: The first hyped how Russian officials were praising Bout's release, while the second pondered what prisoners the U.S. might have to facilitate an exchange for Whelan. That was followed by an article by Jones sneering at Nancy Pelosi for noting that Griner is married to a woman while promoting the Respect for Marriage Act (which CNS absolutelyhates):
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi proclaimed Thursday to be a "glorious day here in the House."
"I mean, the joy, the pride, the euphoria that we feel today, having passed 'The Respect for Marriage Act,' a landmark decision, landmark law, changing the law for full equality," she effused. "Now the federal government will never stand in the way of anyone marrying the person you love."
Pelosi was among those noting the perfect timing of the bill's passage on Thursday -- the same day that lesbian WNBA star Brittney Griner was heading home to her wife, after President Joe Biden struck a deal to free her in exchange for a notorious arms dealer known as "the merchant of death."
"How wonderful is it that on the same day that Brittney Griner is going to be free -- thank you, President Biden. Thank you to Secretary of State and other national security people, and to my -- our colleague Greg Stanton, who represents Arizona -- Phoenix, Arizona in the Congress.
"He has brought her here. We had met her when she was here playing and -- basketball, and now today she is free; free to go home to her wife on the same day that we passed the Marriage Protection Act. So we are -- Respect for Marriage, the Respect for Marriage Act!
"So we are just -- her freedom is a gift to the world, to all of us. Our gift to her is this legislation that her marriage is protected wherever she may -- she may live. Her wife Cherelle and she and their family will have a holiday season without worrying about whether their marriage is protected."
Arter followed that with concern trolling from another Republican congressman that the prisoner exchange "sends the wrong message to U.S. adversaries - that you can take an American citizen hostage to get leverage over the United States." A Dec. 9 column by Lee Kessler, meanwhile, labored to make Griner feel guilty for being freed (bolding in original):
This is my prayer for you, Ms. Griner. As an American, I am happy you are home, and reunited with your family. You are an American, and you have a right to be back in the United States of America. It is my understanding that Viktor Bout's family is equally joyous at his return.
What I want you to understand, though, is that Americans will die as a result of this exchange. You are now free to pursue your American Dream--the NBA, where you play basketball. Mr. Bout is now free to pursue his dream, which is to kill Americans.
Make no mistake, Americans will die in the future as a result of your freedom. You will not know their names, nor will I, for some time. But your experience in Russia must have established for you a new reality on the difference between true freedom--however flawed you view it--and true oppression. Mr. Bout will ensure, directly or indirectly, that Americans die.
So, please, honor them now in advance. Men and women--and possibly children--will pay the price for your freedom. Their families will never be "reunited" because their loved one will have perished. The government of the United States has decided to spare you, in exchange for the future death of American citizens.
It is my prayer that you be grateful for the sacrifice the countrymen you have disparaged will make in the near future for you. And that you will show the same grace and compassion for them and their beliefs as they, fellow Americans, have shown to you today.
Kessler did not identify any American Griner has "disparaged," or what those purportedly disparaging words supposedly were.
CNS' focus turned away from Griner over the next few days:
Then it was Griner-bashing time again in a Dec. 13 column by technically-not-a-convicted-felon Olver North (who normally writes at WorldNetDaily):
We learned Thursday Women's National Basketball Association player Brittney Griner was released from a Russian prison after being arrested 10 months ago on drug charges. It's become almost irrelevant the "reasons" totalitarian regimes use to lock up Americans. What is relevant here is the "negotiated exchange" resulting in her release and return.
A black, LGBTQ+ celebrity was exchanged for Russian arms dealer Viktor "The Merchant of Death" Bout. It's interesting to note, Griner first made news by kneeling through the playing of our national anthem during WNBA games to show solidarity with Black Lives Matter -- a self-professed Marxist organization. Meanwhile, Bout was in a U.S. federal prison for selling arms to groups wanting the weapons to kill Americans. Now, Griner and Bout can return, respectively, to hating America and killing Americans.
North did not explain how Griner taking a stand against racial injustice equals "hating America."
MRC's Graham Continues To Whine That His Fellow Right-Wingers Are Being Fact-Checked Topic: Media Research Center
Media Research Center executive Tim Graham's dubiouswar onfact-checkers continued as part of the MRC's biased coverage of the midterm elections -- mainly in the form of complaining that Republican candidates were being fact-checked. He grumbled in a Sept. 18 post:
Keep an eye on how PolitiFact uses its "Truth-O-Meter" in the congressional races this fall. It's going to be obvious that they'll "finesse" their so-called "independent fact-checking" in favor of the Democrats, as they typically do.
Take the Ohio Senate race: this is how Democrat [sic] congressman Tim Ryan has been rated over the years: 12 "True" or "Mostly True" ratings, two "Half Trues," and one "Pants On Fire" rating back in 2011. That's basically a 12-to-1 True tilt.
By contrast, PolitiFact has five evaluations of Republican J.D. Vance: one "Mostly True," versus one "Mostly False," two "Falses," one "Pants on Fire." That's a 4-to-1 False tilt. And the Mostly True is from 2018. It's all False this year.
As usual, Graham offered no evidence (other than picayune nitpicking) that any of the fact-checks were false, or that Ryan and Vancetell falseoods and the same rate in a way that warrants equivalent coverage.
Graham complained some more in a Sept. 28 post, this time that right-wing attacks on President Biden were being fact-checked:
This week, the Poynter Institute and their PolitiFact website are hosting their "United Facts of America" conference to "celebrate facts" with a cast of liberal journalists, including PBS anchor Judy Woodruff, NPR TV critic Eric Deggans, CNN "misinformation" reporter Donie O'Sullivan and CNN legal analyst Joan Biskupic.
We've also found the "fact checking" at PolitiFact has a liberal tilt. Earlier this year, a NewsBusters study of Biden’s first year in office – from January 20, 2021 through January 19, 2022 – found Biden was fact-checked 40 times, while Biden critics were checked on 230 occasions. In other words, they’re much more sensitive about someone mangling the truth about Biden than they are about Biden mangling the truth.
Now MRC analysts have updated the research to include another eight months to the count. The pattern continues. From January 20 to September 19, 2022, we counted 18 PolitiFact checks on Joe Biden, compared to 108 “fact checks” of Biden critics. That's exactly a six-to-one ratio.
Put it all together, and over his first 20 months in office, Biden had 58 fact-checks, while Biden critics were checked 338 times. Overall, there were 5.8 fact checks of Biden critics for every one of the president.
Why shouldn't false claims about Biden be fact-checked, as Graham suggests? He doesn't explain -- even though that's the clear implication of his complaint.
Graham spent a Nov. 28 post complaining that fact-checkers keep finding that Republican Herschel Walker -- whom the MRC has repeatedlydefended throughout his failed Georgia Senate camapaign -- says things that aren't true:
On a daily or on a yearly basis, it’s not hard to find those "independent" critics at PolitiFact telling the public that Democrats are factual and Republicans are liars.
Take the Georgia Senate race: Sen. Raphael Warnock’s ratings in 2022 are three “Mostly True” checks and one “Half True.” Not a single rating in the False category:
Then look at Warnock’s challenger, Herschel Walker, and you get the exact opposite. In 2022, Walker drew two "False" ratings, two "Mostly False" ratings, and one "Half True." There was no rating on the "True" side.
Rather than, you know, find a false statement by Warnock that PolitiFact missed, Graham instead spouted his cynical talking point that fact-checking Republicans too much is evidence of bias:
Graham then gave away the game:
As we often point out, these "Fact Checkers" don't have to be wrong about the facts to be biased. It's obvious in their "target selection" that they're helping out the Democrats, defending their records and blatantly attacking Republican talking points. PolitiFact is often Exhibit A.
But that's a classic, dishonest heads-I-win-tails-you-lose argument. if Walker lies much more than Warnock, as appears to be the case -- and which Graham makes no effort to disprove -- there's no reason to enforce artificial parity on fact-checking.
Graham doesn't want Repubicans to be held accountable for making false and misleading claims -- period. To do that, he must try to discredit fact-checkers. He hates journalism and accountability, and all who stand for that must be targeted by his MRC through the sowing of microaggressions designed to engender mistrust and portray the mere act of fact-checking a Republican is insidious "bias." That's all he's doing here -- he's certainly not acting in good faith.