MRC's Vazquez Obsesses Over George Soros' Donations Topic: Media Research Center
Another part of the Media Research Center's recent round of attacks on George Soros has been a series of so-called studies that boil down to complaining that Soros funds things like any billionaire does. This was kicked off in an Dec. 6 post by the MRC's point man on hating Soros, Joseph Vazquez, and Dan Schneider who runs the MRC's Free Speech America program:
Leftist billionaire George Soros used his charities to build ties with hundreds of media organizations around the world involved in news and activist media. The journalism and activist media groups Soros supports mold public opinion on practically every continent and in many languages. They also insulate him from inquiry because reporters see him as an ally, not a target for investigation.
The 92-year-old philanthropist’s multimillion-dollar efforts promoting his bizarre “open society” agenda encompass some of the most radical leftist ideas on abortion, Marxist economics, anti-Americanism, defunding the police, environmental extremism and LGBT fanaticism.
His global media clout is massive. An extensive analysis by MRC Business discovered at least 253 news and activist media organizations across the world financed by Soros’ philanthropic organizations. These groups wield massive power over information in international politics.
This report is the first in a three-part series that reveals the extent of the reach Soros wields over international media to influence the world population. Soros once told The New York Times that he was working to “bend” the arc of history “in the right direction.” He means it.
Which makes Soros no different than the right-wing billionaires that fund the paychecks of Vazquez and Schneider, such as the Mercers.
This particular segment complained about a website called Project Syndicate that Vazquez and Schneider hyperbolically describe as "A Global Soros-Funded Behemoth" and a "Global Propaganda Operation" despite few in the U.S. even being aware of it.They also laughably called the Poynter Institute "A Global Soros-Backed Ministry of Truth" mainly becuse it fact-checks right-wing falsehoods and misinformation, and bashed the group Free Press as "anti-American" despite quoting co-founder Robert McChesney saying that that group engage in things like "democracy, social justice, and, dare we say it, socialism," none of which sound particularly anti-America. They go on to apply more overheated language to the Media Demnocracy Fund, declaring it "A Soros-Funded Gargantuan Dedicated to Woke ‘Social Justice’" and "a Money-Spewing Cog in Soros’ Sphere of Influence," then describe National Public Radio as "Soros and State Media" and "Soros’ Taxpayer-Funded Radio Propaganda Mill."
Language like this makes Vazquez sound like they're cranking out a partisan hack job, not engaging in sober or legitimate "media research." But that is the tone they use throughout. Because this is, in fact, a partisan hack job, exposure in the right-wing media bubble is the coin of the realm, not reasoned debate -- so MRC chief Brent Bozell ran to Fox News to promote it and spew hate at Soros: "He hates the Judeo-Christian tradition. He is out to destroy the underpinnings of Western civilization and he’s using $36 billion that he is spending on it. ...This is a dangerous man.” Keeping the promotion in-house, Tim Graham parroted the study on his Dec. 7 podcast, and Vazquez plugged it on Paiten Iselin's Dec. 9 "CensorTrack" podcast. Even the MRC's "news" division, CNSNews, performed an act of whoredom and reprinted Vazquez's hit job.
Vazquez took a break from hyping his own work to note a complementary finding in a Dec. 8 post:
Liberal billionaire George Soros is upping his accolade as the “largest donor” for the 2022 midterm elections to the next level by reportedly signaling that he’s ready to buy the 2024 presidential election.
Politico revealed Dec. 7 that Soros pumped a whopping $50 million into his leftist super PAC — Democracy PAC — “building on an already large investment in Democratic groups and candidates for the 2024 election cycle and beyond.” This is on top of the $128 million he spent during the 2022 midterm elections. Politico noted that it’s “the latest sign that Soros will continue to play an enormous role in the Democratic campaign finance ecosystem, particularly ahead of the next presidential election.” The talking heads at the ABC, CBS and NBC evening news shows predictably ignored the report during their Dec. 7 broadcasts.
[...]
It looks like he’s not done yet as he bids to buy the presidency in 2024.
Vazquez failed to mention the right-wing billionaires who are similarly trying to "buy the presidency in 2024."
Vazquez had another Soros donation spree to complain about in a Dec. 22 post:
Leftist billionaire George Soros apparently kept himself very busy last year by funneling millions into groups and causes spreading anti-police hatred across the country.
Fox News Digital reporter Joe Schoffstall reported Dec. 21 that Soros’ Open Society Foundations “dropped at least $35 million into anti-police groups and initiatives in 2021,” according to reviewed tax forms.
Overhauling the American criminal justice system is a “high priority” for Soros, wrote Schoffstall. Soros’ millions went toward “groups that back defunding police, hubs used by progressive activists aiming to dismantle law enforcement, and even funding databases to track donations to police department foundations and unions.” Schoffstall also mentioned Soros’ record of financially backing “dozens of far-left prosecutor candidates as part of the efforts.”
Open Society-U.S. co-director Laleh Ispahani apparently didn’t mind using Schoffstall’s discovery to smear police officers across the country and push defunding police departments in comments to Fox News.
“The level of police violence, particularly impacting communities of color, has spurred reform efforts across the country,” Ispahani reportedly said. “Open Society supports the exploration and development of policies that actually work to reduce crime and defers to communities regarding what alternatives make sense to them. Whether that includes shifting funding currently allocated to policing into services that actually work to address crime and improve public safety is up to them.” [Emphasis added.]
As Ispahani's statement makes clear, Open Society favors more effective policing and not defunding -- which would seem to be the oppposite of the "anti-police" pejorative Vazquez and Schofstall are trying to hang on the group -- and Vazquez did not explain how seeking more effective policing equates to "smearing police officers." But for these two, clinging to this right-wing narrative -- no matter how it's been debunked -- is more important than reporting facts.
(Vazquez also didn't disclose that Schofstall is a former MRC employee who, like so many others, have entered the pipeline to work for Fox News.)
CNSNews.com has long been a promote of right-wing Sen. Rand Paul's nasty, partisan attacks against Anthony Fauci for his efforts in trying to protect Americans during the COVID pandemic. For instance:
Forhis latest tirade, none other than CNS managing editor Michael W. Chapman chose to serve up servile stenpgraphy for Paul in a Jan. 11 article, with added boldface:
In a tweet of a video showing Dr. Anthony Fauci telling Americans in May 2021 that if they "are vaccinated, they can feel safe that they are not going to get infected" with COVID, Sen. Rand Paul remarked, "so many lies," and added that he would "hold Fauci accountable."
Dr. Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and former chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden, made his remarks on the May 17, 2021 edition of All In with Chris Hayes on MSNBC.
During the discussion, Hayes mentioned cases of COVID infection among members of the New York Yankees who were fully vaccinated but still "tested positive for COVID." These included three coaches, five staff members, and shortstop Gleyber Torres.
Explaining why this happened, Fauci said "these are certainly breakthrough cases," and added, "Breakthrough infections mean, you have been vaccinated, but you still get infected." He also said that even if infected with COVID while vaccinated against COVID, the symptoms in most cases are minor or "no symptoms at all."
"If you do get infected, the chances are that you're going to be without symptoms, and the chances are very likely that you'll not be able to transmit it to other people," said the doctor.
Fauci further said, for the vaccinated, "when you do get infected [with COVID], the chances are, you're going to be without symptoms. And because of that -- that was the accumulating scientific data that prompted the CDC to make that recommendation -- that when people are vaccinated, they can feel safe that they are not going to get infected, whether they're outdoors or indoors. That's the bottom line of that to get people to appreciate: you get vaccinated and you're really quite safe from getting infected." (Emphasis added.)
Commenting on the video-clip of Fauci, Senator Paul tweeted, "How many vaccinated people do you know who still got Covid? So many lies. I will hold Fauci accountable."
But neither Chapman nor Paul offered any evidence that Fauci was telling "lies," a word that means a specific thing that is not defined as Fauci not exactly matching CDC guidance. Neither mentioned the fact that the COVID virus has mutated in a way that makes older vaccines less effective, the updated bivalent boosters protect against infection, hospitalization and death. Boosters are necessary because the nature of the virus means that efficacy of the vaccines wear off over time -- just like protection from a previous case of COVID (which anti-vaxx enthusiasts like Paul like to romanticize as "natural immunity") wears off over time.
Chapman managed to refrain from doing so here , but CNS has previously tried to privilege his rants on COVID-related issues by touting that he is a "medical doctor" -- even though he's actually just an eye doctor with no demonstrated expertise in virology or epidemiology.
MRC Doesn't Understand What Metaphors Are, So It Smears 'View' Co-Host As 'Racist' Topic: Media Research Center
Nicholas Fondacaro -- whose Media Research Center job is to hate-watch "The View" -- put quite the inflammatory headline on a Nov. 3 post: "Rampant Racism: Sunny Calls White Women 'Roaches' for Voting GOP." Despite this framing, the truth was actually quite different:
For a while now, NewsBusters has been documenting and calling out the racism of Sunny Hostin, a co-host of ABC’s The View. But even we were shocked Thursday when she suggested white women were “roaches” if they voted Republican. And being the wealthy elitist that she is, Hostin suggested they “were voting against their own self-interest” and supposedly wanted to live in the dystopian world of The Handmaid’s Tale.
Citing “the abortion issue,” Hostin recalled reading “a poll just yesterday that white Republican suburban women are now going to vote Republican.” “It's almost like roaches voting for Raid,” she proclaimed.
This drew immediate applause from the radical liberal audience and pushback from self-proclaimed conservative co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin, who called the comment “insulting to the voter.” Hostin responded by shouting about how “They're voting against their own self-interest! Do they want to leave it in Gilead? Do they want to be in The Handmaid’s Tale?”
Hostin did not call white women "roaches" -- she used a metaphor. Fondacaro has apparently never heard of metaphors, so he dishonestly decided to take Hostin out of context as an excuse to treat her statement as literal.
Tim Graham tried to further things in a Nov. 8 post:
In her Daily Mail column for Election Day, Meghan McCain responded directly to her old friend (and co-host of The View) Sunny Hostin, who characterized white women voting for Republicans to “roaches voting for Raid”– voting for their own demise.
In fact, McCain wasn't directly responding to Hostin at all -- her column didn't even reference Hostin by name, and she following Fondacaro in taking one word outof context ("we've heard women described as 'roaches' and 'Nazis' for valuing their best judgement over the orders of Democrats and the liberal media"). It seems McCain is just as shaky on metaphors as Fondacaro is.
This is fairly run-of-the-mill incompetence on the part of serialliar Fondacaro and the MRC. So why revisit this now? Because in pretty much every hate-watching post Fondacaro has written about "The View" since then, he has described Hostin as a "racist" and linked back to the above post as evidence.
That's right -- Fondacaro is smearing Hostin as a "racist" because he doesn't understand metaphors. How does such a fundamentally dishonst guy continue to be employed at the MRC?
NEW ARTICLE -- The Big Lie In Arizona: The Rachel Alexander File Topic: WorldNetDaily
The WorldNetDaily columnist has been its biggest promoter of the discredited claim that Kari Lake is the real winner of the Arizona governor's race and that it was stolen from her due to election fraud. Read more >>
Without New 'Twitter Files' To Promote, MRC Engages In Musk-Fluffing Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's electively released "Twitter files" to Elon Musk's hand-picked journalists continued with a Jan. 16 post by CatherineSalgado declaring that "The latest Twitter Files showed Big Pharma “directly” pressured Twitter to help censor users offering any alternative treatments to COVID-19 besides Big Pharma’s vaccines." Salgado didn't mention that "alternative treatments" like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin don't really work in treating COVID.
After that was a bit of a fallow period. Even without any new selectively released "Twitter files" to promote, the MRC's Elon Musk stenography continued with Gabriela Pariseau being stuck summarizing previous releases in a Jan. 16 article:
The Twitter Files have uncovered the internal mess that Twitter has become over the last six years as the company has interfered in American elections, directly colluded with federal government agencies and censored Americans.
Thanks to new Twitter owner Elon Musk, some of the platform’s past misgivings have been laid bare for all to see. To date, 15 Twitter Files have been published by 6 nonpartisan journalists. Musk’s release of the Twitter Files has given us a closer look at what exactly happened when the platform mass-censored the Hunter Biden laptop story, interfering in the 2020 election. The files have revealed Twitter’s deep entanglement with numerous federal government agencies and how those agencies used Twitter to censor speech that they themselves could not. Finally, the files pulled back the curtain on Twitter’s internal conversations about censorship and complete disregard for free speech.
“Twitter did everything they could to deliver the 2020 election to Joe Biden,” said Media Research Center President Brent Bozell. “Now we need Congress to investigate the rest of Big Tech and uncover the same for Facebook, Google, and the rest.”
Neither Bozell, Pariseau nor the rest of the MRC has ever questioned why nearly all the files Musk has selectively release conveniently advance right-wing narratives against "big tech," or why Musk doesn't give those "Twitter files" to journalists who aren't right-wingers -- they're just happy to be subservient to Musk and advance those narratives.
The next day, Autumn Johnson cheered that a class-action lawsuit by former Twitter employees was dismissed, supporting the idea they deserve to have to be forced to go through arbitration:
A federal court judge ruled on Friday that five former Twitter employees from the old censorship-obsessed regime must pursue their claims against the company in arbitration.
The layoffs, which heavily impacted the platform’s content moderation team, were part of Musk’s changes to save the company money while turning the platform into one that supports free speech. However, five former employees disputed Musk’s terms for severance pay and alleged he failed to provide adequate notice before the layoffs, according to The Verge.
[...]
Twitter employees from the pro-censorship regime have to realize they can’t always get their way as many content moderation and Trust and Safety employees formerly did, according to the Twitter Files.
Geoffrey Dickens served up yet another complaint that non-right-wing media are not obsessing about this right-wing-bubble story:
The bombshells from the Twitter files keep on coming, yet the liberal media elite keep ignoring them. Last month when Tesla founder and Twitter owner Elon Musk began tweeting out former Rolling Stone editor Matt Taibbi’s explosive reporting on how Twitter (under pressure from government agents) suppressed the New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story in the final days before the election.
[...]
Of course the tiny amount of network coverage of the Twitter files story does a disservice to the scope and depth of Taibbi’s reporting on how the government forced Twitter to censor the Hunter Biden laptop scandal.
Note how Dickens describes Taibbi as a "former Rolling Stone editor" in an attempt to create some sort of mainstream credibilty for him, even though any association with Rolling Stone -- as well as his history of being a sexist creep -- would be mentioned only in a disparaging way if Musk ever allowed him to report on "Twitter files" that didn't advance right-wing narratives. (Also, Musk was not the founder of Tesla.)
Johnson had more pro-Musk stenography to crank out, this time in the service of bashing an organization of "elitists":
Independent journalist Michael Shellenberger said Tuesday that Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter is a significant obstacle to the radical World Economic Forum’s agenda.
Shellenberger, who has reported on batches of Twitter Files exposing the FBI exerting pressure on Twitter’s censorship operations, joined Blaze Media podcast host Glenn Beck to discuss the pro-free speech changes Musk has made to Twitter since he acquired it last year, including an end to one-sided censorship.
"He's basically said ordinary people should be on an equal platform...and we should stop censoring ordinary folks because the elites demand it," Shellenberger said on the Jan. 17 edition of The Glenn Beck Program, referring to elitists in organizations like the World Economic Forum (WEF).
The WEF is a leftist organization that promotes Orwellian initiatives, such as the “recalibration” of “free speech” online. The WEF is also the same radical organization that legitimized an insane idea of microchipping children.
Pro tip for Johnson: If Schellenberger is Elon Musk's errand boy and running to right-wing radio host to uncritically repeat those errands in a forum where he knows he will get only softballs and will not be seriouslly challenged, he's not an "independent journalist."
P.J. Gladnick spent a Jan. 19 post raging that someone said something less than laudatory about Musk:
On Tuesday, New York magazine published a looooooong hit piece on what a horrible boss Elon Musk supposedly is at Twitter yet the biggest revelation was its admission that it favors censorship. This admission by the authors Zoë Schiffer, Casey Newton, and Alex Heath appeared innquot;Twitter’s staff spent years trying to protect the platform against impulsive ranting billionaires — then one made himself the CEO."
Before getting around to slamming Musk, the New York authors celebrated the early free speech era of Twitter before absurdly claiming it was somehow ruined by Orange Man Bad.
[...]
So just one man, the "tyrant" Donald Trump, caused Twitter to give up on free speech and embrace censorship.
And this was the reason that Musk bought Twitter; to return to its era of free speech by ditching the censorship which was blamed on Trump. For this embrace of free speech, Musk earned the derision of New York magazine -- including the bizarre charge that although he approves free speech for the platform, he disapproves of it in the workplace, when he was letting go of staff who liked everything censorious:
When the article pointed out Musk's tyrannical treatment of Twitter employees, Gladnick huffed in response: "Psst! It's a private company owned by Elon Musk. A lot of bosses have rules for the office that have nothing to do in relation to how it treats the customers or, in this case, the Twitter users." We don't recall anyone at the MRC offering the "it's a private company" defense to Twitter before Musk bought it.
Gladnick even defended Musk and his lackey Taibbi publishing the names and emails of now-former employees involved in communications with government officials as part of the "Twitter files" releases, which resulted in harassmsent and abuse targeting them: "The names but not the homes or phone numbers were revealed. Hardly the doxxing as practiced by Taylor Lorenz." In fact, as we've documented, Lorenz identified the operator of the hate site Libs of TikTok, Chaya Raichik, through publicly available information, and only briefly linked to her real estate license that included an address and employer, which was also publicly available. Gladnick didn't explain why such publicly available information was off limits.
When Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate was raided by the FBI in search of classified documents he refused to return, CNSNews.com's coverage was filled withright-wing spin that symatheticially portrayed Trump as a victim of bias. When classified documents were discovered at offices Joe Biden used between his stints as vice president and president -- which he returned with incident -- CNS made sure to crank up the outrage machine over such possession (which it didn't do regarding Trump). Susan Jones set the tone in a Jan. 10 article:
After all the fuss about top secret documents found at President Donald Trump's Florida estate, it turns out that former Vice President Joe Biden also had documents "with classified markings" in his possession.
The classified documents were discovered in office space formerly used by Joe Biden at the University of Pennsylvania's Biden Center in Washington, D.C., on November 2, 2022 -- six days before the general election.
But we're just hearing about it now, from a statement released by the White House Counsel's Office, which reads as follows:
Jones then went on to uncritically quote Republicans eager to insist that this was somehow much worse than Trump's situation:
Democrats say Biden's case is different than Trump's because Biden's attorneys volunteered the information and sent the documents -- fewer than Trump had -- to the Archives without being asked. Trump reportedly failed to cooperate with the Archives' repeated demands for the return of classified documents in his possession.
But Republicans say Biden has just as much to answer for, as the following tweets from Republican politicians indicate:
-- “Biden stole classified documents and stored them at his think tank while he was VP. The VP does not have any authority to declassify classified documents. And this “think tank” received $54 million in funding from the CCP," Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) tweeted on Monday.
-- "Re. Biden and classified documents: there can't be separate standards for Republicans and Democrats. The same rules must apply to everyone," Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) tweeted.
-- "Joe Biden stole classified documents. This is a very serious crime. DOJ & NARA can’t sweep this under the rug AND persecute Trump," Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) tweeted on Monday.
[...]
-- "It’s just been discovered that Biden had HIGHLY CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS that were improperly stored in one of his private offices. INCREDIBLE! WHERE is the FBI? WHERE is the dramatic raid? We have two systems of justice in this country: one for them and one for us," Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) tweeted.
CNS then fired up its right-wing talking points machine over the next several days:
Another of these articles, by Jones, quoted Rep. Elissa Slotkin, a" Michigan Democrat who formerly worked as a CIA analyst," as pointing out how Republicans are seizing on the the Biden documents as a "political talking point" -- but then immediately followed it with a statement from House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy laughably denying any political motivation "in his choppy fashion."
It wouldn't be CNS if it wasn't mounting some weird, tangentally related attack of Biden over this, and Craig Bannister obliged in a Jan. 13 article:
Despite his insistence that Americans embrace electric vehicles, President Joe Biden treasures his gasoline-powered 1967 Corvette Stingray so much that he stored it next to the documents marked “classified” found at his Delaware home.
Two batches of documents marked “classified” kept by Biden have reportedly been discovered, the second of which Biden says had been kept next to his Corvette in a garage.
Biden admitted at a press conference on Thursday that he had kept documents that bore classification markings next to his Corvette in what he called “a locked garage” at his Delaware home.
The admission prompted the Oil and Gas Association to tweet out a photo and a few facts about Biden’s coveted Corvette – including that it’s not electric:
CNS regularlyparrots talking points sent out by the oil and gas industry.
UPDATE: There was also a strange Jan. 13 column by Josh Hammer, who went straight for a "deep state" conspiracy theory:
But perhaps the most pressing question is: Why? Why was there a leak to CBS News just now, over two months after Biden attorneys discovered the first tranche of classified documents deep in the bowels of a Penn Biden Center office? Why has there been such a slow, drip-drip, dramatic leaking and reporting of various classified document tranches throughout this whole week?
It is thoroughly unsurprising that the federal law enforcement apparatus and the corporate media buried the news of Biden's malfeasance on the precipice of the midterm elections. The "Democrat-Media Complex," as the late Andrew Breitbart called it, demands nothing less than such complicity.
But the timing of the leak from various federal law enforcement actors now, just as Biden is beginning his second term, suggests there is real internal turmoil over at the Democratic National Committee. Perhaps someone at the DNC instructed deep state spooks that now would be a particularly propitious time to leak sordid details to the media. Perhaps someone at the DNC thought that Joe Biden did his job by shepherding his party through the midterms without succumbing to the much-feared "red wave," but that he is now disposable and should be replaced at the ballot in 2024 by Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA). Loath though I am to speculate, it is difficult to think of a sounder explanation as to why, only now, all of this is coming out.
MRC Hides Factual Basis Of Colbert Joke It Bashed Topic: Media Research Center
As part of the Media Research Center's complaining that non-right-wing media pointed out how far-right the Republican opposition to Kevin McCarthy as House speaker was, Alex Christy served up a side complaint about a joke in a Jan. 10 post:
The Late Show host Stephen Colbert tried and failed during his Tuesday show to use Republican infighting during the Speaker battle to play the sexism card by suggesting there was a double standard present.
Recalling the fourteenth and penultimate ballot, Colbert recalled, “After that, all pluperfect hell broke loose. A furious [Kevin] McCarthy got out of his seat, walked up the aisle, and got into a yelling match with [Matt] Gaetz.”
Advertising for a parodic show, Colbert moved on with an exaggerated McCarthy impression, ‘You can catch all the drama on the new Bravo hit: The Real House Guys of D.C. No, no. No! uh-uh, I'm not here to make friends. Because I'm Kevin McCarthy, and no one will be my friend.’”
While showing some C-SPAN footage, Colbert recalled, “then it got even dramatic-er, when McCarthy ally Mike Rogers approached the scrum and then-- where it is, right here-- and appeared to lunge at Matt Gaetz, and then was quickly pulled away.”
Colbert reacted to this confrontation with fake horror, “Oh, my god. I don't know if men should hold political office. They're just too emotional! You know what I mean? They're just... hormones, I guess. I just-- it's just-- it's the damn-- it's their damn hormones.”
The point Colbert is trying to make is not literally that men should be banned for public office because of testosterone. He is trying to ironically suggest a double standard, arguing that less sophisticated people believe women are not as qualified because they are hormonal. Of course, he cannot point to anyone of any relevance to back up this accusation or rebut the obvious point that most people vote based off party label. As it is, the man who called Kellyanne Conway “Satan’s trophy wife” should hold off on accusing other people of sexism.
Christy either didn't do his research or did research and hid it -- but it turns out that Colbert's joke has a basis in fact. CBS reported on a 2019 study on Americans' attitudes toward female politicians:
A Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce (CEW) analysis of the General Social Survey, a broad study of attitudes and opinions conducted every two years, found that 13 percent of Americans still have serious doubts about women's emotional suitability for political office. And while that number represents a substantial decline in the bias against women in politics since the 1970s, it still represents a real hurdle for women running for office.
Republicans were almost three times as likely as Democrats to believe that men were better suited emotionally for politics than women.
[...]
Case in point: Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. Clinton marketed herself as the most experienced candidate to ever run for president, but was dogged by questions concerning her temperament and general likability.
It was a problem female candidates commonly face: Women in politics need to be strong and decisive, but doing so risks making voters uncomfortable by pushing the boundaries of typical gender norms, according to CEW.
A successful, powerful woman could risk coming off as shrill and demanding. At the same time, she could read as too soft on serious issues facing the country such as national security or defense.
That's right -- the idea that a woman is not emotionally fit to hold office is more likely to be held by a Republican than a Democrat. So Christy's right-splaining the joke in an attempt to make it less funny backfired because a full explanation actually shows it to be quite a hoot.
WND's Farah Still Embracing Bogus Claims Of Election Fraud In Brazil Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've documented how WorldNetDaily has embraced unproven claims of fraud made by Jair Bolsonaro, the right-wing former president of Brazil who, like Trump, can't accept that he lost an election. Since then, Bolsonaro emulated Trump in another way: his supporters ransacked government buildings in an attempted insurrection. WND left coverage of the riot itself to a pair of outsidearticles, but editor Joseph Farah -- who pushed the bogus fraud claims in November -- did so again in his Jan. 10 column:
For all of December, the election was contested. Millions of people filled the streets, peacefully, in the some of the largest demonstrations in the world.
But guess what?
Outside of Brazil, the demonstrations went virtually unseen, including in the United States. They were blacked out.
On top of that, Joe Biden, months before the election, sent an unusual message to Bolsonaro. He told him, in no uncertain times, not to contest the election if he lost.
You can imagine what Bolsonaro thought of that warning – coming from Biden. Bolsonaro remembered clearly the 2020 election in the U.S. He knew it had been fixed, rigged, stolen.
Another thing you should know about the Brazilian election. They didn't use paper ballots – at all. They used just machines. One of the ways people knew it was rigged, aside from the activity by the Chinese Communists, was some of the regional results. In heavily contested areas, the supposed results revealed no opposition to "Lulu." None! He received all of the votes.
That's why the people amassed in some of the greatest peaceful protests in the history of the world.
Just look at them! But keep in mind that the people in Brazil knew the protests were not seen outside of Brazil because of the fake news media in the U.S. and in Brazil!
Flash forward to what is being called the Jan. 6 style riots in Brazil, on Jan. 8. They include break-ins at the Brazilian Congress, the presidential palace and the Supreme Court
And by contrast, look at the pictures!
This week, of course, Joe Biden condemned the unruly protests and offered his full support for Lula after the two spoke by phone. Meanwhile, Bolsonaro, a very good man, is in the U.S. but can be easily extradited. Biden called the unrest, familiarly, an "assault on democracy."
In a tweet on Sunday, Biden said supporters of Brazil's former President Bolsonaro were attacking the peaceful transfer of power in the nation, and again cast his support behind President da Silva.
Does any of this surprise anybody?
Did you expert Biden to change his tune with the change in the House of Representative?
Is this whole pattern of rigged elections getting old?
Is it clear to you how it's all done, with the help of the cooperative media and the Big Tech tyrants?
Brazil is the largest county in South America. China has long had its eyes on it – in fact, all of Latin America. It's their big prize. And now Beijing's man is president.
Again, Farah provided no evidence that Lula is "Beijing's man." And he didn't explain why the U.S. shouldn't recognize the winner of an election in which no credible evidence has surfaced to not do so.
MRC's Jean-Pierre-Bashing Watch Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center continued its attacks on White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, portraying her as incompetent for not answering questions to its satisfaction over the discovery of classified documents by President Biden outside the normal places they should be (which the MRC has also obsessed over). For the Jan. 17 briefing, Curtis Houck cheered that the "inept" Jean-Pierre was peppered with question from non-right-wing reporters even as he complained that she ignored right-wing outlets:
Tuesday’s White House press briefing marked another installment of a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day for the inept Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre as, while she ignored journalists from the Daily Caller, Fox News, and Newsmax about President Biden’s classified documents scandal, she ran into a proverbial buzzsaw from outlets such as ABC, the AP, CBS, CBS News Radio, NBC, and NPR with fiery questions about the scandal.
Houck complained further that Jean-Pierre wouldn't take the bait in his writeup of the Jan. 18 briefing, praising not only a current Fox News employee but a former one as well:
As we’ve documented over the last week (see here, here, here and here), Wednesday’s White House press briefing marked yet another tough day at the office for the empty and inept Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre as she kept up her stonewalling on President Biden’s classified documents scandal, while reporters from the likes of the ABC, the Associated Press, CBS, the Fox News Channel, Gray Television, NBC, and even an independent journalist from Angola fired off hardballs.
The AP’s Josh Boak led off the unsuccessful questioning by wondering if Jean-Pierre could give a justification “against visitor logs for” Biden’s Wilmington, Delaware home “given the frequency with which [he] works” there, but Jean-Pierre only told him to review statements from the White House counsel and Secret Service.
Formerly with Fox News Radio, Gray Television’s Jon Decker brought the hardball a little later, invoking Biden’s September 60 Minutes interview where he denounced Trump hoarding classified documents as “irresponsible”: “[D]o you think it was proper for President Biden to comment on an ongoing DOJ investigation?”
[...]
After not being called on Tuesday, Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich had a turn and focused on more public press access seeing as how “we’re in sort of an information blackout.” When Jean-Pierre said “no” to whether she’d have someone speak at a briefing, Heinrich tried once more before returning to the previous concern raised about any national security concerns.
Houck did not offer evidence to back up his claim that Jean-Pierre declining not to answer questions made her "inept."
Meanwhile, Tim Graham gleefully touted criticism of Jean-Pierre from anonymous White House reporters (funny how anonyous sources are suddenly credible when they're spouting right-wing narratives, eh, Tim?) as reported by CNN's Oliver Darcy, whom the MRC normally hates and whom Houck himself obsessively denigrates as a "Benedict Arnold" for for the sin of escaping the right-wing media bubble. Graham went on to whine:
Then Darcy added a comical rebuttal from an anonymous White House source in a statement to CNN: "A lot of this sounds more like theater criticism than concern about ability to report facts for the American people’s benefit." Wrong! Reporters in this case are upset over lies about the Biden documents scandal.
[...]
Anyone watching the briefing in recent says [sic] isn't really seeing a question-and-answer session as much as a question-and-stonewall session.
[...]
Can Jean-Pierre last at the White House if this document scandal goes on for months? Surely, Team Biden wishes they had a more talented stonewaller like Jen Psaki to handle the newly angered press corps.
We don't recall anyone at the MRC complaining when their beloved Kayleigh McEnany stonewalled reporters -- but then, her stonewalling was for the conserative cause.
Despite the MRC previously denying that Jean-Pierre was being attacked as a diversity hire, Kevin Tober did exactly that in his writeup of thte Jan. 23 briefing:
During Monday’s White House press briefing, a handful of members of the White House press corps continued pressing the incompetent diversity hire, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre over the fifth batch of classified documents found in President Joe Biden’s home in Delaware and his regime’s lack of transparency over the scandal.
First out of the gate on this topic was a series of spicy barbs thrown by ABC’s Mary Bruce who asked Jean-Pierre: “You have said though from this podium many, many times over the last two weeks that this President takes the handling of classified material very seriously, and yet we continue to learn about more documents being found and discovered at his home.”
Due to those facts, Bruce asked: “Why should the American people believe that this President takes classified material seriously and the handling of it?”
Of course, Jean-Pierre, like all the prior times she’s been asked, had no real answer. “The American people heard from the President directly on this when he was asked by your colleagues at least twice now about how he sees this process,” she mumbled.
Houck surprisingly whined more about a reporter who dared to deviate from questioning about Biden documents than about Jean-Pierre for the Jan. 24 briefing:
Tuesday afternoon’s White House press briefing brought about plenty more hardballs on President Biden’s classified documents scandal that the ever-inept Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre refused to answer, but along the way, Angolan reporter Hariana Veras temporarily brought the briefing to a halt with two long stemwinders of leftist commentary demanding gun control.
The next day, Houck once again tried to dunk on Jean-Pierre by praising a national security expert who was brought in, though he too was denigrated as a "crutch":
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre brought in National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby Wednesday afternoon to serve as a crutch amid weeks of hardballs on the Biden classified documents scandal and, sure enough, Kirby ended up exposing Jean-Pierre’s repetitive, tiresome answers by actually providing general explanations for why handling classified information is incredibly serious.
ABC’s MaryAlice Parks went first and cited “bipartisan outrage and frustration over the last few days that there are just more and more disclosures of classified documents showing up in places where they were not supposed to be.”
[...]
Jean-Pierre eventually had a turn, but she went back to shutting down, refusing to answer questions from AP’s Aamer Madhani on whether “all former presidents” should “scrub...their homes and offices” for classified documents and ABC’s MaryAlice Parks on whether the Biden-Harris administration would commit to ensure they’d leave office with no classified documents.
Any excuse to take a shot at Jean-Pierre, it appears.
Newsmax's Victimhood Train Keeps Rolling Topic: Newsmax
Newsmaxcan'tstopcomplaining that its TV channel was dropped by DirecTV in a business dispute of licensing fees, which it is dishonestly framing as "censorship" (even though DrecTV replaced it with another right-wing channel, obliterating any claim to viewpoint censorship), and it's continuing to call back seemingly everyone who ever appeared on the channel to perform a little outrage over it. Here's how if finished out its second week of victimhood:
By our count, that's at least 111 "news" articles Newsmax has published complaining about getting deplatformed, attacking DirecTV and threatening to sic the government on the company over a business decision.
Newsmax columnists have opined as well. Tom Borelli parroted the pro-Newsmax line in a Feb. 3 column:
To the uninformed, DirecTV’s claim it got rid of Newsmax based on a business decision seems reasonable on the surface; looking deeper, it’s clear an intimidation campaign by U.S. House Democrats was a driving force behind its move to get rid of Newsmax.
In a February 2021 letter from Reps. Anna G. Eshoo, D-Calif., and Jerry McNerney, D-Calif., to companies that distribute TV news programs through streaming, satellite or cable, pressed those companies on their justification for providing Fox News, Newsmax and OANN to their customers.
Reps. Eshoo’s and McNerney’s opening paragraph didn’t pull any punches; it accused AT&T and DIRECTV of being responsible for "disseminating misinformation to millions."
The congresspersons followed up by asking the companies a number of questions including how "moral and ethical principles" play into deciding which channels to distribute and do they require "content guidelines."
They also asked if actions were taken against the TV channels regarding "the November 3, 2020 elections, the January 6, 2021 Capital insurrection or COVID-19 misinformation."
The last question served as a direct assault on the companies business decision demanding to know if they planned to continue to carry Fox News, Newsmax and OANN and "If so, why?"
Translation?
We want you to cancel Newsmax and other conservative outlets because we don’t agree with their content because it makes Democrats look bad in the eyes of the public.
Borelli censored the fact that bot Newsmax and OAN did, in fact, broadcast falsehoods and misinformation regarding the 2020 election, particularly about election tech firm Dominion, who is suing both of them. Borelli also wrote:
It may well be argued that AT&T and DirecTVare feeling the sting of GOP wrath because they just added a new conservative outlet, The First, to its offerings.
Perhaps that reflects an obvious clean up aisle five move in an effort to placate the political outrage it created.
The best solution for all is for AT&T and DirecTV to bring back Newsmax.
That, as far as we can tell, is only the second reference at Newsmax to the fact that DirecTV did, in fact, replace it with another right-wing channel -- which, again, obliterates the argument that what DirecTV did is viewpoint censorship. The first apparent reference was in a Jan. 27 article.
James Hirsen devoted his Feb. 6 column to blaming Newsmax's deplatforming on DirecTV's parent, AT&T, somehow being "woke" (translation: not filled with right-wingers):
In a nutshell, the world's largest telecommunications company (and third largest provider of cellphones) has insidiously morphed into a far-left organization that poses as a service company.
According to OpenSecrets, during the time period between 1989 and 2019, AT&T was the 14th-largest donor to United States federal political campaigns and committees, contributing tens of millions of dollars, a majority of which went straight into Democrat hands.
As Newsmax contributor Jeffrey Lord reported in the American Spectator, the company's leaders have backgrounds that link them with politicians of the liberal Democrat kind.
AT&T’s board of directors includes a chairman of the board that previously served as FCC chair, and was appointed by former President Bill Clinton. This same chairman of the board was an ambassador that was appointed to the position by former President Barack Obama.
Two board members are reliable contributors to prominent Democratic candidates, including one individual who was an adviser and supporter of former President Bill Clinton, as well as being the co-chair of the left-leaning Brookings Institution.
[...]
Did corporate heads at AT&T via its DirecTV subsidiary set out to suppress the speech of Newsmax? And was the company following the dictates of its fellow left-leaning politicians, media apparatchiks and radical activist groups?
The pieces of the puzzle seem to be falling into place.
Hirsen didn't explain how not being filled with right-wingers makes as company "woke." Nor did he disclose that DirecTV replace Newsmax with another right-wing channel, which undermines his conspikracy theory that the company was "following the dictates of its fellow left-leaning politicians, media apparatchiks and radical activist groups."
(Updated to note a previous reference to The First.)
NEW ARTICLE -- Anti-Semitism And The MRC: The Virus Spreads Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center was as squishy on the anti-Semitism of Kyrie Irving and on Donald Trump's dining with anti-Semites Kanye West and Nick Fuentes as it was on Ye's anti-Semitism. Read more >>
CNS Can't Stop Making Petty Attacks On Nancy Pelosi Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com may have shifted to petty attacks on the House Democratic leader, Hakeem Jeffries, but that doesn't mean it's done with petty attacks on the previous leader, Nancy Pelosi. We've already noted how CNS briefly obsessed over a tiny provision in the omnibus budget bill naming a building after her and that she noted that money in the bill will help LGBTQ youth, but there's much more.
A Dec. 1 article by Craig Bannister complained that Pelosi marked World AIDS Day and reminded us (with boldface!) that most AIDS victims are icky gay people who presumably don't deserve health equity because they're icky gay people:
Democrats remain committed to creating “health equity” when it comes to AIDS, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday, in a statement commemorating this year’s World AIDS Day, December 1.
AIDS “disproportionately” infects LGBTQ communities, those of color and the poor, Pelosi says in a statement posted on the speaker’s website:
[...]
But, as HIV.gov emphasizes with bolded text, behavior, not health discrimination, appears to be at the root of the disproportionately high HIV rates among some subpopulations, as “ gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (MSM) are by far the most affected group in the US”:
An anonymously written Dec. 23 article carried the headline "Nancy Pelosi: ‘As Speaker of the House, I Have Awesome Power’" -- as if to portray her as a power-mad megalomaniac (despite the fact that she was in the middle of voluntarily stepping down from House leadership). The anonymous writer did put her words in context in the article:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) reflected during her last speaker’s press conference on Thursday on how much power she has enjoyed in that position.
“As Speaker of the House, I have awesome power,” said Pelosi.
“Now transitioning to a different role, I expect to have strong influence, but not on my Members, just in terms of encouraging more women, for example, to run,” she said.
“But the Speaker of the House is a very big job, and just wrapping it up will take time, with the Library of Congress for the papers, with the Historian of the Capitol–of the Congress–in terms of interviews and the rest of that,” said Pelosi.
CNS continues to disapprovingly note (anonymously, of course) whenever Pelosi references her Catholic faith:
The latter article made a point of adding: "In May 2022, Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco notified Pelosi that because she persisted in advocating legalized abortion she could no longer receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Church. In doing so, Cordileone cited an instruction that then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger had sent to the Catholic bishops of the United States in 2004." The anonymous writer failed to note that Pope Francis generally disapproves of denying Communion to Catholic politicians.
Another anonymously wreitten article, on Jan. 6, impllicitly took Pelosi to task for invoking the Catholic holy day of Epiphany to criticize the Capitol riot:
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.), the former speaker of the House, put out a statement on Jan. 6—which is the Catholic Feast of the Epiphany--calling on people to pray to ensure that this day remains an “epiphany” for America based on what happened on Jan. 6, 2021.
The statement was headlined: “Pelosi Statement on Two Years Since January 6th Insurrection.”
“Two years ago today, our nation watched in horror as a terrorist mob stormed the Capitol grounds in a violent attempt to subvert the peaceful transfer of power,” said Pelosi in her statement.
“January 6th marks the Feast of the Epiphany in the Catholic tradition,” Pelosi said. “As we commemorate two years since the insurrection, let us pray that this day continues to serve as an epiphany for our nation: to heal the wounds that remain and to preserve American Democracy, what Lincoln called ‘the last best hope of earth.’”
Three days later, CNS managing editor Michael W. Chapman wrote an article trying to whitewash the effects of the riot.
A Jan. 9 article -- anonymously written, of course -- complained that Jeffries said nice things about Pelosi:
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D.-N.Y.) said in a speech from the podium at the front of the House chamber on Saturday that Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) was the “greatest speaker of all time.”
“Before I proceed any further, let me begin by acknowledging the distinguished Gentlelady from the great state of California, the iconic, the heroic, the legendary Speaker Emerita, Nancy D'Alesandro Pelosi,” said Jeffries.
“And without question in my mind, Speaker Emerita Pelosi will go down in history as the greatest Speaker of all time,” he said.
Pelosi, who was in the chamber, acknowledged the praise of her successor with a broad smile.
CNS apparently thinks this is a bad thing.
On Jan. 20, yet another anonymously written article groused about Pelosi's selection of quotes from Martin Luther King:
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) sent out a pair of tweets on Martin Luther King Day in which she quoted King as saying that God did not intend for a one class “of people to live in superfluous inordinate wealth.”
[...]
Earlier that day, Pelosi had sent out a tweet that said: “Dr. King wrote: ‘God never intended for one group of people to live in superfluous inordinate wealth, while others live in abject deadening poverty.’
“Let us draw strength from these words,” Pelosi said, “as we strive to realize Dr. King & Coretta’s glorious vision of justice, equality & peace.”
Kaepernick Derangement Syndrome Lingers At The MRC Topic: Media Research Center
Despite the fact that he hasn't played in the NFL since the2016 season, Colin Kaepernick continues to liverent-free in the collective heads of the Media Research Center. It's not that the MRC doesn't know that fact. In a September 2020 post, Jay Maxson pointed it out in ranting that Kaepernick (whom Maxson called a "vastly overrated SJW" in the headline) was being added to that year's edition of the Madden NFL video game:
Aiming to cash in on social justice warrior dollars, EA Sports is bringing Colin Kaepernick back to Madden video football as a featured quarterback in the Madden NFL 21 edition of the game. He hasn't played in the National Football League since 2016 and is the only long-time inactive quarterback included in the video game.
Not only is Kaepernick's name on the Madden 21 player roster, but his player rating parallels that of past Super Bowl champion Ben Roethlisberger. It's also surprisingly better than that of Cam Newton and Jared Goff.
Why aren't Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck and Tony Romo and other recently retired former quarterbacks included in Madden 21? There's no SJW dollar to be made off those good citizens who never shamed their country when they played.
[...]
To the radical Left, Kaepernick is the second coming of Muhammad Ali and a useful idiot for Black Lives Matter. His sycophants just can't stop talking about him, and the media won't stop pressuring teams to sign him. Any mention of Kaepernick's name or forum to make him visible has been regarded as vindication for his disgusting behavior.
You'd think that Maxson and Co. would want to studiously ignore Kaepernick. Instead, they have continued to lash out at any mention of him , or at anyone who dares to say anything nice about him, in the (non-right-wing) media. Here are the posts the MRC devoted to attacking Kaepernick just in in 2021:
That's a total of 30 articles in two years -- a half-decade after Kaepernick last played in the NFL -- talk about Kaepernick Derangement Syndrome. And these are just the ones that reference Kaepernick in the headline; there are numerous others that reference him in the post itself that aren't counted here.
Kapeernick Derangement is already off and running at the MRC for this year. A Jan. 27 post by Maxson whined:
Football pariah Colin Kaepernick seems to have given up on tweeting endless workout videos in favor of his true calling: smearing America and law-enforcement. After bombing in a tryout with the Las Vegas Raiders last year, Kaepernick appears to be less interested in returning to the NFL, more focused on producing woke television documentaries and taking potshots at cops.
Kaepernick’s next documentary is a three-part series, “Killing County,” targeting the Bakersfield, Calif., police department. People Magazine reports the series debuts Feb. 3. Kaepernick and ABC News Studious teamed up on the series featuring the story of Jorge Ramirez Jr., who was killed by police.
Peoplesaid the documentary covers the story of the Ramirez shooting at a hotel and how it catapulted his family toward “a struggle for justice and answers in their loved one's death.”
The People story by Tristan Balagtas describes the documentary as an exploration of distrust by the Ramirezes and other families toward police officers. Kaepernick is all about distrust of cops.
Maxson didn't demand that the police stop doing things that engender distrust; instead, he (or she) complained that Kaepernic "has compared them to slave patrolmen" -- a not-inaccurate claim.
WND's Orient Tries To Exploit NFL Player's Collapse To Fearmonger About Vaccines Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've shown how WorldNetDaily columnist Jane Orient of the fringe-right Association of American Physicians and Surgeons has bought into the conspiracy theory that people -- particularly athletes -- are dropping dead because of the COVID vaccines, despite a complete lack of credible evidence to back it up. When NFL player Damar Hamlin collapsed during a game. Orient made sure to shoehorn that into her conspiracy, writing in her Jan. 5 column:
Millions of people saw Buffalo Bills player Damar Hamlin collapse on the football field on Jan. 2. He was tackled, fell down and at first stood up. Even to aficionados of the sport, this looked no different from what usually happens throughout the game. But then his heart stopped, and he collapsed. At this moment, Hamlin is reportedly in critical condition despite vigorous CPR on the field. In all likelihood, his promising career is over.
There is an outpouring of sympathy for this young man and his family, suddenly struck by a terrible tragedy. And also a flood of social media posts from both sides of the political narrative: It must have been the COVID shot, or the "safe and effective" COVID shot had nothing to do with it.
People are learning from well-polished presentations about commotio cordis, an extremely rare event. A sudden impact to the chest throws the heart into a fatal rhythm disturbance. Classically, it occurs in young boys not wearing protective gear who get hit in the chest with a baseball or similar projectile traveling around 40 mph – not an older, well-protected football players. Still, Hamlin did get hit in the chest.
By now, people have noticed that a lot of athletes have been collapsing on the field, and a high percentage of them die. Many are not even engaged in contact sports. Sudden death when engaged in strenuous activity that triggers a surge of adrenalin is not new. Certain congenital heart conditions, such as hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy, predispose to it, and aspiring athletes should be carefully screened for this. There are also several possibilities for which screening is not ordinarily done.
Is sudden death occurring more commonly, or is it just getting more attention?
Of course, Orient offered no proof that the former is happeningh; the real situiation is the latter, fed by anti-vaxx conspiracy theorists like her.
Even though Orient offered no proof whatsoever that what happened to Hamlin had anthing to do with a vaccine, she demanded that we get "serious about avoiding future tragedies in case the COVID shots just might play a role" through things like "Suspend[ing] further injections until damage from the shots can be ruled out" and doing "a study that screens a large population of vaccine recipients with cardiac enzymes (troponins), ultrasound, and MRI to check for inflammation." She concluded by invoking another conspiracy: "Which, after all, is more important: the hearts of our people, or the profits of the vaccine purveyors?"
Orient tried to exploit Hamlin's condition for her conspiratorial cause again in her Jan. 24 column:
Cases like Hamlin's, however, may be the stimulus for very important research. It is not only that the spectacular collapse of an NFL star or other celebrity attracts a lot of sensational media coverage. It's not just the individual tragedies. The actual number of cases is increasing at such a disturbing rate that the public is finally noticing it.
A surge of adrenalin with extraordinary exertion may trigger the fatal rhythm disorder. A surge of hormones just before awakening might explain how young people die in their beds. But what makes the heart's electrical system more irritable?
The current spike in reports of SCD just happens to coincide with push to get everybody injected with COVID-19 vaccines. Although your vaccination status must be made known to ticket takers at a concert, it seems to be too sensitive to include in news reports on sudden cardiac death.
What can impair your heart's electrical system? The differential diagnosis includes trauma, a congenital (birth) defect, infection, inflammation, autoimmune damage, toxic effect and drug effect. Damage from the spike protein that COVID injections cause your body to make, and/or the immune response to it, is a plausible mechanism. How to demonstrate it? Patients who die should have an autopsy, with tissue preserved for tests, such as histopathological staining or chemical analysis for toxins, that may become available later. An autopsy should be standard in all unexpected deaths, but is rarely done, for financial reasons. This should be a priority for SCD research funding.
[...]
The COVID products are so different that some say they should not be called vaccines. However, all vaccines affect the immune system, by design. Immunology is extremely complex, varies greatly in individuals and is not well understood.
Instead of speculating about climate change, gas stoves, minuscule increases in dust particles in the air, 5G, plastic bottles, etc., let's try to find an answer to an age-old but dramatically increasing problem.
Again, Orient couldn't be bothered to offer any actual evidence there's any link between vaccines and Hamlin's collapse. But then, fearmongering about vaccines is the point, and actual evidence would complilcate her agenda.
How Has The MRC Been Fluffing Trump Lately? Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has remained fairly loyal to Donald Trump, even after the Capitol riot -- and it's still doing the occasional puff piece for him to help distract from other things.
In mid-December, the big news in Trump World was a "MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT" he saidhe would make... which turned out to be NFT trading cards (issued as the NFT market was crashing) that even his allies criticized as unusually money-grubbing even for him. But you read nothing about that at the MRC's NewsBusters; instead, Gabriela Pariseau served as a servile Trump stenographer for something he released the same day in a Dec. 15 post:
“The censorship cartel must be dismantled and destroyed and it must happen immediately,” former President Donald Trump said in a recent video announcing his policy stance on Big Tech’s approach to free speech.
“Today, I’m announcing my plan to shatter the left-wing censorship regime and to reclaim the right to free speech for all Americans,” he said. Trump added that he would ban Big Tech-government collusion to censor Americans, as well as fire and investigate government officials who previously colluded, break up Big Tech and revise Section 230.
Trump committed to take immediate action to protect free speech if Americans elect him as president in 2024.
“Within hours of my inauguration, I will sign an executive order banning any federal department or agency from colluding with any organization, business, or person, to censor, limit, categorize, or impede the lawful speech of American citizens,” Trump said.
[...]
Trump made these statements in the wake of Twitter CEO Elon Musk’s release of the Twitter Files, which among other things revealed Twitter’s internal and political collusion to censor the New York Post’s Hunter Biden bombshell and to ban then-President Trump.
Speaking of censoring, Pariseau censored any mention of the NFT debacle.
(Newsmax similarly promoted this policy sdtatement, though it did also promote the NFTs while censoring criticism.)
Meanwhile, Jay Maxson served up his (or her) own Trump sycophancy in a Jan. 23 post:
Former President Donald Trump won a senior golf tournament over the weekend and used the occasion to take a driver to President Joe Biden’s physical ability to lead the nation.
Following his victory Sunday in the Senior Club Championship at his own Trump International Golf Club, the ex-prez boasted on Truth Social media:
“A great honor to have won the Senior Club Championship at Trump International Golf Club, one of the best courses in the Country, in Palm Beach County, Florida.”
The 76-year-old former commander in chief then chipped away at his rival President Biden’s physical and mental fitness.
“Competed against many fine golfers, and was hitting the ball long and straight,” Trump said. “The reason that I announce this on fabulous TRUTH is that, in a very real way, it serves as a physical exam, only MUCH tougher. You need strength and stamina to WIN, & I have strength & stamina – most others don’t. You also need strength & stamina to GOVERN!”
These remarks are obviously aimed at Biden, says Outkick blogger Mark Harris. President Biden did not keep his promise to release the results of his 2022 physical examination.
Biden has been too confused in some of his public appearances to remember promises made or where he’s supposed to go and what he’s supposed to do when the cameras are rolling. This has been evident during sports-related events at the White House, too.
It’s also evident that the president’s handlers often have to provide instructions for him in his ability to function.
Maxson didn't mention, however, that Trump played only half of the tournamemt he claims to have "won"; he spent one day of the two-day tourney attending the funeral of Diamond of Trump-fluffing Diamond and Silk notoriety (where he gave a bizarre eulogy in which he admitted he hardly knew her). It was so egregous that even the right-wing Daily Mail pointed it out. Trump apparently substituted that day's play with a round he played a few days earlier, which might be acceptable but for the fact that Trump is a notorioius golf cheat.
But then, that would have negated the purpose of Maxson's Trump-fluffing.
Another part of the Media Research Center's recent round of attacks on George Soros has been a series of so-called studies that boil down to complaining that Soros funds things like any billionaire does. This was kicked off in an Dec. 6 post by the MRC's point man on hating Soros, Joseph Vazquez, and Dan Schneider who runs the MRC's Free Speech America program:
CNSNews.com has long been a promote of right-wing Sen. Rand Paul's nasty, partisan attacks against Anthony Fauci for his efforts in trying to protect Americans during the COVID pandemic. For instance:
Nicholas Fondacaro -- whose Media Research Center job is to hate-watch "The View" -- put quite the inflammatory headline on a Nov. 3 
The Media Research Center's electively released "Twitter files" to Elon Musk's hand-picked journalists continued with a Jan. 16 
When Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate was raided by the FBI in search of classified documents he refused to return, CNSNews.com's coverage was 
As part of the Media Research Center's 
We've documented
The Media Research Center 
Newsmax
CNSNews.com may have shifted to petty attacks on the House Democratic leader, 
Despite the fact that he hasn't played in the NFL since the2016 season, Colin Kaepernick 
We've shown
The Media Research Center has remained fairly loyal to Donald Trump, even after the Capitol riot -- and it's still doing the occasional puff piece for him to help distract from other things.
