MRC Dishonestly Cries 'Election Interference!' When RFK Jr.'s Vaccine Lies Are Called Out Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center loves Robert Kennedy Jr. because he fits into their right-wing victimhood narrative and because he could possibly hurt Joe Biden's re-election chances -- not because it actually wants him to win. LUis Cornelio kept up the victimhood narrative in a June 19 post:
In yet another example of election interference, the leftist media are once again attempting a phony plot to ban The Joe Rogan Experience podcast from Spotify.
Joe Rogan, one of the nation's most popular pro-free speech podcasters, triggered a wave of leftist outrage after an interview with Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The pair discussed several topics, including the potential negative consequences of COVID-19 vaccines. But leftist outlets Vice and The Verge painted the interview as spewing so-called vaccine misinformation and criticized Spotify for airing Rogan’s highly-acclaimed podcast.
Vice published a news article headlined, “Spotify Has Stopped Even Sort of Trying to Stem Joe Rogan’s Vaccine Misinformation.” In the article, Vice accused Spotify of allowing an “orgy of unchecked vaccine misinformation.” The Verge followed suit, dubiously claiming that Spotify has done “nothing” to prevent Rogan from peddling what it claimed to be alleged “vaccine misinformation.”
“The leftist media is at it again,” said MRC Free Speech America Director Michael Morris. “It’s not enough that Big Tech and Big Media silenced Americans during the pandemic in the lead up to and after the 2020 presidential election. Now the leftist media is attempting to silence a Democratic presidential candidate for daring to question the COVID-19 orthodoxy. Whether you agree or disagree with Joe Rogan or RFK Jr., the answer to bad speech is not censorship; it’s more speech.”
But if you're spouting dangerous misinformation about important medical issues, "free speech" isn't the issue, and Cornelio and Morris are dishonestly insisting that lies and misinformation should never be countered -- and that there is no objective definition of misinformation, given its liberal use of qualifiers as "so-called" and "alleged" -- as well as pretending that Kennedy has never been proven to have been a spreader of lies and misinformation. Also note that Cornelio and Morris make no effort to prove anything Kennedy said to be correct or to prove anything Vice and The Verge said to be false.
Cornelio then bought into the manufactured controversy that sprung from this appearance:
Dr. Peter Hotez, one of the nation’s leading pro-vaccine advocates, tweeted Vice’s article and complained that Spotify did not censor Rogan. Hotez wrote in a tweet: “[J]ust awful. And from all the online attacks I’m receiving after this absurd podcast, it’s clear many actually believe this nonsense.”
But Dr. Hotez’s support of leftist Vice’s and The Verge’s tantrums did not appear to go as planned. Rogan offered $100,000 if Dr. Hotez debated RFK Jr. on vaccines. “Peter, if you claim what RFKjr is saying is ‘misinformation’ I am offering you $100,000.00 to the charity of your choice if you’re willing to debate him on my show with no time limit,” Rogan said in a now-viral tweet on Saturday.
Rogan’s offer was supported by other Twitter personalities who pledged to donate more than $2.6 million to charity if the highly controversial doctor agreed to debate RFK Jr. Valuetainment Founder Patrick Bet-David and podcast host Tim Pool were among those who pledged to donate $100,000 to a charity of Hotez’s choice.
Rather than debating his point, Dr. Hotez took to MSNBC’S Mehdi Hasan Show to complain about the so-called misinformation. During the interview, leftist host Mehdi Hasan whined about Rogan’s offer, claiming, “I don’t know if you’d agree to debate or not. My advice is not to, and people might find that surprising because I wrote a book about debate, but I just think there is a time and a place for a debate.”
Hasan, in the spirit of Vice and The Verge, compared those who oppose vaccine mandates to Holocaust deniers, adding, “I don’t think a historian of World War II should debate a Holocaust denier. [Indiscernible.] That’s … that’s my analogy here. Like, I don’t think these debates between experts and cranks do anything other than elevate the cranks.”
Cornelio didn't explain how Vice and The Verge pointing out Kennedy's history of spreading medical misinformation makes the "leftist."He also doesn't seem to understand that scientific facts are adjudicated by a public debate; they are proven or disproven by research. Also, there's no evidence Kennedy would be an honest debater.
Intern Bethany Kawalec complained that Kennedy's misinformation was held to account elsewhere in a June 20 post:
No strangers to controversy, Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and podcaster Dr. Jordan Peterson again face the blast of YouTube’s ire.
YouTube once again meddled in the 2024 election when it removed yet another interview of presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (D) Saturday. In an interview with world-renowned psychologist Peterson, the pair discussed a range of topics including Kennedy’s presidential campaign, vaccines and the alleged dominance of pharmaceutical companies. YouTube told MRC Free Speech America in a statement that it "removed a video from the Jordan Peterson channel for violating YouTube’s general vaccine misinformation policy, which prohibits content that alleges that vaccines cause chronic side effects, outside of rare side effects that are recognized by health authorities."
It appears that YouTube may have censored the interview due to Kennedy’s comments on a since retracted Rolling Stone article in which he wrote about “the links between autism and vaccines.”
[...]
Peterson, whose account was directly affected by the censorship, was having none of it. “Now @YouTube has taken upon itself to actively interfere with a presidential election campaign @RobertKennedyJr,” Peterson tweeted.
Kennedy, however, used the censorship to start a discussion on Twitter, a platform that owner Elon Musk has said should promote free speech. “What do you think ... Should social media platforms censor presidential candidates?” Kennedy asked. “My conversation with @JordanBPeterson was deleted by @YouTube. Luckily you can watch it here on @Twitter (thank you @elonmusk). #Kennedy24.” Kennedy also posted the full video of the interview.
This attack on free speech and America’s electoral process is just the most recent battle in a barrage of YouTube censorship.
Kawalec is being dishonest about the vaccine-autism link, suggesting it dates back to a 2005 Rolling Stone article and ignoring that Kennedy has continued to promote the false link ever since.And like Cornelio, Kawalec refuses to acknowledge that Kennedy's medical misinformation has been repeatedly discredited. She also failed to note that Peterson is a right-wing darling or explain why she and Peterson care so much about a Democratic candidate.
Both Cornelio and Kawalec showed the dishonest why the MRC plans to approach the 2024 presidential election: by framing any attempt to fact-check a Republican candidate (or one convenient to Republican narratives like Kennedy) as "election interference." It doesn't matter if the candidate is lying through his (or her) teeth -- it's wrong to point that out. Expect to see a lot more of this highly dishonest talking point over the next year and a half.
Hirsen's Split On Hollywood Strikes: AI An Issue, But He Hopes They Make Hollywood More Right-Wing Topic: Newsmax
James Hirsen loves to write about about how much he hates the entertainment industry for not being right-wing enough, so it's unsurprising that he's hoping the strikes by writers and actors will push Hollywood ideology to the right, as he expressed in his July 18 Newsmax column:
Like every other aspect of our lives, things presently appear to be out of whack.
The brand of Hollywood itself is in tatters, in large part because of the cultural and political agendas that permeate every nook and cranny of the town.
What has particularly outraged the public, though, are the productions that have been coming from major studios, chock-full of vile and inappropriate imagery, content, and messaging aimed straight at our kids and teens.
Could the Hollywood shutdown created by the two entertainment unions be a blessing in disguise?
A lot of consumers of entertainment fare are viewing it this way, as if maybe a wrench in the works was exactly what was needed to stop the madness.
Note that Hirsen is not opposed to political agendas in the media -- he just wants it to be his political agenda.
On the other hand, Hirsen does seem sympathetic elsewhere in the column to one of the key issues that led to the strikes: the use of artificial intelligence. He noted the issue in his June 6 column, and he railed against AI-generated music in his June 28 column, though as a musician he has a personal interest in that.
Hirsen spent his Aug. 1 column also raising questions about AIwhile also cheering the strikes are"largely unseen":
Almost unnoticeably, the Hollywood strike drags on.
That's a problem for the members of the Writers Guild of America (WGA) and the Screen Actors Guild (SAG-AFTRA). Their plight is largely unseen.
Yes, the picket lines continue to be manned and the press conferences rage on.
But something very different is going on behind the scenes, and that "something," may not bode well for human actors.
The current strikes were initially prompted by the usual compensation-related concerns.
However, this time the central issue revolves around the role that Artificial Intelligence (AI) is going to play in the future creation, production, and marketing of entertainment content.
In terms of the negotiations between labor and management, the situation is truly unprecedented, due to that technological elephant in the room.
And, being Hirsen, he tried to tie the AI issue into his culture war:
From ancient past to present day, new inventions have historically caused labor displacement.
Again, though, something very different is going on.
And it probably has to do with the philosophical, political, societal, cultural, and ethical transformations that are occurring simultaneously in our country and globally.
The Hollywood strikes are likely to last a long time and may not bring a satisfactory outcome to the unions’ memberships.
So goes Hollywood, so goes the world?
Hirsen seems OK with whatever happens with the AI issue as long as it makes Hollywood more right-wing.
WND Promotes Sob Story Portraying Capitol Rioters As Victims Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily lovestoportray Capitol rioters as victims just because they're being held accountable for their behavior. It took the lazy way out for one attempt, republishing an pathos-laden July 16 article by the notoriously unreliable Gateway Pundit written by onetime WND reporter Alicia Powe:
J6 defendants Casey Cusick, his elderly father James Cusick, and David Lesperance, a family friend who is also elderly, are facing up to three years in prison for walking into the Capitol building on January 6 for nine minutes to use the bathroom.
When they entered the Capitol building, a cop told them how to get to the bathroom while other surrounding law enforcement officials waved the massive crowd of peaceful demonstrators into the building as lawmakers certified the stolen 2020 election results.
[...]
Casey, a father of three, James, a 74-year-old pastor and purple heart recipient and David, a 70-year old grandfather, are charged with four federal felonies for stopping to use the bathroom in the Capitol building, including Knowingly Entering or Remaining in any Restricted Building or Grounds Without Lawful Authority, Disorderly or Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building, and Violent Entry and Disorderly Conduct on Capitol Grounds, according to the Department of Justice.
To everyday Americans, the government’s charges against Casey, James and David are bogus, absurd and preposterous. But the litigation will not be an open and shut case.
The odds are stacked against J6 defendants on trial in the District of Columbia, where the pool of potential jurors has a 92 percent rate of voting for Joe Biden in the District of Columbia. District federal judges have almost resoundingly sided with the government against so-called insurrectionists, resulting in an overwhelming, unprecedently high conviction rate for J6 defendants.
That two of the defendants are "elderly" is irrelevant to the case, and it's something Powe apparently added to up the perceived victimhood quotient.While the Cusicks and Lesperance appear to have not to have committed any violence, ther eis much evidence that they were inside the Capitol when they weren't supposed to be. Powe also neglected to mention that, as a real journalism organization did, that the Cusicks' church "presented a blend of Christian theology and patriotism to its audience," but appears to be currently inactive.
Powe also complained that "The Justice Department’s U.S. Attorney’s offices have secured a 99.8% conviction rate on at least one charge in each case, including half through guilty pleas," but didn't mention that this is in no small part due the fact that many of the defendants documented their behavior and posted it on social media, and there was plenty of other video available to document what people did. Indeed, the charging document for the Cusicks and Lesperance point out that CCTV inside the Capitol and Capitol Police body cameras captured them, and geolocation data from Lesperance's phone placed him inside the Capitol; photos taken by Lesperance show the Cusicks (which Lesperance tried to delete but were recovered from his iCloud account).
Powe went on to state that "When Casey, James and John left Washington, DC, they had no inclination that they had committed any crime on January 6" -- never mind the fact that it should have been obvious that entering a restricted public building as part of a mob was a crime.
Powe also hyped claims of innocence by thte trio's lawyer, John Pierce:
Despite the tainted jury pool and corrupt judges, Pierce is confident the Cusicks and Lesperance will be acquitted.
“This is by far, might be the best chance anybody has to get a full-on jury verdict acquittal of all charges because the facts are probably the best of any facts that we have in the case,” he said. “These defendants are pretty much the most credible and sympathetic defendants in any case. Our plan is to win this — I mean, every defendant, every charge, not guilty.”
In fact, by the time WND published this story, the Cusicks and Lesperance had been found guilty on all charges, and sentencing was set for October. WND didn't see fit to report this development to its readers.
NEW ARTICLE -- The MRC Flips Over Elon Musk, Part 13: Burying Bad News Topic: Media Research Center
As loyal Musk shills, The Media Research Center didn't want to talk about how his dismantling of Twitter's blue-check system resulted in chaos, or how "Twitter files" writer Matt Taibbi acrimoniously split with Musk. Read more >>
MRC's DeSantis Defense Brigade Watch, Casey DeSantis Edition Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has spent the past few decades heaping attacks and scorn on Hillary Clinton, so it's more than a little hypocritical for it to suddenly get the vapors over the spouse of a Republican presidential candidate getting what might be called the Hillary treatment. Tim Graham called up the DeSantis Defense Brigade in a May 21 post:
Everyone should remember upfront before the Republican primaries really begin that Politico is a Democrat outlet. Look no further than Michael Kruse's nasty piece on "The Casey DeSantis Problem." Just read this and think of Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama, and know how much liberals would freak out:
She is and always has been by far his most important adviser, they say, because she is hesitant to cede that space to nearly anybody else. The DeSantis inner circle is too small and remains so, they say, not only because he constitutionally doesn’t trust people but because she doesn’t either.
Especially forthright are the people who are granted anonymity on account of their fear of retribution given their power — not just his but hers. “She’s the power behind the throne,” a Republican lobbyist told me. “The tip of the spear,” said a Republican consultant.
This is one of the most irresponsible uses of anonymous sources, just to make catty comments with no idea of the vicious anonymous source's motivations. Then Kruse turned to Trump stone-throwers:
“Have you ever noticed,” Roger Stone, the notorious political mischief-maker who is both a DeSantis antagonist and a many-decades-long Trump loyalist, remarked in a Telegram post last fall, “how much Ron DeSantis’ wife Casey is like Lady Macbeth?” — an agent, in other words, of her husband’s undoing.
As reporters like Fox's oseph Wulfsohnreminded, just last year Politico derided "The return of the Lady Macbeth trope" during the 2022 midterms when it was used against First Lady Jill Biden, Hillary Clinton, and Gisele Fetterman.
We don't recall Graham complaining about those attacks -- in fact, Graham and the rest of the MRC appear to have a case of Jill BidenDerangement Syndrome.Graham went on to tout how "Conservatives slammed the piece on Twitter," continuing to be oblivious to the hypocrisy.
When another piece critical of Casey DeSantis appeared, it was Curtis Houck to go into defense moce in a June 5 post:
Daily Beast executive editor Katie Baker took to her supposedly serious journalistic outfit Sunday with a Mean Girls hit piece on Florida First Lady Casey DeSantis that bordered on infantile in its imbecilic language and proof that, if the person at the top feels this way, it’s a farce for the liberal media to view them as a sober purveyor of real journalism.
Baker’s piece consisted of throwing a conniption over Mrs. DeSantis’s decision to wear “a ghastly black leather jacket” — with an alligator and the phrase “Where Woke Goes to Die” on the back — to Senator Joni Ernst’s (R-IA) Roast and Ride on Saturday as something you’d find in “the racks of a Red State big-bin store where it would be retailing for $24.99.”
Baker argued it was snugly tied into her husband Ron’s 2024 presidential campaign: “Crude. Grasping. Saying the ugly part out loud.”
She added that DeSantis was “even more explicit [than Trump] about who he intends to target” (i.e. minorities, in the fictitious world of liberals) with Florida being where not only “woke go[es] to [die],” but “a lot of other people die as well.”
Not having to fear fact-checkers, Baker provided no evidence other than the liberal media’s talking point (echoed by the Trump campaign) that “Florida under DeSantis has had one of the highest COVID death rates in the nation”.
Houck couldn't be bothered to a fact-check either, so we will. Wait, we already did: Florida's COVID death rate is the 18th highest in the country. And, of course, the MRC has no problem going all Mean Girls on women it hates for being insufficiently right-wing, like Alyssa Farah Griffin.
Houck went on to whine that Baker "needs to go outside and touch some grass instead of whine about how Republican women use fashion “to stick it to political enemies” and “a bored, nihilistic shrug,” concluding:
Baker’s puerile bile (dressed up as a supposedly edgy takedown) ended with her lament claiming Mrs. DeSantis’s jacket proved “she is cheering on a spouse who gets his kicks off targeting his fellow Americans,” “down with his message of division and dehumanization,”and “ready for far more power.”
All the while, Baker seethes, the DeSantis are “seething with hate.”
Houck might have a compelling argument if he and his MRC co-workers didn't have a record of doing to women they don't like what he accuses Baker of doing.
Alex Christy spent a July 7 post complaining that Casey DeSantis got fact-checked:
CNN Tonight host Alisyn Camerota tried and failed to fact-check an ad featuring Casey DeSantis where she touted her husband Ron’s record of banning “child mutilation.” As Camerota tells it, DeSantis’s team admits they have no proof of such events ever happening, but that is not true.
[...]
After the clip, Camerota singled out one issue in particular. Addressing The Atlantic’s James Surowiecki, she claimed, “Okay. James? Child mutilation, illegal? It's illegal everywhere, by the way. I mean, obviously, they're referring to, you know, reassignment surgery, but that, it was fact checked by PolitiFact that actually, the governor's office could not provide PolitiFact any examples of this happening to a child.”
The PolitiFact article in question came out in August 2022. In that article, author Yacob Reyes wrote, “The governor's office sent PolitiFact two examples of people who received transition-related surgeries in their mid to late teenage years — one at 15 and one at 17.”
However, to justify a “mostly false,” rating Reyes got hyperliteral, “DeSantis' Florida Department of Health differentiates between children (under 10) and adolescents (10-18).”
By speaking of children, Casey DeSantis was clearly using “children” as a synonym for “minors” and Reyes notes that such operations do exist:
When one commentator pointed out that such gender-reassignment surgeries are rate, Christy huffed that the post "has an agenda to push, but even if that is accurate, 'not common' is not 'never.'" Talk about being hyperliteral.
Mark Finkelstein took on more criticism of Casey DeSantis the next day:
This could be the ugliest liberal-media attack on a candidate's wife in recent memory. On Jonathan Capehart's MSNBC show on Saturday two guests competed to see which one could smear the wife of a Republican candidate with the ugliest epithet.
The two contestants in the mudslinging match were Tara Setmayer of the disgraced Lincoln Project, and ex-Republican David Jolly. Their target was Casey DeSantis, wife of Ron.
Jolly described Casey as "America's Karen." That led a hooting Capehart to tell Setmayer,"Tara, I think David's beaten you in terms of taking my breath away during a segment."Capehart virtually congratulated Jolly on his insult, saying, "'America's Karen:' David Jolly, you went for it!"
But Setmayer was not to be bested in the slander stakes. She promptly riposted, seeking to demonstrate that she could be even nastier than Jolly: "Well, I called her a Serena Waterford wannabe."
Waterford is the character from The Handmaid's Tale who has been described, in a website about screen villains, as "the cruel, fanatically religious wife of Fred Waterford, the dictator of Gilead."
[...]
Try to imagine how the MSNBC regulars would get the vapors if you called Jill Biden or Kamala Harris or Michelle Obama "America's Karen."
Finkelstein might want to look through the MRC archives to see exactly how it treated those women before he goes any farther with that defense.
WND Tries To Condense Election Conspiracy Theories Into A Bumper Sticker Topic: WorldNetDaily
Bumper stickers really aren't much of a thing these days, and it's telling of of just how out of step WorldNetDaily is with reality that it seems to think it is. Joseph Farah spent his June 30 column touting how WND condensed election-fraud conspiracy theories into a bumper sticker, rehashing them all in the process in his June 30 column:
It's the hottest bumper sticker on the planet! And you can get your very own – starting today – from WND exclusively. We think it says it all.
"Thou Shalt Not Steal Elections."
We're calling the bluff on "Election Integrity!" Here, in a nutshell, is what we know:
Joe Biden didn't get 81 million "votes" in the 2020 election. No way! Impossible! He couldn't have received the biggest number of "votes" in American electoral history. It's a sick joke. Donald Trump got the most votes of any sitting American president in history – at least 74 million, probably far more. We'll probably never know for sure.
We all saw "2000 Mules," probably the most heavily censored film of all time.
We all know about Hunter Biden's "laptop from hell," the pre-election suppression of which constituted the worst case of election fraud ever. Fifty-one former "intelligence agents" claimed it was "Russian disinformation." Remember?
In 2020, Joe Biden didn't even show up. He spent the campaign is his basement.
Right now, the hottest song on the charts in the nation featuring Kari Lake commemorates the 2020 election farce.
And we think we've coined the absolute hottest bumper sticker.
A few years ago, we realized that our elections were being stolen. When we tried to alert the nation to the horror of it, the government came after us and accused us of lying. Then they accused Trump supporters of formulating an "insurrection." They started arresting people, so far about 2,000. They locked many up in solitary confinement – some for years.
It was never really an "insurrection," however. It was a "Fed-surrection." And the nightmare continues today.
Now there's a way for everyone to protest this atrocity – with dignity.
You can get the perfect bumper sticker for our time – which expresses the undeniable truth, commemorates the reality we all lived through and will never forget, and boldly points the only way forward.
Of course, "2000 Mules" has been roundly discredited, and the only person who's on record trying to steal an election is Donald Trump. Also, claiming to be "the hottest bumper sticker on the planet" is a meaningless boast when few poeple care about bumper stickers (and he offers no metrics to back up his boast). And there is no such thing as dignity when you're promoting discredited conspracy theories. Speaking of lack of dignity, Farah continued by defending Trump:
Even as we speak today, the Deep State is persecuting President Donald J. Trump. He's been indicted in two different jurisdictions with more reportedly coming. The Justice Department – or Injustice Department under Merrick Garland – wants to lock him up for 400 years under the charges, a simple paper chase over "classified documents," papers that only the president could declassify.
America has never encountered anything like this, and it's never before suffered a catastrophe like the Joe Biden administration.
They are trying to bury Trump with phony charges – just as they spent four years trying to destroy him while he was our president: impeaching him twice, spying on his campaign, lying about him for spreading "Russian disinformation," etc., etc., etc.
This, too, is nothing but "election interference" of the worst kind. Every waking hour they commit election interference against the Trump campaign, but he just gets stronger and stronger. Can he beat Joe Biden in another campaign? Yes, he can. That's why the Democrats are freaking out.
And it wouldn't be complete without a sales pitch: "You can get one "Thou Shalt Not Steal Elections" bumper sticker for $5.95, two for $10.95, five for $25 or 10 for $49." Farah concluded by stating, "We answer to a Higher Authority." Never mind, of course, that he and WND repeatedly violate that Higher Authority's admonition about bearing false witness.
An anonymously written July 4 article promoted the bumper sticker again while peddling more election-fraud conspiracytheories:
The theft of elections in America by Democrats has a long history.
In fact, WND reported two decades ago how a lawyer who worked for Democrats described his history of stealing elections that dated back two MORE decades.
[...]
Whether it was "stealing" or not during the 2020 election can be left to semantics.
But the facts are that Mark Zuckerberg handed out some $400-plus million like candy to local elections officials who often used it to recruit voters specifically from Democrat districts.
Further, the FBI influenced the election by telling media organizations – falsely – that the details about the Biden family schemes and scandals found on Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop likely were Russian disinformation.
It knew at the time the details were accurate and the schemes were real.
But its campaign against the truth convinced media outlets to suppress that information, depriving American voters of key information about one candidate.
A Media Research Center poll after the election found that many Democrats would have dropped their support for Joe Biden had they known of his actual involvement in Hunter Biden's various operations. And Joe Biden likely would have lost the election.
As we documented, those MRC polls were bought from Trump's own 2020 pollster and a company founded by Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway, so there's good reason to suspect they're more than a little biased.
The anonymous writer went on to repeat a good chunk of Farah's column while plugging the bumper sticker. It's another sign of WND's increasing lack of grip on reality that it seems to believe that a bumper sticker will save it.
Newsmax Defends Trump Yet Again After (Fourth) Indictment Topic: Newsmax
Newsmax spent the days after Donald Trump's thirdindictment preparing for his fourth indictment, this one out of Georgia. The foreshadowing began as early as Aug. 9:
But when a draft indictment document was posted on the Georgia court's website (then quickly taken down), that opened up the floodgates for complaining. Eric Mack parroted the Trump camp's whining in an Aug. 14 article:
Attorneys for former President Donald Trump fired back at Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis' office for leaking the charges being put before the grand jury targeting Trump this week.
"The Fulton County District Attorney's Office has once again shown that they have no respect for the integrity of the grand jury process," attorneys Drew Findling and Jennifer Little wrote in a statement to Newsmax.
The statement came just hours after reporters picked up a grand jury court docket outlining the case and charges against Trump. The document was on the court's website briefly – apparently mistakenly – before it was deleted.
[...]
"This was not a simple administrative mistake," the Trump attorneys' statement continued. "A proposed indictment should only be in the hands of the District Attorney's Office, yet it somehow made its way to the clerk's office and was assigned a case number and a judge before the grand jury even deliberated.
"This is emblematic of the pervasive and glaring constitutional violations which have plagued this case from its very inception."
Newsmax's focus on the Georgia happenings intensified after that:
When Trump's indictment was made official later on Aug. 14, Newsmax began with a wire article on the charges, then quickly moved to its usual defend-and-attack mode throughout the rest of the day:
In the midst of all this apparent criminality, an Aug. 14 column by Larry Bell argued that it was somehoe worth it for people to donate money to Trump:
Democrats are bound and determined to bury their leading political adversary, Donald Trump, in debt through publicly funded lawsuits to redirect money, media attention, and surging momentum away from his 2024 election campaign.
John Lauro, a Trump attorney, said on Fox News within minutes of a third indictment being made public, that the former president is "being forced to spend money on legal defense, which should be spent on the discussion of critical ideas and critical issues."
Recent financial reports gleefully released by a gloating New York Times analysis of federal records show that about 30 cents of every dollar raised by Trump’s various political committees and super PAC this year have been spent on legal-related costs.
[...]
Any good news in this it is that the strategy to bleed Donald Trump’s campaign and personal finances dry with transparently political legal charges energizes his online donor support at a rate that dwarfs all rivals: nearly $46 million in the first half of the year, with an average donation of under $35.
Trump spokesman Steven Cheung accused President Biden and the Justice Department’s special counsel, Jack Smith, of using the government’s "unlimited resources" to try "to force the Trump campaign to spend, spend, spend to defend innocent Americans who have been targeted."
Nevertheless, Cheung added, "As President Trump has said, he will spend whatever it takes to defeat the Deep State and Crooked Joe Biden."
I’ll add that whatever this cost, it will be money well spent.
Bell did not raise the question of why a self-proclaimed billionaire is not spending his own money to defend himself but instead begging for money from others.
NEW ARTICLE: The Death Of CNS Topic: CNSNews.com
The Media Research Center fully turned its back on journalism by quietly blowing up its "news" operation (and firing several longtime employees) to turn CNSNews.com into a right-wing blog not bound by journalistic standards. Read more >>
MRC Now Baselessly Accusing Secret Service Of Covering Up For Bidens On White House Cocaine Topic: Media Research Center
We've shown how the Media Research Center exploited the discovery of a small amount of cocaine in the White House to promote claims -- for which it had no evidence -- that Hunter Biden was responsible. When the Secret Service stated it couldn't find the culprit and closed the investigation, the MRC's Kevin Tober invented a new conspiracy theory in a July 13 post -- that the Secret Service is covering up for the Biden White House:
On Thursday, the Secret Service announced that their investigation into the cocaine that was found in the West Wing of the White House had conveniently come up empty. Just like with the leaker of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade, our so-called investigative agencies have failed us and proved once again that there’s a two-tiered system of justice in the United States.
Later Thursday evening, it appeared that ABC’s World News Tonight was unconcerned with the dual justice system in America since they were the only one of the three networks to ignore the news. Instead, anchor David Muir thought a report on an alligator attack in Florida was more newsworthy.
[...]
Meanwhile, over on NBC Nightly News, White House correspondent Kelly O’Donnell reported: “Officials said they used video and entrance logs to compile a list of more than 500 individuals who had access to the entrance in the days before it was found July 2nd. But without physical or video evidence officials could not connect the drug to any suspect.”
Was Hunter Biden one of the 500 listed? Did the Secret Service talk to him? Nobody in the leftist media wants to ask the question.
Not only did Tober not offer any evidence that Hunter Biden is involved in any of this, he offered no evidence that the Secret Service is on the take from the Bidens. He continued his conspiracy theory in another post later that day:
How bad did the United States Secret Service bungle their investigation into the bag of cocaine left in the West Wing? All you need to know is that even disgraced FBI bureaucrat and Russiagate hoaxer Andrew Weissmann is critical. During a Thursday night appearance on MSNBC’s The 11th Hour, Weissmann told host Stephanie Ruhle that “this is really just not a sufficient investigation.”
When asked for his thoughts on the results of the investigation into the bag of cocaine, Weissmann remarked: “To me, the Secret Service here looks like they can’t find a dead cow in a closet,” which credit where it’s due, is a funny line.
Again, Tober provided absolutely no evidence that anything was "bungled."
By contrast, Nicholas Fondacaro called out what he considered another conspiracy theory (while being mad that GOP exploitation of the story was also called out):
Those stealthy Republican ninjas were at it again! Earlier this year, the Cackling Coven of ABC’s The View claimed Republicans were “behind” the classified documents found in President Biden’s Delaware garage. Now, on Friday, they were claimed Republicans infiltrated the White House and “planted” cocaine in the West Wing to “advance the Hunter Biden narrative.” At least that’s what Joy Behar and Ana Navarro wanted people to believe.
In an attempt to deflect attention away from the possibility that someone in the administration or the Biden family was the perpetrator, co-host Sunny Hostin claimed, without evidence, that the cocaine came from “a tourist, a stupid tourist, a guest, somebody like that.”
But while Hostin was quipping about how the person “left their stash,” Behar was busy wondering: ldquo;Maybe it was planted, or do I sound paranoid?”
At least she had a ting of self-awareness.
But after playing a clip of Congresswoman Nancy Mace (R-SC) pointing out the two-tiered justice system that benefits the Bidens, Behar whined that Cocainegate was just “more fodder for the Republican conspiracy machine.”
Helping Behar drive their own conspiracy machine, faux conservative Ana Navarro claimed, without evidence, that Republicans “planted” the cocaine so they could keep talking about Hunter Biden:
How ironic that Fondacaro complained that Hostin made a claim "without evidence" while he and his colleagues have been pushing conspiracy theories about the cocaine with a similar lack of evidence.
The Secret Service concluded on Thursday that they couldn’t locate a suspect for this baggy of illegal white powder -- it was cocaine, an illegal drug. MSNBC pundit Andrew Weissman colorfully remarked, the Secret Service looks like it "can't find a dead cow in a closet' – yes, that’s it! This doesn't have to be a Biden scandal story. It's a story of Secret Service incompetence.
ABC and NPR couldn't bother to care about the Secret Service when they could devote time to flooding in Vermont or an actors' strike in Hollywood. PBS did a bland 20 seconds....and then devoted 10 minutes and 43 seconds to The networks just can't find any energy on stories that could go south for Team Biden.
Meanwhile, Curtis Houck appeared on Fox News on July 16 to tout Tober's writeup of Weismann criticizing what Houck calle "the so-called probe by the Secret Service into cocaine found in the West Wing.
One gets the feeling that any outcome that did not point the finger at Hunter would be seen by the MRC as Secret Service "incompetence" or failure -- never mind that, again, no MRC writer has provided even a smidgen of proof of anything that would prove the Secret Service wrong.
WND Whines At Possibility That Minor Historical Character Might Have Been Gay Topic: WorldNetDaily
Peter LaBarbera ranted in a July 10 WorldNetDaily "news" article:
How far will Hollywood "progressives" go to advance their agenda of celebrating all things LGBT?
Evidently, as far as taking a real historical figure and making him homosexual – with zero evidence – as a tool to inject "queer" history into the storyline.
Tony Phelan and Joan Rater are the husband-and-wife creators of the popular historical mini-series "A Small Light," about Miep Gies, a Dutch woman who famously helped hide Anne Frank's family and other Jews from Nazi occupiers carrying out Hitler's "Final Solution" in World War 2-era Amsterdam.
The Hollywood couple takes "artistic license" to a whole new dimension by turning Gies' adoptive older brother, identified as Casmir ("Cas") Nieuwenburg, into a homosexual so they could highlight a Dutch gay man's role in the country's anti-Hitler resistance. Phelan then expanded on the deception in an interview by rationalizing that since Miep Gies had five adoptive siblings, "statistically, one of them had to be gay" – an assertion that is both historically and statistically reckless.
[...]
In the series, Cas and Miep share the secret of his homosexuality, and his parents do not know. All of this is historical fiction.
Phelan explained his rationale for concocting an aberrant sexual identity for a long-deceased relative of the series' hero, Miep, and using that as a vehicle to tell the story of Arondeus' role in the Dutch resistance.
"[Y]ou come upon a story like [the Amsterdam gay bar] Café 't Mandje and Willem Arondéus, and the fact that the first gay bar in Europe was this hotbed of the Resistance. In your research, you read that, and you're like, 'Well, we have to tell that story,'" he told Digital Spy in a May 23 interview with him, his wife and the show's writer/director, Susanna Fogel.
LaBarbera went on to huff that "The creators' artificial injection of homosexuality into a retelling of the story of a heroic woman who, with her husband, risked their lives to save Jews, outraged critics who said it detracts from the Gieses' noble and sacrificial work" -- but the "critics" he cites are all virulent homophobes. The first is Artyhur Goldberg, described as "the former director of Jews Offering New Alternatives for Healing, or JONAH"; his group was a huge promoter of anti-LGBT conversion therapy, and it was forced to shut down and pay millions of dollars in fines and legal fees after its fraudulent activities were exposed. The second is Brian Camenker of the virulently anti-LGBT group MassResistance. LaBarbera also quoted right-wing commentator Matt Barber, who ranted that "This kind of propaganda would've made Joseph Goebbels proud. ... People are getting fed up with the alphabet soup lobby and their ramrodding of sexual deviancy down the throat of the public at large."
LaBarbera went on to complain about the idea that there may be more gay people than he would like to admit:
Statistically speaking, Phelan's claim regarding the strong likelihood that of one of Miep's siblings was "gay" is deeply problematic, as even today in the U.S. – after decades of pro-homosexual and pro-LGBT media and educational advocacy – a Gallup poll puts the number of Americans identifying in 2021 as LGBT or "something other than heterosexual" at 7.1 percent. That is the highest number ever polled by Gallup, but still it is not close to one in five.
He went on to call the creators "woke" (whatever that means).
MRC Falsely Accuses Buttigieg Of Lying Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's Kevin Tober complained in a July 2 post:
CNN’s State of the Union co-moderator Dana Bash is always quick to interrupt and correct her Republican or conservative guests when they make claims she believes are false or misleading. Yet, on Sunday when Bash brought up the Supreme Court case 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis had no interest in doing the same to Biden’s Department of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg when he made the pants-on-fire claim that there’s “no evidence” wedding website maker Lorie Smith was requested to design a website for a same-sex wedding. He then went a step forward and lied through his teeth that Smith went into the “wedding business” to provoke this recent Supreme Court case.
These outright lies would never be allowed to go unchallenged if they were uttered by a Republican cabinet official. Sadly, that’s exactly what happened. Bash turned to Buttigieg and asked her long winded question:
[...]
After reading Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch’s well thought out legal reasoning, Bash asked if there’s “any merit to that argument.
Buttigieg claimed there wasn’t and then began smearing Smith and her business 303 Creative LLC: “I think it's very revealing that there's no evidence that this web designer was ever even approached by anyone asking for a website for a same-sex wedding.”
“As a matter of fact, it appears this web designer only went into the wedding business for the purpose of provoking a case like this,” Buttigieg falsely claimed.
Bash let Buttigieg say these unproven claims without any pushback or clarification. Instead of following up, she proceeded to move onto another topic and let the smears stand.
Ytober curiously omitted that Buttigieg's claim really does have a basis in fact. In her lawsuit, Smith claimed that a man named Stewart had previously requested that she make a website for his wedding to a man named Mike. But Stewart came forward a few days before Tober's post and explained that not only did he never ask Smith to make a website for him, he has been married to a woman for the past 15 years. (Smith's attorneys at the right-wing Alliance Defending Freedom later insisted that the allegation was not only false but irrelevant.)
Strange that Tober would not only hide that information from his readers but also falsely accuse Buttigieg of lying. It appears that, once again, narratives are more important than facts at the MRC.
NEW ARTICLE -- Out There, Exhibit 86: Standing Athwart Modern Art Topic: Newsmax
Columnists for WorldNetDaily and Newsmax complain about art being to abstract and non-representational, with one arguing that art is only "good" if it advances "Western heritage." Read more >>
MRC Helps Musk Attack Group For Exposing Hate On Twitter Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Cener made sure to ignore evem more bad news about Elon Musk and Twitter. For instance:
Twitter reinstated the account of right-wing influencer Dom Lucre after he was banned for posting a video of a toddler being tortured.
Twitter also reinstated the account of Kanye West, also know as Ye, months after it was banned for postin an image of a swastika inside a Star of David.
Musk knew he had to change the narrative, so it was right-wing red-meat time. And the MRC's Luis Cornelio eagerly lapped it up in an Aug.1 post:
An anti-free speech group had a meltdown after Elon Musk took legal action against the group’s research targeting X, formerly known as Twitter.
Imran Ahmed, the CEO of the infamous Center for Countering Digital Hate, and its Democrat allies have hysterically responded to a legal threat from Musk, the owner of X. Ahmed lamented that Musk is pushing back against the CCDH’s efforts to destroy the platform after Musk pledged to stand up for free speech. Disgraced Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) chimed in, whining that mass censorship is no longer reining on Twitter.
In a fiery letter, Musk’s attorneys issued an ultimatum to the CCDH, slamming the far-left organization’s research against the X platform. Musk argued that the CCDH is falsely accusing X of allowing so-called hate speech on its platform. The letter, as reported by The New York Times, called the research “false, misleading or both.” Similarly, in a blog post dated July 31, X blasted the CCDH for “actively working to”: “assert false and misleading claims encouraging advertisers to pause investment,” “prevent public dialogue” and “prevent free expression” by targeting individuals it doesn’t agree with.
Once again, Cornelio is dishonestly framing content moderation to address lies and misinformation as "censorship" while refusing to explain why lies and misinformation must be allowed to spread unchecked (if they further right-wing narratives, at least). Also, at no point does Cornelio cite Twitter or Musk providing any evidence that proves false anything CCDH has reported. Instead, he complained that Ahmed is responding to Musk by pointing out that he's effectively demanding that CCDH be censored:
Ahmed wrote an opinion article for MSNBC, whining that Musk is bullying him.“[Musk] is trying to silence the independent researchers at CCDH who are shining a light on the situation,” Ahmed further bellyached, referring to his group’s dubious research that hate speech is on the rise on X. “Musk and his legal team have engaged in an aggressive campaign to intimidate, bully and silence CCDH.”
In a brazen bout of hypocrisy, Ahmed further accused Musk of censoring CCDH, the exact sort of punishment CCDH seeks when accusing those it disagrees with of having spread so-called hate speech. Specifically, Ahmed claimed, “X’s legal threat is a brazen attempt to silence honest criticism and independent research, perhaps in a desperate hope that it can stem the tide of negative stories and rebuild the company's relationship with advertisers.”
Cornelio offered no proof that any bit of CCDH research about Twitter is "dubious," nor did he respond to anything else Ahmed said. He then admitted that his employer's attacks on CCDH are personal: "Just what has CCDH done in the past? In 2022, CCDH classified the Media Research Center, among others, as one of the 'Toxic Ten' of alleged climate 'misinformation.'" As we documented at the time, the MRC never rebutted anything in the CCDH report, instead merely demonstrating just how thin-skinned it is about criticism, smearing CCDH as "digital brownshirts."
Catherine Salgado touted a Republican attack on CCDH in an Aug. 7 post:
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) is requesting information from an anti-free speech nonprofit over potential censorship collusion with the federal government.
X (formerly known as Twitter) accused the UK- and U.S.-based Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) of hurting Twitter’s advertising through false claims of rising hate speech in a lawsuit last week. Now Jordan is asking for information on “the interactions between the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) and the federal government in particular, as well as between CCDH and social media companies.”
Dated August 3, the letter called out leftist CCDH CEO Imran Ahmed and his group for “appear[ing] to have played a role” in President Joe Biden’s “censorship regime by advising the government and social media companies on so-called ‘misinformation’ and other types of content— sometimes with direct or indirect support or approval from the federal government.”
The letter argued that anti-free speech efforts in coordination with the government, whether “directly or indirectly,” is “a grave threat to the First Amendment.” Jordan specifically zeroed in on CCDH’s COVID-19-era report on “The Disinformation Dozen,” which led to censorship of users like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that CCDH labeled as prominent “anti-vaxxers.”
Salgado, like Cornelio, failed to explain why lies and misinformation -- especially about an important health issue like COVID -- must never be countered. Nor did she explain that Kennedy is very much an anti-vaxxer, and he has indisputably spread lies and misinformation about vaccines. Salgado also showed no curiosity about why Jordan is working to weaponize government against a critic at the apparent request of a wealhy man like Musk.
And like Cornelio, Salgado whined that "CCDH included Media Research Center in its November 2021 'Toxic Ten' report of the top spreaders of supposed 'climate change denial'" without mentioning that her employer didn't dispute anything CCDH said about it. She also made sure to note that her boss, Brent Bozell, "previously called CCDH 'digital brownshirts.'" Gotta make sure to smear a critic while cheering how the government is targeting it.
WND's Brown Ramps Up Anti-Transgender Hate Topic: WorldNetDaily
As part of his campaign of anti-LGBTQ hate, Michael Brown unsurprisingly supported the Supreme Court ruling that allowed a Christian website designer to refuse to offer her services, trying to parse the ruling in his July 3 column:
That's why some of the Christians who have come under attack in recent years had served LGBTQ+ customers for years. Some of them even had LGBTQ+ employees. But when it came to creating artistic content that violated their beliefs (such as creating a wedding cake or designing a floral arrangement for a same-sex ceremony), they declined. And for that, they were dragged into court, with their lives turned upside down.
[...]
That's why the Supreme Court's decision should have been 9-0 and applauded by people from all backgrounds. The fact that it was 6-3, with many Americans outraged over the ruling, reminds us of just how confused our nation has become.
May truth and sanity prevail.
Brown was back to cheering a British TV personality's anti-transgender hate in his July 12 column:
Do you remember when Ann Coulter was laughed to scorn on Bill Maher's TV show when she stated that, out of the announced Republican candidates in 2015, Donald Trump was the most likely to become president? "Trump? No way! You're crazy!" Who knew she would be so accurate in her prediction?
Now, what if I told you several years ago that Piers Morgan, well-known as a strong ally of the gay community, would become one of the loudest, most persistent voices against trans-activism? I imagine I would have been laughed to scorn, just as Coulter was.
The difference is that I did not make any such prediction.
That's because Morgan was known as a very strong ally of the LGBT community, not to mention a good friend of Elton John. If anything, I would have predicted that Morgan would also take up the trans cause, just as he had taken up the gay cause.
To my knowledge, he had not been on the record for separating the T from the LGB, nor, to my knowledge did he affirm the reality of gay identity while taking issue with the idea of trans identity.
[...]
To this moment, Morgan remains a passionate defender of same-sex relationships and, in his opinion, doesn't think most people really care to debate this anymore. Yet on broadcast after broadcast, he is challenging the madness of trans activism. (As always, when I speak of this "madness," I am not attacking individuals who truly and deeply struggle with gender dysphoria. I'm speaking about the societal madness of arguing that you are whatever sex and gender you perceive yourself to be. That idea is nothing less than madness.)
Ah, yes, the ol' "I'm not attacking people" claim he loves to take refuge in. But, again, he's framing a refusal to not not hate transgender people as "societal madness" demonstrates that he really is attacking people. Brown closed by cheering Morgan's hate: "You're on the right path, sir, step by step. We'll be waiting to greet you when you make it all the way home."
In his July 14 column, Brown cheered "influential gay blogger Andrew Sullivan" for complaining that LGBT activists tried to "reprogram children" into not hating LGBT people:
He hit the nail on the head. That is exactly what the "queers" did.
But where he was wrong was in saying that "we gays" never targeted children. That is patently false.
Who, then, were these "queers"? They were part and parcel of the larger gay-activist leadership, not least, in the realm of children's education. (And remember one of the best-known cries of early gay activists: "We're here, we're queer, get used to it.")
That's why, for well over a decade, this has been the official policy found in the Los Angeles Unified School District Reference Guide: "'Gender identity' refers to one's understanding, interests, outlook, and feelings about whether one is female or male, or both, or neither, regardless of one's biological sex."
This was not peripheral to the larger gay-activist agenda. It was right in the center of it, part of the radical war against heterosexual normativity and the hated gender binary.
[...]
Please don't tell me today that this was not part of the gay activist agenda from early on and that it was somehow hijacked by queer activists. All of this was mixed and mingled together. In fact, the pro-gay and pro-trans narratives were inextricably intertwined.
That's why, in my sarcastic poem, "Here At School the Slant Is Gay," I included these lines: "GLSEN will fill in for Granny and help kids find their inner-trannie."
Yes, Brown wrote an anti-LGBTQ poem. That's how much he hates these people.
Brown cocluded by touting how "my colleague at Focus on the Family, Jeff Johnston, has done the heavy lifting when it comes to documenting the gay indoctrination of children," then ranting: "It is now incumbent on us as parents, educators, ministry leaders, social media influences and activists to undo the damage that has been done and restore innocence and sanity to the kids of this world. It's the least that we can do." According to Brown, it's "innocence and santiy" to make sure chilren hate LGBT people and "indoctrination" to teach them not to.
MRC Still Censoring That Swalwell Was Cleared In Chinese Spy Investigation Topic: Media Research Center
We've documented the Media Research Center's weird obsession with Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell and his alleged relationship with a woman who turned out to be a Chinese spy -- and its refusal to tell readers that a Republican-led House ethics investigation found no wrongdoing on Swalwell's part. The MRC was at it again in a July 10 post by Curtis Houck immaturely headlined "Fang Fang, Bang Bang":
Former Washington Examiner Justice reporter Jerry Dunleavy revealed Sunday in a series of lengthy tweets that, per a source, senior FBI leadership meddled in and shuttered investigations into Fang Fang, the rumored ex-lover of Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-CA) as well as Russell Lowe, a Chinese-American who had been working for Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
But most notable was something long the subject of speculation and giggles on Twitter, which was, as Dunleavy confirmed, “that there had been a sexual relationship between Swalwell & Fang.” Naturally, none of this was of interest to the “big three” of ABC, CBS, and NBC on their flagship Sunday night and Monday morning newscasts.
[...]
Turning to Fang Fang, Dunleavy dropped the bomb after referring to a 2020 story in Axios:
One thing that was actually not in the Axios story but which my source has confirmed — the FBI firmly believed based on the evidence they collected on Fang that there had been a sexual relationship between Swalwell & Fang.
He added that said official told him“the FBI had FISA surveillance up & running on Fang...and so many of her actions & communications were being intercepted & monitored.” This also drew in the CIA and the NSA.
Houck censored the fact that a bipartisan House committee found no wrongdoing on Swalwell's part, even as he complained that non-right-wing media covered other stories. It's as if the MRC is averse to doing "media research" that might not mesh with its preconceived partisan notions.
The Media Research Center loves Robert Kennedy Jr. because he fits into their right-wing victimhood narrative and because he could possibly hurt Joe Biden's re-election chances -- not because it actually wants him to win. LUis Cornelio kept up the victimhood narrative in a June 19 post:
James Hirsen loves to write about about how much he hates the entertainment industry for not being right-wing enough, so it's unsurprising that he's hoping the strikes by writers and actors will push Hollywood ideology to the right, as he expressed in his July 18 Newsmax 
WorldNetDaily 
The Media Research Center has spent the past few decades heaping attacks and scorn on Hillary Clinton, so it's more than a little hypocritical for it to suddenly get the vapors over the spouse of a Republican presidential candidate getting what might be called the Hillary treatment. Tim Graham called up the DeSantis Defense Brigade in a May 21 
Bumper stickers really aren't much of a thing these days, and it's telling of of just how out of step WorldNetDaily is with reality that it seems to think it is. Joseph Farah spent his June 30 column touting how WND condensed election-fraud conspiracy theories into a bumper sticker, rehashing them all in the process in his June 30 
Newsmax spent the days after Donald Trump's 
We've shown
Peter LaBarbera ranted in a July 10 WorldNetDaily "news" 
The Media Research Center's Kevin Tober complained in a July 2 
The Media Research Cener made sure to ignore evem more bad news about Elon Musk and Twitter. For instance:
As part of his 
We've documented
