WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah haslongembraced bogus election conspiracy theories, so it's no surprise that he's all in favor of the Republican-driven recount in Maricopa County, Ariz., as expressed in his April 23 column:
They're busy counting votes in Arizona, again.
You might recall this was the state that was called early on election night by the Fox News team – but took days to reveal a "victory" by Joe Biden by 10,000 votes of 3.2 million supposedly cast. Why were they so sure?
Oh, and for the record, there were no illegal alien votes disqualified. None! They were not searched for. Neither were the voter rolls cleaned. And don't forget about the people who went to the polls and were told, "You've already voted. You're not eligible."
If you believe that, you probably voted for Joe Biden because he was the most articulate, most prescient, most lucid, most visionary, most capable presidential candidate in American history.
It's just that some voters in Arizona are stubborn. They can't believe that Biden got some 81 million votes nationwide in the election, more than Donald J. Trump's 74 million and Barack Obama's 69 million. He did this without campaigning! He got just enough votes to outpoll the most popular president and beloved leader ever.
Farah offered no evidence that anyone in Arizona went to the polls and was told they already voted.
HE went on to assert that "Republicans have chosen an independent firm called Cyber Ninjas, a Florida-based cybersecurity company" to run the audit -- but Cyber Ninjas is not "independent" at all, given that its CEO has been spreading the same kind of elecction conspiracy theories Farah has.
Farah also claimed, "And just so no one will be disappointed by the results, the audit will be livestreamed for public viewing, and officials say there will be 24-7 private security inside and outside of the Veterans Memorial Coliseum in Phoenix throughout the process." In fact, the audit has been far from transparent; it took a court order to force Cyber Ninjas to make its policies and procedures public, violations on pen color usage were found, it wasn't until days after the audit started that journalists were granted full access to it, and reporters are being barred from observing the audit for specious accusations like a tweet deemed to be objectionable.
Still, Farah ranted:
Why would we want to know the truth? How could we not insist on knowing the truth?
Was Joe Biden's win legitimate, or was Donald Trump robbed? We must know!
This may be the beginning … of getting to the truth.
This may be the beginning … of getting our country back!
IN his April 28 column, Farah defended the audit from critics such as Rachel Maddow:
So what is Rachel Maddow afraid of? Is she afraid that we're going to overturn the whole national election? Or is she afraid we might learn how they perpetrated the biggest election fraud ever? And what are the hosts and guests on CNN and other networks afraid of? Why are they resorting to hysteria, rage, insanity?
And why is Fox News not even paying attention to the Arizona audit? Why are they pretending nothing is happening here?
Something's happening here, all right.
Ordinary Americans are holding their leaders accountable. Nay, they are being leaders, and they are going to continuing being leaders. They realize we don't have any choice in our system of government. This is the state of our nation we've been left with.
As criticism mounted of the audit -- to the point that even the Justice Department has expressed concerns about it -- Farah used his May 7 column to, um, conterintuitively claim that all the criticism means the audit is being run perfectly, or something:
It seems the Justice Department wants to be sure no one uncovers proof of shenanigans in the election of 2020. Why?
Because Cyber Ninja may engage in rooting it out by personally canvassing voters – looking for actual fraud. For instance, the suspicion is that illegal votes were cast by voters registered to certain addresses. The Justice Department does not want Cyber Ninja to ask them about the addresses, because this supposedly would be construed as "voter intimidation."
The Justice Department did not want to conduct the investigation – and they sure don't want anyone else conducting one.
Who else opposes the audit?
How about every Democrat you can think of.
What do they have in common? They all know that the fraud will be uncovered and ultimately send Joe Biden packin'.
That's not the case in the short term. The hand count will not change the results because officials in the states have already certified them. Sen. Fann insisted that the audit is meant to restore trust in the system and influence changes to the law.
But President Donald Trump has celebrated the audit, insisting it will show Arizona was a "scam election" state. And this is what bugs the Democrats. He'll likely be running for the president in 2024, and if cheating occurred, it won't be Republicans to blame.
This is the kind of thing that only makes sense in Farah's conspiracy-addled brain.
MRC Psaki-Bashing, Doocy-Fluffing Watch Topic: Media Research Center
How has Media Research Center writer Curtis Houck been attacking White House press secretary Jen Psaki and man-crushing on hostile Fox News reporter Peter Doocy since the last time we checked? Let's find out!
Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy joined the Briefing Room rotation on Friday to cap off another whirlwind week and, as the fourth reporter called on during Press Secretary Jen Psaki’s Q&A, he brought up President Biden’s past opposition to court-packing (as he seems to be moving toward doing just that) and the latest headlines from the Biden border crisis.
And on the courts, Doocy got a key assist from none other than CNN chief White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins.
Doocy started with the Supreme Court and brought up comments Biden made in 1983 in light of Biden’s appointing of a commission to study court reform (which should be read as nothing more than a leftist power grab).
When he brought up 1983 before his question, Psaki interjected with a weak dad joke about how she was impressed with Doocy’s trip aboard the “time back machine.”
Weird how Houck believed that Kayleigh McEnany could be as snarky as she wanted to be, while Psaki gets shut downb for allegedly making a "weak dad joke." It's almost as if his severe right-wing bias influences these posts of his.
On April 12, Houck didn't have to man-crush on Doocy because "New York Magazine correspondent Olivia Nuzzi put Press Secretary Jen Psaki on the defensive as she asked about whether the Biden administration’s continued mask usage despite having been vaccinated and discouragement of social interaction has contributed to vaccine hesitancy." Houck failed to mention that one of the groups with the largest rate of vaccine hestiancy is Republican men, who likely aren't taking their cues from Biden.
Houck whined of the April 15 briefing that "Thursday’s White House press briefing quickly devolved into a predictable pattern of near emptiness in terms of answers from Press Secretary Jen Psaki, who ducked questions on issues such as the debunked Russian bounties story, the Johnson & Johnson coronavirus vaccine, and her party’s attempt to pack the Supreme Court." Of course, Houck loved when that "emptiness" from the podium emanated from McEnany.
Houck grew outraged that pressers from both Biden and Psaki on April 16 didn't entertain hostile right-wing reporters -- and, because he's incapable of seeing anything in other than black-and-white terms, he pushed the MRC narrative that if hyou're not a hostile right-wing reporter like Doocy, you're a pro-Biden sycophant:
The White House press corps has never been a fan of guns or the Second Amendment, so it was no surprise on Friday when multiple reporters hammered President Joe Biden and Press Secretary Jen Psaki from their left flank on gun control. In one instance, a reporter compared gun violence to the coronavirus pandemic and demanded their responses be of equal vigor.
Capping off his first foreign head-of-state visitor to the White House in Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga, Biden wrapped up his week with a brief, joint press conference with Suga (which followed the traditional two-and-two model of two reporters from each country’s press corps being called on).
ABC’s Maryalice Parks likewise sounded like someone from Everytown or the Giffords Center, expressing frustration with hearing Psaki<“talk over and over again about the President’s support of the House bills, but right now it just doesn’t seem like they’re — you guys have those votes in the Senate.”
Houck had a different hostile Fox News reporter to cheer on -- and even more sneering hatred of Psaki -- for the April 19 briefing:
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki began her week with a briefing so bad that there’s no way to go but up. On Monday’s episode, Psaki arrived with a short fuse and clashed with multiple reporters over basic immigration questions, and blew a gasket at the Fox News Channel’s Kristin Fisher over the administration’s mixed messaging on the refugee cap.
Fisher started with an admission of confusion and an open invitation to clear things up on the White House’s flip-flopping on what number of foreign refugees could be allowed entry into the U.S.: “I’m still just a little bit confused about what changed between 1:00 pm. on Friday and around 4:30p.m. on Friday to go from, ‘We’re not raising the refugee cap to, we are raising it by May 15th.’ What – what changed in those three and a half hours?”
By then, Psaki had fielded numerous questions on it, but Fisher merely wanted the record corrected. Instead, Psaki claimed “we never said we’re not raising the refugee cap” and the administration had always been clear.
Fisher tried to interject, but Psaki demanded she be allowed to in order to reassert that there was never a doubt that they would maintain Trump immigration levels (though that’s exactly what they had said they would do).
Remember: In Houck's world, Fox News reporters are always right and Psaki is always wrong. That's because narratives are more important at the MRC than the truth is.
WND Censors Important Fact About Capitol Police Officer's Death At Riot Topic: WorldNetDaily
Joseph Farah wasn't the only WorldNetDaily person to omit important information about the medical examiner's report on the death of Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick in order to keep right-wing narratives alive.
An anonymous WND staffer wrote in an April 19 article:
The chief medical examiner in Washington, D.C., says the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick after the Jan. 6 riot was due to natural causes – complications from a stroke he suffered the day after the violence.
Democrats have blamed the crowd of mostly Trump-supporting activists who marched to the Capitol and broke in in protest of Congress' certification of Joe Biden's election victory.
The Washington Examiner reported Francisco Diaz, the chief medical examiner in D.C., told the Washington Post that Sicknick died after suffering two strokes.
He explained there was no allergic reaction to chemical irritants.
The 42-year-old officer died a day after the riot.
Capitol Police had blamed the protesters for the death, apparently without evidence.
This anonymous WND writer joined Farah in omitting the fact that the medical examiner also said that "all that transpired" at the Capitol riot "played a role in his condition." That can be interpreted as meaning that while no single incident from the riot directly caused Sicknick's death, the riot did contribute.
Such incomplete reporting doesn't boost confidence in the veracity of what WND publishes -- and, more importantly, doesn't make people want to republish what appears at WND, which is the goal of the WND News Center, its latest gambit to stay afloat.
In a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), which was largely ignored by the left-wing media, more than 1,500 Orthodox rabbis explained that the pro-LGBT Equality Act "is a direct attack upon our religious values."
Further, Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer, chairman of the Coalition of Jewish Values' Rabbinic Circle, said "the law even explicitly rejects religious freedom as a defense, meaning it provides Anti-Semites with a new way to persecute the religious Jewish community.”
Chapman simply and lazily copied-and-pasted from the group's website to describe it: "According to its website, the Coalition for Jewish Values (CJV) 'represents over 1,500 traditional, Orthodox rabbis in matters of public policy.' The coalition 'advocates for classical Jewish ideas and standards in matters of American public policy. The CJV begins from the premise that something can be called an authentic Jewish value only if it is rooted in Biblical and Rabbinic teachings through millennia of Jewish history. Neither spurious references to 'Tikkun Olam' nor the use of Biblical verses plucked out of context transform personal views into Jewish tenets.'" No mention, of course, of the group's kneejerk right-wing Trumpism.
On April 9, Champan uncritically forwarded the group's assertion that "By deciding to renew funding for the Palestinian Authority and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the Biden administration is funding terrorism." Five days later, Chapman uncritically presented evidence of just how far-right the Coalition for Jewish Values is with its attack on the Anti-Defamation League for criticizing Tucker Carlson's turn to white supremacy:
In a letter to Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt, the Coalition for Jewish Values, which represents more than 1,500 traditional, Orthodox rabbis, strongly criticized the ADL leader for calling on Fox News Channel to fire conservative commentator Tucker Carlson for his alleged "white supremacist ideology."
The coalition also criticized the ADL for its apparently selective denunciation of anti-Semitism.
"Your recent attack on Tucker Carlson of Fox News, calling it 'white supremacist' to question whether particular policy choices enable illegal immigrants to nullify the votes of American citizens, is merely one example," reads the letter.
Interestingly, Chapman made no note of the evidence, if any, the group had to support its contention that Carlson isn't echoing white supremacy by invoking the "great replacement" theory that immigrants are replacing white people in the U.S. in order to make it more liberal -- an argument regularly invoked by white nationalists and white supremacists.
Chapman further promoted the group's endorsement of Carlson's racist conspiracy theory (and another attack on the ADL) in a May 10 commentary (surprisingly, labeled as such, not passed off as "news" as CNS typically likes to do):
The ADL "does not speak for Jews and no longer even is a Jewish organization," said Rabbi Dov Fischer, the Western Regional vice president of the CJV in an article for The American Spectator.
Rabbi Fischer also stressed that the Biden administration's immigration policy is designed precisely to allow as many illegal immigrants into the country as possible, as part of a decades-long policy, to "replace" American voters and secure a Democrat-majority electorate.
"Carlson is absolutely correct," wrote Rabbi Fischer, referencing a recent column by Jeffrey Lord in The American Spectator. "Voter 'replacement' is exactly, precisely what the Biden-Pelosi-Schumer Democrats now are endeavoring to do, with the U.S. Supreme Court's nine seats next in their sights."
"Of course we now are watching, before our very eyes, a concerted effort to replace the electorate that was electing Republicans," said the rabbi. "And look where newcomers are being sent, all those unaccompanied children who are wrapped up by Biden’s administration in aluminum foil and placed initially in Obama–Biden cages — places like San Diego, one of the last redoubts of conservatism in California, and Texas, the red state with the most electoral college votes. Understandably, North Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem has spoken out forcefully, telling Biden that she will not let her state be next."
"How can anyone objective not see what is happening?" he added. "The reason that Biden insists that the chaos at the border is not a 'crisis' is plain to see: it is planned chaos, aimed at overrunning the system to leave no choice but to move millions of future Democrat voters ultimately into states where they can turn those tides as they have in the American Southwest."
CNS also gave space to Moshe Parnes, the CJV's "southern regional vice president," for an April 27 column further whining about the situation on the border while gushing that how "under Trump, the border was—for all intents and purposes—finally secured."
And CNS' mission statement to "fairly present all legitimate sides of a story" takes another hit.
MRC Still Complaining That TV Cop Shows (Except 'Blue Bloods') Aren't Fawning Over Police Enough Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has been whining for months that TV cop shows are covering racial justice issues based on what's actually happening in the world instead of blindly parroting the right-wing narrative that the police are always right and it's unfair to make them out to be victims, like its favorite show "Blue Bloods" does. That hasn't stopped. Dawn Slusher served up a typical rant on March 6:
CBS’s Magnum P.I. reboot teased viewers in Friday night’s episode, “The Long Way Home,” by making it seem like they might follow in the footsteps of their fellow cop drama Blue Bloods and depict the unfair treatment police and their loved ones are facing in today’s anti-cop culture. But sadly, they not only dropped the ball, they kicked it out of the park by instead stating, “the system is broken,” and defending BLM activism, which has led to violence and riots, as “a form of patriotism.”
I guess it was too much to hope for there to be more than one show in Hollywood willing to defend the hard work, dedication, and sacrifice of the majority of good police officers.
On March 12, it took both Karen Townsend and Alexa Moutevelis to complain that an episode of "Chicago P.D." featured how "a black cop accuses his white partner of being racist while they work together on a police shooting case." They then attacked the actor who plays the black cop for stating that his job was to "his job is to "make black people look good" to white audiences," insisting "That was liberal-speak for convincing white people that they are all racists who must be re-educated.
Julia A. Seymour went after a hospital drama, "New Amsterdam," on March 24 for an episode in which a nurse said that police were “just a different kind of unsafe” than violent patients, declaring this to be "anti-cop." Four days later, she groused: "In order to show Chicago cops in the worst possible light, Showtime’s Shameless made up a rule observed by the police force – "We're here to serve and protect the rich," going on to sneer, "This is the last season of Shameless. Frankly, I don’t think it will be missed."
Anyone who thought Law & Order: Special Victims Unit was finished with kowtowing to Black Lives Matter will be severely disappointed. The latest episode of the NBC drama reminds that there’s always time to scold the police, just like there’s always time to call new voting laws racist.
Funny how when Portland and Minneapolis are set on fire by BLM and Antifa activists, Law & Order still finds time to have not one, not two, but three episodes warning viewers about white supremacists and other conspiracy groups. NBC does know they can criticize both, right?
Network television has officially jumped the shark in its desperate efforts to defend the domestic terrorist organization Black Lives Matter. This week on CBS's court drama Bull, an earnest defense attorney actually said with a straight face that BLM is "not opposed to the police."
Black Lives Matter protest slogans include "ACAB" ("All Cops Are Bastards") and “Fuck 12” ("Fuck the Police"). If those slogans are not "anti-law enforcement," I do not know what is. And considering that in 2019 the number of unarmed black men fatally shot by police in the United States was a total of 14 people in a country of 330 million, BLM was never really about addressing a supposed epidemic of evil cops targeting black men. BLM was a corporate shakedown operation that used terror to rake in billions for its founders and Democrat Party [sic] entities.
Violence does indeed follow BLM wherever it goes. Its "mostly peaceful protests" have left a tragic trail of billions of dollars in damage, dozens dead, and many more injured. Such violence is likely to continue in the coming months, especially with the George Floyd murder trial wrapping up and people like Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) encouraging more violence.
But Hollywood cannot dare let that truth come out of the mouths of its shows' main characters. The role of television heroes in 2020 and 2021 are to keep pushing the same lies that legacy media pushed all last year about BLM protests being "mostly peaceful." And as the gaslighting continues, more innocent communities will be terrorized while BLM founders buy more mansions.
Ehrhard returned to grouse on April 22 that "CBS's cop drama S.W.A.T. signaled to its audience this week that those who question critical race theory and the Black Lives Matter agenda are really white supremacists. ... As long as Hollywood continues playing these sort of games with their messaging, Americans will feel afraid to speak up about real issues that harm all Americans for fear of being lumped-in with genuine villains. This twisted media and entertainment tactic makes authentic dialogue in our country impossible." Of course, the MRC's knee-jerk binary narrative that all cops are good and all protesters against police brutality are violent and evil (see above Ehrhard screed) isn't exactly encouraging authentic dialogue.
But the MRC did find a couple shows in its normal (for right-wing activists) pro-cop, anti-BLM propaganda. Ehrhard gushed on April 8:
Could common sense actually be returning to network television cop shows? Are some Hollywood scriptwriters waking-up to the insanity of the left's radical anti-police activism?
CBS's normally BLM-friendly cop drama S.W.A.T called out the anti-police crowd's woke hypocrisy and unfairness in this week's episode, 'Sins of the Father,' on April 7. In the episode, quintessential good guy Sgt. Deacon Kay (Jay Harrington) was excited about his son's school career day. Deacon planned to speak to the kids about his work as a police officer. Then he got a call from his son's teacher telling him the parents do not want a cop presenting to their kids.
So while a show like S.W.A.T. has too often pushed BLM propaganda to placate the woke Hollywood powers that be, they deserve credit for sneaking in certain truths this time around.
Four days later, Ehrhard was back in her "Blue Bloods" safe space:
Throughout the 2020-21 television season, Blue Bloods has been the rare network cop show that has refused to kowtow to the woke BLM mob.
The show did it again this week with an episode that called-out politicians and media for condemning cops based on civilian complaints devoid of any context.
Wow, a show that asks the public to see the full picture and try to see the complex and dangerous situations police officers face every day. That is radical in an age when Black Lives Matter torches cities, vilifies officers and demands communities defund police departments.
Blue Bloods is a unique network show with a conservative star in which a close-knit family regularly gathers around the dinner table and says grace before eating. If it is not renewed, network television will mostly be left with woke cops shows that are now prone to seeing the boys in blue ;as the villains.
Larry Tomczak's Biden Derangement Syndrome Topic: WorldNetDaily
Joe Biden is in the Oval Office cockpit as Obama's docile lieutenant for the leftist policies of the radicalized Democratic Party. Did you know he has a weekly phone chat with socialist leaders Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren? As the undisputed head of the fawning Democrats, Barack and the team are integrally involved in the decision-making process as they hand off stacks of official-looking executive orders. Joe dutifully signs them at his desk flanked by ready media "reps" in photo-op positions.
Does he really know what he's signing? Did he read the record number of 28 executive orders he signed with lightning speed in his first days (almost more than FDR did in an entire month)? Anyone get the feeling someone is moving aggressively to make changes as fast as possible?
Adherents to the Democratic Party (like my parents who loved Truman and Kennedy) recognize the leftist metamorphosis of Joe Biden. They also fear he is in cognitive decline and not competent for the job.
I am not a medical authority, but I join scores of Americans who observe what's taking place and are uncomfortable as we come to grips with the reality that Mr. Biden is basically a figurehead "puppet" for those deliberately using him in his weakened state.
His handlers have worked tirelessly to shield "Hidin' Biden" from letting his guard down and being exposed in embarrassing situations. Everyone knows he was concealed for over 50 days in the basement during the campaign and finally gave a press conference. The State of the Union address has been dodged with the usual "COVID concerns."
Was the rough and ready Donald Trump an expression of God's mercy for our nation in our time of crisis? Was he similar to a Winston Churchill, whom God provided to stand courageously and help rescue people from the coming peril? Was there sufficient fraud in the 2020 election for Dems to rob it? Biden's middle name is Robinette - "robin' it." Interesting.
Here's the deal: The O'Biden team, is like a runaway freight train demolishing almost all of the policies of the pro-life, pro-family, pro-traditional marriage, pro-religious freedom Trump administration.
Instead of seizing the opportunity to rightfully pay tribute to America, our system of justice plus honor the outstanding work of the judge and jury in a fair trial that featured due process and meticulous investigation envied by much of the world, Mr. Biden engaged in a shameful indictment of our nation, insulting hundreds of millions of Americans. Former speaker of the House and statesman Newt Gingrich was stunned by his reckless rhetoric.
"It was murder in the full light of day, and it ripped the blinders off for the whole world to see the systemic racism the vice president just referred to – the systemic racism that is a stain on our nation's soul; the knee on the neck of justice for black Americans; the profound fear and trauma, the pain, the exhaustion that black and brown Americans experience every single day … tackle systemic misconduct in police departments, to restore trust between law enforcement and the people they are entrusted to serve and protect."
These words were a slap in the face to millions of Americans as he trashed the United States of America before the entire world. This was something so reprehensible and unprecedented, and in fact, never in our history has a sitting president blatantly insulted America as he did.
When Biden stood at the podium was he a puppet-like pawn of the leftist, anti-America progressive movement? In his diminished state of cognitive decline, is it possible he was clueless to the seriousness of what he was communicating before the entire global community?
The man who stood before us 100 days ago and in his Inaugural Address said he was going to "unify" and "bring us together" is polarizing us horribly. He's partnering with the radical Democratic progressives intent on replacing traditional America with a secular, socialistic system of centralized government control. The key to their strategy is to continue hammering a fallacious narrative of an evil, racist America that can only be rescued and rebuilt by following a savior-like Biden and his power-hungry socialist cohorts.
NEW ARTICLE: MRC Defends An Extremist, But Hides Her Extremism Topic: Media Research Center
Just like its "news" division did, the Media Research Center portrayed Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene as an innocent victim of "censorship" by social media while censoring the extreme views and offensive acts that got her in trouble. Read more >>
CNS Columnist Upset Minorities Aren't Competing With White People To Get COVID Vaccine Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com columnist Hans Bader is weirdly obsessed with making sure white people get the coronavirus vaccine. He wrote in his April 8 column:
The State of Vermont recently drew criticism for giving racial minorities priority in access to the COVID vaccine. Lawyers and law professors (including me) said that racial preference was unconstitutional. But at least Vermont didn't waste doses of the vaccine.
The state of Virginia did. It kept at least 11,000 doses of the COVID vaccine unused due to its extreme push for racial "equity." That will result in increased transmission of COVID-19 among Virginians of all races, notes James Bacon, the former publisher of Virginia Business.
In Danville, Va., so few local residents were getting shots from a COVID-vaccination clinic that people, mostly white, were driving in from out of town to avoid the long waits elsewhere. Danville is over 51% black; Virginia as a whole is only 20% black. The administration of progressive Gov. Ralph Northam became concerned about the “equity” implications of so many more white people getting vaccinated than blacks. So the Northam administration restricted access for out-of-town walk-ins. Only people separately scheduled through a state registration system would be allowed.
That largely shut down vaccinations in Danville. Danville’s vaccination clinic had the capacity to administer up to 3,000 vaccinations per day. But in early April, it was averaging only 184 shots per day, according to an article in the Danville Register & Bee. So the Northam administration's way of promoting “equity” in vaccinations was to prevent white people from getting them, even if that did not result in more vaccinations of black people.
Of course, Bacon isn't the puiblisher of Virginia Business anymore; it's apparently not enough of a deal to even mention mention on the bio page on his own blog. Beyond that, the estimate that 11,000 vaccine doses went "unused" is an estimate and not a reflection of actual reality.
Further, for all the whining that white people weren't getting the vaccines they are apparently entitled to, there was no explanation by either Bader or Bacon about whether they did their part to help people who are disadvantaged or lack the internet access needed to make an appointment to get a vaccine -- the main way of getting one at the time. Are those people on their own, where they will get trampled by better connected white people?
Rhode Island excluded whites from vaccinations given out at Providence's Dunkin Donuts Center on April 10, where 3,000 doses were available. As a result, many of those doses were left unused.
As Erika Sanzi of Parents Defending Education notes, this vaccination "event was only for BIPOC residents of the state —they ended up with tons left over. So many people desperate to get one but can't because" of so-called "equity." To get the vaccine, you had to be "Black, Indigenous, Asian, Hispanic" or "People of Color."
The total exclusion of whites was unnecessary to help minorities. But Rhode Island has reserved for minorities only, in Providence and Woonsocket.
This was discrimination for discrimination's sake, so it was doubly unconstitutional. Rhode Island didn't have a "strong basis in evidence" for giving minorities a preference at all. But even if minorities deserved a preference, to ensure that they would get the vaccine, totally excluding whites made no sense, because that wasted many doses of the vaccine.
Bader's source for the unsubstantiated 3,000 "unused" claim is a tweet from a right-wing education activist. Bader then rehashed an argument he has made before to assert that minorities are not deserving of better access to the vaccine than white people:
Lower vaccination rates among blacks reflected reluctance to take the vaccine, rather than racial bias in administering the vaccine. Surveys showed blacks were far more reluctant than whites to take the vaccine when it first became available. Higher COVID rates among blacks and Hispanics in many states have resulted from occupational and other non-racial risk factors, rather than discrimination by state governments.
This is just victim-blaming on Bader'spart. As we noted the last time Bader made this argument, Blacks and Hispanics really are at risk of catching coronavirus, and even if they are in occupations that expose them to greater risk of catching it, that's all the more reason to prioritize them for vaccines.
It seems Bader wants a more Darwinian process for vaccine access, where the well-connected get it immediately and everyone else must scramble for leftovers -- strange since conservatives normally don't like Darwininan concepts.
Insecure? Another Man In A Dress Causes Another MRC Meltdown Topic: Media Research Center
Why is the largely male Media Research Center so insecure in its collective manhood? Late last year, it flipped out over a photo shoot of Harry Styles wearing a dress. Earlier this year, it was triggered over a study arguing that pollution may be shrinking male penises. Now, the men-wearing-dresses thing has resurfaced, and a very uncomfortable Gabriel Hays ranted about it:
Look, we don’t care if you’re Harry Styles or rapper Kid Cudi, you’re NOT GOING TO MAKE MEN’S DRESSES HAPPEN!
In another shock fashion statement aimed at making straight men feel uncomfortable and making lesbians even more confident in their mating decisions, Kid Cudi donned a white, floral patterned dress during his appearance on Saturday Night Live.
What’s worse is that straight guys can’t just ignore the emasculated exhibitionism of one confused hip hop artist, they have to deal with fashion media telling us that Cudi’s move is evidence that dresses for men are “becoming the norm.”
Pardon our French, but the hell they are!
Maybe, we are the type of people who don’t “get” high fashion, but come on, a grown man wearing spaghetti straps and a floor length gown does not look right, even in an avant-garde way. Sure, a man flexing his biceps while in a dress fit for his young daughter on Easter Sunday offends our sensibilities, but not in any sort of revolutionary way. It’s just dumb.
It’s about social engineering. For Tashjian and GQ, Styles and Cudi looking super girly is about tipping the scales towards the further feminization of culture. Tashjian is tired of the male suit being the standard for traditional society dress. Getting more men to wear dresses balances the scale. She wrote, “dressing gender-neutral or gender-fluid meant wearing something derived from the men’s suit. Now, the dress may be slowly usurping that role.”
Oh yeah, take that, men! Your days of oppressing us with clean cut business attire are at an end. Despite the suit being a conservative look that is polished and flexible for both sexes, GQ needs the dress to be the new model for gender-neutral attire. “It’s relaxed and universally wearable, a Big Fit in just one garment,” they argued.
The clothing designer who dressed Cudi for his appearance, Virgil Abloh, mentioned that the idea behind the rapper’s dress is to destroy gender norms. He told the magazine, “The beauty about now, is our generation, piece by piece, can dismantle norms. 2020 was a year of reckoning about how the system in place that governs us as people is out of date.” Well we guess that if 2020 was a year of hell on earth, then perhaps the ensuing fashion statements were going to represent that as well. Gross.
Just like a right-winger to be obsessed with enforcing "gender norms." We're so sorry this happened to you, Gabe.
CNS Censors Partisan Agenda of Right-Wing 'Honest Elections' Group Topic: CNSNews.com
A group called the Honest Elections Project has gotten significant promotion at CNSNews.com of late:
A March 24 column by Tim Graham of CNS' parent, the Media Research Center noted that "A recent survey by the Honest Elections Project, for example, found that 77% of respondents believe voters should be required to show a photo ID when they vote." (Graham also cited poll findings from McLaughlin & Associates but didn't tell readers it worked for Donald Trump.)
An April 5 article by managing editor Michael W. Chapman stated; "As President Joe Biden and Democrats in Congress push for passage of HR 1, a massive election reform bill that Republicans largely oppose because they see it as a way to allow voter fraud and entrench Democratic rule nationwide, the Honest Elections Project reports that only 28% of Americans support the legislation, and that contrary to the bill, 77% of Americans want voter ID."
An April 9 article by Craig Bannister repeated other poll findings: "Nearly three-fourths of U.S. states have some form of voter identification requirement that would be abolished, if Democrats’ “For the People Act” (H.R. 1) bill becomes law, a new study by the Honest Elections Project (HEP) warns. ... In conclusion, the report warns that H.R. 1 would 'permanently reshape elections in ways that weaken voting safeguards, put public trust in elections at risk, and ignore the desires of mainstream voters.'"
An April 19 column by the Heritage Foundation's Mike Powell claimed: "Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, said, 'Overall, the Georgia law is pretty much in the mainstream and is not regressive or restrictive. The availability of absentee ballots and early voting is a lot more progressive than what’s in the blue states.'"
Chapman returned to tout the group in a May 6 article on changes to Florida election laws: "Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, said of the new law, 'Every Floridian can request a mail-in ballot, vote early, or cast a ballot on Election Day. Anyone who reads this new law will see that it keeps voting easy, and makes cheating harder.'"
Interestingly, none of these articles explain what, exactly, the Honest Elections Project is. That's because it's a partisan right-wing, dark money-driven activist group. The Associated Press explains:
The Honest Elections Project was created in early 2020 to advocate for greater controls on elections. The group has drawn scrutiny in part because of Leo’s influence in conservative legal circles. As co-chairman of the Federalist Society, Leo helped spearhead the effort to appoint conservative judges to the federal courts.
The group does not disclose its donors and there will be no public reporting of how it spends its money until later this year, at the earliest.
Last year, Honest Elections was part of the GOP legal strategy to fight voting changes, many of which were aimed at making voting easier during the pandemic. It sued Michigan, forcing the state to clean up its list of registered voters, and blocked a settlement easing absentee voting rules in Minnesota.
The Guardian further reported that the group is a "backed by a dark money group funded by rightwing stalwarts like the Koch brothers and Betsy DeVos’ family" and denies that voter suppression exists -- a key claim of right-wing election activists. The group is actually "a legal alias for the Judicial Education Project, a well-financed nonprofit connected to a powerful network of dark money conservative groups," the Guardian reported.
Strange that a group calling for "honest elections" has no interest in being honest about itself. It's less strange, unfortunately, that CNS is censoring the partisan nature of the group in order to push for more restrictive voting regulations that right-wingers love.
WND's Farah (And Steve Bannon) Have A Crazy Idea To Put Trump Back In Power Topic: WorldNetDaily
Joseph Farah's April 8 WorldDNetDaily column began with a wacky rant:
When Joe Biden took the oath of office to become president – or, should we say, presidential pretender – I was morose.
I was one of the million or so cheerleaders for Donald J. Trump in Washington, D.C., Jan. 5-7 – for what has become known as "the insurrection." Then it was over.
That was not easy to accept. I believe Trump was the greatest president in the history of the United States. That's right! His achievements in four years exceeded that of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan. I loved them all. Reagan changed my politics. But Trump was one of a kind.
So, you can understand my disappointment – and to be replaced by Biden!
This was truly an outrage.
While Trump was the greatest president ever, Biden has been the worst – with a sample size of only three months.
Biden is sullen, his voice hurts my ears, he's cognitively challenged, he's incoherent, he falls a lot – and, worst of all, he's mean. He lies on a grand scale and he's hopelessly immoral.
The worst thing he has ever done is to commit a high crime against America by perpetuating election fraud against the greatest country the world as ever known.
He then recounted a January column in which he fantasized that in 2022 Biden and Kamala Harris would be impeached "for high crimes and misdemeanors – not phony ones like they had to manufacture against President Trump, but real, weighty crimes." He's assuming that Republicans will take the House that year, so that would make Kevin McCarthy president (since the House speaker is third in line), and he could then appoint Trump as vice president. McCarthy would then resign, making Trump president.
Farah went on to tout a speech by former Trump adviser and pardoned criminal Steve Bannon, who in a related fantasy of Republicans naming Trump speaker of the House after retaking it in the 2022 elections, after which Biden and Harris would be impeachedf or "his illegitimate activities of stealing the presidency." A right-wing mind-meld commenced:
I texted Bannon a message asking if he had read my column.
"I loved it," he said.
Could this be the way this turns out?
[T]he latest to join the campaign is Ed Martin, president of Phyllis Schlafly Eagles.
Martin told "Secrets": "I'm serious. We need the Trump voters. With the possibility of having Donald Trump as speaker, conservative voter turnout would be through the roof nationwide."
Let's make it a wave. Ride the wave. This is a MAGA moment!
Farah willingly believes the lie that the eleciton was stolen -- just as he willingly elieved the lie that Barack Obama's birth certificate wdas faked -- so of course he would think this is a plausible and desirable outcome.
Hunter Biden's Book Triggers The MRC Topic: Media Research Center
As loyal pro-Trump sycophants, the Media Research Center went all in on the Hunter Biden laptop story before the election -- the point was to get Donald Trump re-elected after all, not tell the truth. Meanwhile, to this day the authenticity of the laptop has not been independently confirmed. But Hunter is not a real person to the MRC -- he's a target and a political weapon to use against his father. So when Hunter wrote a memoir, the MRC was predictably triggered. Scott Whitlock whined in a April 2 post:
Hunter Biden has a lucrative new book to promote, So now it’s okay to ask him basic questions about a missing laptop that may implicate his dad, the now-president, in business dealing with China and Ukraine. CBS will have a pair of interviews with Hunter airing on Sunday and Monday morning. CBS This Morning co-host Gayle King on Friday reacted to a preview of one by gushing, “What Hunter just said there I thought was — gave me goosebumps.
After Hunter said he wasn't sure whether the laptop was his, Whitlock huffed: "Perhaps the networks and other outlets should have been following the laptop story more closely last year during the presidential election. Instead they ignored or tried to debunk the story." Again, the story hasyet to be independently confirmed, and given that it was forwarded by Trump allies like Rudy Giuliani and the New York Post, there was (and is) plenty of reason to not accept the story at face value.
Bill D'Agostino similarly complained in an April 4 post:
Hunter Biden’s new book deal landed him a sympathetic interview on this weekend’s CBS News Sunday Morning with correspondent Tracy Smith. While the interview alluded to various political scandals plaguing the younger Biden (namely the Burisma controversy, the laptop scandal, and an ongoing active investigation into his finances), it provided viewers with barely any information about the scandals themselves, while giving him plenty of time to argue his innocence.
The Friday morning preview of this interview contained an admission from the younger Biden that the laptop “could be” his. Unfortunately, the full interview that aired on Sunday failed to provide anything else of note about the topic. Instead viewers were treated to another insinuation that the whole story was Russian propaganda: “Last month, a declassified intelligence report said that before the election, the Russians had launched a smear campaign against Joe Biden and his family.”
That same day, P.J. Gladnick raged that a Politco article called Hunter a "noted locomotive expert" in an article because he once served on the Amtrak: "Does that mean that high speed rail conferences around the world are incomplete without the input of Hunter Biden, the "noted locomotive expert?" And how did Hunter gain such expertise on the subject to the extent to be on the board of Amtrak? Well, he did it by riding the choo-choo a lot."
Whitlock returned to huff: "CBS donated 25 minutes of air time to syrupy, softball interviews of Hunter Biden. Despite the massive amount of coverage, the journalists offered little in the way of curiosity about what was actually on the laptop Biden now admits 'certainly' could have been his." He further dismissed this as "Biden propaganda" and complained that Hunter's book was published by a division of the company that owns CBS.
Tim Graham devoted his April 7 column to complaining that Hunter -- and, by extension, Joe Biden -- wasn't being destroyed as a man while promoting his book, bashing one reviewer for saying that the book "humanizes Hunter." We wouldn't want that, would we, Tim? Graham further complained: "The most overlooked fact on the Hunter Biden book-and-sympathy tour is that he was committing many of these financial scams and behavioral debaucheries while his father was in the obscure job of... Vice President of the United States."
Curtis Houck touted pornography in an April 9 post:
Scandal-plagued First Family member Hunter Biden continued his book tour late Thursday with a softball-laden interview with ABC late-night host Jimmy Kimmel, who assisted him in not only dismissing the infamous laptop as “a red herring” because it came from Rudy Giuliani, but declare that he was eminently qualified to served on the board of Burisma.
Unsurprisingly, Kimmel and Biden did not address the breaking news from hours earlier when the Daily Mail published more of what they said were contents of Biden's laptop, including naked photos of Biden with prostitutes.
Like Graham, Houck groused that Hunter said he wrote the book to "humanize people suffering from addiction," and continued to treat Hunter as the less-than-himan he clearly believes the guy is: "While the interview started on a bizarre note before going to the softball portion, Kimmel ended with a retelling of how quickly Biden married his current wife less than a week after they met. Of course, there was nothing about how Biden dated his late brother Beau’s widow for a period of time."
(Also: The Daily Mail is even less credible than Giuliani and the New York Post, which Houck somehow forgot to mention.)
Graham devoted a podcast the same day to the Kimmel interview, in which he whined that Hunter wouldn't appear on Fox News and the Kimmel's interview was "uber-sympathetic, apologies to Uber." We wouldn't want anyone to think Hunter Biden is a human deserving of even a bit of sympathy, eh, Tim?
Graham whined further that Hunter Biden hasn't been subjected to fact-checking by PolitiFact while the Trump children have been. He forgot to mention that the Trump children, unlike Hunter, have been very politically active in service to their father and, thus, make political statements that are fact-check-worthy.
WND Columnist Falsely Defends Man Who Shot Protester Topic: WorldNetDaily
Rachel Alexander devoted her April 5 WorldNetDaily column to defending "Christian crowdfunding site" GiveSendGo for serving as a platform for helping accused criminals like Kyle Rittenhouse and the Capitol rioters. Alexander lionized siblings Jacob Wells and Heather Wilson who founded the site, then tried for a tragic story to defend them and their operation:
The site could have ducked taking on fundraisers for controversial people like Rittenhouse, but once the siblings observed "death by deplatforming" they knew they had to take a stand. Jake Gardner was a Nebraska bar owner who committed suicide after being indicted in the fatal shooting of a black protester last year. The tragic series of events began during riots after the death of George Floyd. Gardner's dad pushed a protester who would not leave the area near the bar. The protester pushed back, and so the younger Gardner displayed his handgun. Two protesters jumped on his back, and he fired two warning shots. They left, but James Scurlock, a young black man who had been involved in vandalism earlier, tackled him and put him in a headlock. Gardner begged Scurlock to release him, but he didn't, so he shot him.
Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine wasn't even going to press charges at first, believing Gardner had acted in self-defense. But obviously due to public pressure, he asked a grand jury to review his decision. Meanwhile, Gardner was trying to raise money for his defense, but was being deplatformed everywhere. People like Nebraska State Sen. Megan Hunt piled on and incited more hate by calling him a white supremacist. His bar was known for hosting Republican events, which no doubt intensified the vicious reaction. But he wasn't a hateful person. In 2017 he went to the Trump inauguration and was interviewed about the Women's March, and he said they have a right to be out there protesting.
Gardner moved to California to escape the hate. A decorated veteran who had served two tours in Iraq, he suffered two brain injuries. He found out about GiveSendGo due to the publicity surrounding Rittenhouse, but it was too late. Just two days after the fundraiser was started, the jury indicted him for manslaughter and other felonies, and he killed himself. The Jake Gardner family has since set up its own GiveSendGo fundraiser.
Alexander is lying when she calls the charges against Gardner politically motivated. As an actual news outlet reported (as opposed to the right-wing opinion pieces Alexander cited), 60 witnesses were interviewed, and Gardner's claim that he killed Scurlock in self-defense was undermined by statements from Gardner himself. The special prosecutor noted evidence including texts from Gardner’s phone; messages from Gardner’s Facebook account; and Gardner’s interactions with bystanders prior to his contact with Scurlock, as well as surveillance video that showed Gardner and his father inside the bar.
But Alexander is too far in victim mode to care about the truth, declaring that "the left is trying to destroy alternative platforms like GiveSendGo," adding, "We must stay vigilant, shedding light on the situation and supporting those who dare to stand up to the woke crowd like GiveSendGo, because eventually they're coming for the rest of us, too."
Newsmax Columnist: Lockdowns, Vaccine Passports Are Ideas From Chinese Commies Topic: Newsmax
The coronavirus and subsequent government response to the pandemic has been a disaster for most Americans' economic, mental, and physical well-being.
But the coronavirus has been wonderful for a certain handful of people: The would-be tyrants who derive their meaning in life from controlling people.
This is because they have wielded the pandemic to their own advantage and to grow government power. In doing so, these public "servants" have inched America towards the kind of communism as seen in China.
Even though most lockdowns utterly failed on any reasonable cost-benefit analysis, that class of bureaucrats, government unions, and HR apparatchiks imposed them anyway.
Because these mandates fed the illusion that authorities had things under control. It indulged their sense that they were "pro-science." In truth, these tyrants had no other ideas about how to stop the spread. They were simply terrified of doing nothing at all.
But an overlooked reason driving these unthinkable power grabs was that our leaders now take cues from authoritarian China.
Quite simply, the virus is not nearly dangerous enough to justify coercive measures and stripping freedoms.
But tyrants want them anyway.
In many cases, safety appears irrelevant compared to the sheer glee of forcing the recalcitrant to submit or lose basic rights now recast as privileges.
Just like lockdowns and the coronavirus itself, vaccine passports are another toxic import from China.
Thse passports draw clear inspiration from the CCP’s sinister social credit system.
The right has a duty to resist these passports utterly. For any Republican seeking office in 2022 or 2024, opposing COVID passports right now is a basic litmus test.
It’s a test that Florida’s Ron DeSantis has passed with flying colors. He issued an executive order banning all vaccine passports late last month.
Conservatives must monitor their own state and local leaders to make sure they do the same thing. Otherwise, we'll soon move beyond passports for vaccines, and into passports to monitor other areas of society that the left deems unsafe.
The only thing that will protect America’s remaining freedoms from CCP wannabes who put America Last is perpetual vigilance, and legal action, from America First allies.
CNS Didn't Report On Capitol Police Officer's Death Until It Couldn't Be Directly Blamed On Capitol Riot Topic: CNSNews.com
Even though CNSNews.com is a right-wing operation that claims to care about the police, it curiously didn't have much to say about the death of Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick, who died after trying to defend the center of American democracy in the Jan. 6 Trump-inspired Capitol riot.
CNS did no articles specifically on Sicknick in the weeks after the riot; instead, he received only passing references on Jan. 8, Jan. 11, Feb. 3, Feb. 3 (again), Feb. 8, Feb. 15, and March 2. But as the original narrative of Sicknick's death was questioned in right-wing media and an autopsy wasn't immediately forthcoming, it was time for CNS to suddenly care.
Sicknick's name appeared for the first time in the headline of a CNS article in a March 3 piece by Susan Jones featuring FBI Director Christopher Wray being questioned by Republican senators about Sicknick's death, with Sen. Chuck Grassley citing "conflicting reports about his cause of death" and Sen. Ted Cruz also noting "conflicting reports about the circumstances of his death"; Wray responded that the investigation was ongoing. This was followed on March 5 with a column by Pat Buchanan, who wrote: "Capitol police officer Brian Sicknick died of a stroke the next day. Media reports that he had been hit with a fire extinguisher proved false. In the two months since Jan. 6, no one has been charged in his death."
Sicknick got another passing mention in an April 6 article by the mysterioius "A. Kim" about a Ben Shapiro radio rant. Then, on April 20, the results of Sicknick's autopsy was released, and Sicknick's name appeared in a CNS headlione for the second time, in an article by managing editor Michael W. Chapman pushing the result that it was "natural":
Contrary to the Jan. 8 U.S. Justice Department claim that Capitol Police Officer Brian D. Sicknick died because of "the injuries he suffered defending the U.S. Capitol, against the violent mob who stormed it on January 6th," the D.C. chief medical examiner, Dr. Francisco Diaz, announced today that Sicknick's cause of death was "natural."
In layman's terms, Officer Sicknick died from strokes on Jan. 7.
Back on Jan. 7, 2021, one day after Sicknick died, the Acting Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen told the public in a statement, “Our thoughts and prayers are with the family and fellow officers of U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian D. Sicknick, who succumbed last night to the injuries he suffered defending the U.S. Capitol, against the violent mob who stormed it on January 6th. The FBI and Metropolitan Police Department will jointly investigate the case and the Department of Justice will spare no resources in investigating and holding accountable those responsible.”
Chapman unsurprisingly omitted a couple things: 1) the original account of Sicknick's death came from a Justice Department that was still under control of then-President Trump, and 2) the medical examiner also said that "all that transpired" at the Capitol riot "played a role in his condition." That can be interpreted as meaning that while no single incident from the riot directly caused Sicknick's death, the riot did contribute.
Nevertheless, an article by Jones the same day declared that the original story of Sicknick's death was a "media/Democrat narrative":
It took more than three months for the American public to learn that U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes -- two strokes, the D.C. medical examiner disclosed in an email to media outlets.
So contrary to earlier reporting and Democrat claims, Sicknick was not killed by Trump supporters during the January 6 invasion of the U.S. Capitol.
Yet the article of impeachment against Donald Trump, dated January 13, 2021, says Trump supporters "incited by President Trump...injured and killed law enforcement personnel..."
But it's not true. And there's no explanation for why it took so long for the D.C. medical examiner to say Sicknick died of natural causes, not as the direct result of a criminal act.
Jones buried the medical examiner's statement that "all that transpired" at the Capitol riot "played a role in his condition" in the 11th paragraph of her article.
Sicknick got one more passing mention that day, in an anonymously written article huffing that "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) is calling again for a federal commission to be created to analyze and report on what happened at the U.S. Capitol on January 6."
Chapman followed up on April 23 with an article featuring a Republican senator questioning Capitol Police about "why its office claimed in a Jan. 7 press release that Officer Brian Sicknick died 'due to injuries sustained while on-duty' -- during the Jan. 6 breach of the Capitol -- when the D.C. Medical Examiner announced on April 19 that Sicknick died of 'natural causes.'" The answer, of course, is in the question -- there was no reason not to believe on Jan. 7 that Sicknick died of injuries sustained in the riot, and the autopsy didn't come out until three months later. Again, Chapman failed to mention that the medical examiner also noted that "all that transpired" at the Capitol riot "played a role in [Sicknick's] condition."
This is how in thrall to Trump CNS is -- it refused to exploit the death of a law enfoircement officer in order to protect him.
UPDATE: CNS also published an April 8 article by "A. Kim" bashing the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in D.C.; Kim apparently "specifically asked the OCME if it knows what caused Sicknick’s death," only to be accuratley told the case was still under investigation. Kim immediately went conspiratorial: "Thus, more than two months after Sickick’s body was cremated and buried, the OCME cannot—or will not—state the cause of his death." Kim's article was deleted without explanation at some point after its publication; the link to the story on the website states that it can't be found. But the internet is forever, and so is the Internet Archive.