MRC's Unhinged Response to Comey Firing: Calling Everyone Else Unhinged Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center knew exactly what it needed to do in order to deflect from questions about President Trump's firing of FBI director James Comey: portray anyone who questioned the decision as deranged. And "unhinged" -- one of the MRC's favorite attack words -- was far from the only description used.
Count the derogatory name-calling, complete with added bolding:
"CNN political commentator David Gregory was in a visible rage over the whole ordeal."
"ABC and CBS on Wednesday went into full panic mode on Wednesday, seeing Donald Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey as a crisis comparable to Richard Nixon during the darkest days of Watergate. ... Co-host Robin Roberts turned to liberal journalist Cokie Roberts to push this hyperbolic narrative[.]"
"Melber chimed back in by wildly speculating that the President had opened himself up to 'criminal liability'[.]"
"Dilbert cartoon creator, Scott Adams, had a good laugh over Olbermann's profanely unhinged tweet over the Comey firing."
The firing of FBI Director James Comey has pushed the deranged, bloodthirsty media over the edge. Rather than reporting the facts, the media rushed to breathlessly pushing Democratic talking points and conspiracy theories untethered to reason or reality."
"Slate may win the award for most hyperbolic reaction to the firing of FBI Director James Comey."
"In a hyperbolic segment for MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Wednesday, co-host Joe Scarborough went all in comparing President Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey to the firing of U.S. Attorneys by Richard Nixon at the height of the Watergate scandal."
Appearing on CNN Wednesday afternoon to participate in the network-wide meltdown over James Comey’s ouster as FBI Director, longtime liberal journalist and CNN political analyst Carl Bernstein invoked Watergate but went further, fretting that 'this is terribly dangerous moment in American history.' ... Perhaps most unglued was former FBI official and CNN law enforcement analyst Philip Mudd..."
"Leave it to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow to beclown herself right out of the gate last night in describing President Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey."
"You can find countless examples of lunatic reactions to the Trump move."
"After initially refraining from making irresponsible comparisons between President Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey to the Watergate scandal, on Wednesday’s NBC Nightly News and Thursday’s Today, the network could no longer resist its liberal instincts, joining ABC and CBS in labeling Trump the new Richard Nixon."
Appearing as a panel member on Thursday's New Day to discuss the firing of former FBI director James Comey, regular CNN guest Jason Johnson of The Root hyperbolically fretted that "this is how democracy dies" and worried that it was a "constitutional and a sovereignty crisis."
"All night on Tuesday, journalists obsessively compared Trump’s move to Richard Nixon’s “Saturday night massacre” of special prosecutor Archibald Cox during the Watergate scandal."
"The journalists at MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Thursday were in full freak out mode over the firing of James Comey."
"As the Media Research Center has documented since FBI Director James Comey’s firing on Tuesday, the liberal media have been in a rage and desperately trying to tie the firing to Russia."
If you can't beat 'em with the facts, start hurling insults. Right, MRC?
Patrice Lewis starts off her April 28 WorldNetDaily column with a spectacularly ill-informed anti-transgender screed:
People have always embraced wild, wacky fads. While most are harmless, some delve into darkness and morbidity. Today, one of the most destructive fads is transgenderism – and make no mistake, it’s a fad.
From Australia: “Psychiatrist Stephen Stathis, who runs the gender clinic at Brisbane’s Lady Cilento Children’s Hospital and is responsible for diagnosing gender dysphoria, reports that ‘many’ youth are ‘trying out being transgender’ in order to stand out. Apparently, declaring oneself ‘transgender’ is trendy. ‘One said to me, “Doctor Steve … I want to be transgender, it’s the new black,”‘ Stathis related.”
The silliness includes “fluid” options. (“At the moment I feel like a girl. Now I feel like a boy. Now I feel like, um, a cat. Now I’m a mushroom. Now I’m a vacuum cleaner.”). Social media offers dozens of gender options created out of thin air to cater to this madness.
The more serious gender dysphoria is a mental illness that has resulted in so many mutilated bodies and horrific regrets that until recently Johns Hopkins Hospital refused to conduct surgeries, preferring counseling to help patients address their issues.
It’s worse when an activist parent takes a child’s transitory make-believe and makes it a permanent, life-altering reality. (“Mommy, I feel like a girl today.” “OK, Johnnie, I’ll schedule an appointment with the doctor to have your parts cut off and give you hormones the rest of your life to force your body to conform with your momentary fantasy. Meanwhile, let’s go shopping for Barbies and makeup.”)
So transgenders are at best faddish and at worst mentally ill. No one is born into the “wrong” body, no matter how much someone might feeeeel like the opposite sex.
Needless to say, Lewis provides no example of a parent who ever rushed her child in for gender reassignment surgery based on a single declaration of how a child "feels."
Lewis then relates a tale of what her column's headline claim is "a true tale of a true transgender" ... which isn't one at all. What the person in question has, as Lewis eventyually admits, is androgen insensitivity syndrome, a hermaphroditic condition in which a person has a mixture of male and female genitalia. The person, raised as a girl, became a male named James. Lewis then rants:
When the trendy transgenders are tired of being the opposite sex, they can take off their funny clothes and call it a day. James doesn’t have that option. His condition is the same no matter what clothes he wears. In public, James will use male bathroom facilities, though he must use a stall since he has no external genitalia. This is his reality, no matter how he “feels.”
She then quuotes James' mother as saying, "Don't judge my son until you've walked a mile in his shoes."
The fact that Lewis thinks transgenderism is nothing more than a mentally ill person engaging in cosplay shows that Lewis has no intention to take that same walk before spewing more malicious hatred at transgenders.
The Trump Flip Is Complete: MRC Won't Even Complain About Roger Stone Anymore Topic: Media Research Center
In April 2016, the Media Research Center rather belatedly congratulated CNN and MSNBC for banning Trump confidante and dirty trickster Roger Stone from their airwaves. MRC chief Brent Bozell called stone "a thug who relishes personal insults, character assassination, and offensive gestapo-like tactics that should be unequivocally dismissed by civil society, most especially those who might give him a platform from which to spew his hatred."
A May 11 MRC post by Kyle Drennen starts off by declaring any comparison of Trump's firing of FBI director James Comey to the Watergate scandal to be "irresponsible." Then he touts how Stone, appearing on NBC's "Today," followed the Trump talking points by calling such a comparison "apples and oranges."
Drennen made no mention of his boss' harsh description of Stone just a year ago, nor did he condemn NBC for having Stone on.
Amazing what the healing powers of time and millions of dollars in donations from right-wing pro-Trump philanthropists will do to change an organization's mind.
WND Still Won't Tell The Truth About Minn. Measles Outbreak Topic: WorldNetDaily
On April 25, WorldNetDaily published a column by so-called "medical researcher and author" Bill Sardi that is a lengthy rant against vaccines, in which he insisted that recent measles outbreaks have occured largely among vaccinated people, not the unvaccinated, and that "pro-vaccine advocates do not hold the high scientific ground in the battle over whether to vaccinate or not vaccinate school-age children."
Three days later, WND published an article by Leo Hohmann seeking to blame a measles outbreak in a Somali-American community in Minnesota on Islam itself, citing a random Muslim cleric that opposes vaccines. In fact, anti-vaxxer activists -- much like the ones WND has been promoting over the years -- have been aggressively trying to discourage Somali parents in Minnesota from vaccinating their children, something Hohmann omitted from his article.
WND did an update on the Minnesota outbreak in an anonymously written May 10 article. Aside from updating the numbers, it rehashed the same points Hohmann did -- namely, blaming Islam itself for it and repeating a baseless attack by anti-Muslim activist Andrew Bostom citing the random anti-vaxxer Muslim cleric.
WND again fails to acknowledge that its anti-vaxxer friends had been lobbying the Somali community. Nor does it explain how its concern over this story jibes with its previous anti-vaxxer advocacy.
Apparently, at WND it's OK to like vaccines only if you can blame Muslims for ruining it for everyone else.
MRC's Latest Heathering Target: John Kasich Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has made it clear that any Republican who dares criticize Donald Trump is now a target of Heathering. Thus, we have this rather petulant example in an April 30 NewsBusters post by P.J. Gladnick:
Ohio governor and failed presidential candidate John Kasich had his new book, Two Paths: America Divided or United, published on April 25 and after just the first week it has already sunk beneath the waves of public disinterest to #264 as of this writing on Amazon. So much for the sales appeal of a presidential candidacy. It doesn't take any great genius to figure out that he thinks President Donald Trump represents the evil "Divided" while the son of a mailman is somehow the enlightened "United" one.
Although it is obvious that Kasich holds himself in incredibly high esteem, the rest of the country has a very different point of view considering that of all the primaries, he won only in his home state of Ohio. After putting all his marbles into winning New Hampshire which he lost to Trump, Kasich never advanced much beyond being permanently relegated to the edges of the debate stages. The only reason why anyone even paid any attention to him was due to his strategy of eating sloppy food like a slob on camera in the latter stages of his failed campaign.
After breaking his pledge to support the eventual GOP nominee, the Buckeye Ingrate showed his utter contempt, as a DIVIDER, for the system by refusing to even attend the Republican convention in the Ohio host city of Cleveland. To rub in his disdain for that convention he even broadcast his spoiled brat attitude by being active on the Cleveland periphery of the convention such as notably appearing at the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame and other non-convention events
Remember the kid who knocked over the Monopoly game board because he was losing? Yeah, that's John Kasich except he has proven himself to be much more delusional than any annoying kid you ever knew. An example is his video late in the primary season, when it was clear he had no hope of being nominated, portraying himself as the Republican nominee at the convention which he didn't attend.
It looks the one with the actual "spoiled brat attitude" here is Gladnick, for his inability to tolerate criticism of Trump.
WND's Michael Savage Petition Is An Email-Harvesting Operation Topic: WorldNetDaily
An anonymously written May 2 WorldNetDaily article does its best to lay out its case:
Friday will mark the eighth year of Britain’s ban of a prominent American talk-radio host and bestselling author from entry because opinions he expressed on the air purportedly made him a threat to national security.
On May 5, 2009, Michael Savage, host of the nationally syndicated “The Savage Nation” and a member of the National Radio Hall of Fame, was blacklisted by Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s government, which lumped him together with Muslim jihadists and leaders of racist groups for “seeking to provoke others to serious criminal acts and fostering hatred,” as WND reported.
The British government, however, has never specified what Savage has said that might threaten the nation’s security.
Further, government correspondence by top officials revealed the decision was made in an attempt to provide “balance” to a “least wanted” list dominated by Muslim extremists.
Now, with Donald Trump in the White House, a new petition is urging the president and the U.S. State Department to demand that Britain remove Savage from the list.
What WND doesn't tell you: This petition is hosted by WND, and appears to be a business decision rather than any act of altruism or journalism.
WND has had a long-running business and personal relationship with Savage -- it published a couple of his early books, it hosts Savage's website, and WND editor Joseph Farah was touting as early as 2003 about being a "frequent guest" on his TV and radio shows and has guest-hosted at least once. Onetime WND columnist Ellis Washington was so creepily enamored of Savage that he proclaimed himself Savage's "authorized biographer." (No book on Savage by Washington ever surfaced.)
The petition itself reads a bit like a press release, asserting that "Michael Savage has been known to his millions of listeners for more than 22 years as an advocate of the patriotic values of borders, language and culture" and that "Michael Savage has never advocated violence, and his political views are protected by the First Amendment, which is rooted in the civil-rights tradition that began with Britain’s Magna Carta." Savage does, however, have a history of violent rhetoric, which WND conveniently ignores.
But the clue to the petition's real intent comes at the end of it, which states this: "Note: By signing this petition, you agree to receive confirmation email and future notices from co-sponsors WND.com and MichaelSavage.com."
In other words: The petition is being used to build the email lists of both WND and Savage. It's a business proposition, not a cry against censorship.
WND and Savage should stop pretending it's anything else but that.
MRC Writer Still Thinks Gay Conversion Therapy Is A Good Thing Topic: Media Research Center
The last time we tuned into Media Research Center review Dawn Slusher's hate-watching of the TV show "Greenleaf," she was cheering the show's tiptoeing into the subject of gay conversion therapy and insisting that it actually works despite not being able to cite a scientifically valid, replicable method that does no harm to the client.
In a May 4 post, Slusher laments that the show allowed the main character, Kevin, to "succumb to his desires":
Signs were there that Kevin was attracted to family friend and Calvary’s legal counsel Aaron (William H. Bryant Jr.), but May 4th’s episode left no doubt. As the two got closer and closer, physically and emotionally, on the couch while watching TV, Kevin brushes his hand against Aaron’s leg and Aaron pats Kevin on the back, leaving his hand there to linger and turn into a flirtatious massage. Before long, they are passionately making out, as the scene ends with Aaron removing Kevin’s belt.
It’s a shame that the show took this turn rather than show that many Christian men have found success with conversion therapy. Galatians 1:10 in the Bible reads, “For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.”
Had Kevin sought to change for God and himself, rather than for his wife or any other human, he may have found it easier to stay straight. But by directing his efforts to the success of his marriage and Charity’s happiness, he was bound to fail the moment she abandoned him.
This was a ripe opportunity for the show to feature the stories of Christian men who have converted or have stayed straight for themselves and their faith, stories you won’t find in the mainstream media. Kevin’s outcome is common in the world of entertainment, so Greenleaf could have stood out if it had been brave enough to show the other side that’s never talked about. A side that can offer hope to those in the Christian faith who wish to lead a straight life.
As before, Slusher's evidence that "many Christian men have found success with conversion therapy" boils down to a pro-conversaion therapy group and self-proclaimed ex-transgender woman Walt Heyer, a current fave of anti-gay activists who admits he was misdiagnosed as transgender.
Slusher never explains why one's homosexual desires must be suppressed, and she never mentions that the reason why "the other side that’s never talked about" is never talked about is because it really doesn't exist to any notable extent and, again, there's no rigorous science to back it up. Suppression isn't exactly "conversion," after all.
Klayman: Thanks, WND, For Letting Me Indulge My Obama Derangment! Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily has been a patron, and occasional client, of terrible lawyer Larry Klayman for years, so it's no surprise that Klayman would devote his May 5 column to singing WND's praises on its 20th anniversary. One of the reasons, it seems, is that WND let Klayman fully explore his Obama and Clinton derangement:
WND fully explored the self-contradictory, ever-changing stories of Barack Hussein Obama’s birth certificates. When the Obama White House offered a computerized laser-printer version of Obama’s 1961 birth certificate, although laser printers had not been invented in 1961, WND asked questions while the rest of the media couldn’t admit that the emperor had no clothes. When Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Mike Zullo, like others, identified the serious inconsistencies in the various birth certificates offered for Obama, WND reported the facts and let the readers decide, while the “old media” tried to hide the facts from its readers, buried under fictions. WND sent investigative reporter Jerry Corsi to Kenya and Hawaii. When Corsi was arrested in Kenya, WND stood behind the pursuit of the truth.
WND followed the evidence to report on the likely murder of Clinton lawyer and aide Vince Foster and the mysterious events of 80 other people who threatened the Clinton machine.
The clear evidence about the true beliefs of Barack Hussein Obama, whom Freedom Watch dubbed “Muslim of the Year” in 2016, was suppressed in most places, but not in the pages of WND. I have no problem with patriotic Muslims willing to peacefully follow U.S. laws. But Obama is a cynical and dishonest politician who will say and do anything to get elected. Obama wears his faux Christian persona as a scam while helping the most malevolent Muslim influences to hurt America, which has been so good to him.
Now, as evidence has been revealed – so often from the media of England – of Barack Obama’s considering having homosexual relationships and even how he was spurned by white women romantically, WND is one of the few organizations reporting on the facts as we know them. This news development may help explain why he disdains white people. The evidence is showing that Obama married Michelle because she would help him get elected, while secretly resenting the white women that reports now show spurned him. He has lied about his past just as he has lied about being a Christian, among many other lies over the last eight years.
Of course, if WND really was in "pursuit of the truth" on Obama's birth certificate, it would have reported that all of the conspiracy theories Klayman is still promoting are bogus, as is the entire Arpaio-Zullo investigation. And the only thing Corsi pursued in Kenya were falsified documents.
Klayman added: 'WND has been so much a part of my efforts in the public interest that I am working on a book compiling many of my columns. In keeping with my ironic sense of humor, I am calling it “Essays of a Mad Man.” I expect that the truths revealed in these columns will make other people mad as well."
Wait, Klayman has a sense of humor? So we are to believe that his peddling every sleazy fringe conspiracy theory he can find about Obama and Clinton are something akin to Alex Jones letting it slip that he doesn't really mean what he rants? Perhaps Klayman should explain to the rest of us when he's kidding and when he's being deadly serious.
CNS Hyped Lurid Rape Allegations Against Immigrants -- But Is Silent On Charges Being Dropped Topic: CNSNews.com
In March, CNSNews.com was all over the case of an alleged rape at a Maryland high school of a 14-year-old girl by two undocumented immigrants.
CNS managing editor hyped on March 20 how "the young girl allegedly was brutally raped and sodomized by both of the suspects." He luridluy touted in a editor's note that his article would include "graphic details" of the alleged incident, and later added another flag stating, "WARNING: The material below is sexually graphic and disturbing." Chapman even included pictures of the police incident report.
Two days later, Melanie Arter uncritically reported the Trump White House's statement on the case of "the alleged rape of a 14-year-old girl in the boys bathroom of a Maryland high school last week by two male students - one of whom was on an 'alien removal' list."
On March 24, CNS' Susan Jones -- seemingly appalled that the suspects would even be permitted to defend themselves -- quoted the attorney for one of the suspects arguing that the contact between his client and the alleged victim was consensual and "was not a rape in any sense." She later huffed that "the attorney refused to say who is footing the bill" for his client's defense.
CNS also published a column by their Media Research Center overlords Brent Bozell and Tim Graham's complaining that the incident wasn't being hyped enough in the media and insisting that "An immigrant convicted of raping or killing someone is an inconvenient fact if you're a liberal."
Last week, however, prosecutors dropped the rape and sexual assault charges against the two immigrant students, citing a lack of corroboration and numerous inconsistencies. And for CNS and its MRC parent, that's become an inconvenient fact.
While the MRC side has been deflecting criticism for hyping a story that turned out to be false by insisting that, hey, it could have been true, the silence is deafening at CNS. Our search of CNS' archives found no story whatsoever, either original or from the AP, on the charges being dropped.
And once again, CNS' mission statement to "fairly present all legitimate side of a story" has been trashed. Unless, of course, it doesn't consider dismissal of charges against undocumented immigrants to be a "legitimate" story compared with hyping of lurid allegations that apparently turned out to be false.
Kupelian's Idea of 'Truth' Is Mostly LGBT-Bashing Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've already highlighted the May 3 article marking WorldNetDaily's 20th anniversary in which WND managing editor David Kupelian glossed over WND's foundational link to accused cult leader Roy Masters. But there's another statement by Kupelian in that article that's worth noting:
Kupelian praised WND for its willingness to acknowledge truths that can be difficult for other news outlets to swallow.
“I’m a 35-year journalism veteran, but in today’s world, how many news organizations would I want to work for? Not too many,” he declared. “Most – not just ‘mainstream’ organizations, but even, frankly, many ‘conservative’ or ‘alternative’ news outlets – shy away from acknowledging politically incorrect truths that a generation ago were obvious to almost everyone. Hard-core, provable truth like, for example – Islam is not a religion of peace and never has been; homosexuality is a sin and a disorder; transgenderism is a mental illness and delusion, and so on – is increasingly indigestible to most in the news business.
No, Mr. Kupelian, those things aren't "hard-core, provable truth." They are ideologically driven, biased opinions based on hate. Just because you think they are "truth" does not make them so.
This underscores that WND has never been about what most sentient beings would call "truth" -- it's about pushing an ideology. That Kupelian apparently doesn't understand the difference tells you all you need to know about WND's utter lack of veracity and reliability.
MRC Defends Pushing Now-Retracted Immigrant Rape Claim: Hey, It Could've Been True! Topic: Media Research Center
In March, the Media Research Center hopped on the right-wing anti-immigrant bandwagon in order to exploit allegations that a 14-year-old girl at a Rockville, Md., high school was sexually assaulted by two students who were undocumented immigrants. The MRC's Brittany Hughes even scored a Fox News appearance where she "lambasted ABC, CBS, and NBC for their callous refusal to cover the alleged heinous rape of a female student in a Washington D.C. suburban high school by two men and one of which is here in the country illegally."
But earlier this month, prosecutors decided to drop rape charges against the two students, citing a lack of corroboration and numerous inconsistencies. Prosecutors are, however, pursuing child pornography charges against the two, apparently stemming from images the girl shared with them.
So, does the MRC feel a little sheepish about having promoted a story that was retracted? Not at all.
Curtis Houck was in full distraction mode, complaining that "After remaining silent on the alleged March rape of a teenage girl and illegal immigrant in a D.C. suburb, journalists from ABC and CBS demanded the White House on Friday apologize, 'retract' their comments on the case, and admit they 'unfairly jump[ed] to conclusions' now that prosecutors have dropped the rape charges against the two teenage boys." Houck further whined: "Again, this is coming from the same outlet that, like their fellow cohorts, sought to speculate on what happened with the Trayvon Martin, the Duke lacrosse team, and Michael Brown cases before the facts came to light."
Nicholas Fondacaro was further offended that CNN's Brian Stelter called out Fox News for not promoting the dismissal of charges as obsessively as their original filing:
Stelter never addressed the child pornography charges. He instead railed against [Fox News anchor Chris] Wallace for not talking about why it became an international news story. "The answer is his network. Too much of the coverage of this story omitted the conservative media's role in making it a national story,” he said with a clear disdain for conservative media. There was still no explanation about why the Rockville case shouldn’t be a national story.
"Bill O'Reilly there was outraged at the rest of the news media wasn't shouting like he was. But maybe NBC and ABC and CBS were right to be cautious," he said. But at the time of the original story, there was little evidence that the charges wouldn’t stick, yet the Big Three Network often fail to cover crimes by illegal immigrants.
Of course, the idea that "there was little evidence that the charges wouldn’t stick" applies to stories like the Duke lacrosse case as well -- remember, much of that came from the district attorney, Mike Nifong, until it was discovered he was behaving unethically, and the case was rooted in lacrosse team members hiring a stripper -- but the MRC would never admit that because it runs counter to the MRC's anti-media narrative. Indeed, just last year the MRC's Clay Waters ranted that the Duke lacrosse case was a "racially charged rape hoax" perpetuated by the media -- something the MRC would never call the Rockville case, even though the description arguably also applies.
Jorge Bonilla tried mightily to spin the dismissal of the charges, insisting that it was "due to a quirk in Maryland's rape statute." Huh? Since when is lack of solid evidence, as stated by the prosecutors, a legal "quirk"?
Bonilla went on to lament that in coverage of the case on Univision, "The actual facts of the case took a back seat to the optics of whether 'conservative media' and Trump now look bad for having pointed out the immigration status of these youths." He then cheered, in boldface, that the remaining child pornography charges are "a very serious charge that leads to certain deportation."
Brittany Hughes -- who got her shot on Fox News to exploit the now-retracted story -- has yet to retract her attack on "liberal" media outlets for not covering it to her satisfaction.
We Somehow Fail To Make WND's Enemies List Topic: WorldNetDaily
As part of its 20th anniversary self-aggrandization, a May 2 WorldNetDaily article by Bob Unruh lists "the Top 10 'enemies' that have attacked WND over its truth-telling." But most of it is legitimate criticism of WND spun to portray it as unfair.
For instance, Think Progress is on the list for pointing out in 2012 that WND's traffic numbers depend heavily on its conspiracy-laden and birther-centric stories being linked at the Drudge Report . Unruh doesn't dispute any of this, so it's unclear why it's even being highlighted.
There was also this item:
Then there was the “fake news,” before it became popular, that Joseph Farah was removed from the guest list of the sixth Presidential Inaugural Prayer Breakfast that took place on Jan. 21, 2013.
The report simply was false.
Media Matters even featured a quote from Merrie Turner, the organizer of the independent Inaugural Prayer Breakfast, that said that his original inclusion was a mistake.
Actually, WND's own reporter touted that Farah would be a "distinguished guest" at the breakfast before Media Matters contacted breakfast organizers to question why such a rabid Obama-hater would be permitted to take part. The organizers then flip-flopped and re-invited Farah. And after all the rigamorole, Farah didn't even bother to show up. There was confusion to be sure, but there was no "fake news." (That's WND's department.)
One organization, however, is missing from WND's list: ConWebWatch.
Perhaps that's because WND couldn't come up with a strawman about our work that it could easily knock down. In the 17 years of ConWebWatch's existence, the only attack on us WND could muster was a 2008 column in which Farah tried to lamely smear me as a "talent-challenged slug" -- and even then he didn't dispute anything we wrote about WND. And it hasn't happened since.
It's standard propaganda procedure to portray unfounded or poorly reasoned criticism as representative of all criticism. WND doesn't want to bring us up because they know we're right.
No, MRC Blogger, 'Leftists' Did Not 'Confirm' Protesters Are Paid Topic: NewsBusters
Media Research Center blogger P.J. Gladnick declares in an April 27 NewsBusters post:
Have you noticed how the mainstream media has recently mocked the notion that leftwing protesters are being paid? The idea is ridiculous they claim and only Trump and his supporters are making that silly charge. Well, guess what? A pair of leftwingers have confirmed in the April 26 Washington Post that protesters are indeed paid.
Except, well, that didn't happen at all.
At no point in the Post column Gladnick is referencing do authors Leo Gertner and Moshe Marvit state that anti-Trump protesters are being paid. They do argue that even if some protesters were paid, doing so would not necessarily delegitimize the movement for which the protests are taking place.
Gertner and Marvit noted the example of Rosa Parks, who had been involved in the civil rights movement for years and was trained in resistance tactics prior to her refusal to give up a bus seat to a white person, asking whether Parks' protest would be "worth less" if she was thought of as a paid protester. Gladnick curiously omits that example from the excerpt of the column he includes in his post (which, again, never backs up Gladnick's claim that protesters are paid).
Gladnick includes in his post an alleged screenshot of a Craigslist ad seeking paid protesters. Fox News wrote about it last November but, crucially, apparently never verified the legitimacy of the ads -- it only notes that groups allegedly linked to the ads "have not returned phone calls seeking comment" -- or if anyone was ever, in fact, paid for protesting.
You'd think that given how purportedly rampant pay-for-protest is, Gladnick would be able to easily find someone who got paid instead of having to extrapolate conjecture from an op-ed and pretend that it's definitive proof.
WND's Cashill Complains Obama Biographer Didn't Interview Obama Conspiracists Like Him Topic: WorldNetDaily
The new Obama biography by David Garrow, "Rising Star," has a non-fan of sorts in WorldNetDaily columnist and anti-Clinton obsessive Jack Cashill, who complains in his May 3 WND column that Garrow didn't talk to Obama-haters and conspiracists like himself:
Garrow allegedly interviewed a thousand or so people for the book. When I suggested to friend Susan Daniels last week that “Rising Star,” out May 9, has potential, she asked, “Did Garrow interview you?”
No, Garrow had not talked to Susan either, despite the fact that she had taken her case against Obama’s use of that number to court in her native Ohio.
That got me to wondering just who Garrow did talk to. I contacted Joel Gilbert, producer of the widely seen documentary,“Dreams from My Real Father.”
“Not me or anyone I know or interviewed in Obamaworld. Not Malik or Keith etc.,” Gilbert replied.
Malik would be Obama’s half-brother and the best man at his wedding, Malik Obama. Keith Kakugawa was Obama’s best friend in high school. He appears frequently in “Dreams” as “Ray.”
Gilbert added, “We know he interviewed Barry, which is a red flag! Claim sounds like BS.”
I reached out to Charles Johnson, founder of Gotnews.com and a deep Obama researcher. Johnson is also the possessor of an early draft of “Dreams.” Said Johnson of Garrow’s claimed thousand interviews, “I think he is lying.”
“He never contacted me,” said Jerry Corsi who led the quest to secure Obama’s birth certificate at WND and ina best-selling book.
Given that Garrow has reportedly discussed Obama’s alleged bisexuality, I thought for sure he would have interviewed Larry Sinclair.
In June 2008, Sinclair held a press conference at the august National Press Club in Washington to discuss what he claimed were his drug-fuel sexual assignations with Obama in Chicago.
The media called the conference a “circus act” and refused to follow up. To be sure, they did not review his book, “Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder.” For all his eccentricities, Sinclair tells a convincing tale.
I reached out to Sinclair through Facebook. “I just don’t know any David Garrow,” he told me, “nor have I given any interviews in last couple of years as I have been restoring a neglected community.”
Cashill conveniently fails to mention that both Sinclair and Gilbert have been completely discredited. Obama's purported "Connecticut Social Security number" is not even taken seriously by other birthers, and Daniels perhaps should be charged with publicly releasing Obama's Social Security number without his permission, thus exposing him to identity fraud. Corsi is a discreditedObama-hater, and nobody takes Charles Johnson seriously.
Cashill did finally find one person in his coterie of conspiracists who talked to the author: John Drew, who spent the Obama years overstating his decades-ago connection to a college-age Obama in order to paint him as an unrepentant Marxist.
Cashill did offer a quote from Drew that puts him firmly in the conspiracist camp: "Darrow [sic] also dismissed the ‘conspiracy theories’ that Obama was a Marxist, Muslim or gay. Although I use the broadest definitions, I see Obama as all three. I’m not even sure I made the final cut of the book at this point."
Why would Garrow have done so, if he wanted to be taken seriously as an author?
As with "far left," some people and things may actually be "unhinged" -- we will concur on Alex Jones -- but most of them aren't. The MRC is trying to delegitimize any criticism it doesn't agree with, mostly regarding Trump, by depicting it as fringe whatever its actual merits.
The funny thing: In the midst of all this smearing of anyone who dares issue a criticism of Trump as "unhinged," the MRC itself was complaining when anyone else used the word. In February, it huffed that some in the media "breathlessly hurled one sensational adjective after another" to describe Trump's strange February press conference, one of which was -- wait for it -- "unhinged." Trump syocphant Jeffrey Lord then grumbled in a Feb. 18 MRC column that "Words like 'unhinged' [were] a particular favorite to describe the event."
If the MRC is just going to engage in increasingly meaningless name-calling, why listen to anything it has to say?