MRC's Toto Pushes Right-Wing Narrative About 'Canadian Fascism'
Topic: Media Research Center

Christian Toto -- the movie critic who really wants to be a right-wing pundit -- began his July 29 Media Research Center column by complained that Bill Maher isn't fully buying into his preferred right-wing narratives:

Bill Maher makes a living mocking political elites, but he has major gaps in his Beltway knowledge.

For example, he admitted last year that he still believes President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election. That’s despite the Mueller Report finding no evidence of such collusion and major investigations concluding the same.

We know even more today how Hillary Clinton concocted the faux scandal and various government bodies doubled down on the lies.

Maher didn’t know the truth, in part, because he likely ingests a steady diet of Mainstream Media misinformation.

Of course, it's not a "faux scandal" that  the 2016 Trump campaign met with Russian operatives dozens of times, or that then-campaign manager Paul Manafort gave internal polling data to another Russian operative, or that Russia rooted for Trump to win in 2016. But those facts are inconvenent to Toto's narrative, so he won't bring them up. Anyway, this was all just a setup for Toto to hype how Maher was "schooled" by right-wing influencer Jordan Peterson about "Canadian fascism":

Maher broached the subject with this week’s “Club Random” guest, Canadian professor and Daily Wire contributor Jordan Peterson. Maher, knowing his guest’s native roots, brought up a “dumb” quote from Trudeau about the truckers who protested the country’s pandemic policies.

Maher paraphrased Trudeau’s quote with shock.

“We have a vibrant democracy here in Canada and we value protests… but when you use protests to object to the policies of the government I think you’re going too far,” Maher said.

“What the f*** is protest for except to object to the policies of the government,” Maher added, laughing.

Canadian truckers rebelled against the nation’s draconian lockdown measures which impacted their livelihoods and, as we learned later, had little actual science behind them.

Neither Peterson nor Toto mentioned that the fact that, as one analysis noted, most Canadians supported the country's measures to combat the spread of COVID, and that the trucker protest was little more than a right-wing temper tantrum in which protesters were calling for civil war. When the truckers occupied the streets of the capital, Ottawa, area residents were threatened or assaulted, and fences were torn down around the capital's hallowed Tomb of the Unknown Soldier so protesters could dance on it.

Toto hyped how Jordan stated that the Canadian government "seized the bank accounts of 200 Canadians." But the accounts were not "seized"; they were frozen because they were used to help fund the increasingly unruly protests. Most of those accounts were unfrozen after the protest ended. We doubt that Toto would consider government efforts to quell rioting after the death of George Floyd to be "fascism."

Toto continued uncriticially quoting Jordan:

“I can’t imagine a politician doing anything more inappropriate than that … No trial. No real investigation,” Peterson said before adding how Trudeau even blamed MAGA Republicans for allegedly funding the protests.

“It’s completely preposterous,” Peterson noted. “Why would MAGA Republicans foment dissent in Ottawa? Even if they knew where it was, which they don’t, why would they?”

Maher laughed through those comments.

In fact, American right-wingers did help fund the Canadian protests, and high-profile right-wing U.S. politicians like Ron DeSantis and Ken Paxton aligned themselves with them. But, again, those are inconvenient facts that don't mesh with Toto's preferred narrative, so they were ignored.

Whatever happened to all people sacrificing together to work toward a common good, such as trying to reduce spread of a deadly disease? Toto didn't say anything about that either.

Joseph Farah's Obama Derangement Syndrome Flares Up Again
Topic: WorldNetDaily

It doesn't take much to send WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah into paroxysms of Obama Derangement Syndrome -- that was WND's bread and butter for years, after all -- and he went there again in his June 28 column:

Remember Barack Obama? I'll never forget him. He always thought more of himself that others did. But I digress.

I was just musing about a recent Politico story that carried the following headline: "Is Barack Obama Ready To Reassert Himself?" It was written by Jonathan Martin, Politico's politics bureau chief and senior political columnist. (How is that title for overdoing the use of the root word "politics"?)

Imagine my fear and loathing about the aforementioned headline. As far as I am concerned, the best thing about America politics since Obama left the presidency is that … he left, and would not be returning. Now it appears he's about to reassert himself. Should I be alarmed?

Naturally, this turned into rage against President Biden:

When it comes to Obama's old sidekick, 29 months into his illegitimate term in the White House, Biden has allowed approximately 5.5 million illegal aliens to enter our nation, a record, admitted without any oversight. It could be more. We just don't know.

Is that an issue for Obama? No, it was planned all along.

Does he regret anything Biden has done as president?

Nope.

So what regrets does he have? Well, he regrets that Donald J. Trump might become president again – and nothing can stop him this time – no amount of cheating between now and the 2024 election, barring the unmentionable, Trump's assassination, God forbid.

After all, that can become a dreaded reality, especially to those who have witnessed them. John Kennedy … Bobby Kennedy … Martin Luther King Jr. … Gerald Ford's attempted assassination … Ronald Reagan's attempted assassination – all took place in many of our lifetimes.

What's to say it couldn't happen again?

Why does it seem that Farah is rooting for someone to assassinate Obama or Biden?

Then, of course, this evolved into rehashing yet agian discredited claims of election fraud:

Think about it. In 2020, the Democrats cheated. Since then, they have indicted Trump twice. Before that they conspired to impeach him twice. They also attacked him mercilessly during his presidency. During the 2020 election, Democrats conspired to get Joe Biden over 81 million "votes" – by far more than anyone, including Obama, ever got. Other than that highly inflated tally of Biden's, no president candidate ever achieved more than Trump's 74 million.

[...]

We can't even imagine how many Democrats expect an ending. We can't even imagine what they have at stake. They've even accused Trump of formulating an "insurrection," arresting some 2,000 of his supporters. Jan. 6 was nothing of the kind. Most see it as a "Fed-surrection" – among the dirtiest tricks ever done in the history of American politics.

We collectively shudder to see how this ends in 2024.

God protect Donald J. Trump.

No call of protection, of course, for Obama and Biden, further suggesting that he has a death wish for them.

Farah then spent his Aug. 2 column rehashing WND's bogus birther crusade:

Aug. 4, 1961, is, for many, a day that will live in infamy – even in these dark days of Joe Biden. It's Barack Obama's birthday – or so we believe.

At the height of its notoriety, it attracted controversy with as many as 50% of the nation and caused the book, "Where's the Birth Certificate?" by Jerome Corsi, a writer at WND and WND Books, to become a No. 1 bestseller.

Obama, himself, had raised questions about his birthplace when it was fashionable – as in his literary bio (below, right) from 1991 to 2007 in which his place of birth was Kenya. Coincidentally, 2007 was the year he began his presidential aspirations. I raise the moot question once again to play angel's advocate.

It ended, for all intents and purposes, in 2011 – the third year of his presidency – when he publicly released his "long-form birth certificate." Why did he take so long? Did he do it to set up a controversy or end one? Or to make us forget about it?

Today, it's as though we never had a debate. We don't even recall what the debate was about. Let me remind you: It was about who is constitutionally eligible to become president of the United States and vice president of the United States.

I don't remember much of a debate taking place around whether Kamala Harris was eligible in 2020 when she was on the presidential ballot. Her mother was born in India and her father in Jamaica. That issue was part of the debate involving Obama – there was a serious constitutional question of who confers birthright citizenship. In Obama's case, some contended that his mother conferred it since his father was born in Kenya. The founders were strict enough to think seriously about these matters – until Obama seriously confused the question and made it toxic to even discuss.

Well. we remember that WND suddenly stopped caring about birther issues in 2016 in order to avoid having that conversation about Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada (and who, not conicidentally, was endorsed by Farah for president that year prior to his embrace of Trump).That tells us that Farah was never concerned with having a legitimate debate about constitutional eligibility -- only with trying to stop Obama by any means possible.

Farah then decided that Obama's birth certificate never really mattered anyway:

It was never really about the birth certificate, anyway. As we have found out over the years, they are unreliable in most states, notably in Hawaii. There are two problems with them – even when we are talking about an original. I contend that no one has seen Obama's original. All we have seen is a copy – probably even Obama. An original is something wholly other. It was once one of the most personal documents we owned. Not so much in the age of digital everything and the iPhone.

We did an enormous amount of work on Obama. Others did too. I'm afraid it all ended without any serious resolution or conclusion.

Think of all the plans that were made earnestly. They continued right through the opening of 2011 state legislative sessions. A headline on a Politico story read: "Birther debate alive across U.S."

Yet Farah still whined, "In 2008, John McCain was asked to show his original birth certificate. Obama was not." As we documented, Obama showed a copy of his birth certificate that was certified by the state of Hawaii, which should have sufficed (and which even WND initally admitted was "authentic"). Then, somehow, Farah concluded by steering things toward Trump and Biden:

But the states couldn't agree on much in 2011. They agree on even less today.

Today, the Justice Department disagrees whether they think Biden should be investigated for taking bribes or whether Donald Trump should face at least four major felony indictments while seeking reelection. And today the Republicans are sure that Joe Biden didn't really get 81 million votes in the 2020 election. Meanwhile, the Democrats think Trump shouldn't be allowed to run ever again – even if it takes locking him up for 400 years to prevent it.

Farah will never admit he was wrong about his birther crusade because it help successfuly tar Obama -- no matter how untruthful the crusade was. And still he doesn't understand why his WND is struggling to survive when it continues to embrace such untruthfulness.

MRC Keeps Up Distraction, Whataboutism Over (Third) Trump Indictment
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center distraction-and-whataboutism complaints about Donald Trump's third indictment continued in more whining from Kevin Tober in a Aug. 3 post:

All day long Thursday, as reported extensively by NewsBusters, the big three evening news broadcasts were beside themselves with glee over the third arraignment of President Joe Biden's political opponent Donald Trump. Between the motorcade chases broadcasted live, and breathless coverage of every detail large and small, it's clear this was seen by the networks as a ratings-grabbing television production rather than the federal government prosecuting the leading challenger to the Biden regime's power in the upcoming elections. The show continued during the big-three evening newscasts, where each network's anchor relayed the day's events to anyone who wasn't already watching.

All in all, the networks were so obsessed that their total coverage of the Trump indictment was now up to 132.5 minutes (2 hours, 12 minutes, and 28 seconds). 20 minutes and 31 seconds of that total occurred on Thursday alone.

Curtis Houck got mad that it was pointed out how Republicans failed to do their job in refusing to convict Trump in an impeachment trial for helping to incite the Capitol riot:

Amid the O.J. Simpson Bronco chase-like idiocy on the broadcast and cable networks Thursday afternoon surrounding former President Trump’s third criminal arraignment, NBC’s Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd suffered a near-emotional, weapons-grade meltdown seething at the Republican Party for putting America on the precipice of collapse because the GOP “refused to do” what was right and remove Trump from office in 2021 so he can never run again.

Worse yet, he claimed that, by not listening to “the Founders” who “created a process” to do right, Republicans (and not Democrats running urban hellscapes) are the reason there could be an irreparable “erosion of the rule of law”.

[...]

Sounding like he was near tears, the former Senate Democratic staffer blasted the GOP as having made “the wrong call for the Republican Party,” “the American public,” and< “the justice system.”

Houck didn't rebut anything Todd said -- he simply complained that it was said at all.

Houck served up yet more Biden whataboutism in an Aug. 4 post, though he did concede that a former president being repeatedly indicted is "a huge story":

Through four days and three installments each of the flagship morning and evening news shows on the major broadcast networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC have eagerly doled out astounding 162 minutes and 16 seconds through Friday morning salivating over the third criminal indictment of former President Trumpthat has the potential to either land him in prison or propel him to the White House in 2024.

These numbers represent a network tally that is 19 times larger than what these same networks gave (eight minutes and 32 seconds) to Monday’s closed-door House Oversight Committee hearing featuring Hunter Biden’s former business partner, Devin Archer.

The indictment of a former President is undoubtedly a huge story, but scant attention for a person heavily involved in Hunter Biden’s life of ruin amid allegations of bribery involving Burisma, where both Archer and Hunter were on the board? Of course, the networks don’t have any time for the bribery claim.

Alex Christy served up his own whataboutism-laden count:

Former President Donald Trump was arraigned for the third time on Thursday and the cable networks of MSNBC and CNN once again obsessed over the matter to the detriment of coverage of any other topic.

A study of the two networks from 5:00 a.m. Eastern to midnight Eastern on MSNBC and from 6:00 a.m. Eastern to midnight on CNN found that 91.32 percent of their news-related coverage focused on Trump’s alignment [sic], other legal problems, or reaction and analysis. The networks combined for 26 hours, 48 minutes, and 23 seconds of news coverage on Thursday, 24 hours, 28 minutes, and 50 seconds of which was devoted to all things Trump. This marks yet another instance of CNN and MSNBC spending over 90 percent of their day on a Trump arraignment.

Joe and Hunter Biden’s scandals received only 13 minutes and 59 seconds. Put another way, Trump’s problems got 105 more times the coverage than the Bidens’ or 1 percent of the total time.

Christy didn't explain why he omitted Fox News from his cable news analysis.

Houck and Nicholas Fondacaro regurgitated these complaints in the MRC's Aug. 4 podcast: "As they flood the zone with coverage, they also fill the airwaves with flaming hot takes proclaiming their anticipation of Trump behind bars or even exiled."

Jeffrey Lord went back in time in his Aug. 5 column to serve up some good ol'-fashioned Clinton equivocation (like the MRC did on Trump's second indictment):

The media love fest for the Trump-investigating Jack Smith was curiously absent when the name of the prosecutor was - Ken Starr. That would be the Special Counsel assigned to investigate Democrat President Bill Clinton. Somewhere along the way I crossed paths with him at a conservative event. A nicer, more decent and smarter guy it would be hard to find. Not that you would have learned that from the media that covered his most famous case in the mid 1990’s.

Lord went back even further to criticize special counsels for Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon before returning to present-day complaints:

In short, as is frequently the case with the liberal media, the more things change the more they stay the same. 

Special Counsel Jack Smith is now on his way into the liberal media hall of fame.

Shocking.

Not.

Tim Graham spent an Aug. 6 post having a fit that the contrast between our current president and our previous one, under the headline "As Trump went to court, Biden went for a bike ride," was pointed out. Graham lashed out at the reporter who made the observation, declaring that he is "one of the most flagrant Biden publicists in the White House press corps" and huffing: 'In the Trump years, White House reporters competed to see which could be more bombastically anti-Trump. Under Biden, they compete to see which one can sound the most like a White House press secretary."

Clay Waters huffed that some people see Trump's criminality more harshly than he does in an Aug. 7 post:

What's Amanpour & Co’s idea of a balanced segment on the news of former President Donald Trump’s third indictment for “conspiring to defraud” the United States for contesting his loss in 2020? Hosting a sitting liberal Democrat, Representative Joe Neguse (CO), and the ex-Republican (in all senses) Representative  Joe Walsh, who ran against Trump in the 2020 primary and remained fiercely opposed.

Amanpour’s Tuesday (August 1,2023) evening show promised both sides, which turned out to be one sitting and one former congressman, both adamantly unsympathetic to Trump. From host Christiane Amanpour's show introduction: Then, how Republicans are reacting to the newswith former GOP congressman and presidential candidate Joe Walsh….”

Neguse was positively placid in comparison to former congressman Walsh’s theatrically rabid attack on Trump.

Picking Walsh of all people to deliver the Republican opinion on Trump was just more evidence that Amanpour & Co. was more concerned about piling on the former President than any sense of journalistic balance.

[...]

Amanpour showed no feel for counter-arguments about an indictment that some have called an example of a two-tiered justice system, one for Republicans, and a more lenient one for Democrats like Hunter Biden.

We don't recall Waters ever demanding that Fox News show concern about having "any sense of journalistic balance."

Newsmax Pushed Bogus 'No Comment' Attack On Biden Over Maui Wildfire
Topic: Newsmax

Brian Freeman huffed in an Aug. 14 Newsmax article:

President Joe Biden refused to comment on the rising death toll in Hawaii after he spent several hours on Sunday relaxing on the beach in Delaware during his vacation, the Daily Mail reported.

As Biden left the beach, he was asked for his response to the wildfires that have killed 96 people, to which he replied, "No comment."

During a bike ride earlier in the day, Biden gave a similar answer when asked about the tragedy, which is Hawaii's worst natural disaster ever, saying, "We're looking at it."

Just one problem: there's no proof he said that. As the White House press pool report stated (h/t Robert Mackey), reporter and pool report writer Rob Crilly of the Daily Mail -- a right-wing anti-Biden content mill -- never actually heard those words but claim that "lip readers in the pool" claimed he said it. But that was enough for the fellow Biden-haters at Newsmax to manufacture a controversy. Mark Swanson followed up later in the day:

The White House on Monday tried to beat back criticism of President Joe Biden in the aftermath of his "no comment" regarding the wildfires in Maui that have left 96 dead, to this point.

The president is "deeply concerned," the White House assured.

A vacationing Biden invited the criticism with his responses to questions about the rising death toll from reporters on Sunday. He also gave an obtuse "we're looking at it" when asked about the worst natural disaster in Hawaii's history. It left many thinking the president couldn't be bothered amid his relaxing day in Rehoboth, Delaware.

And, yes, Donald Trump was given a chance to weigh in, as Charles Kim wrote:

Former President Donald Trump called out President Joe Biden in a video Monday for saying "no comment" when asked about the deadly wildfires on the Hawaiian island of Maui that officials confirm killed 99 to date with hundreds of people still missing.

"Our government was not prepared, and very importantly, the aftermath is going very poorly," Trump said in a video post on social media site X Monday. "Crooked Joe Biden, the most incompetent president in the history of our country, with a laugh and a smile, said that he had 'no comment' on the death and the tragedy."

While Trump said there are times that response is appropriate, using it in this situation was "horrible and unacceptable."

"It is a disgraceful thing that Joe Biden refuses to help or comment on the tragedy in Maui just as he refused to help or comment on the train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, for a very, very long time."

Neither Swanson nor Kim disclosed that Biden's words were divined for attempted lip-reading, not anyone actually hearing him say it.

Nicole Wells wrote in an Aug. 17 article that "President Joe Biden has been blasted for relaxing on a beach in Delaware and telling reporters he had 'no comment' on the situation in Maui." In an Aug. 23 article, Wells wrote that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said that "President Joe Biden telling reporters he had 'no comment' on the Maui fires while on vacation in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, is 'unacceptable.'" She also failed to tell readers that no reporter heard him say it.

An Aug. 23 article on the first Republican presidential debate by the apparently unironically named Charlie McCarthy uncritically quoted Ron DeSantis saying, "Biden was on the beach while those people [in Maui] were suffering. He was asked about it [and] he said no comment. Are you kidding me?" Again, there was no mention that the remarks are based on alleged lip-reading, not anyone actually hearing the words.

WND Dismisses Winners Of Climate Change Lawsuit As 'Whining Teens'
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily sure hates it when people it doesn't like score legal victories. Bob Unruh whined in an Aug. 16 article, headlined" Judge bends to whining teens on climate change, makes huge ruling":

A judge in Montana has ruled that teen angst over the possibility that "climate change" may impact their lives is so important it overrides a state policy that energy decisions should not be made on that ideology, and it is being appealed.

The ruling came in a case brought by the Oregon-based Our Children's Trust which has brought similar complaints in every state, with most of the complaints failing.

The rare victory in Montana came because the state's constitution says the state must supply to residents a "clean and healthful" environment, and the plaintiffs claim that oil and coal projects don't do that.

Internationally, a court said several years ago that the Netherlands must cut greenhouse gas emissions. In the U.S., the Supreme Court earlier rejected a case that Our Children's Trust was pushing, although two other lawsuits from the organization still are moving forward.

Those are pending in Hawaii and Oregon.

A report from Legal Newsline reported the judge decided in favor of a "passionate skier" who felt like "a part of him is lost" after a wildfire at one Montana location, a woman "who believes the deteriorating climate has hurt her ability to play competitive soccer," and another woman who wonders if having children "is an option in a world devastated by climate change."

It wasn't until the 10th paragraph of the article that Unruh got around to noting that "At issue were energy industry permitting decisions by the state," and he never specifically stated what, exactly, the issue entailed. As a less biased news organization reported, the judge ruled that Montana's refusal to factor in environmental effects when evaluating fossil fuel permits violates thte state's constitution, which states that citizens have a right to a clean and healthful environment. Unruh waited until the 15th paragraph to mention that "Lawmakers in the state limited consideration of both in- and out-of-state "climate effects" in permitting processes."

Rather than do relevant factual reporting up front, Unruh continued to obsess over the students pointing out specific effects of climate change:

The judge noted most of the injury from the situation to the plaintiffs involved "anxiety, despair and depression."

"Plaintiffs’ injuries will grow increasingly severe and irreversible without science-based actions to address climate change," the judge claimed.

The report explained that the skier, "'Badge,' for example, loves skiing but 'climate change is reducing Badge’s ability to participate in this important recreational activity.'"

Other concerns cited by the judge were that Olivia Vesovich of Missoula "experiences bouts of depression when she thinks about the dire projections of the future" and Claire Vlases, a ski instructor, "said reduced snowfall is reducing her work days and ability to hike and practice cross-country running."

Unruh didn't expllain why explaining such direct effects of climate change must be mocked, nor did he make any effort to disprove those concerns.

NEW ARTICLE: Dragphobia Is (Still) All The Rage At The MRC
Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center wants you to hate and fear drag queens as much as it does, and its attacks on them at the start of this year continued that narrative (but Milton Berle and "Bosom Buddies" have been deemed exempt from criticism). Read more >>

MRC Complains That Trump's (Third) Indictment Is Considered News
Topic: Media Research Center

As it had before with previous indictments, the Media Research Center rushed to defend Donald Trump after his third indictment with the usual distractions and whataboutism. An Aug. 1 post by Kevin Tober whining that that the non-right-wing media covered additional charges under a previous indictment:

Late Tuesday afternoon, Biden DOJ-appointed special prosecutor Jack Smith announced yet another indictment against former President Donald Trump on four separate counts. This time related to his alleged actions in the run-up to the January 6 riots at the United States Capitol. In stark contrast to their dismissive coverage of Hunter Biden’s criminal activity, the three networks spent a combined 24 minutes and 36 seconds on the third indictment of Trump. 

ABC’s World News Tonight was the worst offender when it comes to the obsessive network coverage. In total, the network spent 11 minutes and 56 seconds harping on the news. Their total airtime dedicated to reporting the news (minus teases and commercials) was 19 minutes flat, which meant over 60 percent (62.8%) was about Trump.

Tober didn't explain why a former president getting indicted yet again wasn't newsworthy. An Aug. 2 post by Alex Christy similarly complained about newsworthiness:

If CNN has a line on hyperbolic rhetoric about former President Donald Trump, law enforcement analyst and former D.C. police officer Michael Fanone almost crossed it on Tuesday’s CNN Tonight when he compared Trump’s new indictment related to the aftermath of the 2020 Election to the death of Osama bin Laden. Even liberal host Laura Coates was shocked by the comparison.

After Coates asked Fanone his thoughts, he recalled that, “When I first learned about the indictment, I had a long conversation with a friend of mine, Ryan Reilly, and I told him how proud I felt to be an American at that moment. Much in the way that I did when I learned that our military had killed Osama bin Laden. I just felt incredibly proud.”

Amid some crosstalk, a confused Coates sought clarification, “These two seem comfortable to you?... I'm sorry, I don't want to cut you off, but why that comparison in particular?... In what way?”

Doubling down, Fanone declared, “Osama bin Laden was a terrorist who committed a horrific act against American people and against our republic. And I believe that Donald Trump is a terrorist who committed horrific acts against the American people.”

Curtis Houck played Hunter Biden whataboutism on indictment coverage:

With Tuesday’s third indictment of former President Trump, the “big three” networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC had their ticket out of having to acknowledge the scandals surrounding the Biden family, including reasons to continue skipping Burisma bribery claims and no longer probe Monday’s testimony from Hunter Biden’s former business partner, Devon Archer.

Between their flagship Tuesday evening (24:36) and Wednesday morning news shows (46:05), they’ve spent a whopping 70 minutes and 41 seconds obsessing over the charges filed against Trump relating to January 6 riot and claims about the 2020 election.

All three networks were within two minutes of each other with NBC at 22 minutes and 17 seconds, CBS at 23 minutes and 28 seconds, and then ABC on top at 24 minutes and 56 seconds. Each of these networks far exceeded what all three put up for post-Archer hearing coverage, which was only eight minutes and 32 seconds.

Mark Finkelstein groused about another Osama bin Liden reference to Trump's indictment:

On Wednesday's Morning Joe, liberal historian Michael Beschloss said that the indictment of former President Trump "fits perfectly into the American story" because there has been a history of "monsters" seeking to destroy American democracy. Beschloss cited the Confederacy, the attack on Pearl Harbor, and Osama Bin Laden.

In the context of commenting on the new indictment of Trump relating to January 6th, an apparently panicked Beschloss [see screencap] described Trump as a "monster" like Bin Laden. And in a bit of unhinged scare-mongering, Beschloss warned that if elected, Trump will institute a "presidential dictatorship" and "take away our democracy."

"9/11/2001, Osama bin Laden and other terrorists hated our democracy, tried to destroy it. You see where I'm going," he proclaimed.

Finkelstein was giddy at the prospect that his fellow normally law-and-order right-wingers won't accept their their favorite presidential candidate is a criminal:

Beschloss didn't offer any evidence in support of his claim that Trump has said that the would institute a "presidential dictatorship," or that he would "take our democracy away."

As for the indictment somehow saving America from Trump being elected: even a conviction would not legally bar Trump from running and serving, and Trump has indicated that would be his intention. Indeed, this indictment, which even the National Review has editorialized "shouldn't stand," could be the very thing that propels Trump back into the White House.

Be careful what you wish for, Michael Beschloss and the rest of the liberal establishment!

Houck took over the MRC's Aug. 2 podcast to rehash his complaint about "the astounding totals of coverage on ABC, CBS, and NBC" of the Trump indictment," again claiming that this "has given the networks the perfect excuse to wave goodbye to any and all Biden scandals for an indefinite period of time."

Houck whined again that Trump's indictment was treated as news, with added Biden whataboutism, in an Aug. 3 post:

On Wednesday afternoon, NewsBusters brought you the tally of broadcast network coverage of the third Trump indictment as having stood at roughly 70 minutes (70:41) on the flagship morning and evening newscasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC. Unsurprisingly, the coverage ballooned ahead of Trump’s arraignment Thursday afternoon on charges relating to his conduct on and prior to January 6. The total this time? Roughly 112 minutes (111:57).

Another pattern held serve as, thanks to this third Trump indictment and the liberal media’s obsession with all things Trump (including elevating his 2024 candidacy), the networks again had nothing on Wednesday night and Thursday morning about any of the scandals pertaining to the Biden presidency, Hunter Biden’s life of ruin, or allegations of corruption against President Joe Biden.

The three remained in close touch on the stop watch with ABC still in first place with 38 minutes and 48 seconds.

Houck didn't explain why he apparenty thinks Trump's indictment should be censored.

Nicholas Fondacaro melted down over the ladies of "The View" -- whom he once again smeared as a "cackling coven" -- had an opinion on Trump's latest indictment:

With 2024 on the horizon, the Cackling Coven of ABC’s The View really wanted former President Trump out of the picture. So much so that co-host Sara Haines was flabbergasted on Thursday by the notion that he would get a fair trial and not have any potential jury pool poisoned by the Justice Department releasing information pre-trial. They also fantasized about what his imprisonment situation would be like with Joy Behar saying she would settle for him being exiled somewhere, anywhere.

Referencing an interview Trump Attorney General Bill Barr gave to CNN the previous night, Haines couldn’t wrap her mind around why Trump deserved to have a fair trial, admitting it “blew my mind”:

Fondacaro again referenced "Racist co-host Sunny Hostin," apparently still under the delusion that his inability to understand how metaphors work justifies the smear.

Tober returned to rant that someone said nice things about Smith:

During CBS’s live coverage of former President Donald Trump’s arraignment on charges related to the January 6 riots at the United States Capitol and his alleged attempt to “overturn” the results of the 2020 presidential election, anchor Norah O’Donnell and correspondent Robert Costa heaped sycophantic praise for the corrupt anti-Trump prosecutor Jack Smith. O’Donnell took a break from analyzing the multiple indictments Trump was facing as they were speaking to Beclown herself by swooning over Smith and his so-called “grit” and “determination.”   

“Also in the courtroom is a special counsel, Jack Smith,” O’Donnell observed. “He is essentially who Donald Trump is up against in multiple of these indictments,” she said referring to Smith. “The two of course the classified documents and the January 6 one. And they're sitting across from each other inside this courtroom.”

Tober offered no evidence to back up has assertion that Smith is "corrupt," unless he's arguing that merely indicting a Republican is evidence of "corruption." Instead, he closed by huffing: "The media is enjoying this saga way too much. They can’t be trusted to report on these indictments and trials objectively. It’s all a game to them." But that falsely suggests that Fox News is somehow not part of "the media" -- Tober didn't tell us how Fox News is covering the indictment -- and it ignores that Tober and the rest of the MRC can't be trusted to report on Trump's indictments objectively because its anti-media agenda is nothing but a game to them.

CNS Pushes Bogus Idea That Trump Cares About 'Election Integrity'
Topic: CNSNews.com

CNSNews.com is nothing more than a right-wing blog these days, though we still pop in on occasion to see how Craig Bannister -- the only remaining employee from when CNS tried to be a "news" organization -- is peddling right-wing narratives. He did just that in an Aug. 24 post under the wildly dishonest headline "GOP Debate Moderators Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum Fail to Question Election Integrity - Trump Did, and Got Arrested":

The first Republican presidential primary debate, hosted Wednesday by Fox News Channel and moderated by Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum, failed to address the issue of election integrity. But, former President Donald Trump says he'll "proudly be arrested" for doing so.

Conservative voters, pundits and politicians expressed disappointment and disenfranchisement over the omission of the topic, including former Arizona governor candidate Kari Lake, who questioned how election issues can be resolved without discussing election integrity.

Lake’s sentiments reflect those of many voters. A recent poll conducted by the Honest Elections Project, revealed that a significant majority of U.S. voters - including Black and Hispanic voters - support measures such as voter ID requirements and limitations on mail-in voting.

A poll by the Honest Elections Project found that nine in ten (88%) of U.S. voters - including Black and Hispanic voters - support measures to improve election integrity, such as voter ID requirements and limitations on mail-in voting.

The poll also highlighted the prevailing preference for in-person voting over mailed-in ballots, with three-fourths of voters stating their preference for the former. Furthermore, there was overwhelming opposition (89%) to the idea of noncitizens voting in U.S. elections, underscoring the significance of election integrity as a pressing concern. Likewise, 72% said they oppose lowering the voting age to 16.

Key to Bannister's narrative is not explaining anything he's writing about. "Election integrity" is nothing more than a euphemistic term to describe right-wing efforts to reduce the number of registered voters out ot the belief that doing so gives Republicans a better chance at winning elections. Bannister failed to mention that Lake, like Donald Trump, refuses to admit that she lost her race for Arizona governor and is making up tales of election fraud to justify her failure to acknowledge reality. He also failed to disclose that the Honest Elections Project is a right-wing group dedicated to suppressing voter registration, and it promoted a fringe theory that state legislatures have absolute power to control elections that can't be infriged upon by state constitutions or even courts.All the poll results Bannister cited are tailored to support the organization's objectives,including raging against voting by mail.

Bannister then portrayed Trump as a victim and promoted his ranting abouty "election integrity":

In stark contrast to the debate's oversight, former President Donald Trump made a bold statement on his social media platform Truth Social. Trump declared himself to be the foremost advocate for election integrity and pledged his willingness to be arrested for standing up for this cause:

“NOBODY HAS EVER FOUGHT FOR ELECTION INTEGRITY LIKE PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP. FOR DOING SO, I WILL PROUDLY BE ARRESTED TOMORROW AFTERNOON IN GEORGIA. GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!!”

Trump will turn himself in at the Fulton County Georgia on Thursday, after District Attorney Fani Willis indicted him, claiming that he tried to overturn the 2020 election results in the state.

In her zeal to convict him, Willis leveled a variety of charges with dubious and fanciful relevance to election interference.

Bannister failed to tell readers that none of Trump's claims of election fraud have held up upon scrutiny. And his claim that the charges against Trump have  "dubious and fanciful relevance to election interference" cited a Fox News report noting the RICO-centered charges, which simply illustrate that there was a broader conspiracy to interfere with the election results.

This is the kind of thing the Media Research Center blew up CNS to end up with.

MRC Annoyed That It's Pointed Out How Trump Acts Like A Mobster
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center has aggressively defended Donald Trump against the many indictment he faces, but before it could get around to defending him against his third indictment, it felt the need to complaing that people were likening him to a mob boss. Peter Kotara groused in a July 26 post:

On Wednesday’s Morning Joe, race-baiting Reverend Al Sharpton came up with an excessively belligerent and hateful reason for why Democrat prosecutions of former President Donald Trump were not affecting his support among voters in the Republican primary.

Sharpton argued that the reason why all these indictments brought by Trump’s political enemies right before the election, was in fact because Trump appealed to the Republican electorate who just hated blacks, women, and gays, and wanted to oppress them.

[...]

He added that Trump was a “crime boss.” Sharpton argued that “It was Trump that had a crime attorney, Roy Cohen [sic], who represented outright mafia chiefs. That was Donald Trump's lawyer. I mean if anyone was a crime boss and is a crime boss, it would be Donald Trump. And if you think it's an overstatement, get the calendar of court dates he has coming up the rest of the year.”

It should be noted that none of the Trump indictments were about mafia activities or organized crime, and hiring a very well-known attorney that happened to represent mafia members in the past does not prove that Trump was a mafia member.

Yes, Kotara is reduced to insisting that Trump can't possibly be a mob boss because he hasn't been specifically charged with being one. And doesn't the hiring of a mob attorney like Roy Cohn say volumes about the company you keep, whether or not you're actually involved in the mob?

Mark Finkelstein similarly complained in a July 28 post:

It's easy for the pro-Biden networks to promote Jack Smith's indictments with maximum drama. On Friday's Morning Joe, NBC News justice correspondent Ken Dilanian is bringing all the doom-and-gloom language he brought to the Mueller probe of Russian collusion with Trump. 

Speaking of the new charges against Trump, that he attempted to have surveillance video at Mar-a-Lago deleted, Dilanian really built this up as a criminal conspiracy:

"These allegations rival anything that Richard Nixon was accused of. These are two additional counts of obstruction of justice. . . This indictment reads like a Mafia case."

As you'll see in the video, Dilanian appeared to be virtually at a loss for words as he declared the situation "mind-boggling."

Willie Geist, hosting today's show, agreed with Dilanian, saying:

"It really is astonishing, Jonathan Lemire. It has to be said, reading through this new indictment, it reads like something straight out of the Gambino crime family."

Finkelstein offered nothing but whataboutism in response:

Given his track record on the truth, Dilanian's declarations might be taken with a grain of salt. Back in 2020, NewsBusters caught Dilanian claiming that the Hunter Biden laptop story sounded "really fishy " He suggested that it was, in fact, a Russian "intelligence operation." Whoops!

PS: If Trump sounds like a Mafia boss, what does Joe '10% for the Big Guy' Biden sound like—Cosa Nostra Ken, complete with Dr. Jill Barbie?

Finkelstein didn't mention that, as we've previously noted, questions about Hunter's laptop were reasonable given that they came from the wildly biased pro-Trump right-wing rag that his the New York Post , and the Post could have avoided such questions had they provided independent verification of the laptop that would have address skepticism about it.

The MRC reguarly gets annoyed when it's pointed out that Trump acts and speaks not unlike a mobster -- something many others have also pointed out.

WND Touts Malik Obama's Latest Bitter Rants Against Half-Brother Barack
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Malik Obama is a bitter attempted grifter who has been angry for years that his half-brother Barack -- with whom he has infrequently interacted -- has done much better than him and won't send some unearned cash his way. He's been lashing out at Barack for years over his failure to be able to right Barack's coattails to fame ... and, of course, WorldNetDaily has lapped it up because they hate Barack Obama even more. WND started out hating Malik, though, out of guilt by association; in 2014, for example, he was attacked for allegedly wearing a Hamas-linked scarf (thought the accusation came from Obama-hater and apparent fabluist Walid Shoebat).

It touted in 2015 how Malik did an interview with discredited charalatan filmmaker Joel Gilbert (though it also noted that Malik "has been accused of collaboration with Sudan’s radical Islamic regime, using money raised in his father’s and brother’s name for personal profit, and partnering with a cult leader."In 2017, it made a big deal out pretending to be a responsible birther by admitting that a purported birth certificate for Barack released by Malik was a "fraudulent document," though it spent two months claming otherwise wen it first surfaced in 2009.

After that, though, it started treating Malik's anti-Barack rants as credible:

• In 2019, WND cheered how Malik bashed Barack as a "narcissist" (as if Malik isn't one by running to right-wing media for attention).
• The same year, WND also hyped how Malik asked, "Is Michelle Michael?"
• It touted in 2020 how Malik endorsed Donbald Trump for president, something he also did in 2016.

(Newsmax has also promoted Malik's rantings as well.)

Meanwhile, Malik was feeling a little desperate attention again by insulting Barack, and WND once again bit. Joe Kovacs dutifully wrote it up in an Aug. 7 article:

Barack Obama's brother is again going public with his assertion the former president is a homosexual.

Sunday night on Twitter, Malik Obama tweeted: "This guy must be gay," referring to Barack's public support for keeping pornographic books in libraries.

Just weeks ago in mid-July, Malik made a similar comment on the same issue his brother was addressing.

Barack had tweeted on July 17: "Today, some of the books that shaped my life – and the lives of so many others – are being challenged by people who disagree with certain ideas or perspectives. And librarians are on the front lines, fighting every day to make the widest possible range of viewpoints, opinions, and ideas available to everyone."

Barack Obama was alluding to graphically explicit books including "Gender Queer," which is replete with pornographic images.

Kovacs offered no evidence that "Gender Queer" is pornography as defined by law. He also didn't mention that Barack has a wife and two children, which most poeple would consider evidence that he isn't gay (and that Michelle is not a man).

As Malik continued to rage, Kovacs gave him another platform in an Aug. 14 article:

In the wake of his recent accusations that Barack Obama is homosexual, Malik Obama, the ex-president's brother, is launching a fresh attack, calling Barack "Fake ass a snake" and a "traitor," also suggesting the recent catastrophic fires on the Hawaiian island of Maui may have been intentionally set to pave the way for a buyout of all property owners.

Sunday evening, Malik tweeted a photo of himself with Barack, noting: "Me and Fake ass a snake (President Barack Obama) when he was a nobody."

He later added, "Before he became a SNOB."

Malik wrote many follow-up comments about Barack, including:

"That guy thinks he's GOD."

"Fake ass a snake is a TRAITOR!"

"Power totally corrupted him. NERO."

Additionally, Malik tweeted a photo of himself sporting a red baseball cap emblazoned with the simple message, "F Biden."

His further disdain for Joe Biden was evinced in his comments such as, "Cast your vote for President Trump!"

[...]

Malik Obama also retweeted online speculation about the devastating fires in Maui, saying: "I [k]new something was up considering the silence of FAKE ass a snake (President Obama)."

Kovacs didn't mention that even people back in Malik's native Kenya have pointed out what a bitter grifter Malik is, with one news outlet noting, "While Africans have the Ubuntu spirit of rising together, that does not mean sitting pretty and waiting for handouts from a successful relative. It also does not allow you to hate and besmirch the character of your successful relatives when they do not send as much resources as you would wish."

MRC Tried To Whitewash Alleged Shady Criminal Witness Against Hunter Biden
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center was a big fan of Gal Luft in 2008, mainly because of his objection to importing oil.

• A March 2008 post by Ariel Cohen approvingly stated: "As Gal Luft, Director of the Institute for Analysis of Global Security recently wrote, at current oil prices the United States sends $460 billion per year overseas to finance its daily purchase of 12 million barrels of imported oil. This amount of money is about the size of our defense budget and three times the size of the ''economic stimulus'' package recently passed by Congress. Dependence on imported oil threatens the U.S. with a long-term economic decline and loss of sovereignty, according to Luft."
• A June 2008 post by Geoffrey Dickens included a quote of New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman stating that "we basically have an energy policy that Gal Luft has described, I think very accurately as the 'sum of all lobbies.'"
• Julia Seymour devoted an entire July 2008 post to "energy security expert" Luft claiming that "The environmental movement stands to lose many supporters if it works against people's economic prosperity."

The next time Luft popped up at the MRC was in a February 2013 post by Brent Baker noting that an essay by Luft was among the contents of an issue of Foreign Policy that said too many nice things about Barack Obama.

Luft didn't get renewed attention at the MRC again until his entanglement as an alleged whistleblower against Hunter Biden. A March 31 post by Dickens doing a time count of coverage of "Biden family corruption" repeated a claim by the right-wing New York Post that "Israeli energy expoert" Luftwas claiming that "Hunter Biden had an FBI mole named “One-Eye” who tipped off his Chinese business partners that they were under investigation," also noting that Luft was "arrested in Cyprus last month on gunrunning charges" and made his claims after "being detained at a Cyprus airport as he prepared to board a plane to Israel." Dickens also included Luft ranting that he was the target of a "politically motivated extradition request by the U.S." and that the "DOJ is trying to bury me to protect Joe, Jim, and Hunter Biden."

But the MRC never told its readers that Luft kinda disappeared after that, as Republican Rep. James Comer seemed to confirm in a May appearance on Fox Business. That's not a good look for a would-be whistleblower, but the MRC doesn't care. When he surfaceed while in fugitive-from-justice mode, Dickens cheered the development in a July 6 post:

An eyewitness with stunning claims about the Biden family scandals has come forward on a video, yet so far ABC, CBS and NBC have yet to report on them. 

Israeli professor and former Israeli army officer Dr. Gal Luft in a 14-minute long video (released by the New York Post on late Wednesday night) claimed he was about to testify to the House Oversight Committee on the Biden family receiving payments from Chinese officials but was arrested in Cyprus, before he could deliver that testimony.

Dickens quoted the Post noting that Luft is a "fugitive" whose video was "filmed in an undisclosed location while he’s on the run."  The Post was evendismissive of Luft, calling him a "self-proclaimed fall guy." But Dickens made sure to reward Fox News for helping to push this anti-Hunter narrative: "While the broadcast networks have yet to utter a word on this amazing development, FNC’s Fox & Friends did jump on the story this morning."

Luft popped up one last time in a July 11 post by Curtis Houck, who was uncritically quoting a question at a White House press briefing by a New York Post reporter who noted that Luft hads been indicted "for violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act by working without registration for a company called CEFC China Energy. The President’s son and brother worked for the same firm without registration and the President was invoked in that infamous shakedown text message preceding the transfer of $5 million to the Biden family."

But there's a lot the MRC hasn;t told you about Luft. As Liz Dye at Wonkette pointed out, the original charging document against Luft was issued in November 2022 -- before there was a Republican House to obsess over Hunter -- meaning that it's arguably untrue that Luft is being charged to shut him up about Hunter. She further summarized: "Luft didn't get indicted because he tried to blow the whistle on Hunter Biden. He got indicted because he was wildly corrupt and because he made false statements about it to the FBI, including in March of 2019, during the very same interview in which Comer alleges that Luft blew the whistle on Hunter Biden."

Allof which makes it strange that Comer and the MRC are hanging their credibility hat on a guy who's clearly spining stories in order to save himself from jail -- in part for being a fugitive from justice -- rather than out of any interest in telling the truth. But then, there's a lot of Hunter Biden Derangement Syndrome going on at the MRC these days.

Newsmax Tries To Hire Yet Another Troubled Ex-Fox Newser
Topic: Newsmax

Newsmax just loves to hire personalities with troubled pasts --especially if they used to work for Fox News -- resulting in a rogue's gallery that has been occupied by anti-vaxxers, deadbeat dads and credibly accused sexual harassers. It appears to be interested in yet another troubled ex-Fox Newser.

Ed Henry was fired by Fox News in 2020 over allegations of sexual harassment; he later tried to sue anyone who reported on it (but ultimately dropped the litigation). Henry ended up landing at the far-right channel Real America's Voice, where he co-hosted their morning show. In August, Henry and co-host Karyn Turk were pulled from the show, allegedly because he was entertaining a job offer from another channel. It probably didn't help that a month or so earlier, Henry was pulled over on suspicion of DUI, and he had reached a plea agreement to avoid jail time the day before his RAV dismissal. (Henry's passenger during the DUI arrest was none other than Karyn Turk; Henry is married, but not to her). It turns out that the job offer that allegedly got Henry yanked from RAV came from Newsmax -- and even other Newsmax staffers were outraged that their employer would consider hiring him, as Mediaite reported:

While a contract has yet to be signed, the potential hire has already sparked consternation among staffers who expressed to Mediaite their apprehensions about bringing the scandal-prone host on board during a precarious time for the conservative cable news network.

“They are really freaked out about anything legal. Anything to do with litigation,” said one current Newsmax employee. “This guy is a walking lawsuit.”

“I can’t imagine why anyone would want to hire him,” they added. “He’s a legal risk. It’s not even a question of it, it’s a guarantee. He can’t help himself. Besides, who thinks he’s good on TV? He’s not some polished broadcaster.”

A Newsmax spokesperson declined to comment on the move: “As a matter of policy, Newsmax does not comment on individuals that it may be or not be hiring.”

Concerns over the potential drafting come at a time of great uncertainty for a network that has grown its audience in recent years by offering viewers an alternative to Fox News that more enthusiastically embraces Donald Trump.

Imagine how terrible a person you have to be when employees of a channel that also employs ex-Fox Newsers Eric Bolling and James Rosen  -- who also left the channel under the cloud of sexual misconduct allegations -- object.

The former Fox News producer who accused Henry of sexual misconduct, Jennifer Eckhart, also had things to say:

Eckhart condemned Newsmax for courting Henry in a statement to Mediaite.

“The decision by Newsmax to hire Ed Henry, a known sexual predator, says that they are willing to put the safety of every single one of their employees at risk while placing him in that same position of power that he has, time and again, used to groom, coerce and forcibly prey upon vulnerable individuals,” she said. “I will pray for every woman working at that network. We, as survivors, hear it over and over again, ‘But why didn’t you come forward sooner?’ This is why.”

Things have gone quiet on the Henry-Newsmax front after all of that went public. But as its hring of Bolling and Rosen show, Newsmax does have a soft spot for ex-Fox Newsers as a quick way to build right-wing credibility as it competes against their former employer.

WND's Cashill Serves Up Sob Story Of Capitol Rioter Facing Accountability
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily loves to whitewash the stories of participants in the Capitol riot in order to portray them as political prisoners. Jack Cashill took a stab at one case in his Aug. 2 column:

The headline in the otherwise useless Kansas City Star caught my eye, "Kansas City man spent 6 seconds in Capitol on Jan. 6. Now he's charged with 4 crimes."

As veteran Star reporter Judy Thomas gleefully informs the paper's dwindling reader base, "The arrests have come as the massive Capitol riot investigation has picked up the pace, more than 2½ years after the Jan. 6 breach. The arrest tally now stands around 1,100, on charges ranging from demonstrating in a Capitol building to seditious conspiracy."

Why, one wonders, has the FBI "picked up the pace"? This is the same FBI that sat on Hunter Biden's laptop for nearly a year, doing little but hiding it.

All of Thomas' breast-beating is undone by two words, "six seconds." The headline begs the question, "What horrible thing must this 'Kansas City man' have done in those six seconds to deserve being arrested two-and-a-half years after the fact?"

When sane readers discover that Angelo Pacheco did exactly nothing in those six seconds, they have to question just how far out of control the FBI investigation has gone. This is no manhunt. This is a witch hunt.

[...]

An FBI special agent with the FBI domestic terrorism squad tells what steps she (an assumption) took that led to the arrest of this idealist turned "terrorist."

The agent was helped greatly by a citizen-narc, unknown to Pacheco, who allegedly reviewed his Facebook and Instagram pages, and likely his profile on KCPT, to tag Pacheco as a junior insurrectionist.

"Based on that information," the agent reviewed the photo on Pacheco's driver's license and identified him as being on the Capitol grounds Jan. 6, "wearing a distinctive American flag trapper hat on top of a white baseball cap."

[...]

Six seconds of nothingness. That's it. Reading this, I feel embarrassed for the agent and disgusted anew by the actions of the Bureau that employs her, the Department of Justice that oversees the Bureau, and the capo di tutti capi who runs this criminal enterprise.

Cashill didn't mention that there's also a picture of Pacheco hanging on scaffolding outside the Capitol building, suggesting his motives may not have been quite as benign as Cashill wants us to think.

Cashill then tried to justify Pacheco's appearance at the riot: "Even if Pacheco thought the voting in the 2020 election was on the up-and-up – please! – he had to know too how the FBI colluded with the intel community to rig the election agains Trump. He had every right to be upset." Cashill provided no evidence to support his conspiracy theory or why he thinks Pacheco shared his belief in it.

Cashill didn't note that Pacheco could have simply avoided all this by, you know, not entering the Capitol building -- there was no legitimate need for him to do so, even for six seconds. And the length of time does not matter; once Pacheco crossed the threshold of the Capitol doors, he committed a crime.Instead, he whined:

Six seconds was enough to nail Pacheco for his effort to "knowingly enter" a restricted building, to "disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business," to "engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct," and to "parade, demonstrate, or picket in any of the Capitol Buildings."

Four counts. All misdemeanors. And likely hundreds of thousands of dollars spent to ruin this one ambitious young man's life. Meanwhile, back in Washington, Hunter Biden …

Again, Pacheco chose to enter the Capitol and, thus, indisputably committed a crime by doing so. The government is not "ruining his life" by holding him accountable for his behavior -- that's called the American justice system. And we thought right-wingers believed in law and order.

Cashill also didn't explain why crimes should not be prosecuted if he approves of the commission of them. Then again, he loves criminals who commit the right crimes (like killing a black person), as his support for George Zimmerman and Derek Chauvin has demonstrated.

NEW ARTICLE: The MRC Hating Transgender People, 2023 Edition
Topic: Media Research Center
In the first few months of this year, the Media Research Center kept up its nasty campaign of hate against transgender people. Read more >>

MRC Floods The Zone To Promote RFK Jr.'s Victimhood (And Hide That He's An Anti-Semitic Wacko)
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center had to work to clean up Robert Kennedy Jr.'s bizarre anti-Semetic remark that COVID was "ethnically targeted" to spare Jews because he was the star witness at a Republian-led congressional hearing where he was to play victim and repeat the MRC's "censorship" narrative. And when that day came on July 20, the MRC made sure to flood the zone. Nicholas Schau was first up on the RFK Jr. stenography beat:

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. dropped the hammer on Big Tech, particularly YouTube, for censoring free speech about important issues.

In his opening statement, Kennedy agreed with ranking member Stacey Plaskett that “this body ought to be concerning itself with the issues that impact directly the American people.” But, he retorted, “we can’t do that without the First Amendment, without debate.” Kennedy has been in a seemingly never-ending fight against a barrage of censorship by Big Tech platforms who colluded with federal entities to silence online free speech. But today the tables have turned, and the presidential candidate has been given a platform before the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. 

Kennedy came out swinging at the hearing, which covered the notable trend in collusion between the federal government and Big Tech to censor American speech, according to the House Judiciary Committee website.

To illustrate the importance of free speech, Kennedy referred to how his campaign announcement speech was censored. He said that, in the speech, he “talked about… all the issues that deeply concern” Plaskett. However, despite this, Kennedy said that “five minutes into my speech, when I was talking about Paul Revere, YouTube de-platformed me.”

“I didn’t talk about vaccines in that speech. I didn’t talk about anything that was a forbidden subject. I just was talking about my campaign and things that, conversation that we ought to be having with each other as Americans, and I was shut down,” Kennedy said. “And that is why the First Amendment is important.”

Indeed, Big Tech companies have already interfered in the 2024 presidential election and have censored Kennedy no fewer than 10 times between April and June 2023, according to MRC’s exclusive CensorTrack.org database. YouTube, in particular, has censored Kennedy most prolifically in comparison to other platforms. A 2022 MRC Free Speech America study found that Kennedy’s accounts were repeatedly targeted for alleged “ false COVID-19 vaccine claims ” and “vaccine misinformation.”

Schau didn't explain why he apparently believes false information about COVID vaccines should be allowed to spread unchecked.

Gabriela Pariseau followed by attacking Plaskett for pointing out that Kennedy is an anti-vaxxer conspiracy theorist and apparent anti-Semite:

House Ranking member Stacey Plaskett (D-VI) kicked off Thursday’s hearings by railing against her committee for giving Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. a platform to share his experiences with Big Tech censorship. 

In her remarks, Plaskett attempted to discredit Kennedy and the hearing entirely during a hearing before the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. Her comments came after she joined over 100 Members who tried to remove Kennedy from the witness list prior to the hearing.

He recently came under fire for comments claiming that COVID-19 was an ethnically targeted bioweapon that does not affect certain Jewish and Chinese people. Kennedy has been in a seemingly never-ending fight against a barrage of censorship by Big Tech platforms. But today the tables have turned, and the presidential candidate has been given a platform before Congress.

In an attempt to discredit Kennedy, Plaskett asked why the committee was Kennedy a platform. She said mockingly, “many of my Republican colleagues will rush to cover that they have Mr. Kennedy here because they want to protect his free speech, that they do not believe in American censorship.”  

She went on to show her true colors when she seemed to dismiss the idea of Kennedy having the freedom to speak at a hearing about free speech. “This is not the kind of free speech that I know of, the free speech that is protected by the constitution’s First Amendment,” she said. “[F]ree speech is not an absolute. The Supreme Court has stated that and other’s free speech that is allowed –hateful, abusive rhetoric– does not need to be promoted in the halls of the people’s house.”

Plaskett went on to try and defame the Republican conference and staffers who she claimed “have even questioned whether the Holocaust took place” and “openly follow white supremacy.”  She followed up by saying “It’s a free country. You absolutely have a right to say what you believe,” she said. “But, you don’t have the right to a platform, public or private. We don’t have to give one of the largest platforms of our democracy, congress this hearing.” Of course, she glossed over the fact that Americans’ do have the right not to have their government pressure private companies to censor their viewpoints. [Emphasis added].

The congresswoman went on to claim that Kennedy’s views are “harmful” and “dangerous” and by having them at the hearing Republicans were not merely “supporting free speech” but “endorsing” or even “co-signing” his views.

Pariseau made no effort to disprove Plaskett's claim that Kennedy's anti-Semitism and continued lies about vaccines have effectively forfeited his right to unfettered frree speech. Instead, she whined that Kennedy's vaccine lies deserve free speech too:

Plasket [sic] additionally showed that she is out of touch with the concerns of many Americans. She noted questions that she has been asked like: “Why are you having this hearing? What does this have to do with inflation? What does this have to do with the cost of living? What does this have to do with the lives of everyday Americans?” There’s a simple answer. A right to free speech and a right to access relevant information about vaccines and elections deeply affects the everyday lives of Americans.

Catherine Salgado then did stenography for the Republican committee head insisting that Kennedy was telling the truth when he tweeted that baseball great Hank Aaron died of COVID vaccine:

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) called out the anti-free speech efforts of the FBI and President Joe Biden’s administration during a Thursday Congressional hearing.

The House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government held a hearing July 20 at which two targets of government censorship efforts, Democrat presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and journalist Emma-Jo Morris, testified. The White House pounced on Kennedy just “pointing out facts,” the representative insisted. Jordan described the Biden administration efforts to silence Kennedy and FBI censorship priming that triggered censorship of Morris, who in 2020 broke the Hunter Biden laptop scandal for the New York Post.

A mere 37 hours into the Biden administration’s term in office, Jan. 23, 2021, Jordan explained, the White House emailed Twitter: “‘Wanted to flag the below tweet, and I am wondering if we can get moving on the process for having it removed ASAP.’” The tweet referred to was from Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which said, “‘Hank Aaron’s tragic death is part of a wave of suspicious deaths among elderly closely following administration of the vaccine. He received the vaccine on Jan. 5 to inspire other black Americans to get the vaccine.’”

Jordan emphasized the tweet did not contain any false claims, despite the White House email subject line of “Flagging Hank Aaron Misinformation.” Jordan said, “Misinformation is when you don’t have the facts right, you’re saying things that are not true.” Jordan said Kennedy was just “pointing out facts, and yet the White House … 37 hours into the administration, they were trying to censor Mr. Kennedy. I find that interesting. The irony here of trying to censor the guy who’s [now] actually their Democrat primary opponent.”

In fact, Kennedy was lying when he falsely blamed Aaron's death on a COVID vaccine -- a medical examiner found that Aaron died of natural causes, not from the vaccine. Salgado failed to mention that inconvenient fact.

Craig Bannister rehashed Kennedy's statement in an post republished from the right-wing blog that CNSNews.com has been reduced to:

YouTube deplatformed him five minutes into his announcement that he was a Democrat presidential candidate, Robert Kennedy, Jr. said Thursday, while defending himself from attacks by fellow Democrats during a House hearing.

A hearing, which was supposed to be about the weaponization of government through censorship, quickly detoured into vicious efforts to smear Kennedy and prevent him from testifying against censorship of viewpoints opposed by the Biden Administration.

[...]

“Big Tech and the media are desperately trying to censor @RobertKennedyJr to protect Biden. Stop interfering in our elections!” Media Research Center (MRC) President Brent Bozell tweeted, reacting to Kennedy’s testimony.

Bannister uncritically quoted Kennedy claiming that "I've never been anti-vaccine" while failing to mention all the facts that prove the exact opposite.

Tom Olohan squeezed yet another Kennedy-promoting item from this hearing for a July 21 post:

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ronald F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK Jr.) went after Big Tech platforms for censoring free speech on natural immunity during the pandemic.

On Thursday, July 20th, RFK Jr. was given a chance to speak to Congress and the American people. This provided Rep. Massie, another opponent of censorship, an opportunity to speak to RFK Jr. about how Big Tech had censored him and others who posted about natural immunity, even when the censored information was both scientifically accurate and promoted by a legacy media source. Massie said, “One of the immutable and undeniable uh tenants of immunology is natural immunity. But for two years it was denied. It wasn't even just denied. It was censored.”

Massie also noted to Louisiana Special Assistant Attorney General D. John Sauer, “I noticed in the court ruling — in the case that you worked on— that they said that the court said that Facebook reported to the White House that it labeled and demoted posts, suggesting natural immunity to a COVID-19 infection is superior to vaccine immunity,” before discussing how Twitter had specifically censored him on the issue.

In fact, there is little evidence that "natural immunity" -- catching a disease that might kill you in the hope of becoming immune from it -- is superior to vaccination, and there was little information earlyon in the COVID pandemic about whether "natural immunity" was a valid path given that, again, COVID was quite deadly early on.

As we've said before, this is a lot of time and energy for the MRC to spend on a candidate it supports only because he fits its victimhood narrative and he might be a spoiler to President Biden's re-election -- not be it would ever support him should he somehow win the Democratic nomination.