MRC's Tantrums: Cover Hunter, Not Trump! Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's desperation to defend Donald Trump from being held accountable for his actions led to no fewer than four bouts of Hunter Biden Derangement Syndrome, demanding that the media cover him and not Trump. Kevin Tober complained in a March 19 post:
Continuing the week-long trend of the leftist media ignoring each and every new revelation in the rapidly growing scandal surrounding the Biden family’s corrupt overseas business dealings, the March 19 Sunday shows all blatantly ignored this latest Biden scandal in favor of a familiar media spectacle: Donald Trump.
The four liberal Sunday talk shows, which consist of ABC’s This Week, CBS's Face the Nation, NBC’s Meet the Press, and CNN’s State of the Union spent a combined 46 minutes and 46 seconds obsessing and sometimes gleefully reporting on the news that former President Donald Trump could be indicted over his involvement with former porn star Stormy Daniels.
The time breakdown that each show spent on the Trump news is as follows: This Week (13 minutes 14 seconds), Face the Nation (7 minutes), Meet the Press (6 minutes 10 seconds), and State of the Union(22 minutes 22 seconds).
In contrast, these Sunday shows spent no time at all on the news that House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) acquired the bank records of Hunter Biden’s business associates.
Unfortunately, today’s media with the exception of Fox News and a few other outlets, serve no other purpose than being the Democrat Party’s [sic] PR agents.
Translation: Tober is very happy and grateful that Fox News is serving as a PR agent for the Republican Party.
Tober returned to complain a week later that non-right-wing Sunday shows still were not promoting Republican propaganda:
For the second week in a row (March 26), the four liberal Sunday roundtable shows ignored the rapidly growing scandal surrounding the Biden family’s corrupt overseas business dealings, even as new details continued to unravel. Instead, of reporting on the hard evidence in the federal Hunter Biden probe (and other alleged crimes and corruption surrounding the Biden family), they spent considerable airtime speculating and debating about a possible indictment of former President Trump by Alvin Bragg, the Soros-backed district attorney in New York City.
The four liberal Sunday talk shows, which consist of ABC’sThis Week, CBS's Face the Nation, NBC’s Meet the Press, and CNN’s State of the Union, spent over an hour (63 minutes and 53 seconds) of combined time on the possible Trump indictment story.
The fact that the Sunday shows continued to ignore the Biden story while harping on a week-old Trump story with no new substantive information shows their efforts to deflect for the Biden administration.
Tober didn't explain why he didn't think the possibility of a former president facing a criminal indictment wasn't newsworthy -- or why Republican specuation about a non-politician's possible indictment is.
After news of Trump's indictment broke, Geoffrey Dickens took the indignation stick, continuing to be mad that it was considered news and Republican ranting over Hunter Biden wasn't in a March 31 post:
Shhh! Nothing to see here! The Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) networks continue to bury the Hunter Biden probe and the growing scandals surrounding the Biden family’s corruption, including the House Oversight Committee’s revelations that Hunter, the President’s brother Jim and Hallie Biden (widow of son Beau) received payments from a Chinese energy firm — something President Joe Biden firmly denied.
However, their voracious appetite for covering the various investigations (Stormy Daniels, Mar-a-Lago documents, January 6th) surrounding former President Donald Trump remains unsatiated.
Beginning with the House Oversight Committee’s breaking of the Hallie Biden news through the evening of Trump’s indictment, MRC analysts tracked the glaring double standard.
Over 14 days (March 16-March 30) ABC, NBC, CBS filled their evening, morning and Sunday roundtable shows with over 272 minutes (4 hours, 32 minutes, 56 seconds) of Trump investigation coverage compared to ZERO seconds spent on Biden family corruption stories. On average, network audiences saw almost 20 minutes per day of Trump investigation stories.
The Big Three (ABC, NBC, CBS) networks are trying to play magician again, hoping their audiences stay so focused on former President Donald Trump that they don’t notice how they’ve used a sleight of hand trick to completely hide the Biden family corruption stories.
Despite the House Oversight Committee digging up new dirt on President Joe Biden and his clan, the broadcast networks continue to censor revelations that Hunter, the President’s brother Jim and Hallie Biden (widow of son Beau) received payments from a Chinese energy firm. Most recently they whistled past more incriminating news on Biden’s improper handling of classified documents.
However, they remain obsessed with covering the various investigations (Stormy Daniels, Mar-a-Lago documents, January 6th) surrounding former President Donald Trump.
Beginning with the House Oversight Committee’s breaking of the Biden family receiving payments from payments through the day after Trump’s arrest in New York, MRC analysts tracked the glaring double standard.
Dickens concluded by huffing: "It’s striking how the networks have completely disappeared any mention of the most recent Biden family scandals while at the same time obsessively reporting on the Trump investigations. The contrast is truly stunning." He didn't mention that no actual evidence of Biden wrongdoing has been released -- even Fox News has called out oversight committee head Jamnes Comer for not producing anything meaningful to back up his Biden-bashing claims -- and he again failed to explain why Trump's indictment was not newsworthy.
Newsmax Pushed Anonymous Attack Over Biden Not Attending Coronation Topic: Newsmax
Newsmax peddled a dubious, anonymous attack on President Biden in an April 3 article by Eric Mack:
President Joe Biden reportedly will not attend King Charles' coronation next month because he is deemed "too old" to make two transatlantic trips in a month, according to an insider.
Instead, first lady Jill Biden and "high-profile representatives" might be sent in order to avoid the appearance the U.S. president is snubbing the royal family, sources told The Telegraph.
President Biden, 80, is making an April 11 trip to Northern Ireland, and as the oldest U.S. president ever elected, there are concerns he is too old to handle two long trips in a month's time.
"The guy is 80," a source told The Telegraph. "They space out his big bursts of activity quite considerably. They did that too with Trump, and he was younger. When Biden does something like the State of the Union address, we didn't see much from him in the following 48 hours. They don't like to push him around the world too much."
Mack didn't mention that the Telegraph has a right-wing bias, which would make it more prone to attacking Biden, so there's little reason to take the word of an anonymous source at face value.
Mack also failed to tell his readers that there's a historical precedent for Biden not attending: As we pointed out when a WorldNetDaily columnist lashed out at Biden, no U.S. president has ever attended the coronation of a British monarch.Mack did hint at this but got the reasoning wrong: "The late Queen Elizabeth's coronation in 1953 was not attended by President Dwight Eisenhower. A U.S. president's attendance might have been rejected to avoid overshadowing the coronation event."
WND Pushes Another Capitol Riot Conspiracy Theory Topic: WorldNetDaily
It's been more than two years since the Capitol riot, and WorldNetDaily is still trying to whitewash it or build conspiracy theories around it to protect Donald Trump and his right-wing supporters (like WND). Bob Unruh did the latter in a March 14 article:
The congressional certification of Joe Biden's win in the 2020 presidential race was accomplished in the dark of night after the so-called "riot" happened at the U.S. Capitol and members of Congress reconvened.
Now a report on the Conservative Treehouse website explains it had to happen that way – no matter what any supporters of President Trump may or may not have done that day.
The short explanation is that since there were multiple motions pending before Congress on challenges to the election results, had the event proceeded routinely, they would have been considered, and Congress would have been required to debate them.
The results could have been catastrophic for Joe Biden.
In order to dispense with those motion without having them considered, Congress had to be in an "emergency" session, which was provided for by the reaction to the protesters at the Capitol, the report explains.
Cited is longtime Conservative Treehouse reader "Regitiger" who offered the analysis that suggests a "federal government motive to create a J6 crisis that permitted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to trigger an emergency session and avoid the 2020 election certification challenges."
Those challenges were known about well in advance of that day, and even if they had been voted down, could have provided a legal standing for subsequent judicial cases, the report said.
Unruh is in stenography mode here, so he's not going to even ettempt to do any critical analysis of a conspiracy theory forwarded by writers hiding behind fake names on a right-wing website. Instead, he simply parroted the discredited claims they made, such as "Why didn’t House Speaker Nancy Pelosi secure the Capitol Hill complex, and why did she deny the request by President Trump to call up the national guard for security support? Why did the FBI have agent provocateurs in the crowd, seemingly stimulating rage within a peaceful crowd to enter the Capitol building?" In fact, Trump issued no request for Pelosi to deny, and "agent provocateurs" is an apparent reference to Ray Epps, and WND can'tstopclinging to this never-proven conspiracy theory.
NEW ARTICLE -- Out There, Exhibit 84: The MRC's Watergate Complex Topic: Media Research Center
Fifty years after the scandal that brought down Richard Nixon, the Media Research Center wants you to believe that the real victim was ... Nixon. And an MRC executive served up a fond farewell to the sleazy G. Gordon Liddy. Read more >>
MRC Tried To Attack Wis. Court Candidate Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center gave a little attention earlier this year to an election for a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat -- almost entirely to attack the liberal-leaning candidate. Mark Finkelstein took the first shot in a Feb. 25 post:
This was political kabuki theater at its transparent worst.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court balance could tip leftward in a general election in April. On his new Saturday Showon MSNBC, Jonathan Capehart invited on the liberal candidate Janet Protasiewicz. The clear intent was to signal to voters and donors how she would vote on key issues before the court, notably abortion.
Capehart might as well have had a flashing screen graphic: "Vote/Donate To Protasiewicz! She'll strike down Wisconsin law restricting abortion!!!" Even The New York Times has reported "Judge Protasiewicz has pioneered what may be a new style of judicial campaigning. She has openly proclaimed her views on abortion rights (she’s for them) and the state’s legislative maps (she’s against them)."
Protasiewicz also condemned the "extremism" of the current court, which has a conservative majority. She wants to get back to "normal." Because, you know, there's nothing more "normal," and non-extreme, than supporting abortion up to the moment of birth with no restrictions!
Finkelstein didn't mention that Protasiewicz's opponent, Dan Kelly, has a long history of right-wing activism -- even having declared that abortion "involves taking the life of a human being" -- and had been endorsed by Wisconsin anti-abortion groups (even as he laughably insisted his politics didn't matter).
Alex Christy bashed a temporary "Daily Show" host for endorsing Protasiewicz in a March 30 post:
Comedy Central The Daily Show temp host John Leguizamo fulfilled show creator Lizz Winstead’s dream of using the show to promote abortion on Wednesday as he campaigned for liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Janet Protasiewicz. Leguizamo would also accuse Republicans of stealing the state legislature because conspiracy theories about stolen elections are apparently okay when liberals are the ones peddling them.
The election will determine the ideological balance of the court, as Leguizamo explained, “All right, let's move on to Wisconsin because they're about to have an election for the state supreme court that's hugely important, and not just for there, but for the whole goddamn country. And it's a little complicated to explain why in a short time, but fortunately, I'm a Latino New Yorker and I can talk very fast… So, let me break it down for you in my new segment: ‘A New York Minute.’”
It’s not a great endorsement of Protasiewicz’s legal philosophy that Leguizamo wants people to vote for her because she’ll give them policies liberals can’t win through regular elections.
Christy overlooked the fact that Republican gerrymandering of thet state legislature effectively rigged the system and made it difficult to pass policies supported by a majority of state residents.
Kevin Tober issued a more direct attack on Protasiewicz in an April 3 post:
On Tuesday, Wisconsin voters will decide the ideological balance of the state Supreme Court for the first time in fifteen years. This election will have national implications on everything from abortion to gun rights to election integrity. Despite this, both the national and local media in Wisconsin have refused to look into the soft-on crime record of the Democrat candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Janet Protasiewicz.
A recent email exchange between Dan Curry of Restoration News, part of the non-partisan political action committee Restoration of America PAC (ROA), and Corrinne Hess, a political reporter for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, showed how uninterested the leftist media are in covering any unfavorable stories having to do with Democrats.
Tober is being highly dishonest by portraying ROA as "non-partisan" -- Restoration PAC is indisputably a right-wing organization funded by billionaire Richard Uihlein that pushes right-wing causes. Restoration PAC funded a different PAC that spent more than $2 million on ads supporting Kelly and attacking Protasiewicz. Despite Tober's framing that the Journal Sentinel was "uninterested" in what the Restoration PAC guy was peddling, the more simple and obvious explanation is that the paper was choosing not to cozy up to a partisan activist who had other means (and the money) to push his narrative.
Tober made sure to include his own attack line as well: Unsurprisingly, Protasiewicz was also being backed by liberal billionaire George Soros." Like the MRC's attempts to link DA Alvin Bragg to Soros, this isn't as clear-cut as he'd like you to believe; a Soros PAC donated money to a PAC supporting Protasiewicz, which is not the same thing as Tober's insistence that Soros donated directly to her campaign.
After Protasiewicz won the election, Luis Cornelio spent an April 5 post in a full anti-Soros rage (to the point that he had problems spelling her name correctly):
George Soros’s scheme of funneling millions of dollars to overhaul America’s judicial system seems to be paying off, with Wisconsin becoming his latest return on investment.
Judge Janet Protasiewicz, a Soros-tied leftist candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, won the April 4 election, effectively establishing a Democrat majority on Wisconsin’s highest court for the first time in 15 years, the Associated Press reported April 5.
Wisconsin campaign finance filings, first revealed by Fox News on March 28, show leftist mega-donor George Soros funneled $1 million to the Democratic Party of Wisconsin on February 22, marking the largest donation to the party between Feb. 7 and March 20 alongside Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker (D), who also reportedly donated $1 million.
There was no mention of the money supporting Kelly's campaign coming from the likes of billionaires like Uihlein.
Cornelio then touted how "Protasiewciz’s [sic] opponent, Dan Kelly —a former Wisconsin Supreme Court justice —conceded the election but not before slamming the Soros-tied leftist candidate as a “serial liar” and raising the alarm about what’s to come in Wisconsin" -- even though he immediately contradicts himself by quoting Kelly as saying that "I do not have a worthy opponent to which I can conceit [sic]." Cornelio unsurprisingly concluded by repeating his employer's talking points on tying Bragg to Soros.
We've shown how WorldNetDaily has been despserately trying to turn "QAnon Shaman" insurrectionist Jacob Chansley into a victim by hyping cherry-picked and misleadingly edited video showing him acting peacefully that was aired by then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson. Peter LaBarbera found another piece of cherry-picked video to promote for a March 16 article:
Newly-released police bodycam footage from Jan. 6 shows Trump supporters obeying cops leading them out of the Senate chamber, with some even thanking the police — further eviscerating the Democrats' "deadly insurrection" J6 narrative.
The footage came to light due to the sentencing trial of Jacob Chansley, the infamous horned J6 protester dubbed the "QAnon Shaman" by the media. Chansley is shown in the video thanking the police officers who are clearing ralliers out of the Senate chamber in the U.S. Capitol building.
The video shared on Twitter by "D. Scott" (@eclipsethis2003) hit social media on Tuesday and conservatives responded with outrage, with many saying the liberal J6 narrative is collapsing before their eyes. D. Scott's March 14 tweet reads: "Newly released video footage captured by body-worn police cameras has shown a new perspective of the clearing of the Senate chamber from Jan. 6. The footage was presented as evidence during Jacob Chansley’s sentencing [hearing] and was finally made public today."
Chansley himself is shown in footage, saying to the officers as he approached the door, "Thank you for your patience. We really appreciate it." It was Fox News Tucker Carlson's airing of previously unseen J6 footage of a cooperative Chansley being led around inside the Capitol by police that engendered a new wave of outrage and skepticism among conservatives toward the Democrat-run Jan. 6 Committee and the "insurrection" narrative it attempted to sell to the public (in part through cherry-picked videos).
Of course, the video LaBarbera is hyping was cherry-picked. By contrast, prosecutors pointed out that these selectively edited videos "did not show Chansley, who was sentenced to 41 months in prison for his actions on January 6, facing off with officers for half an hour outside the Senate chamber or when Chansley refused to be escorted out of the Capitol by an officer and only left after being forcibly removed," adding: "Chansley was not some passive, chaperoned observer of events for the roughly hour that he was unlawfully inside the Capitol. ... He was part of the initial breach of the building; he confronted law enforcement for roughly 30 minutes just outside the Senate Chamber; he gained access to the gallery of the Senate along with other members of the mob (obviously, precluding any Senate business from occurring); and he gained access to and later left the Senate floor only after law enforcement was able to arrive en masse to remove him.”
When Chansley was moved to a halfway house a couple weeks later, Bob Unruh tried to credit those videos in a March 30 article:
Security video of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, shows Jacob Chansley, 35, the "QAnon Shaman," being escorted into the Senate that day by security officers in the building.
Now, after his lawyer charged that the government deliberately had withheld exculpatory information about his client, Chansley has been released from a federal prison and moved to a halfway house.
Chansley was a key part of many of the videos of the Jan. 6 events at the Capitol, when hundreds protested what they saw as an unfair – even stolen – election, with his costume of helmet and such.
He pleaded guilty in September 2021 to civil disorder and violent entry and was given 41 months in prison.
The report explained, "Bureau of Prison records confirmed that Chansley is in the custody of the Residential Reentry Management field office in Phoenix, with a release date set for May 25."
[Chansley attorney Albert] Watkins decline[d] to attribute a reason for the decision.
"This was a decision of the US Bureau of Prisons," he said.
The report pointed out federal guidelines allow for reduced time for good behavior, "but under those guidelines Chansley would have expected to serve at least 35 months and 22 days of his 41-month sentence."
Watkins had argued only weeks ago that Chansley should be freed based on video publicized by Fox News host Tucker Carlson that showed him not breaking into the Senate, but actually being escorted there by security officers in the Capitol.
In fact, Watkins also admitted that "It was a decision which was part of an established protocol in place since well prior to the release of the videos" -- meaning the videos played no role whatsoever.
MRC Hypocritically Complains Again About Labeling Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center is having another labelingmeltdown. Bill D'Agostino whined in a March 24 post:
Television broadcast networks tend to slap a “far-right” label onto anything even remotely conservative, often referring to Republican members of Congress, fringe conspiracy theorists, and outright domestic terrorists with identical terminology for all three. Yet these same networks refuse even to acknowledge the existence of a “far-left,” — and in fact, since the 2022 midterms, they have not applied that label to any group or individual even a single time.
An MRC study found that between November 9, 2022 (the day after the 2022 midterm elections) and March 21, broadcast networks ABC, CBS, and NBC used such labels as “far-right,” “extreme right,” and “ultraconservative,” a total of 101 times on their flagship morning and evening shows, as well as their Sunday political talk shows. During that same period, analysts found only one instance in which a journalist used an equivalent “far-left” label.
Across all three broadcast networks, the totality of airtime the fringe left received since November was limited to that single vague reference.
Meanwhile, “far-right” and similar labels were applied to a very wide array of individuals. Republican members of Congress were by far the most heavily labeled group (38 times), followed by general references such as “the far right,” or “extreme rightwing Twitter users,” (19 times). There were 12 instances of labeling for the administration of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, 11 cases for the Oathkeepers, 10 cases for the radical German group that attempted a coup in late 2022, and five for the supporters of former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro. All others were labeled only once or twice.
But just as the MRC did with Benjamin Netanyahu's government in Israel and Republicans who opposed Kevin McCarthy as House speaker, D'Agostino made no attempt to dispute the accuracy of the"far-right" label -- as per MRC procedure, he's just mad that the label was reported at all. And, of course, this performative outrage is utterly hypocritical, since he and his co-workers love to promiscuously throw around the "far-left" label at pretty much anything it thinks isn't conservrtive enough. Here are the people and things the MRC has labeled as "far-left" in just the first four months of this year:
By contrast, when the MRC uses the term "far-right," it's usually in the context of complaining that others use it, not to put that label on people or groups. Of course, D'Agostino playedhypocritical whataboutism on that too:
There is no arguing that far-right extremists exist in the U.S. and abroad. Rather, what’s at issue here is the media’s inability to acknowledge extremism on the left. It seems that whenever they do bother to report on the misdeeds of far-left actors, they meticulously avoid ideological labels.
If the MRC can't apply "far-right" to the extent it uses "far-left," it has no standing to complain about how others use labels. This is why no legitimate media critic takes the MRC seriously -- they care about partisan politics, not journalism.
Bill Donohue Lies Again That Soros Was A 'Nazi Collaborator' Topic: CNSNews.com
Last year, we caught dishonest Catholic Bill Donohue spreading the malicious lie that George Soros was a Nazi collaborator. Well, he went there again in his April 10 CNSNews.com column, which began by complaining that Soros' critics were being called out for invoking anti-Semitic tropes in attacking him:
George Soros has been one of the most prominent philanthropists serving the radical left-wing agenda for decades. Everyone knows it, yet there is a coordinated effort of late to bail him out, saying his critics are “anti-Semites,” looking for a “boogeyman.” His allies are particularly miffed about reports that Soros is funding criminal-friendly district attorneys across the nation.
Here’s a recent sampling of efforts to brand Soros’ critics as anti-Semitic. In the last 19 days, the following news stories were written with that objective in mind.
Not one of these persons who made the charge that Soros’ critics are driven by anti-Semitism quoted even one person to make their case!
Donohue failed to link to any of the articles he complained about, nor did he disclose the context in which this was discussed.We can assume, however, that it involves the attempts by Donald Trump and right-wing activists to link Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg to Soros -- after all, the Media Reserach Center similarlywhined about this narrative being called out.
Indeed, Donohue went on to declare any district attorney who could be linked to Soros money to be "corrupt," adding: "He gave Alvin Bragg $1 million when he was running for DA in Manhattan in 2021." But that's not quite true; as we documented when the MRC complained it was called out for getting this wrong, Soros gave $1 million to the group Color of Change, which had pledged a few days earlier to spend that amount to help elect Bragg; it ultimately spent only half that amount, and the campaign itself raised much more than that pledge, though Bragg was far outspent (yet still won) by an opponent who was largely self-funded. Donohue crowed that he copied this from his new book; it looks like it will need to be reprinted to correct this error.
He went on to huff that "No doubt there are anti-Semites who have attacked Soros, but it is scurrilous to tar all his critics as bigots. Soros is guilty as charged." Then he spread that nasty lie again:
One final note. Soros knows a personal thing or two about anti-Semitism. As a young man he became a Nazi collaborator. In a “60 Minutes” interview, he admitted that he hung around as property was confiscated from his fellow Jews. In the interview with Steve Croft [sic] he said that he never regretted his participation in the process. When asked if this was difficult, Soros said, “Not, not at all. Not at all.” Stunned, Kroft said, “No feeling of guilt?” “No” came the reply. This was because, according to him, he was not the one actively doing it, but rather was more of a spectator.
As has beenrepeatedly documented, Soros was a teenager in Nazi-occupied Hungary when Soros' father arranged to have his son pose as the nephew of a Hungarian official whose job it was to inventory the property abandoned by Jews who fled the country that the Nazis appropriated, playing no other role beyond helper. As any reasonable person might expect, Soros has no regrets about doing what he needed to do to survive the Nazis.
Once again, Donohue is effectively declaring that he fervently wished that the Nazis has killed just one more Jew. Not a good look.
MRC Went Into Trump Defense Mode On Arraignment Day Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center did a lotof ranting about Donald Trump's impending (and then actual) indictment and thedistrictattorney who charged him. When the day of Trump's arraignment came on April 4, the ranting ramped up. Curtis Houck hit all the required talking points -- Bragg-bashing, Biden whataboutism -- in complaining about that a former president facing a criminal indictment is somehow consindered newsworthy:
Since Thursday evening, the media profession somehow found a way to even further embarrass itself by taking a steroids-induced trip back to 2015 and 2016 with wall-to-wall Trump coverage in light of his indictment by Soros-backed Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg on charges related to the infamous 2016 payments to Stormy Daniels.
As such, a litany of stories that have significant bearing on the country have been ignored and one story has been reporting that the Chinese spy balloon did, in fact, gather intelligence on some of our country’s most sensitive military installations. ABC and CBS have shown zero interest in highlighting this, ignoring it on their flagship Monday evening and Tuesday morning news shows.
Tim Graham whined that NPR was committing the offense of covering news, with an added fit of Hunter Biden Derangement Syndrome:
On Monday night's All Things Considered newscast, co-host Mary Louise Kelly covered the indictment of Trump as a serious conundrum for the media. She was pandering to the leftist audience, angered that Trump will probably get away with all this again, that he's just milking this indictment for fame and fortune and another Republican nomination for president. Kelly brought on NPR vice president and executive editor Terence Samuel to think out loud about how the coverage might disappoint the audience.
Samuel promised they would "flood the zone," as they say. "And what we have now is we have two reporters in the courtroom. We have two reporters outside the courtroom because the world is completely different now, and we will have to update that story as it's happening online in our newscast....It is constant and ongoing. We want to be authoritative. We want to be complete. And we're going to be relentless."
Now for conservative critics of NPR, Terence Samuel is infamous for proclaiming in 2020 that the Hunter Biden laptop was "not really" a story, a "pure distraction" that NPR shouldn't cover. They never wanted to be "complete" on that subject. None of that came up in this conversation, obviously.
When commentators on a couple of networks raised questions about the charges against Trump -- despite the fact that all the evidence has not been made public -- Kevin Tober spun: "You know the charges against former President Donald Trump by the corrupt Soros-backed prosecutor Alvin Bragg are in trouble when even ABC and NBC are skeptical about their legal standing. ... The case is in serious jeopardy if this is the way two of the three liberal broadcast networks are covering these charges against Trump." Tober returned later to defend Trump and inject the "Soros-backed" talking point:
During MSNBC’s special live coverage of former President Donald Trump’s speech where he gave his initial reaction to the Soros-backed Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charging him with 34 counts of falsifying business records, co-host Stephanie Ruhle had a diva-like tantrum over Trump daring to fundraise off the controversy. Ruhle should check her emails because this writer has received dozens of fundraising emails from Democrats since Trump’s indictment Tuesday.
Ruhle has no problem with being a hypocrite. Instead, she lashed out at Republicans for claiming this ordeal was good for Trump: “right-wing media has been saying scandal after scandal this is great for Trump. It is never great for Trump politically.”
“It's a win-in-one-place and one-place-only: fundraising,” Ruhle claimed. She then went into meltdown mode over how Trump has solicited donations:
No understanding the difference between a grift and fundraising for a presidential campaign. Ruhle cried that for Trump “this is always about the grift and fundraising.”
Why can't it be both? Tober didn't ask that question.
Call it their Super Bowl, the greatest day of their lives, or the pinnacle of their careers. Either way, CNN went wall-to-wall Tuesday with coverage of former President Trump’s arrest and arraignment on charges by far-left, Soros-backed Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg in relation to payments made to Stormy Daniels. and, as such, CNN’s coverage showed a network relapsing back to its Trump-centric days of 2015 and 2016 with imbecilic hot takes masquerading as expert analysis.
NewsBusters suffered through Tuesday afternoon so you didn’t have to and below represents ten moments (in chronological order) from the embarrassing display of CNN’s non-existent status as a news organization.
CNN is "non-existent" as a news organization? Doesn't that description more accurately apply to Fox News, which actually lied to its viewers about election fraud?
Ther MRC's coverage on April 5 started with a post from Mark Finkelstein cheering that "the former lead prosecutor of Robert Mueller's Russia-Russia-Russia investigation of Trump" raised questions about Trump's prosecution despite the fact that, again, not all of the evidence has been made public. Clay Waters complained that right-wing attacks on Bragg and his prosecution were called out, complete with 25-year-old whataboutism and an upgraded smeaer of Soros to an "international billionaire":
National Public Radio’s media reporter David Folkenflik, who has been on an anti-Fox News kick of late, went off on “right-wing media’s” “apocalyptic” coverage criticizing the legal case against Donald Trump and their attacks on Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg, who has brought charges against Trump involving payments to former porn star Stormy Daniels.
Earlier, Trump and his conservative defenders were baselessly accused on Friday’s PBS NewsHour of both racism (Bragg is black) and anti-Semitism (for accurately pointing out Bragg’s campaign for district attorney was funded by left-wing international billionaire George Soros).
Left out of these agitated takedowns were any sense of historical context – such as when media outlets like NPR and PBS went “apocalyptic” and “extreme” in defense of Democratic president Bill Clinton when he was supposedly persecuted by special counsel Kenneth Starr for lying under oath about his own hushing up of his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Go here for a taste of the way the press reacted to Starr’s attempt to follow the rule of law in pursuit of a president accused of sexual misconduct. It’s safe to say Alvin Bragg won’t be getting the Starr treatment.
The MRC continued to write up any little thing that could be considered to be pro-Trump:
Graham summed up the day's bias in his podcast (bolding his):
The media's Trump obsession overflowed on Arraignment Day in New York City. They loved analyzing Trump's grumpiness in photographs taken in the court room, but they didn't love the substance of the actual indictment once it was widely released. The legal analysts expressed concerns that Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg didn't explain how misdemeanors could be promoted into felony counts, and there could be problems with the statute of limitations.
NewsBusters Associate Editor Nick Fondacaro joins the show to discuss all the video tweets we put out to analyze the events. At first, analysts like CNN's Jamie Gangel were excited to note from photographs that Trump looks like "he's in custody. He's in their control. I think this is very striking." But then lawyers who hate Trump -- like his former appointee John Bolton -- announced on CNN "I'm extraordinarly distressed by this document...This is even weaker than I feared it would be."
It was especially funny when Rachel Maddow announced MSNBC would be running no live coverage of Trump's speech in Florida, because it's the usual routine of "lies" and "grievances" about his "perceived enemies" (like he has none). But then she says MSNBC is such a serious news network: "there's a cost to us as a news organization of knowingly broadcasting untrue things."
Newsmax Flip-Flops On Carlson, Stops Criticism To Woo Him And His Viewers Topic: Newsmax
After Russia invaded Ukraine last year, Newsmax repeatedly called out Fox News for not being as pro-Ukraine as it should have been -- and, in particular, host Tucker Carlson for his pro-Putin attitudes. That criticism largely faded away in recent months; a Feb. 27 column by Allan Ryskind criticized Carlson's stance on Russia and Ukraine, though he framed it around praise for him:
Where would conservatives be without Tucker Carlson?
Though clearly a man of the right, he takes on conventional political wisdom espoused by all sides. He's pro-family, pro-marriage, pro-God, a deadly enemy of the cultural left.
Every week he takes on the Leviathan, causing federal bureaucrats to quake. And he's outspoken against those who seem eager to involve us in useless foreign wars. It's hard to think of a crusade Tucker pursues that most conservatives don't endorse, or, at the very least, take seriously.
Still, many of his loyal fans aren't happy with how he has dealt with the Ukrainian issue. His opposition to sending American troops to "save Ukraine" is what the overwhelming majority of U.S. citizens believe. (And Ukraine's leaders assure us aren't needed.)
But Tucker frequently teams up with Fox News contributor Tulsi Gabbard, Hawaii's Democrat former House member, to verbally abuse any and all who think military or economic aid should be given to the Ukrainian resistance.
Tucker is surely right to fear that the U.S. may be involved in a war with Putin and Xi no matter what we do to confront them. But he has to ask himself this question honestly: Can any credible historian point to a single time in history that any nation that dismantled its military arsenal and abandoned its military alliances while two of its most deadly, brutal, and expansionary foes were on the march?
A March 8 article did note a text from Carlson released as part of the Dominion lawsuit stating that he "passionately" hated Donald Trump. The tide continued to turn, however, in a March 13 column by Deroy Murdock, who gushed that "My Fox News colleague Tucker Carlson last week refuted multiple lies that Democrats and their dinosaur-media bodyguards have trafficked since Jan. 6, 2021." That praise ignored the fact that the footage Carlson aired to manufacture that narrative was cherry-picked and misleading.
But when Carlson was fired from Fox News last month, Newsmax wanted you to forget it had ever critricized him at all. After an initial wire story on his departure as well as an unusually balanced article on the departure by Eric Mack, Newsmax took a two-prong approach: bashing Fox News for dumping their highest-rated host (with an eye toward luring those viewers away from Fox to Newsmax's TV operation) and touting what a great guy Carlson is (with an eye toward luring Carlson to be a host). The boss himself set the tone in an April 24 article:
Christopher Ruddy, CEO of Newsmax issued the following statement following Tucker Carlson's departure from Fox News:
"For a while Fox News has been moving to become establishment media and Tucker Carlson's removal is a big milestone in that effort," Newsmax CEO Christopher Ruddy said. "Millions of viewers who liked the old Fox News have made the switch to Newsmax and Tucker's departure will only fuel that trend."
Political author Dick Morris on Monday said that with Tucker Carlson out at Fox News, Newsmax is now the number one network for conservatives.
Speaking on Carlson's departure, Morris says, "The obvious fact is that Newsmax has won — has won."
"Newsmax is now the sole conservative voice in media," Morris told "American Agenda" during his appearance. "And Fox News can talk about that, but by firing Carlson, they have decidedly moved to the left and to the center."
"The other big win here," Morris says of Carlson's departure, "is Donald Trump because Newsmax covers all of Trump's rallies. Fox News did not cover any of them because [News Corp Owner Rupert] Murdoch hates Trump. Because when Trump was President and Murdoch was the media boss, Trump didn't let him run the country — didn't let him call the shots."
Numerous articles over the next couple days served up some combination of those two talking points:
And because Newsmax is effectively the Trump News Network, Donald Trump was allowed to comment too:
The ouster of Tucker Carlson at Fox News has left former President Donald Trump "shocked," but perhaps the libertarian just needs "free rein," Trump told Newsmax on Monday.
"Well, I'm shocked, I'm surprised," Trump told "Greg Kelly Reports" in an exclusive interview just hours after the news broke. "He's a very good person, a very good man, very talented, as you know, and he had very high ratings."
Mack surprisingly noted that Carlson had bashed Trump as released in the Dominion lawsuit filings:
Trump told Kelly he had seen Carlson come around after some reports of a distaste for the former president.
"But I think Tucker's been terrific; he's been, especially over the last year or so, he's been terrific to me," Trump said.
"Maybe he left because he wants to be given his free rein. He wants free rein maybe, but I was surprised by it."
In several messages revealed in the lawsuit, Carlson suggested he had distaste for Trump at the time, but feared the network was losing viewers among the former president's fans, particularly to Newsmax.
Newsmax very much knows on which side its extremist bread is buttered, and it isn't afraid to cater to those viewers.
WorldNetDaily eagerly swallowed Tucker Carlson's narrative of a peaceful Capitol riot based on cherry-picked video that he got from Kevin McCarthy, despite the fact that people who actually know about the riot pointed out the cherry-picked editing.When Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell pointed out Carlson's dishonest portrayal of riot events, Peter LaBarbera rushed to attack in a March 7 article:
Conservative reaction is now pouring in after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said it was a "mistake" for Fox News to allow Tucker Carlson to use the newly released Jan. 6 tapes to depict the events that day in a way contrary to the view of Capitol law enforcement.
"It was a mistake in my view for Fox News to depict this in a way that's completely at variance with what our chief law-enforcement official here at the Capitol thinks," McConnell said Tuesday.
McConnell's statement circulated widely on social media and was used by left-leaning media who have slavishly echoed the Democrats' "insurrection" narrative for more than two years to level their own attacks on Fox News and Carlson. Conservatives pushed back against the Kentucky senator and hailed Carlson for exposing the Democrats' J6 "insurrection" claim.
Missing in McConnell's statement was any mention of Carlson's key findings, especially that the newly exposed footage undercuts the Democrats' and media's mantra that Jan. 6 was a "deadly insurrection" inspired by Trump.
LaBarbera even defended one Republican senator caught running away from the riot he helped provoke:
Curiously, McConnell also failed to defend his fellow Republican colleague in the Senate, Josh Hawley of Missouri, by not mentioning Carlson's revelation that the Democrat-run J6 Committee had used its selective release of Capitol surveillance footage to make Hawley look like a coward.
As Carlson explained on his show Monday night, one of the J6 Committee hearings showed a clip of Hawley running out of the Capitol building, seemingly alone, thus making it appear as if Hawley was fleeing like a frightened chicken from the building. At the time, that potentially doctored clip actually drew derisive laughter from many attending the committee hearing, including reporters, as it purposely humiliated Hawley, one of the few GOP senators who supported Donald Trump's challenge to what Trump said was a "rigged" election.
However, the new footage aired by Carlson, thanks to House Speaker Kevin McCarthy opening up the full 41,000 hours of video footage, shows many legislators and their staff running out of the same Capitol exit, amidst the chaos, with Hawley actually one of the last people shown in the video clip to run out of the building.
In other words, even though Carlson's critics are accusing him of "cherry-picking" J6 footage to support his own, allegedly "conspiratorial, undemocratic" narrative, the popular Fox News anchor is actually exposing the cherry-picking done by the Democrats and the now-expired J6 Committee to sustain their overwrought "deadly insurrection" narrative.
LaBarbera omitted the fact that Hawley's fleeing was newsworthy and irrelevant to the "cheery-picking" accusation because he displayed a raised fist in a show of solidarity toward a crowd of Trump supporters shortly before the riot.
WND's columnists bought into Carlson's bogus narrative too, starting with editor Joseph Farah in his April 7 column:
That was the conclusion of Tucker Carlson's review of 40,000 hours of the so-called "insurrection" at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. It was a sham. A not-so-clever ruse. Are you surprised?
The media establishment, Nancy Pelosi, Liz Cheney, every Democrat in Congress, Big Tech – they all lied to the American people. It wasn't an "insurrection" after all.
Five cops were not killed; only Ashli Babbitt was murdered by a deranged Capitol policeman. Most of the "protesters" were peaceful, cameras revealed. They were taking pictures, mostly, as they were ushered into the building by the police.
Jacob Chansley, a Navy veteran and the man dubbed as the "QAnon Shaman," never posed a threat. He was escorted, instead, by three to nine policemen. He prayed for them, the tapes revealed, which should make you wonder why he's serving four years in jail now for his role in the kerfuffle.
One person who became a household name was Officer Brian Sicknick, whom the media alleged was "attacked" by the mob and for days falsely claimed was hit in the head and murdered by Trump supporters with a fire extinguisher. Yet Sicknick was seen on one of the newly released videos, after his supposed murder, walking normally while guiding Trump supporters out of the building as he wore a helmet. He later died of a reported stroke unrelated to Jan. 6 events.
As we've documented, prosecutors pointed out that the Chansley footage ignored that part of the initial breach of the Capitol, repeatedly confronted law enforcement and surrendered only after enough law enforcement arrived to take him down, and that officials agree that what happened to Sicknick during the riot led to his deadly stroke the next day. Also, the police officer who killed Babbitt was not "deranged" -- that would be Babbitt, a domestic terrorist who was part of a violent mob trying to crawl through a broken window inside the Capitol and reasonably posed a threat to law enforcement.
Laura Hollis used her March 9 column to criticize right-wing writer Andy McCarthy for seeking "a happy middle ground between the factions warring over Fox News host Tucker Carlson's access to (and coverage of) 41,000 hours of video footage taken on that day":
McCarthy's criticisms of Democrats are, in essence, "Tsk, tsk – see? We told you guys you should have had a bipartisan committee," and "Democrats' narrative about Jan. 6 has been a bit overwrought."
I enjoy reading McCarthy, respect his expertise and generally appreciate his analyses of legal issues. But he's missing the larger point here.
It's not merely that the "mythmaking" of J6 has been used as an excuse to smear half the country as "domestic terrorists," weaponize the Justice Department against irate parents at school board meetings, sic the FBI on pro-lifers praying at abortion clinics and create a new bogeyman – "white Christian nationalism" – as the greatest threat facing the republic.
It's that the J6 manipulation is just one of many instances of Democrats flat-out lying to the American people for political gain.
The point Andy McCarthy's NRO editorial misses is that the J6 hysteria is not merely unfortunate political hyperbole; it is part of an ongoing scheme to deceive the public and deflect attention away from the behavior of Democrats that legitimately threatens the health, stability and prosperity of our country and its people.
Tucker Carlson is unintimidated by those like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer who object to the release of the J6 video footage to the public, accusing them of spreading "panic" and "fear."
Jack Cashill used his March 15 column to suggest that the Capitol riot should be treated as a sort of indepenence day based on Carlson's cherry-picked footage:
On Jan. 10, 2021, I submitted an article to another publication titled "President Trump Takes a Hit for the Team." The article appeared on Jan. 12 of that year minus only the last sentence.
It read as follows, "If we the people refuse to apologize, refuse to back down, refuse to submit, January 6 may one day be celebrated as a mid-winter 4th of July."
I understood the publisher's prudence. At the time we all labored under the belief that Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick had been struck dead by a fire extinguisher-wielding "insurrectionist."
That, of course, proved to be a lie, one of many. As Tucker Carlson showed last week, the helmeted Sicknick was captured on video doing his job a half-hour or so after his alleged murder.
The Democrats excite themselves by comparing January 6 to Sept. 11, 2001, or even Dec. 7, 1941, but a more apt point of comparison might be July 14, 1789.
On that steamy day, Parisian rioters stormed the Bastille. Although they behaved far worse than the January 6 crowd – they actually killed people – the French subsequently made July 14 their national holiday.
America doesn't need another national holiday in January. What we do need, once the rot is cleared, is a day of truth and reconciliation. And January 6 is as good a day as any.
Given all the falsehoods and conspiracy theories he has promoted over the years, Cashill is the one who could stand to face a little truth and reconciliation.
NEW ARTICLE -- The MRC Flips Over Elon Musk, Part 9: New Year, Same Musk-Fluffing Topic: Media Research Center
As the volume of "Twitter files" dwindled, the Media Research Center had to find new ways to promote Elon Musk's ambitions and massage his ego. Read more >>
MRC Complains About Media Coverage of Trump Indictment Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center spent its time in anticipation of an indictment of Donald Trump by engaging in whataboutism diversions and trying to tie his prosecutor, district attorney Alvin Bragg, to George Soros. When Bragg's indictment of Trump finally came down on March 30, the MRC spent a lot of time whining that it was reported on. Alex Christy complained that jokes were told about it:
For the late night comedy show hosts and their audiences, the Thursday indictment of former President Trump was more of a chance to enjoy a cathartic experience than anything else. However, buried beneath their joy was the sense that they haven’t completely thought through the ramifications.
CBS’s Stephen Colbert could not contain his glee as he opened The Late Show, “Ladies and gentlemen today I'm feeling a little extra American. One reason, today is baseball's Opening Day! Here in New York—here in New York—here in New York it was 40 degrees, but I still ate ice cream out of a baseball helmet. Why? Oh, just a little something worth celebrating today because literally three minutes before I walked out on this stage here, the New York Times reported a New York grand jury voted to indict former President Donald J. Trump.”
Colbert was so happy that he broke his self-imposed embargo on mentioning Trump’s name. After over 30 seconds of cheering from the audience during which he did eat ice cream out of a baseball helmet, Colbert declared, “he was right, we're finally saying Merry Christmas again!”
Friday’s CBS Mornings featured a whopping 24 minutes and 53 seconds on the indictment of former President Trump by far-left, Soros-backed Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg and it included their latest nauseating interview with Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). Co-host and Democratic donor Gayle King steered much of the conversation with softballs on Trump and a plea for gun control with her co-hosts touching on banking and TikTok.
She later added she found it “Trump is calling for, in his words, death and destruction” along with “allies to rally behind him” and “show out.”
“Are you worried about violence in the streets,” she asked.
Co-host Nate Burleson chimed in to decry Trump using “dangerous rhetoric,” which gave King a shot to reemphasize her concern: “Yeah. It’s very – I'm very concerned about that.”
“It is dangerous,” Warren replied, “and violence is never the answer. This is part of the reason we have a court system so that we don't resolve these things in the streets.”
A forlorn King made one last plea on Trump: “Are you worried about it? Are you worried about it?”
Of course, Warren said she’s “always worr[ied] about violence.”
Houck didn't explain why Americans shouldn't be worried about a threat of violence from Trump, especially when he instigated an attempted insurrection.
With former President Trump being indicted there was bound to be some cable news historian who reached for an outlandish analogy while attempting to wax poetic on the news and Douglas Brinkley delivered on Friday’s CNN Newsroom, declaring Trump’s upcoming mugshot will be like the wanted poster for John Wilkes Booth.
Getting to Trump specifically, Brinkley claimed, “Now we're set up to see the biggest reality show that's actually real come to life and watching a the-- I can't even think of an artifact except maybe wanted John Wilkes Booth after the Lincoln assassination of a wanted poster or a mugshot that's going to be circulating around the world in the kind of way that this one of Donald Trump is.”
It says more about Brinkley and his fellow liberals that they would analogize the alleged falsification of business records with the assassination of a president. More to the point, New York doesn’t release mugshots, so those wanting that “artifact” should prepare to be disappointed.
Kathleen Krumhansl similarly groused that "While the Latino networks quickly buried Monday's deadly Nashville school shooting when it was learned that the assassin was a deranged transsexual, the prospect of a dream coming true in the shape of a Donald Trump mug shot was too much to ignore." As it turned out, the person who really wanted a Trump mugshot was Trump himself, whose own online store started selling a T-shirt with a fake mugshot on it.
Kevin Tober laughably attacked the hosts of "The View" as "immature and vindictive" when talking about Trump while, at the same time, immaturely and vindictively describing their audience as made up of "suburban liberal wine moms":
Ignorant legal commentary and gloating over Trump’s reported indictment was the theme Friday on ABC’s The View as the clucking hens who make up the cast made sure to let their audience know how immature and vindictive they were.
After setting their audience up to believe the coven was about to discuss the indictment of Trump, a soundbite of the jury in the Gwyneth Paltrow case was aired. That got a laugh from the suburban liberal wine moms in the audience.
“In other legal news,” co-host Joy Behar announced before gloating how “the twice impeached, one term, once indicted, but who's counting? Former President is reportedly facing more than 30 count them—criminal charges.”
Butting in once again to showcase her chronic hatred of the former President, Navarro said she wanted to “thank this special grand jury” because they are “regular New Yorkers” and “not people with a political agenda.”
Getting in another juvenile shot at Trump, she shouted that he “finally won a popular vote yesterday. The Grand Jury voted to indict him!”
Tober couldn't even settle on an animal insult for the "View" hosts, starting off by sneering they were "clucking hens" but at the end declaring they were "hyenas." Looks like Kevin is the real juvenile here.
Mark Finkelstein spent an April 1 post bashing "Morining Joe" for talking about it:
From fascism to the Forbidden Fruit, and more, Morning Joe had it all on Friday when it came to the indictment of Donald Trump.
Al Sharpton gloried in the fact that Alvin Bragg, "a black man whose great-grandfather had no rights," could indict the former most powerful person in the country. Obviously, if a black Republican indicted a Democrat, this wouldn't be celebrated as cosmic comeuppance on MSNBC.
In a country-club allusion, Meacham referred to mainstream Republicans like Gov. Glenn Youngkin of Virginia: "These are men's grill enablers, right? These are 19th hole enablers of a quest for power above all." Jon the Preacher suggested our American experiment could die because Republicans obsess over "tax rates above all."
Joe Scarborough, fulfilling his contractual obligation to work "fascism" into every conversation concerning Trump, then added "the men's grill enablers of Trumpism, a form of fascism. Hope those drinks on the 19th hole are enjoyable for 'em."
Morning Joe and the rest of the liberal media might revel in Trump's predicament. But our country is headed into uncharted waters from which no one might emerge a winner. At least Willie Geist was willing to suggest that it's possible that a judge will dismiss the whole thing.
Nicholas Fondacaro attacked "The View" again for talking about the Trump indictment in an April 3 post, asserting that co-host Whoopi Goldberg spread "disinformation" in suggesting that Trump was "lying to the FEC" by bragging about how much money he has raised in fund-raising done since the indictment. He didn't explain what, exactly, was "disinformation."
WND Pushed Bogus Narratives About Cherry-Picked Capitol Riot Video Topic: WorldNetDaily
A Feb. 23 WorldNetDaily article by Peter LaBarbera tried to rehash an old story about the Capitol riot:
Newly surfaced Jan. 6 video footage shows D.C. police firing stun grenades into a crowd of peaceful, pro-Trump protesters, raising the specter that police brutality and reckless, provocative actions by incompetent officers enraged the crowd and led people to rush past them into the Capitol.
Another video shows D.C. police accidentally showering themselves with tear gas, causing them to flee from protecting the Capitol. Conservative Charlie Kirk's Rumble page description sums it up this way: "Bodycam footage shows a cop shooting a tear gas grenade *into police lines* causing them to retreat."
The shocking videos, obtained by the group "Investigate J6," undermine the Democrats' and the media's dominant "insurrection" narrative by showing the crowd reacting to the police show of force, rather than engaging in any kind of planned or aggressive "assault" on the nation's legislative body. The group's GiveSendGo page states, "Investigate J6 is a coalition of forensic video investigators, attorneys, journalists and intelligence analysts. Your funds will help the investigations of many dedicated patriots and bring much needed truth to light."
The initial Investigate J6 tweet states: "What led to the storming of the US Capitol on January 6th? #FollowTheTimeline. POLICE BRUTALITY evidence thread."
"You know what happens when you launch multiple stun grenades into peaceful J6 crowds?" O'Handley says in his next tweet. "The same thing that happens when you rattle a dog's cage. This is why they don't want more J6 videos released. It exposes their setup VC: @InvestigateJ6"
But it's long been known that police used flash grenades and tear gas to disperse the agitated pro-Trump crowd outside the Capitol during the riot -- it was reported the day of the riot -- so there's no actual news here. Given that police correctly believed that the rioters were a possible threat, efforts to disperse them were justified, and no independent evicence was provided that the crowd was "peaceful."
This ended up being a prelude to House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy giving access to unreleased video from the riot to then-Fox News host Tucker Carlson. Bob Unruh was quick to hype the footage Carlson aired in a March 7 article:
There long have been reports that some of the "rioters" during the Jan. 6, 2021, events at the U.S. Capitol, in which there were some election protesters who did vandalism, were allowed into the building by security officers.
Now video showing exactly that has been revealed.
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy granted "Tucker Carlson Tonight" access to some 40,000 hours of security camera film from the Capitol – video that has been concealed by Democrats from the public for over two years – and it shows, Carlson explained, that "lawmakers and the media were 'lying' about the events that took place on Jan. 6," Fox News documented.
"Capitol police officers were seen escorting Jacob Chansley, a Navy veteran widely referred to in the liberal media as the 'QAnon Shaman,' around the building without incident. Carlson reported that officers were seen showing Chansley around, even trying to open locked doors for him. At one point, at least nine police officers were seen in close proximity to Chansley, and none of them slowed him down, as Carlson noted," the report said.
The Daily Mail confirmed, in fact, in footage screened on his show, Chansley was apparently seen being escorted into the Senate by Capitol police officers.
In fact, that video was taken out of context. Prosecutors responded that the "video did not show Chansley, who was sentenced to 41 months in prison for his actions on January 6, facing off with officers for half an hour outside the Senate chamber or when Chansley refused to be escorted out of the Capitol by an officer and only left after being forcibly removed," adding: "Chansley was not some passive, chaperoned observer of events for the roughly hour that he was unlawfully inside the Capitol. ... He was part of the initial breach of the building; he confronted law enforcement for roughly 30 minutes just outside the Senate Chamber; he gained access to the gallery of the Senate along with other members of the mob (obviously, precluding any Senate business from occurring); and he gained access to and later left the Senate floor only after law enforcement was able to arrive en masse to remove him.”
The Capitol Police also pointed out that the video Carlson showed "conveniently cherry-picked from the calmer moments of our 41,000 hours of video. ... The commentary fails to provide context about the chaos and violence that happened before or during these less tense moments."
Carlson also reported Democrats used Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick’s death for their political agenda.
The media alleged Sicknick was "attacked" by the mob and falsely claimed was hit in the head with a fire extinguisher.
"Sicknick was seen walking normally while guiding Trump supporters out of the building as he wore a helmet, which appears to contradict the media narrative that he died of a head injury," the report said.
In reality, Capitol Police Chief Thomas Manger attacked Carlson over his cherry-picked footage of Sicknick, as did Sicknick's family:
"Finally, the most disturbing accusation from last night was that our late friend and colleague Brian Sicknick’s death had nothing to do with his heroic actions on January 6. The Department maintains, as anyone with common sense would, that had Officer Sicknick not fought valiantly for hours on the day he was violently assaulted, Officer Sicknick would not have died the next day."
Sicknick’s mother and two brothers responded to Carlson's characterization of the officer's death by saying Carlson's "'truth' is to pick and choose footage that supports his delusional views that the Jan 6th Insurrection was peaceful."
But pushing right-wing narratives is more importantto Unruh than telling the truth, so these rebuttals went ignored. Interestingly, Fox News itself largely ignored Carlson's videos, suggesting that even its highly compromised "news" operation knew this was a nothingburger and it was just red meat for far-right, pro-Trump partisans -- like WND.
Newsmax Spins To Insist That Its Dominion Lawsuit Is Different From Fox News' Lawsuit Topic: Newsmax
Newsmax's coverage of Dominon Voting Systems' lawsuit against Fox News over claims that it knowingly broadcast lies about election fraud after the 2020 election was largely subdued -- perhaps not surprising given that Dominion is also suing Newsmax for the same thing. It ran the occasional story on revelations found in the lawsuit, and it even tried to defend Fox News by noting a claim that Dominion officials were invited on Fox News but refused.
When Fox News settled with Dominion for a whopping $787.5 million, coverage was muted on its website, largely limited to a single wire story on the settlement. But given that, it also had to do some damage control. Thus, an April 19 article by Marisa Herman declared that "Dominion Voting Systems still has a pending lawsuit against Newsmax, but the media outlet says there are different facts in its case that will enable it to prevail in court." Herman then cited how MSNBC's Joe Scarborough noted Newsmax made the occasional attempt to swat down election fraud claims during an appearance with New York Times media critic Jim Rutenberg:
Rutenberg told Scarborough: "I don't see how Newsmax can get through this case [the] way that [they] just did. Look at the resources Rupert Murdoch has . . . they don't have the money to settle like the way Rupert Murdoch did."
But Scarborough quickly noted major differences between Fox's and Newsmax's coverage.
Scarborough recounted: "We had that moment when you had an anchor, when Mike Lindell, Mr. Pillow, came on and started lying. The anchor literally got out of his chair, and basically in the words of Eric Cartman, basically said, 'Screw yourself, I'm going home.' And he got up and walked off the set."
Scarborough asked Rutenberg, "Didn't that show that Newsmax, at least, tried to move beyond and made their apologies and tried to mitigate any damages?"
Rutenberg agreed: "That was certainly a moment."
Scarborough's story referenced a Feb. 2, 2021, appearance by Mike Lindell and his exchange with Newsmax anchor Bob Sellers.
That, of course, was more than three months after the election, long after Newsmax had promoted attacks on Dominion and fellow voting-tech company Smartmatic, which we've documnented.
Herman then recited her employer's legal defense against Dominion, which it portrayed as different from the situation Fox News was in:
After Fox's settlement was announced Tuesday, Newsmax released another statement:
Newsmax believes that the facts at issue in Dominion's case against it are materially different from those that may have driven Fox to settle, and no conclusion about Newsmax should be drawn from that settlement. Newsmax stands by its coverage and analysis of the 2020 election and will continue to vigorously defend against the claim.
Dominion sued Newsmax in Delaware state court in August 2021, and the case is ongoing.
Newsmax, in its court filings, has stated that:
It reported fairly and accurately on the public statements made by President Trump, his attorneys, and surrogates.
Newsmax reported on both television and online claims by multiple officials and experts that the election was not "stolen" or "rigged."
Newsmax published online at least a dozen articles sharing Dominion's response to Trump campaign claims. Those headlines appeared on Newsmax TV.
On Dec. 19, 2020, Newsmax published to its website a statement, "Facts About Dominion, Smartmatic You Should Know," which read, in part, "No evidence has been offered that Dominion or Smartmatic used software or reprogrammed software that manipulated votes in the 2020 election."
Newsmax shared its statement over the course of months during segments related and unrelated to the 2020 election.
It should be noted that Fox News has never made a statement, even after its settlement, as strong and specific as Newsmax's statement of Dec. 19, 2020.
It should also be noted that Newsmax made that Dec. 19 stdatement only after Smartmatic sent Newsmax a legal notice demanding a retraction.
Herman continued to push her employer's (or, more to the point, her employer's lawyers') defense again Dominion:
Dominion has cited more than 3,600 communications it purportedly sent to reporters and producers throughout the Fox News organization correcting allegations and asking it to clarify its reporting, which were largely ignored.
Meanwhile Dominion purports to have sent a handful of communications to a single Newsmax employee — which they have not produced to date.
Newsmax acted promptly in clarifying its reporting and attempted early on to have Dominion representatives on the network, Newsmax has stated.
"Newsmax believes that it acted well within the First Amendment to provide Americans with facts and opinions that helped them make an informed opinion about the 2020 election results," Christopher Ruddy, Newsmax CEO, said.
Ruddy noted that the first mention on Newsmax of an allegation about Dominion by Trump attorney Sidney Powell was on Nov. 16, 2020. In the ensuing weeks she and others within the Trump campaign promised to reveal evidence of software manipulation.
When that evidence failed to appear, Newsmax, in a reasonable time, noted that failure.
"Anyone who looks at this fairly, including jurors, will conclude we acted reasonably," Ruddy said.
Not only did Herman offer no supporting evidence to prove this defense, she also didn't give Dominion a chance to respond to the claims. She also didn't mention that Newsmax reached an out-of-court settlement with Dominion executive Eric Coomer, which included retracting defamatory claims it made about him.
Newsmax followed this with an attempt to capitalize on the settlement in an anonymously written April 19 article touting how "A recent study of major American media by the respected Economist magazine found that Newsmax rates among the top cable networks in public trust" -- though the numbers show Newsmax still running far behind CNN, Fox News and MSNBC. Still, it quoted Newsmax CEO Christopher Ruddy insisting that ""The Economist/YouGov findings show a large and increasing number of Americans trust Newsmax's 'real news' — a significant accomplishment for a relatively new network."