MRC Rushes To Defend GOP Congressman Accused Of Leading Surveillance Tour Of Capitol Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center rushed to defend a Republican congressman accused to leading a tour of the Capitol complex in which suspicious behavior occurred. In a June 15 post, Kevin Tober clung to a Capitol Police investigation that allegedly cleared Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk of wrongdoing while downplaying additional evidence the committee released:
On Wednesday’s CBS Evening News, anchor Norah O’Donnell and congressional correspondent Seth MacFarlane erroneously linked Republican Congressman Barry Loudermilk (GA) to an alleged advanced reconnaissance inside the Capitol building prior to the January 6 riots at the Capitol. This despite Capitol Police stating that nothing suspicious or out of the ordinary was spotted on surveillance cameras.
Not letting facts get in the way, O’Donnell hyped the report claiming “there's some new developments in the January 6 investigation. The House Select Committee today released stunning new video that's raising questions about whether there was advanced reconnaissance inside the capitol the day before the insurrection.”
She then went to the January 6 obsessed MacFarlane who claimed “the committee investigating the attack on the U.S. Capitol is focusing on the man in the gray sweatshirt. Seen on surveillance video taking photos of staircases and hallways in the Capitol complex on January 5, the day before the attack.” Adding that “a day later, they say he was recording this video amid a crowd marching to the capitol.”
Nicholas Fondacaro did the same thing in a post the next day:
With the Democrat-led January 6 Committee dredging up the long-debunked conspiracy theory that Republicans Congressman Barry Loudermilk (GA) was involved in helping the Capitol rioters plan the attack, ABC’s The View had all they needed to gaslight their viewers with lies and disinformation designed to smear Republicans. They even lashed out at the Capitol Police who exonerated Loudermilk after their own investigation found that neither he nor anyone in the tour group did anything wrong.
“So, Loudermilk insists, like last night, that the Capitol Police already investigated and found nothing shady, and he doubled down that it was just a wholesome family tour,” co-host Whoopi Goldberg announced in a mocking accent.
Following a soundbite of Loudermilk on Fox News explaining the nature of the tour group and how the Capitol Police had investigated and found no wrongdoing, self-proclaimed “Republican” Ana Navarro, who’s not known for her oversized wit, proclaimed Loudermilk should change his name to “lying butter.”
Gripping her tinfoil hat as tightly as she could, Hostin praised the committee for battling the Capitol Police. “And I'm not sure why they did that, but then in response to that, the January 6 Committee released some of that video that we saw,” she touted.
And just like that, the Capitol Police, who were portrayed as the bravest of paladins fighting off the Trumpist hoards, were suddenly relegated to the trash and called liars just because the Democrats on the committee have a false narrative to weave.
“They have all their stuff in order,” Goldberg touted the committee as the play-off music sounded. “Here's the proof. How you can deny stuff that's on tape, always knocks me out.”
The real question is, how can any sane or non-politically motivated person look at the Capitol Police’s findings and still push a debunked conspiracy theory?
Neither Tober nor Fondacaro commented on the fact that newly released evidence like this -- that the tour participants took photos of non-touristy things and one of them was part of the Capitol riot the next day -- tends to raise questions about previous denials and the Capitol Police's clearing of Loudermilk, which presumably did not have access to this video. As the Washingotn Post noted, Loudermilk long -- and falsely -- denied there was any tour at all and has made statements about the tour that seem to contradict the new evidence.
Despite the discrepancies, the MRC's defense of Loudermilk continued. Mark Finkelstein complained in a June 16 post:
Such a tough hombre, that Joe Scarborough! On Thursday's Morning Joe, Ragin' Bull Scarborough twice fantasy-bragged about what he would do if he saw someone taking photos of security areas in the Capitol, claiming he'd threaten them with feeding them the camera.
Joe's flight of macho fantasy came in the context of a discussion of a Capitol tour Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia had given the day before the January 6 riot. Video later emerged of a member of the tour taking pictures during the tour. Scarborough claimed it was of security areas such as metal detectors. But as NewsBusters analyst Kevin Tober has noted, that is apparently not true. The Capitol Police reviewed video of the tour and found nothing suspicious.
And in his hyping of staffers from "The Late Show With Stephen Colbert" being arrested in the Capitol complex allegedly without authorization, Tim Graham used a June 18 post to quote a writer from the right-wing RedState claiming it was "incredibly ironic that Democrats went after Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) for just having guests at the complex taking pictures of the artwork." As we documented, the MRC portrayed the staffers' arrest as the next Capitol riot but censored the news when charges against the staffers were dropped because they had, in fact, been properly let into the Capitol.
NEW ARTICLE: The Keystone Cops At The MRC And CNS Topic: CNSNews.com
The Media Research Center made a short film making distorted claims about the end of the Keystone XL pipeline, and its "news" division keeps pushing the fiction that the pipeline would keep gas prices low. Read more >>
MRC Brings Hate And Fear Of Drag Queens To Pride Month Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has always despised drag queens, but because it marches in lockstep with right-wing narratives that have determined that they -- along with transgender people -- are the new Enemies of the People, the anti-drag queen hate at the MRC has ramped up considerably this year. In March, Matt Philbin freaked out that high school students held a drag show:
If it's any consolation Tucson, those drag queens putting on a show in your public high school might otherwise be hanging around libraries offering to read to preschoolers.
According to AZ Free News, Tucson High Magnet School (THMS) will be hosting “its first-ever drag show in early May.” First-ever? (OMG! Welcome to the 21st Century, Tucson.)
Elise Ehrhard devoted an April post to attacking the "Gay, Inc.'" that lives totally in her imagination to justify a meltdown over a show about a drag show for children:
With disturbing regularity, massive entertainment conglomerates are targeting minors with the latest fads of Gay, Inc.
The latest abomination comes from the streaming service Discovery+, owned by Warner Bros. Discovery.
On Tuesday, Discovery+ tweeted Generation Drag, a new series about underage drag queens from executive producer Tyra Banks. The docuseries hits the streaming service on June 1 in honor of Pride Month.
The trailer is painful to watch as minors prepare for Dragutante, a drag show for kids held in Denver, Colorado. According to Dragutante's website, the show is for "Teen queens, kings & non-binary performers ages 8-18."
(Warning: The following trailer is disturbing.)
Yes, it would be "disturbing" and "painful" for Ehrhard to see people she desperately wants to spew hate at and have only a blog post to impotently express her rage. Shen the show premiered in June, Ehrhard's sputtering rage flared up again:
Many of the kids have been exposed to gender ideology and pride activity early and often. Most feel "different" and have struggled to make friends throughout their lives. All are vulnerable.
The whole series is heartbreaking. It's sad to watch sensitive, struggling or damaged youth be groomed as they fall further down the rainbow rabbit hole. Generation Drag is just the latest manifestation of the sort of child indoctrination Hollywood encourages and promotes.
Writtren like a bitter right-wing activist who desperately wants to indoctrinate people into hating non-heterosexual people as much as she does but, again, has only a right-wing blog post to do so.
Since June was Pride Month, that was code for the MRC to be as hateful to LGBT people as it could muster. Intern Michael Ippolito unleashed the nasty "grooming" smear in a June 6 post:
The left’s obsession with grooming children is in full throttle during Pride month.
A Dallas bar named Mr. Misster held an event, “Drag the kids to pride,” drag show on Saturday, June 4. This so-called “family-friendly” event saw drag performers dance and walk down the room aisle, even interacting with the crowd and taking dollar bills from little children. The event was advertised as “We have FIVE limited spots for young performers to take the stage solo, or with a queen of their choosing,” promoting children to dance with half-naked men posing as women. During the event, protestors arrived to call out the open grooming of children.
Protestors from the group “Protect Texas Kids” condemned the depravity.
On cue, a local LGBT youth organization called the protestors “transphobic” for defending the innocence of children — no surprises from the groomers here.
Ippolito grew even more hateful two days later about another drag event:
The pride month drag show for children at a Dallas bar last weekend is rightly infamous. But out in Phoenix, the grooming got underway a whole day earlier.
According to AZ Free News, the Heard Museum hosted its first drag show, titled “Pride Night at the Heard,” on Friday, June 3, sponsored by BlueCross BlueShield of Arizona with Arizona Public Service. As in Dallas; children got a front-row seat to this grotesque show. The museum checked several woke boxes by making its characters Native American drag queens. “Tomahawk Martini” and “K.Yasss Savage” accordingly strutted their stuff for the kiddies.
But perhaps the most atrocious aspect of the event is that the kids were then forced to listen to the poetry of the performers. A Drag Queen Twerk-Off and Poetry Slam may be the most heinous instance of child abuse ever reported.
In a June 10 post, Ippilito bizarrely smeared former "Wonder Woman" Lynda Carter as a "has-been" for not hating drag shows as much as he does:
Hollywood lefties hate Christians, and never pass up a chance to show it. Following a spate of incidents of children participating in drag shows, they’re showing what they hold sacred.
Lynda Carter, whose claim to fame is playing Wonder Woman on TV in the 1970s, was on Twitter taking shots at Christians who don’t think kids should hang around with drag queens.
Following the Dallas drag show for children's fiasco, many conservative commentators on Twitter showed their disdain for the event. Congressman Lauren Boebert tweeted, “Take your children to CHURCH, not drag bars.” Carter responded with an asinine retweet.
You don’t have to think like a superhero to have played one on TV.
Catherine Salgado took up the drag-bashing baton in a June 13 post:
Google sponsored a disturbing LGBTQ+ “Pride” and drag event in Austin, Texas, which was billed as “family-friendly,” according to the Rainbow on the Creek web page.
The “Rainbow on the Creek” event in Austin’s Waterloo Park said on its official webpage that it is “a free family-friendly celebration that connects, educates, and celebrates Austin’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQIA+) community.” The webpage also prominently announced that the event was “[s]ponsored by Google.”
Performers at the event June 11 included multiple drag queens, including “Pelvis Wrestley” and “Roxxxy Andrews of RuPaul’s Drag Race” as a featured performer, according to the event page. A self-described independent journalist claimed that scantily-clad drag performer “Heyonce The Vocalist” was caught on video performing suggestive dance moves at the event while children watched.
Salgado went on to huff, "Google also has a history of pandering to radical LGBTQ+ ideology and censoring those who criticize it. " If being LGBTQ or a drag queen is "ideology," does that mean the MRC's irrational hatred of them is an "ideology" too?
When that right-wing anti-LGBTQ hate was pointed out, the MRC freaked out about that too. Kevin Tober whined in a June 14 post:
On Tuesday’s Deadline: White House on MSNBC, host Nicole Wallace once again proved that she will distort reality and twist facts to further her left-wing political agenda. This indisputable fact was on display when she gathered her panel of miscreants to discuss the troubling incident over the weekend where over thirty men linked to the white supremacist “Patriot Front” were arrested in an attempt to disrupt a “Pride Month” event.
Instead of chalking it up to a group of deranged racists intent on causing a violent incident, Wallace and Washington Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart suggested it is part of a trend of “anti-LGBTQ hate” from Republicans like Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis and others.
“AP writes this, last month a fundamentalist Idaho pastor told his small Boise congregation that gay, lesbian, and transgender people should be executed by the government. Another fundamentalist pastor in Texas gave similar sermons,” Wallace said using an extreme example of hatred that nobody endorses.
She then wailed that “Heather Scott, an Idaho Republican lawmaker recently told an audience that drag queens and other LGBTQ supporters are waging, quote, 'a war of perversion against our children,' end quote.” Wallace then bemoaned how “Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said he would consider sending child protective services to investigate parents who take their kids to drag shows.”
The suggestion is that because DeSantis wants to protect children from sexually explicit “drag shows”, a group of white supremacists and a fringe Idaho pastor want to kill LGBTQ people.
Tober never explained why this isn't true; he just whined that the linkage was made.
CNS Hypes Violence Against Anti-Abortion Groups, Hide Decades Of Anti-Abortion Violence Topic: CNSNews.com
As loyal right-wing anti-abortion activists, CNSNews.com made sure to hype instances of violence against anti-abortion activists in the wake of the leak of a draft ruling overturning Roe v. Wade in May and then its actual overturning in June. Stephanie Samsel wrote in a June 21 article:
Pro-life individuals and groups have been targeted more than 40 times with violence, vandalism, and intimidation, since the Supreme Court draft opinion to overturn Roe v. Wade leaked, according to a new report.
The 22-page report, Pro-Abortion Vandalism, Violence & Intrruptions of Worship, released by Susan B. Anthony (SBA) Pro-Life America lists over 40 incidents of attacks on peaceful pro-life groups, including churches and crisis pregnancy centers, since May 3.
In response to ongoing threats against pro-life groups across the country, SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser issued a statement condemning “inherent violence” against “community heroes.”
A July 12 article by Melanie Arter hyped how "The director of a pregnancy care center in Sacramento, Calif., said Tuesday that her she has had to spend $150,000 in 'valuable resources' to protect themselves from violent assaults and vandalism, including someone armed with a machete, in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade":
“Just last week, as the exhibit shows, a man approached our care center with an armed machete. We have been forced to hire 24-hour on site security. We’ve had to reinforce doors and bullet-proof our walls. We’ve had to paint our building with anti-graffiti coating. We’ve added cameras, armed our staff with pepper spray and stopped running our mobile clinic, because of threats of violence,” she said.
“We have been forced to expend valuable resources – resources for women of up to $150,000 just to protect ourselves. Why? Because we offer free care to women. What we do though is worth the risk. Every community needs a place for women facing unplanned pregnancies who are seeking dependable, medical resources in a safe, caring environment during one of the most difficult times of their lives,” Matzke said.
Last Thursday morning, two women’s pregnancy counseling clinics in Worcester, Massachusetts were vandalized, and the head of one of them is calling the attack on her center “domestic terrorism.”
Both Clearway Center and the nearby Problem Pregnancy clinic were hit. Glass doors and windows were smashed in, paint was splattered, and the entrances to the clinics were spray-painted in black with the words, “Jane’s Revenge,” the name of a radical pro-abortion group, which has yet to publicly claim responsibility for the attacks.
Violence against pro-life groups and churches has surged since the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, which had established a national right to abortion. Since the court’s decision was leaked in May, more than two hundred threats have been uncovered by the FBI. Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America has also listed at least forty-five violent assaults on pro-life-affiliated groups.
None of these articles, however, mentioned the anti-abortion movement has a 50-year legacy of violence and murder, which includes vandalism and arson of clinics that perform abortions. CNS has long turned a blind eye to anti-abortion violence; when abortion provider George Tiller was murdered by an anti-abortion activist, CNS pretended that he was an outlier and censored reports that prominent anti-abortion activist Randall Terry cheered Tiller's death.
That's relevant history when writing about protester violence over the issue of abortion. But CNS chose to censor it instead.
MRC's Double Standard On Sex Scenes In Politicians' Books Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's Kevin Tober proved that Hillary Derangement Syndrome is still alive and well after all these years in a June 29 post:
You could’ve gone your entire life without witnessing this and you probably would be better off too. On Wednesday’s CBS Mornings, co-anchor Gayle King sat down with former first lady, Secretary of State, and failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for part two of a gushy softball interview about her new fiction political thriller called State of Terror. At one moment in the interview, most sane viewers were probably driven to a state of terror and revulsion when King read aloud from a sex scene in the book which Clinton and co-author Louise Penny wrote.
While King seemed to be having a blast laughing while Hillary cackled and screeched with her friend Louise, it’s safe to say that even the CBS audience was repulsed over the thought of a sex scene written by Hillary Clinton.
Yet, the band of leftists at CBS Mornings loved it, and even after the interview was over, couldn’t stop swooning over Clinton and Penny like a group of preteens at a Justin Bieber concert.
Yes, the MRC really thought this merited a full-length post from one of its full-time "media reserarchers."
By contrast, a sex scene by another female politician got treated differently by the MRC. Back in 2006, when the MRC and its "news?" division CNSNews.com were trying to smear Democratic Virginia Senate candidate James Webb as a pedophile (and thereby boost the Republican candidate, George Allen of "macaca" fame) by cherry-picking out of context certain passages from fiction novels he wrote and portraying them as his personal beliefs. In response, some folks noted that then-second lady Lynne Cheney wrote a steamy book that included a lesbian sex scene. The MRC dismissed it as whataboutism:
Noel Sheppard whined that "CNN was extraordinarily expedient in finding examples of Republican writings to deflect criticism from Webb" by offering "examples of other Republicans doing exactly what the Democrat is accused of doing."
A couple days later, Sheppard huffily included the sexy excerpt as an addendum to a post about a CNN interview of Cheney: "What follows is a full transcript of this segment. Also, for those that are interested, a blog called OC Chronicle discovered the part of Lynne Cheney’s 1981 book that is being equated to the sex-scenes in Jim Webb’s novels." Sheppard didn't seem grossed out by it at all.
It's quite entertaining to see the MRC whine about whataboutism when that's pretty much what it runs on these days.
WND's Farah Uses His Wife To Play Victim Topic: WorldNetDaily
Joseph Farah just loves to play the victim when it comes to absolving himself from responsibility for any bad thing that happens to his WorldNetDaily. And he did it again in his July 4 column:
My wife, Elizabeth, was leading a small Bible study, seen by no more than 50 people, as she does every Saturday. Last Saturday was no exception.
I was moderating as usual.
She was delivering a livestream presentation via YouTube on the little book of Haggai.
Elizabeth has a heart for the lost. She spends countless hours every week researching the Bible and learning from the original texts, Hebrew and Greek, and other sources. She loves to share this information. She's more gifted at this than I am – and I've been doing it for over 45 years.
Suddenly, about 30 minutes after starting the streaming Bible study, with no warning, the program was called to an abrupt end – replaced by a message that said Elizabeth had violated "community standards" and was getting a timeout until Sept. 29.
But it wasn't for something she was talking about last Saturday. It was for an earlier YouTube video in May on the overturning of Roe v. Wade.
They said it was "MISINFORMATION."
That's a scary word for Democrats.
Of course, they never spread "MISINFORMATION."
t was apparently "MISINFORMATION" about the election of 2020.
Elizabeth just wanted to thank President Donald J. Trump for fulfilling his promise to nominate all pro-life justices to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Apparently, that was a "sin" against Big Tech.
Note that Farah doesn't directly quote what his wife said or explain why it wasn't misinformation. Perhaps that's because we know he and WND have been prolificsourcesofmisinformation about the 2020 election in promoting false and discredited claims that there was election fraud.
So rather than actually defend his wife, it was time to cry victimhood yet again with a told orld story: "Earlier, YouTube completely and permanently demonetized WND. Google, which owns YouTube, also completely and permanently demonetized WND, costing us millions of dollars in annual revenues." As we've documented before, Google has stopped doing business with WND -- as any private business has the right to do -- because it no longer wants to be associated with a website that spreads hate, lies and misinformation. He went on to whine that WND was targeted because it supported Trump, ending with this odd declaration:
I've been nagging Elizabeth to use a different platform – one that respects other opinions. YouTube, Google and Big Tech do not. She doesn't plan to go through the agony of answering the charges this time. Never again. Why humiliate yourself?
In retrospect, WND was always right about Trump.
And we stand with him yesterday, today and tomorrow.
All he ever wanted, in good faith, was to make America great again.
Join with me in prayer that he gets another chance to do just that.
And, to my darling Elizabeth, I respect you and love you for what you are doing with God's Word.
Who needs YouTube?
Actually, Farah is looking for a different platform that will tolerate her lies and misinformation. And, actually, what Elizabeth Farah is "doing with God's Word" is spreading hate and lies. In videos before the 2020 election, she repeatedlysmeared Joe Biden while bizarrely proclaiming that Trump was appointed by God to the presidency. She is not a good person, let alone a person anybody should be taking Bible lessons from.
MRC's Jean-Pierre-Bashing, Doocy-Fluffing Watch Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's malicious narrative of new White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre as an incompetent diversity hire continued with attacks at the end of July. Kevin Tober subbed for Curtis Houck on the July 25 briefing:
For the second press briefing in a row, the White House took a beating from reporters due to President Joe Biden’s personal physician hiding from hungry reporters’ questions on the state of Biden’s COVID treatment, recovery, and overall health. You know it's bad when reporters from CBS News, The New York Times, and NewsMax all grilled the White House COVID-19 response coordinator Ashish Jha on the administration’s lack of transparency.
Due to Biden’s bout of COVID, and the fact that White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre can’t take questions from the media without stepping on rakes, Jha was trotted out to handle all questions related to Biden’s illness and other public health-related topics.
Of course, Tober served up the obligatory Doocy-fluffing:
Later on in the briefing, Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy brought up the subject again by asking if “this a situation where Dr. O'Connor does not want to come and talk about the President's health or where the President doesn't want Dr. O'Connor talking about his health?”
In response, Jha claimed he’s “spoken both to the President and to Dr. O'Connor on an ongoing basis and neither of them has expressed a preference. Dr. O'Connor at any point has not said he doesn't want to come and the President has not at any point said he doesn't want Dr. O'Connor to come. So, I would say neither of those is correct.”
Proving once again why he’s one of the best reporters in the briefing room, Doocy went after Biden’s photo ops taken during his time in quarantine:
We don't recall the MRC complaining about the obviously staged photos taken by the Trump White House when Donald Trump had a bout of COVID.
Houck returned to attack Jean-Pierre anew over the July 27 briefing by quibbling over the definition of a recession:
Wednesday’s White House press briefing wasn’t smooth sailing for Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre (as most if not all are for someone in way over their head) with Fox’s Peter Doocy and a select few others reporters who pressed her on the Biden administration’s disinformation campaign to redefine what a recession is ahead of what’s expected to be a dour second quarter number on Thursday.
Doocy began with the premise that the American Rescue Plan contributed to inflation, but Jean-Pierre wasn’t having it. Instead, she claimed Biden came into office facing a litany of crisis, but he still “turned the economy back on” and created “a stronger labor market” “outside factors.”
Doocy used her answer to then corner her on defining a recession: “If things are going so great, though, then why is it that White House officials are trying to redefine recession?”
Jean-Pierre predictably walked right in to the trap, insisting “we’re not redefining a recession,” leaving Doocy to hit back:
So Doocy is a layer of "traps," not an actual reporter. Got it.
Tober returned for even more Doocy-fluffing over the July 28 briefing:
During Thursday's train wreck known as the White House press briefing, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre got demolished by Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy after Jean-Pierre accused Republican governors of using migrants as political pawns by bussing them to Washington D.C. The always floundering Jean-Pierre mumbled and stumbled her way through multiple grillings by Doocy.
The first question out of the gate was whether "President Biden ask[ed] President Xi anything about getting to the bottom of the origins of COVID." Naturally, this simple question completely flummoxed Jean-Pierre who began frantically flipping through her notes in her binder for an answer to Doocy's question.
Changing topics, Doocy asked "The DC Mayor sent the White House a letter asking for National Guard help with migrants who have been bussed here from Texas and Arizona. Is the President gonna approve that request for the National Guard?"
In response, Jean-Pierre ducked by referring him to the Department of Defense. She went on to whine how "Republicans using migrants as a political tool, and that is shameful, and that is just wrong."
Doocy shot back: "There’s a process and they come to a big city and now the Mayor says she needs the National Guard?"
Realizing she's running out of non-answers, Jean-Pierre replied: "That’s because Republicans are using, they’re using migrants who are coming here for who knows? Because they’re dealing with humanitarian issues back in their country. They’re coming here for a better life and they’re being used, Peter, they’re being used by Republican governors. That is what’s happening."
Doocy managed to get in one question before she frantically called on another reporter to get out of Doocy's line of questioning: "Does any of this make the President want to say 'this is causing a lot of burdens on small cities, big cities, maybe I should just close the border?’"
Fox News must have given Tober a nice little kickback for spending an entire post fawning over Doocy (and, of course, denigrating Jean-Pierre). He earned another one for even more Doocy-worship the next day:
On Friday’s White House press briefing, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre got into another battle with Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy because of her apparent inability to answer simple questions put to her.
The first question from Doocy came in light of comments made by the former chief editor of the Chinese state media outlet the Global Times, who suggested China would shoot down House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s plane if she visits Taiwan.
This is an extremely serious situation, so Doocy attempted to get a response from the White House: “an official who is associated with Chinese state media is suggesting that if Speaker Pelosi tries to go to Taiwan her plane could be shot down. Does the President have a response to that?”
Jean-Pierre’s response was that this was “something that we’re just not going to speak to” adding that it’s “a hypothetical, we are not we're just not going to speak on her schedule.”
You would think this would be a topic the White House would make a statement about since if China shot down the plane of the woman second in line for the presidency it would lead to a war between the United States and China.
Realizing he’s not going to receive an answer from Jean-Pierre, Doocy switched gears to the news that the Biden administration quietly approved construction of former President Trump’s border wall in Arizona asking “why is the Biden administration building a border wall in Arizona?”
Doocy came prepared as always because he dug up comments made by Jean-Pierre from 2019 in which she called the border wall racist, and now three years later she’s in an administration that is attempting to finish building part of the wall:
“Is this racist? Because in 2019 when the former guy was proposing a wall, you said that it was his racist wall. So how is this any different? I'm just having a hard time understanding how this is any different” Doocy asked.
Doocy will be happy to have Tober's writeups in his scrapbook.
WND Melts Down Over Call For COVID Boosters Topic: WorldNetDaily
Bob Unruh ranted in a July 12 WorldNetDaily "news" article:
Just when things were getting back to normal, mostly. People could do their shopping without wearing a face covering in most retailers. The masks still are being demanded in doctors' offices, but, heck, that's where sick people are anyway.
In light of that, Joe Biden's director of the Centers for Disease Control, Rochelle Walensky, has unleashed a new demand – for seniors to get their second booster shot against COVID-19 "right away."
"Many Americans are under vaccinated, meaning they are not up to date on their COVID-19 vaccines. Not all people over the age of 50 have received their first booster dose…" she started out.
Of those over 50 only 28% have gotten their second booster after lining up to take their first, she said. Those over 65 are even worse.
"So my message right now is very simple: It is essential that these Americans … get their second booster shot right away."
Unruh appears to be gleefully unaware that the reason "things were getting back to normal, mostly" is precisely because of those vaccinees and booster. Because Unruh lives in WND's world of anti-vaxxer fearmongering, he followed up with anti-vaccine propaganda:
Meanwhile, an MIT study as tied COVID shots to cardiac arrest among young patients. And the CEO of the maker of the Astrazeneca shots was caught saying millions of people should avoid them completely.
Previously, Joe Biden's medical adviser, Anthony Fauci, said he really doesn't know how many shots ultimately will be recommended, but studies have shown they're virtually ineffective for children.
And the FDA has warned Joe Biden may end up demanding annual shots.
First: The AstraZeneca vaccine isn't even available in the U.S. Second: As we've documented, WND and other anti-vaxxers have misrepresented not only the the findings of that study (the study itself states it does not establish "causal relationships" between vaccines and heart problems) but also the link to MIT; two of the researchers were associated with the MIT Sloan School of Management and not a medical organization.
Unruh kept up the fearmongering, declaring that "WND reported earlier this year when New York Times reporter Alex Berenson called for the "dangerous" shots to be withdrawn." In fact, Berenson hasn't worked for the Times in a couple of years, and he too is a documented liar and anti-vaxxer. (Funny how WND hates the "liberal media" but will invoke the Times to put a veneer of credibility on a right-wing narrative.)
Unruh also named checked "renowned cardiologist and medical scientist Dr. Peter McCullough," who "told WND in a video interview the official pandemic narrative is 'completely crumbling' and the vaccines 'should be pulled off the market.'" Calling McCullough "renowned" doesn't wipe away the fact that McCullough too is a dishonest anti-vaxxer whom, of course, WND loves for his lies.
CNS Promotes Anti-Transgender Study, Buries Criticism Of It Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com gave plenty of attention to an anti-transgender study put out by the right-wing Heritage Foundation. The first step was a June 13 promotional column by Heritage's Jarrett Stepman:
State policies that allow children to access so-called gender-affirming care without parental consent have created a significant increase in suicides, according to a new Heritage Foundation study.
The Heritage study released Monday found that 2020 saw 1.6 more suicides per 100,000 residents ages 12 to 23 in states that allow minors access to puberty blockers and other gender-reassignment procedures without parental consent. (The Daily Signal, where I write, is Heritage’s multimedia news organization.)
Jay Greene, a Heritage research fellow in education, found little evidence that such procedures prevent suicide. In fact, they may be fueling an increase in suicide among young people, the study finds.
A common argument of those in favor of so-called gender-affirming care is that such medical procedures prevent suicide.
Two days later, intern Lucy Collins was tasked to crank out a "news" article on the Heritage study, which sounded not unlike Stepman's column:
A new study by the Heritage Foundation, Puberty Blockers, Cross-Sex Hormones, and Youth Suicide, shows that states which give children easier access to puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones have a youth suicide rate that is 14% higher than states which require parental consent for such access.
Jay Greene, a senior research fellow for the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Education Policy, released a report on June 13 claiming that when children have easier access to cross-sex medical interventions, it not only fails to decrease suicide rates, as transgender activists claim, but “is associated with a significant increase in the adolescent suicide rate.”
Greene looked at the research supporting claims that increased access to “gender-affirming care” lowers suicide rates. He found that only three studies had been conducted on the link. These studies' were flawed, in Greene’s opinion, because they compared suicide rates between those who were approved versus those who were denied cross-sex hormones, without factoring in that those who were denied were likely already at an increased risk for suicide as mental health is a reason for denial of treatment.
Greene saidmanother flaw was that the studies were conducted or aided by activist groups who likely only sampled those who were pleased with their gender transition.
Greene then conducted a study of his own by observing states that allow minors to access health care without parental approval and comparing them to states that do not have these provisions. Greene looked only at age groups that would be candidates for hormone blockers (12-23) during the years 2001 and 2020.
As limited data are available showing availability of cross-sex hormones to children by state, Greene looked at states with legal provisions allowing children to access routine health care without the consent of their parents as a proxy. He juxtaposed these states with those that do not have similar provisions, and thus children would presumably be less able to access these drugs.
Claims from transgender activists that increased access to cross-sex hormones should decrease rates of suicide do not manifest in Greene’s data. Rather, the data show the opposite: suicide increases correlated to greater access to transgender medicine.
Despite noting Greene's complaint about research being conducted by "conducted or aided by activist groups, Collins didn't note that Greene's employer is an activist group that pushes anti-LGBTQ arguments and policies, which by his own defintion should mean his own research must be qustioned for bias. And it was not until the second-to-last paragraph of her 17-paragraph article that Collinsgot around to mentioning that Greene's study has been criticized:
His study has faced backlash on Twitter around claims that his methodology was flawed, a claim Greene has responded to, saying that although his study is not the “gold standard” due to limited data resources on the subject, it is still a “superior research design” than the studies citied by transgender activists. Greene plans on submitting his findings for peer review.
Collins could not be bothered to further detail any of that criticism, however. even though those critics have offered much more detailed criticisms , not only on the quality of the data Greene used but also that the data could not have been used to get the results Greene claimed. As Jesse Singal wrote:
In short, this data definitely cannot be used to assert that many kids obtained access to blockers and hormones without the knowledge of their parents. If Greene is making a “by Turban’s logic” argument, sure, whatever — at this point, anyone who has even briefly perused the U.S. Transgender Survey data knows it’s ridiculous how much Turban and other researchers are extrapolating from it. “Water from a stone” is an understatement.
But Greene’s own argument does rely on the idea that fairly large numbers of kids could access these treatments without parental consent. If for a sizable chunk of that 2010 to 2020 span there was very little of this going on in much of the country, then of course it’s bunk, definitionally, to point to changes in suicide trends and to not only attribute them, but attribute them entirely, to kids going on blockers and hormones.
The core claim is that suicides in under-24s are increasing in states that have minor access provision for healthcare and that therefore this access is the cause. One thing to remember is that - because of the difficulty of determining what access is available - the selection criteria are a proxy for access to paediatric medical transition. As such, the whole report is based on minor access to healthcare generally on the assumption that this translates to minor access to puberty blockers. But how sound is that?
But because neither Collins nor any other CNS writer followed up, CNS readers don't know that Greene's study has been seriously debunked. Indeed, it continued to promote the study: A June 22 article by Craig Bannister claiming that President Biden is forcing states to "embrace LGBTQ+ gender ideology" complained that gender-affirming care for transgender youth "is listed in the White House fact sheet as a means of “Preventing LGBTQUI+ Youth Suicide,” a claim that is contrary to results of a new study conducted by the Heritage Foundation, which found that the youth suicide rate is 14% higher in states with greater youth access to GAC than it is in states where access is more limited." Bannister censored the fact that the study has been credibly debunked.
NEW ARTICLE: Joseph Farah's Blame Game Topic: WorldNetDaily
The WorldNetDaily editor is desperate to blame everything and everyone for his website's financial problems -- except, of course, himself and WND's editorial agenda of fake news and conspiracy theories. Read more >>
MRC Still Rooting For Surveillance State To Stop Women From Having An Abortion Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has already endorsed the state-level Orwellian monitoring of women lest they have an abortion. That has grown to demanding that the normally hated "big tech" also montior women and hand those records over to thestate when women think about having an abortion. Tierin-Rose Mandelburg, the MRC's chief promoter of the abortion-surveillance state, wrote in a May 25 post:
As our nation preps for the overturn of Roe v. Wade, baby killing enthusiasts are freaking out. They’ve been protesting, pouting, and rallying all across America and now they're even calling for ways to abort kids illegally - and get away with it.
In a May 24 letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, dozens of Democrats demanded that Google stop collecting location data so that women can abort their babies without getting in trouble, according to Insider.
42 Dems penned the plea where they claimed, “Google's current practice of collecting and retaining extensive records of cell phone location data will allow it to become a tool for far-right extremists looking to crack down on people seeking reproductive health care.”
People who don't support killing babies are "far-right extremists" apparently. Cool.
The letter indicates that lawmakers want Google to keep location private so that women who live in states where abortion is or becomes illegal can kill their babies without getting caught. It’s ironic that lawmakers want to help people break the law.
Mandleburg doesn't menion the obvious: Information isn't illegal and can't be stopped from crossing state lines, and it's perfectly legal for a woman to have an abortion in a state where it's legal, even if the state she's from has outlawed it. Again, Mandelburg doesn't explain the structure or cost of the state surveillance apparatus that would be needed to monitor every woman in a state to make sure she's not thinking about having an abortion -- which would also, presumably, involve imprisoning or otherwise physically restraining a woman who wants to go to another state or is simply thinking about doing so -- nor does she point to any court ruling that would legalize such a massive state surveillance apparatus.
A July 7 post by Catherine Salgado lamented that Google would not entertain the MRC's surveillance state fantasies:
Following pressure from Democratic Party lawmakers and the liberal media, Google announced that it would make a new exception for retaining users’ location history—users visiting abortion clinics.
After the U.S. Supreme Court Dobbs v. Jacksondecision that struck down Roe v. Wade, multiple tech companies and executives rushed to voice their support for baby killing. Google has now joined the ranks of pro-abortion businesses.
The Big Tech platform received considerable pressure from Democratic Party lawmakers, with 42 demanding that Google help those seeking illegal abortions by not collecting their location data.
14 senators and seven House lawmakers -- all Democrats -- also signed a letter to Google pressuring the company to remove crisis pregnancy clinics from abortion-related search results. Following such pressure, lo and behold, the platform announced that it will delete user location data for abortion clinic patients.
LIke Mandelburg, Salgado did not explain how this anti-abortion surveillance state would work, let alone how it would be legal given that how it would fly in the face of longstanding rulings upholding the freedom to travel, or why simply searching for information should be treated as a crime. Instead, she played whataboutism:
Google didn’t appear so concerned about user data privacy in the past. Free Speech Alliance member Project Veritas presented evidence in April alleging that Google had complied with secret government court orders and gave the government detailed private data from Project Veritas employees’ Gmail accounts.
Perhaps Project Veritas shouldn't have been committing crimes if it didn't want its communications to be surveilled.
Joseph Vazquez tried a different kind of whataboutism in a July 13 post:
Leftist outlets warning about potential data privacy infringements for those seeking abortions pushed for the surrender of people’s privacy when it came to COVID-19.
MRC Free Speech America found at least eight major publications that seemed to have respective major epiphanies on the importance of data privacy. Once the news broke that the U.S. Supreme Court would — and eventually did overturn the infamous pro-abortion Roe v. Wade( 1973) decision, liberal outlets like The Washington Post, The New York Times, BuzzFeed News and Fortune went into apparent shock and hypocritically warned about Big Tech’s threat to women’s abortion-related data privacy.
But these same outlets sang a different tune when it came to data privacy and contact tracing during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Vasquez clearly doesn't understand the difference between a medical procedure that is legal in many states and a communicable virus that is spread by close contact with people, thus making contact tracing a helpful to in prevention and treatment. And, like the others, Vazquez didn't explain why a massive anti-abortion surveillance police state is needed (let alone legal) or why simply searching for information must be made a crime. Instead, he whined that one publication "sounded the Big Brother alarm for women seeking abortions" while refusing to explain why it wouldn't be.
As much as the MRC whines about "big tech," it knows it can be used to advance its policy objectives -- like an anti-abortion surveillance state.
WND Wildly Accuses Soros Of Declaring 'War' On America Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily has its own particuarly virulent brand of Soros Derangement Sydrome, which has symptoms like Joseph Farah desperatelycalling for Soros' American citizenship to be revoked. Now, WND's Art Moore has had a derangement-fueled freakout over a commentary Soros wrote, hyperbolically declaring in a July 6 "news" article:
On Independence Day, billionaire activist George Soros effectively declared war on the United States Supreme Court and the Republican Party
"But voters need to recognize the Court's radical majority for what it is: part of a carefully laid plan to turn the US into a repressive regime."
Soros made no declaration of war, effectively or otherwise, and Moore knows it. He's paid by WND to spread lies about the declared enemies of far-right politicans, and that's what he's doing here -- and that's why he's citing the Gateway Pundit, a notoriously unreliable website (even more than WND) who's currently being sued for defmation over the lies and hate it spread in promoting Donald Trump's Big Lie about election fraud.
Moore made no attempt whatsoever to rebut or challenge anything Soros wrote; instead, he played whataboutism, declaring that "Meanwhile, violent crime has risen substantially in major cities with progressive district attorneys whose campaigns were bankrolled by Soros" -- which has nothing to do with anything Soros wrote about.
Moore's highly inflammatory article was accompanied by a poll asking, "Is George Soros evil?" Unsurprisingly 99 percent of the 1,395 respondents -- a decidedly paltry number that seems to indicate WND's declining readership -- said yes.
UPDATE: Moore also got it wrong when he called Project Syndicate Soro's website. In fact, it's an independently run commentary and analysis site to which Soros is only one of several donors.
MRC's Fondacaro Heathers Alyssa Farah Griffin Again Topic: Media Research Center
We've shown how the Media Research Center turned against occasional "View" guest host Alyssa Farah Griffin -- whose right-wing credentials are impeccable, given that her father is right-wing hater, Obama birther and WorldNetDaily founder Joseph Farah -- for committing the offense of insufficient loyalty to Donald Trump. Unlike the MRC, Farah found the Capitol riot andhis Big Lie about election fraud to be a bit of a turnoff. As this summer continued, the MRC -- mainly misoygynistic writer Nicholas Fondacaro -- continued to give Farah Griffin the Heather treatment. He sneered in a June 14 post:
Former Trump White House official-turned-self-serving sellout Alyssa Farah Griffin once again joined ABC’s The View on Tuesday to commiserate about the January 6 Committee hearings and bash the party she claims to still be a part of. And at the start of a conversation about potential 2024 nominees for both sides, Griffin slipped and seemingly announced she was interested in pushing a Democratic candidate. And co-host Sunny Hostin announced her primary requirement for a candidate is that they’re hot.
With co-host Whoopi Goldberg kicking off the segment by fretting that former President Trump would run again in 2024, Griffin noted that inflation, gas prices, the tumbling stock market, and his advanced age were bad news for President Biden. She soon pivoted to asking about who the Democrats would put up and flashed her interest in pushing them as her candidate.
“I’m curious. Like who are the Dems going to run? Where is like the Obama energy that we could bring?” she asked the liberal cast. She caught what she said and quickly tried to walk it back, adding, “That you guys could bring.”
Fondacaro is so filled with hate for anyone who does not follow in rigid lockstep with his right-wing ideology or offers even the slightest reasonable criticism of Trump -- deviation equals treason as far as he's concerned.He's desperate to read treason into Griffin's mild comments solely as an excuse to spew hate at her. His hatred for her is so irrational that he even attacked her for something he might actually agree with, which he did the next day:
The cast of ABC’s The View was in something of a panic Wednesday after several congressional primaries revealed which Republican candidates would be squaring up against Democrats in November in what’s likely to be a massive red wave victory for the right. But the coven was in such denial that they aggressively shot down any mention of the red wave and completely ignored the historic win by Latina Republican Mayra Flores in a special election flipping a seat occupied by Democrats for over 100 years.
“I'm a conservative. I'm a Republican. And listening to Russell Fry who unseated Tom Rice, a principled conservative who voted to impeach Donald Trump,” whined guest co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin. “But here's what I would warn. The red wave is coming. Republicans are going to win the midterms short of something unforeseen that I cannot predict now.”
In a June 17 post, Fondacaro tried to gloat over another "View" host bashing people who worked for Trump (which Farah Griffin did):
It appears as though the likes of former Trump administration officials Alyssa Farah Griffin and Stephanie Grisham sold out their “conservative” principles for The View’s blessing for nothing (not like it was worth anything to begin with). During Friday’s edition of the ABC show, co-host Joy Behar lashed out at them, calling them “recovering addicts” and complaining about them coming on the show; essentially exposing how the liberal cast doesn’t even want mediocre opposition on the program.
“So, I do think he needs to be commended for his actions that day,” self-proclaimed Republicans and staunch Never Trumper Ana Navarro said of former Vice President Mike Pence’s actions on January 6. “That does not erase four years of complicity.”
That was that comment that set off Behar. “Exactly. These people who are now all, like, recovering addicts – recovering addicts in the Trump world that come on, even on this show. They come on this show, they go on other shows and they're turning on Trump,” she whined.
It’s obvious who she was talking about as Griffin and Grisham are part of the rotation for the “conservative” seat and are the only ones who used to work in the Trump administration. Griffin has even been on the show multiple days earlier in the week. And both are seemingly okay with relegating themselves to being punching bags for the liberal cast members.
Fondacaro added: "Griffin has been widely accused of selling out to enrich and ingratiate herself with influential people on from the left." He didn't mention that his definition of "widely" is limited to rigid ideologues like him who are unable to handle even the slightest deviation from right-wing, pro-Trump dogma.
When Farah Griffin was reportedly a candidate for a full-time slot on "The View," Fondacaro rehashed his previous attacks on her in a July 5 post:
Eager to please and be the punching bag for the Hollywood liberal cast that will never really accept her, Farah is the obvious choice when examining her performance.
And Griffin has been roundly criticized for the self-flagellation she’s undergone in an attempt to receive praise from the radical leftist co-hosts. Former Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway once confronted her on the show and declared: “we're supposed to think that you've seen the light and not just see your name in lights.”
Again, Fondacaro's criticisms focus more on not toeing thehard-right line, not on her suddenly becoming a Whoopi Goldberg-level liberal. And Conway is hardly a credible source of criticism, given how she has profited handsomely off her years in the Trump administration with a new book and frequentFoxNewsappearances; she clearly loves seeing her name in lights, even more than Farah Griffin.
Fondacaro clearly can't handle a woman who thinks for herself,and that those thoughts might be different from his, even if she's unquestionably a conservatives. That's why he's lashing out so viciously at Farah Griffin.
CNSNews.com has long been obsessed with the Keystone XL pipeline and pushing the fiction that building the pipeline would lower gas prices in the U.S. (it won't). And it's still popping up in CNS talking points. In mid-July, CNS interns went on another congressman-pestering mission to asked biased questions of senators designed to advance right-wing narratives. Four senators -- Mitt Romney, Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz and Sherrod Brown, all Republicans except Brown -- were asked, "Is it appropriate for President Biden to travel to Saudi Arabia and meet with Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman?" The boilerplate copy in each article brought up the Keystone ghost again:
When campaigning for office in 2020, Biden said, “I guarantee you, we’re going to end fossil fuels.” Once in office, Biden took action to reduce domestic oil production, including revoking the permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline, which was expected to carry 830,000 barrels per day of Alberta oil sands crude to Nebraska, according to CNBC.
The boilerplate didn't mention that, as we've pointed out, most of the petroleum products made from the oil that would be exported, not saved for use in the U.S. Additionally, some of that proposed oil volume from Canada to the U.S. is already being transported by rail to the Gulf Coast.
Another intern article allowed Republican Sen. Steve Daines to virtue-signal on the question by referencing Keystone, in addition to the boilerplate:
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) disapproves of President Joe Biden’s trip to Saudi Arabia this week in an attempt to combat inflated gas prices, asserting that Biden first needs to meet with U.S. oil producers to discuss “how we can increase production and to restore the Keystone Pipeline.”
At the U.S. Capitol on Monday, CNS News asked Senator Daines, “Is it appropriate for President Biden to travel to Saudi Arabia to meet with Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman?”
Daines replied, “The first meetings President Biden should have—should’ve had—are with U.S. oil producers talking about how we can increase production and to restore the Keystone pipeline. He should be staying home, talking to U.S. producers.”
Like the others, this article failed to report that the most of pipeline's products would likely be exported.
MRC Cranked Out Even More Gun Defenses Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center loves defending guns by any means necessary, and it was busy doing just that, what with all the recentgunmassacres. In between the massacres, the MRC did its best to defend guns and attack anyone who criticized them or advocated for sensible (or any) gun regulation.
In a May 26 post, Margaret Buckley whined that MSNBC's "Morning Joe" detailed what it called "The Conservative Playbook for Deflecting Anger After Mass Shootings" -- which, of course, is exactly what the MRC has been following:
New York magazine writer Jonathan Chait then joined in on the conversation with Brzezinski reading an excerpt from his article: "The Conservative Playbook for Deflecting Anger After Mass Shootings." She went on reading that through the steps of this “playbook”, Republicans attempt to “to locate solutions outside of gun control. And blame Democrats for opposing them.”
When asking Chait about this article he replied “That's a great point on mental health.”, agreeing with Brzezinski that conservatives love to use it as an excuse for mass shootings, labeling mental health as a “distraction” from what really has to be done.
Do Joe Scarborough and friends really think that ranting and whining about the GOP will bring about positive solutions? Or are they just trying to fill up their three-hour duration by throwing harmless insults at those who don’t agree with them?
Throwing insults at those you don't agree with? Buckley just described the content of the vast majority of NewsBusters posts.
Alex Christy spent a May 27 post whining that a CNN host fact-checked Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's false statements about gun violence and insisting it was unfair that he was taken literally:
While attempting to fact check Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday on his claim that there is no correlation between gun laws and gun deaths, CNN Newsroom host Alisyn Camerota failed to not only consider what Abbott actually said, but cherry-picked her statistics in an attempt to prove him wrong.
During an interview with State Rep. Nicole Collier, Camerota read a quote from Abbott, “One of the things that your governor said on Wednesday was that ‘there are more people shot,’ he said, “’every weekend in Chicago than there are schools in Texas. We need to realize that people who think maybe we can just implement tougher gun laws, it hasn't solved it in Chicago and L.A. and New York, it disproves that thesis,’ he said.”
Abbott’s point was about gun violence that occurs so often in Chicago that national reporters have stopped talked talking about it, but a rare school shooting gets all the headlines.
However, Camerota decided to talk about all gun deaths in the entire state, “Actually, he's wrong, Texas is the state with the highest amount of gun deaths. Here's the graphic. Texas is number one. Far and away, of all of the states with gun deaths. Then California, Florida, Georgia, Ohio. And so it seemed as though he was casting a lot of blame in different directions, but he wasn't talking about guns in Texas changing anything.”
Christy offered no evidence that Abbott was speaking metaphorically or that he should be judged only by whatever his "point" allegedly was and not by what he actually said -- which is what Camerota did.
Another May 27 post by Aidan Moorehouse declared that nobody had any right to deny guns to the shooter who racked up quite the body count in a Uvalde, Texas, classroom because he pased his background check:
The shooter, tragically, passed his background check and was of age to buy a gun, and an 18-year-old buying a gun on his birthday in much the same way a 21-year-old would go to a bar would not be seen as unusual in rural Texas. Sure, it's easy for Costas to say “we know now” that the shooter was a deeply disturbed individual, but to call it insane for the gun dealer to have sold legal firearms to someone who had passed his background check is lunacy.
Just as it did after his speech following the Buffalo massacre, the MRC lashed out at President Biden again for making a speech following the Uvalde massare, bashing news coverage of it for not spewing hate at the president like a loyal right-wing outlet would in a June 3 post by Curtis Houck:
On Friday, the “big three” broadcast networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC each led off their morning newscasts with laudatory praise for President Biden’s latest remarks calling for mass gun control, trumpeting it as “an impassioned” “urgent plea” for Republicans to capitulate to the demands of this “emotional” President.
ABC’s Good Morning America was the most insufferable. Co-host and former Clinton official George Stephanopoulos boasted: “President Biden's address to the nation on gun violence. Emotional and urgent. The President called on Congress to act, saying we cannot fail the American people again.”
Loyal Biden supporter and White House correspondent Mary Bruce replied that “Biden knows the fight” for gun control “well...and he’s trying to use the power of the presidency to keep up the pressure on Republicans in Congress” “emotionally pleading with Washington to do something and asking the question that so many Americans ask themselves after every one of these shootings: will this finally be enough?”
Bruce continued to lament as she did nothing to offer even a scintilla of a Republican response: “After three decades of congressional inaction, Biden is painfully familiar with the difficulties of gun reform, blaming Republicans who have been standing in the way.”
Houck did not explain why he tagged Bruce as a "loyal Biden supporter." after all, he would never tag Peter Doocy as a "loyal Republican supporter."
Houck returned for a June 6 post complaining once again that one measure of gun violence made guns look bad:
On the Monday morning broadcast network newscasts, ABC, CBS, and NBC continued to promote the inflated definition of mass shootings from the Gun Violence Archive in light of weekend shootings in Chattanooga, Tennessee and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, claiming there were 13 weekend mass shootings. And, worse yet, they absolved far-left cities and prosecutors from being a reason for spikes in crime.
The Gun Violence Archive defines a mass shooting as an event in which four or more people are shot and/or killed (minus the gunman), but as we’ve discussed “confusing” with the definition of gun violence even includes things such as home invasions, accidental shootings, using a gun in self defense, “and everything else.”
For one story, our Nick Fondacaro spoke with The Reload’s Stephen Gutowksi, who said Gun Violence Archive’s measuring stick “increases the number of mass shootings by a factor of ten or more.”
The MRC, of course, can't have that kind of increase, so it attacks the numbers. As we've documented, the MRC did more than "discuss" the Gun Violence Archive's numbers -- it falsely called them lies even though they are a perfectly valid way to measure mass shootings and their numbers are fully documented.
Buckley, meanwhile, returned for a June 9 post to whine that people were still talking about guns:
The upcoming January 6 hearings are not the only subjects being unnecessarily dragged on and on by the liberal media. On Thursday’s edition of Morning Joe, viewers had the privilege of seeing Scarborough and friends once again continue ranting about the GOP as monsters unmoved by children killed in mass shootings.
When reacting to Congressman and assassination attempt survivor Steve Scalise’s (R-LA) speech about gun control, where he compared banning guns to banning airplanes after 9/11, the show’s hosts acted absolutely appalled; with Mika Brzezinski commenting that it was “unspeakably stupid.”
Scarborough then circled back to Congressmen Scalise’s 9/11 comparison attempting to throw TSA regulations in his face. “TSA regulated the hell out of air travel,” Scarborough exclaimed, “You would get checked at the gate. Like, you had to get patted down. You're still getting patted down. Liquids -- Mika and I just traveled. Liquids taken out.”
Gun reform and post-9/11 are completely different things, Joe. It is widely accepted that those TSA “pat-downs” are mostly theatrics. Not only that, but when tested for the real thing, the TSA actually fails to catchmost prohibited objects.
Of course, Buckley won't make the parallel argument that if we shouldn't have gun laws because people will violate them, then abortion shouldn't be outlawed because women will still have abortions regardless. Instead, she whined further: "Viewers always get the same spiel from these people: Republicans equal bad, Republicans equal evil." Change "Republicans" to "Democrats," and you have the daily spiel put out by Buckley and the MRC.