NEW ARTICLE -- The MRC Flips Over Elon Musk, Part 18: An Anti-Semitic Meltdown
Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center decided that the best person it could find to defend Elon Musk's rage that the Anti-Defamation League showed how anti-Semitism has grown on Twitter since he bought it was ... racist cartoonist Scott Adams. Read more >>

MRC Promoted Bogus Claim That Photojournalists Embedded With Hamas
Topic: Media Research Center

Nicholas Fondacaro loves spreading lies -- we just documented him lying that a Palestinian Instagram influencer was a "crisis actor." A couple days before he started that lie, he repeated another one in a Nov. 8 post:

On Wednesday, HonestReporting drew attention to what they described as “ethical questions” stemming from the fact that local Gazan photojournalists affiliated with the Associated Press, CNN, the New York Times, and Reuters followed Hamas terrorists through their breaches in the border fence and into Israel during the October 7 terrorist attack. This led to accusations that these journalists were “embedded” with the terrorists and that they were given advanced notice of the attack.

In the subsection titled “AP: Photojournalists or Infiltrators?,” HonestReporting identified four photojournalists with various ties to Western liberal media outlets who somehow found themselves among the chaos of the invasion of Israel that was a shock to everyone but those who planned it. The reporters of note were “Hassan Eslaiah, Yousef Masoud, Ali Mahmud, and Hatem Ali.”

“What were they doing there so early on what would ordinarily have been a quiet Saturday morning? Was it coordinated with Hamas?” HonestReporting wondered. “Did the respectable wire services, which published their photos, approve of their presence inside enemy territory, together with the terrorist infiltrators? Did the photojournalists who freelance for other media, like CNN and The New York Times, notify these outlets?”

The answer was obvious to Free Beacon contributor Noah Pollak, who posted on X (formerly Twitter): “Important expose by @honestreporting: Photographers working for AP, CNN, NYT, and Reuters were EMBEDDED with Hamas on 10/7 and accompanied the terrorist group into Israel. They knew the attack was coming, and participated in it.”

Fondacaro followed up with a post the next day noting that the media outlets in question denied having any advance knowledge of Hamas' attack. But he didn't tell readers the truth: that the allegation was a lie.

The Associated Press reported that HonestReporting admitted it never had any evidence to back up its claims of embedding; it insisted it was merely asking "legitimate questions" and that despite its name, "we don’t claim to be a news organization." But because the lie serves the MRC's anti-media narratives, not only did it stay silent about the lie being exposed, it chose to perpetuate the lie. Curtis Houc, ranted about the lie being called out in a Nov. 10 post:

On Thursday night, CNN sent out its cartoonishly pathetic senior media reporter Oliver Darcy to do what he dubbed “Shooting Down a Smear” in the wake of HonestReporting’s bombshell alleging Gaza freelance journalists for CNN and The New York Times as well as Associated Press and Reuters embedded with Hamas terrorists during the group’s animalistic October 7 terror attack.

[...]

Touting the outlets “strongly pushing back against the report from the staunchly pro-Israel media watchdog, HonestReporting, that claimed photographers for the news outlets were present during the initial attack,” Darcy insinuated there’s nothing further to see since the AP and CNN “severed ties with the freelance photographer Hassan Eslaiah”.

The former conservative reporter pointed to an AP story doing damage control and doing what the liberal media do when targeted, which is try to smear and maim those who criticize them:

When Darcy cited the AP takedown of the lie, Houck whined with out evidence that "Darcy and the AP were a tad misleading":

HonestReporting published a statement Friday morning that, while they “unequivocally condemn calls for violence or death threats aimed at bona fide media workers” and disagree with arguments that there’s no distinction between terrorists and journalists, “HonestReporting stands behind the legitimate questions we asked media outlets in our recent expose.”

Back to CNN from the night prior, the dictatorial dweeb bemoaned that “the damage had already been done” in that “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu...used HonestReporting’s story to give credence to the false notion that newsrooms were aware of the terror attack prior to it taking place” with a member of his war cabinet saying terrorists and those who stood as “idle bystanders...are no different”.

Actually, Houck is the one who's being a tad misleading here, having deliberately omitted the fact that HonestReporting admitted it never had any evidence to back up its claims.

Houck promoted the lie  again in another Nov. 10 post promoting an interview NewsNation host Leland Vittert (a former Fox News personality) did with IDF spokesman Jonathan Conricus:

After alluding to the HonestReporting bombshell about Gaza freelancers, he asked Conricus for his reaction whenever he “see[s]...that the stories that Israel puts out and then the...same validity given to information coming from Hamas in American media.”

Conricus acknowledged journalists shouldn’t be threatened before hitting the nail on the head that Gaza journalists “report what Hamas allows them to report...and, if they don’t prove correctly, according to the Hamas message page, then they” and their families “face consequences.”

He even called them “compromised”:

[...]

Vittert spoke from experience on that issue: “I dealt with it myself. I mean, I — I worked with stringers in Gaza as well. And you had to — you had to sort of — ba — try — try and figure out what was Hamas propaganda and what were they really trying to tell you.”

Houck did not indicate whether Vittert and Conricus discussed whether journalists who cooperated with the IDF are "compromised" because they report only what the IDF allows them to report.

This also spread to an interview MRC executive Dan Schneider did with far-right writer Sara Carter, as detailed in a Nov. 10 post by Tom Olohan:

Liberal media photojournalists employed by CNN, Reuters, The New York Times and The Associated Press have been accused of embedding with Hamas during the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks against the nation of Israel. According to NewsBusters, on Nov. 8, The Associated Press, CNN, The New York Times and Reuters have all responded to HonestReporting's story with reactions ranging from cutting ties with the photojournalists in question to defending their work. You can read NewsBusters' reporting on their statements here.

Schneider commented on these atrocities in his interview with Carter. “[T]these photojournalists were embedded with the Hamas terrorists before the attack began,” Schneider explained. “They knew the attack was going to commence. They did not warn anybody that the attack was going to commence.” 

Schneider also predicted that there will be consequences for the journalists involved in attacks. “I think we’re going to see big lawsuits by the families of the murdered victims and the injured victims against AP, CNN, [The] New York Times and Reuters at a minimum for paying these, their own photojournalists kept silent about what was about to happen,” said Schneider

Carter agreed, also calling for lawsuits. “I certainly hope so. I hope every single family that is connected and has lost a loved one or has a loved one who has been taken, or who was harmed in any way shape or form or had to flee their home or has family in the United States, I hope there are multiple lawsuits across the board, targeting these news agencies,” Carter said.

No mention, of course, that the story was a lie. The narrative, however bogus, is more important than the truth, remember?

Newsmax Writers Try To Spin Eleciton Results In Va.
Topic: Newsmax

Things did not go well for Republicans in off-year elections in Virginia, and Newsmax struggled a bit to figure out how to spin it. A Nov. 8 column by John Gizzi admitted that one casualty of the election was Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin's presidential ambitions:

Two years after his dramatic capture of the Virginia governorship, Glenn Youngkin already was being boomed as a late-starting candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024 — speculation about which he did little to dampen.

But on Tuesday, after his party failed miserably in a drive backed personally by Youngkin to capture the state senate — the Old Dominion State governor's dreams of a White House bid seemed to have evaporated.

Worse, Youngkin even lost Republican control of the lower House of Delegates to the Democrats.

The governor now faces two years of a legislature with Democrat [sic] majorities in both houses and thus very capable of thwarting his conservative agenda on issues ranging from abortion to taxes.

Indeed, later that day, an article by Solange Reyner confirmed that Youngkin "says he won't be running for president in 2024 after Republicans narrowly lost both state legislative chambers in Tuesday's election."

Pro-Trump pollster Jim McLaughlin, meanwhile, admitted that Republicans messed up by obsessing over abortion in a Nov. 8 Newsmax TV appearance:

Virginia's Republicans "made a mistake" by going on defense against Democrats' General Assembly campaigns that focused on abortion rights instead of going on offense on issues that the voters "really care about," said Jim McLaughlin of McLaughlin and Associates, who is also a pollster for former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign.

"There's no question that Republicans underperformed in Virginia, but I saw one analysis that said the Democrats outspent them by almost $8 million," McLaughlin said on Newsmax's "National Report" about Tuesday's election, in which Democrats in Virginia won full control of the General Assembly.

McLaughlin acknowledged that "every race is different," but said that in Virginia and other places, making the race a "referendum on abortion" hurt Republican candidates.

Gizzi, however, returned for a Nov. 14 column in which he tried to spin results as not so bad after all:

In the week since elections in Virginia, the national press has made much political hay about the outcome — in which Democrats control both houses of the state legislature and are sure to lock horns with Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin.

To no one's surprise, Youngkin has since ended widespread speculation he would jump into the GOP presidential sweepstakes. Moreover, there is now ubiquitous analysis that the governor's support of a ban on abortion 15 weeks before birth — reasonable by virtually all standards but used as a "dog whistle" by many Democrat candidates to charge a Republican-ruled legislature would ban abortions under all circumstances.

But in the end, were the results in the Old Dominion State were a "wipeout" for Republicans? Hardly.

[...]

Much has been made in the press about many School Board candidates in Virginia endorsed by the pro-parents rights Moms for Liberty group falling short of an across-the-state sweep. There was considerable coverage devoted to the defeat of Meg Bryce, a daughter of the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, losing a bid for the Albemarle County School Board to Allison Spillman, a liberal and mother of five (one of whom her campaign brochure describes as "a proud member of the LGBTQ community").

But another conservative, pro-family group, the Middle Resolution, endorsed 28 winning School Board candidates throughout the state.

Only 7 Middle Resolution-backed candidates lost.

All told, November 7 was not a day Virginia Republicans want to remember. But it wasn't a bad day, either.

Gizzi's only glimmer of hope was that Repubilcans appeared to have won a seat in the state Senate, though Democrats would still hold a three-seat advantage.

The Persistence Of Stelter Derangement Syndrome At The MRC
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center went into full-scale Stelter Derangement Syndrome when Brian Stelter released a new book about Fox News. When the sales numbers came in, that derangement quickly became gleeful schadenfreude, as Tim Graham exhibited in a Nov. 28 post:

Colby Hall, the founding editor of left-leaning Mediaite.com, reports that Brian Stelter's new Fox-trashing book Network of Lies is selling well below expectations, like a Disney blockbuster. It's a dud! 

Published on November 14, Stelter’s book sold 3,807 copies in its first week, according to Nielsen BookScan. Those numbers are down 82% from his previous book about Fox (Hoax), which saw first-week sales of 20,832 in August 2020, according to ookScan.

Mediaite has learned that Stelter’s latest will not make the New York Times bestseller list. As of publishing, it is currently ranked 6,638th on Amazon’s Best Sellers list, despite his numerous appearances on cable news and several podcasts, including Mediaite.

Stelter has been on CNN and MSNBC and PBS and NPR and NewsNation and Univision and a plethora of podcasts to plug his "epic saga" -- we're still waiting for the NewsBusters Podcast, come on, pal -- but it's not moving the needle.

Graham didn't mention that despite all his mocking, Stelter's book still had better first-week sales than Chadwick Moore's fawning biography of Tucker Carlson, which sold just 3,227 copies. (You will not be surprised to learn that right-wingers have manufactured a conspiracy theory about this.) Instead, he complained that the New York Times published a positive review of Stelter's book, though he did not question thedid accuracy of either the review or the book.

That was followed by an even more shadenfreude-filled Nov. 30 post by Bill D'Agostino claiming to note "9 Tiny Things That Still Outnumber Brian Stelter’s Failed Book Sales." He too did not mention that Stelter's book outsold Moore's bio of Carlson.

A Nov. 30 post by Graham whined that Stelter appeared on MSNBC to point out how Trump did try to block the merger of CNN's parent with another company because it aird things critical of Trump and is threatening MSNBC's parent for doing the same thing:

On Wednesday night's All In on MSNBC, host Chris Hayes brought in Brian Stelter to address the latest Trump outburst on his Truth Social account threatening Comcast and MSNBC for their left-wing propaganda: "our so-called government should come down on hard on them and make them pay for the illegal political activity. Much more to come, watch."

There's nothing there defining what is "illegal" in all of MSNBC's propagandizing. But it certainly allows MSNBC to feel good about their "defending democracy" credentials. Hayes warned Trump's "whining" could turn into "real punitive action."

Hayes and Stelter talked up how the Trump Justice Department sought to block AT&T's merger with Time Warner in 2017, which went through in 2018. The top antitrust official at the time said he never spoke to Trump or his aides about AT&T, but the liberals only believe the Justice staff is independent when Democrats are running it. 

You know liberal media outlets are involved when liberals love a merger of mega-corporations. Before long, AT&T dumped Warner's media assets like CNN to Discovery.

Graham then went on a whataboutism tear, whining that Stelter questioned the reach of right-wing influencers "after January 6," but he left out the part where those right-wing influencers helped incite a violent insurrection.

Nicholas Fondacaro added a little Stelter derangement to his own Nov. 30 post as part of his daily hate-watch of "The View":

The sales of Brian Stelter’s latest anti-Fox News book were so low that he made an appearance with the liberal ladies of ABC’s The View on Thursday in an attempt to bump up his numbers. Of course, there were the usual back-slapping conversations for him going after one of their mutual hate objects, but Stelter also had sweet nothings to proclaim the cast: falsely claiming the show was home to truthful conversations.

[...]

As they were nearing the end of the second segment with Stelter, Farah Griffin finally got around to admitting “have a handful of very good reporters like Trey Yingst, Jennifer Griffin, people who cover actual news.” Lamenting: “And it's so hard for those journalists that they have to be next to basically people espousing propaganda.”

Stelter called Fox News “a very uncomfortable environment” for them and suggested that that was why The View was better. “[W]e should advocate to have a truthier, healthier environment. That’s why I love this show! Your guys are louder than the liars!” he praised.

The MRC concluded 2023 with one final reminder of how Stelter lives rent-free in their collective heads: One of its year-end awards is named "The Brian Stelter Memorial Award for Worst Quote of the Year." Never mind that Stelter isn't dead, or that all he has done is write a book telling the truth about Fox News.

WND's Cashill Still Trying To Defend Derek Chauvin Over Killing George Floyd
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily columnist Jack Cashill, it seems, can't stop running to the defense of Derek Chauvin as part of his longtime race-baiting defense of white people who kill black men (see: George Zimmerman and a cop in Kansas City). Cashill used a Nov. 1 column to cheer others playing the same game as him on Chauvin:

Giving credit where it's due, popular podcasters Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly recently ignored the media taboo and openly addressed the railroading of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin and his three colleagues.

As refreshing as their discussions were, both Carlson and Kelly seemed unaware of a critical bit of exculpatory information that was first revealed more than two years ago.

At that time, no one at their level in the media dared address the obvious injustice unfolding in Minneapolis.

As the world knows, the four officers were imprisoned for their respective roles in the death of chronic felon and drug abuser George Floyd in May of 2020.

Cashill again rehashed his earlier claim that local medical examiner Andrew Baker caved to political pressure to state in an autopsy report that Floyd died of neck compression despite stating that wasn't the case in a preliminary report -- which ignores the fact that Baker testified under oath that he faced no pressure to change anything in Floyd's autopsy report and that the change was due to his learning more about the effects of neck compression -- the method Chauvin used to incapacitate Floyd -- Cashill concluded by huffing: "No justice, no peace."

Cashill hyped a fellow Chauvin defender inhis Nov. 29 column -- after, of course, serving up a llittle performative outrage over Chauvin getting stabbed in prison:

Not satisfied with sentencing an innocent man to prison for 22 years, the federal government has found new ways to punish former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin.

That includes a near fatal stabbing of Chauvin on Friday, Nov. 24, in a federal prison in Arizona and the inexplicable refusal to alert Chauvin's mother about the incident.

There is no evidence that the feds planned this attack or encouraged it, but their failure to anticipate it at the end of a two-week stretch in which Chauvin was continuously in the news raises eyebrows.

On Nov. 13, Chauvin filed a motion in federal court claiming he never would have pleaded guilty to a federal civil rights charges in 2021 if he had been aware of the theories of William Schaetzel, a recently retired Kansas forensic pathologist.

Chauvin is asking Peter Cahill, the judge who presided over his trial, to order a new trial or, at the very least, an evidentiary hearing.

On Nov. 16, producer Liz Collin released a new documentary, "The Fall of Minneapolis," which makes a powerful case for the innocence of Chauvin and his three colleagues.

On Nov. 20, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to entertain a prior appeal on grounds that Chauvin could not get in a fair trial in fear-soaked Minneapolis.

Although the major media blew off Schaetzel's research and Collin's documentary, major figures in the conservative media did not. Megyn Kelly, Jesse Watters, Tucker Carlson and Greg Gutfeld among others paid attention. So did the millions of Americans who have seen the movie.

Meanwhile, one reviewer pointed out that "The Fall of Minneapolis" is about "throwing a lot of victim-blaming, blame-shifting, and other nonsense at the wall to see what sticks" and pushes "the Orwellian notion that what every one of us has seen with our own eyes is not what really happened. Mostly, it makes arguments that have already failed in court, in some cases multiple times"; for example, the film doesn't reference "Chauvin’s extensive history of use-of-force complaints, some of which involved choking."

Cashill again repeated his evidence-free claim that Baker was "under pressure" to change Floyd's autopsy report, which he claimed "gave Minnesota's radical black attorney general, Keith Ellison, the excuse he needed to charge Chauvin with murder." Meanwhile, his new pathologist hero Schaetzel -- who didn't examine Floyd's body but merely read autopsy reports -- is claiming that Floyd may have had a paraganglioma, a tumor that allegedly produced a surge of adrenaline that might have killed Floyd. That sounds a lot like the dubious "excited delirium" defense that officers originally cited as an excuse to subdue Floyd.

Cashill weighed in more on Cashill's prison stabbing in his Dec. 6 column -- and, of course, had a conspiracy theory to spread:

Having long ago decided to ignore all inconvenient news, the major media yielded serious coverage of the prison stabbing of Derek Chauvin to the intrepid independent investigator Maryam Henein.

As Henein reports, the man who stabbed Chauvin 22 times on "Black Friday" in an Arizona prison is a 52-year-old con named John Turscak. Don't let the name fool you.

The half-Croatian Turscak is serving a 30-year sentence for crimes committed while leading a Los Angeles faction of the Mexican Mafia in the 1990s.

As even the major media acknowledge, Turscak was an FBI informant. The intel he provided federal investigators led to the indictments of 40 or so of his former colleagues.

Henein, by the way, is a conspiracy theorist who spread many falsehoods about COVID and promoted fraudulent treatments. Cashill offered no reason why anyone should trust Henein given her track record. Instead, he continued to whine thatothers weren't buying into his own conspiracy theories:

In its scant coverage of the stabbing, the New York Times is quick to remind its readers, "Mr. Chauvin, a former Minneapolis police officer who is white, murdered Mr. Floyd, who is Black, during an arrest on a South Minneapolis street corner in May 2020."

Although race had nothing to do with Floyd's death, nor for that matter did Chauvin's restraint of Floyd, the Times puts race front and center in its coverage, capitalizing the "B" in Black and lowercasing the "w" in white.

Not surprisingly, the Times has not seen fit to cover the potentially game-changing new documentary on the Chauvin case, "The Fall of Minneapolis." According to Liz Collin, producer of the film, not even the local Minnesota media will review the film or discuss its findings.

Still, Cashill had a conspiracy theory to keep alive:

With only three years left to go before his release, the question remains as to who or what prompted Turscak to attack Chauvin.

According to the document Turscak signed with the FBI, the agreement between the Bureau and him "shall continue as long as the FBI deems that TURSCAK's services are required."

Given the rush of narrative-eroding information released in the month before the stabbing, one has to wonder whether someone in power thought it a useful time to require "TURSCAK's services."

Of course, Cashill never apologizes when his narratives get eroded -- you know, when his conspiracy theories get debunked, which happens a lot.

UPDATE: Cashill also talked about Chauvin on his Nov. 2 podcast, in which he repeated parts of this and complained Chauvin is a victim of "Jacobin justice," huffing that the Floyd case "sent four innocent men to prison" because of "mob fury." Cashill and co-host Loy Edge then manufactured a conspiracy theory that left-wingers want to undermine local police.

MRC Spreads Palestinian 'Crisis Actor' Lie
Topic: Media Research Center

Media Research Center writer Nicholas Fondacaro is a very prolific liar. He launched another one in a Nov. 10 post:

In the same week that four other major American news outlets had to answer for utilizing dubious sources with connections to Hamas for their reporting on the Israel-Hamas war, MSNBC seemingly tried to one-up the rest by promoting a video put out by Saleh Aljafarawi, a known Hamas-linked propagandist and crisis actor. On her eponymous show Friday afternoon, Chris Jansing treated him as though he was an innocent civilian brutalized by Israel.

Aljafarawi has been dubbed “Mr. FAFO” and “Mr. Pallywood” (a combination of Palestinian and Hollywood) on social media by those who call him out. He posts his propaganda videos to his Instagram account which has over three million followers. He’s pretended to be a Hamas fighter in a music video, a radiology tech in a hospital, a foster father, a member of the press, and a rescue worker, among other roles. He even put out a video of himself praising Hamas rockets that were launched at Israeli civilians.

But that didn’t stop Jansing from elevating a video of him purportedly at the al-Shifa hospital running around with “blood” on his hand.

[...]

MSNBC regular Malcolm Nancy [sic] was among the first to call out the network for promoting Aljafarawi’s propaganda. “I LITERALLY JUST SAW @MSNBC JUST FEATURE THIS SAME GUY AT AL-SHIFA HOSPITAL SCREAMING WITH BLOODY HANDS. PRODUCERS! FFS CHECK YOUR SOURCES. HE IS FAKE!!! #PunkedAgain,” he wrote in all-caps on X (formerly Twitter).

“‘Content creator/Actor’ Yes for HAMAS,” he scolded one of his commenters. “People are so ridiculously ready to excuse a dedicated HAMAS propaganda player they refuse to believe their own eyes.”

But as commentator Matt Binder documented, Aljafarawi is not a "crisis actor," nor has he pretended to be one. He's a prolific poster on Instagram. Binder pointed out that Aljafarawi appears to be in many different places in Gaza because Gaza isn't that big -- and also that videos that have been claimed online to be Aljafarawi being a "crisis actor" aren't him at all. Others have pointed out that a collage of images purporting to be of Aljafarawi are doctored, taken out of context or lack evidence to back the claims.

In other words, Nance is lying and Fondacaro chose to repeat his lie without bothering to fact-check first. But Fondacaro is so committed to the lie that he repeated it a few hours later:

If you’re on X (formerly known as Twitter) and follow the Israel-Hamas War, you’re likely aware of the man we’re about to speak of. Saleh Aljafarawi, dubbed “Mr. FAFO” and “Mr. Pallywood,” is a KNOWN Hamas-linked social media influencer and crisis actor. But those easily researchable facts were of no interest to ABC’s World News Tonight, CBS Evening News, and NBC Nightly News on Friday as they all, much like MSNBC did, treated his content as though it was a legitimate source of news from Gaza.

[...]

CBS was the most brazen in flaunting the video. Correspondent Debora Patta used the part of the video that featured Aljafarawi. “Reeling in stunned disbelief, this man shouts, 'They bombed the hospitals,'" she breathlessly translated for him. “Nearby, a young girl breaks down hysterically, ‘my mom, my father, my brother.’”

“Their one place of refuse, now a blood-soaked battleground,” she lamented. Meanwhile, it was yet another Gaza-launched rocket that fell short.

Over on ABC and NBC, correspondents Matt Gutman and Keir Simmons (respectively) both used arguably deceptively edited versions of Aljafarawi’s video. They edited down the video to take him out of it completely and only used the portion with the little girl.

Aljafarawi was very much a highly recognizable figure that had emerged from the conflict, so it’s suspicious that they used the part he was not visible in.

Note Fondacaro's lie that Aljafarawi is a "KNOWN ... crisis actor." If Fondacaro had bothered to do any research at all before posting,he would have KNOWN that Aljafarawi is NOT, in fact, a "crisis actor."

Alex Christy parroted Fondacaro's "known crisis actor" lie in a Nov. 11 post: "Just on Friday, ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC got caught using footage from a Palestinian propagandist and known crisis actor." Curtis Houck also repeated the lie in touting a right-wing congressman spouting Fondacaro's falsehood in a Nov. 14 post:

On Monday’s edition of Senator Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) podcast The Verdict, Cruz and co-host Ben Ferguson had a lengthy segment praising the work of NewsBusters and associate editor Nick Fondacaro for exposing the “big three” networks of ABC, CBS, NBC for using dubious footage from a known pro-Hamas crisis actor named Saleh Aljafarawi.

“I want to show part of this propaganda. NewsBusters found that ABC, CBS, and NBC elevated a Gaza video from a known propagandist influencer. This guy — we’re going to show you all the different jobs that he has,” Ferguson began just prior to the 25-minute mark.

Cruz and Ferguson then played the full video that the networks would use Friday night and, on a second view, Cruz walked viewers (and listeners on the audio-only side) through the video, including multiple people with “red liquid” that they want to portray as blood, but there’s “no visible wounds” on Aljafarawi or a young girl.

[...]

Ferguson then read from Fondacaro’s piece about who Aljafarawi really is before the co-hosts put on-screen a collage of the roles Aljafarawi has played over the course of the war:

Meanwhile, PolitiFact pointed out that there's no actual evidence to prove this particular video was faked. Remember, the MRC doesn't care about the truth; they care much more that their narratives get traction in right-wing media.

Perhaps realizing he had been caught spreading a lie, Fondacaro hilariously de-escalated things a bit in another Nov. 14 post:

During an appearance at the Global Women’s Summit put on by The Washington Post on Tuesday, CBS News president Ingrid Ciprian-Matthews boasted about her organization’s new fact-checking unit “CBS News Confirmed” which was allegedly supposed to be able to identify and call out images and video that were meant to misinform the public. But as NewsBusters reported just last week, CBS Evening News promoted a video out of Gaza created by a known Hamas-linked propagandist and alleged crisis actor.

[...]

But as NewsBusters reported, CBS was the most brazen evening newscast last Friday in flaunting a video from Saleh Aljafarawi, a known Hamas-linked social media influencer and alleged crisis actor, who was dubbed “Mr. FAFO” and “Mr. Pallywood” online.

But who was the person who "alleged" that Aljafarawi is a "crisis actor"? Fondacaro. Did he apologize for his lie? Of course not.

Luis Cornelio complained that YouTube called out Cruz's parroting of Fondacaro's lie in a Nov. 21 post:

Anti-free speech YouTube targeted a video from Sen. Ted Cruz’s popular podcast where the lawmaker praised a report from MRC’s NewsBusters about fake videos depicting alleged victims in the Gaza Strip.

YouTube placed a contentious age restriction banner on the Nov. 14 episode of The Verdict podcast. During the show, Cruz and co-host Ben Ferguson highlighted a study by NewsBusters that exposed ABC, CBS and NBC for using dubious footage from Saleh Aljafarawi who has gone viral over accusations of being a crisis actor in the Hamas-governed Gaza Strip. “This video may be inappropriate for some users,” YouTube inexplicably warns potential viewers, before asking users to log in and “confirm” their age—but wait, there’s more.

Yes, Cornelio is actually claiming that YouTube putting an age restriction on Cruz's video is "censorship." Needless to say, Cornelio refused to admit that his co-worker is a liar.

(Catherine Salgado put this on her Dec. 5 list of the "WORST Censorship of November," despite the fact that only the most deluded partisans think an age restriction on a video is "censorship." She also claimed that Aljafarawi was "accused of being a crisis actor in the Hamas-governed Gaza Strip" while not disclosing that those making the accusation are her co-workers.)

As Fondacaro's "crisis actor" fizzled with people continuing to debunk it, he devoted a Dec. 2 post to bashing PolitiFact's debunking, weirdly headlined "PolitiFact Comes to the Defense of THAT Hamas Influencer You’ve Seen:"

You might not know his name but you’ve probably seen his face. Saleh Aljafarawi is a known Hamas-linked influencer who has been all over social media where he praises Hamas, pretends to be a journalist, hospital worker, and pretty much anything to get sympathy for Palestinians. But despite what was known about Aljafarawi, PolitiFact came to his defense on Thursday to quibble over his being described as a “crisis actor” by those who know his connection to Hamas.

PolitiFact decided to assign “Spanish misinformation reporter” Marta Campabadal Graus the task of aiding Aljafarawi because Gaza influencers were totally in the Spanish media sphere. And she gave the accusations that he was a “crisis actor” a “false” rating.

“PolitiFact’s review of Aljafarawi’s social media accounts and background did not reveal evidence of him being a ‘crisis actor’ or faking the scene at the hospital,” she proclaimed, ignoring his connection to Hamas and without providing evidence that the hospital scene was real.

It's not a "quibble" to get basic facts right, of course. Fondacaro made clear, declarative claims about Aljafarawi that were proven false, as well as a claim about a video of his that are unproven at best. So rather than admit he lied and correct the record, Fondacaro hastily tried to change the narrative to assert that is a a "Hamas propagandist":

But while Campabadal explored his social media accounts, she didn’t make the obvious connection that he’s a Hamas propagandist. “The ‘freedom fighter’ image of Aljafarawi with a gun was taken from a music video that was deleted a few weeks ago. In the music video, he was posing as a singing Hamas fighter,” she admitted.

But the fact of the matter was that he would have needed to get all the gear and weapon he was wearing in the video from Hamas since they controlled that kind of stuff.

As Soch Fact Check noted, that video was first posted in July -- three months before the war started. (It has now been deleted from Aljafarawi's account.) That means Fondacaro is lying again by suggesting it was posted after the war started.

This is the way the MRC works -- spread a lie, don't acknowledge that the lie has been debunked, then move on to the next lie. Fondacaro has learned well from his employer.

Newsmax Continued to Dabble In Ray Epps Conspiracy Theories
Topic: Newsmax

Newsmax appears not to have pushed Ray Epps conspiracy theories as much as, say, WorldNetDaily, but that doesn't mean it didn't dabble in them. It did some of that early on, and has continued to dip its toe into them. A Dec. 31, 2022, article by Eric Mack hyped Donald Trump's invoking of Epps conspiracy theories:

Buried in the release of the House Jan. 6 Select Committee transcripts is the interview with Ray Epps, the un-indicted man who was urging supporters of then-President Donald Trump to "go into the Capitol" the day before and the day of the protest.

The unusual interview featured anti-Trump Reps. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., and Adam Schiff, D-Calif., tossing Epps softball questions, if not treating him like they were his defense lawyers, according to some conservative critics on Twitter.

It caught Trump's eye, too.

"The Unselect Committee doesn't explain Ray Epps, Sullivan, or the 'other' ringleaders," Trump posted early Saturday morning on Truth Social. "Gee, I wonder why?"

"Sullivan" was a reference to the panel's report omitting the references to Jason Sullivan, who independently urged supporters to protest at the Capitol days before Jan. 6, 2021, according to The New York Times.

Mack further attacked Epps by cherry-picking responses from his deposition:

Epps' responses were framed to suggest he had no involvement in the breaching of the Capitol.

"What I meant by 'orchestrate,' I helped people get there," Epps responded.

Earlier in the transcript, Epps had suggested he was there to watch Trump's speech and look after his son Jim, but reality is neither happened and Epps never tried.

Epps broke away from Jim, never attended the speech, and according to video, was nearby urging people to the Capitol and pointing the way.

Epps told the committee he was "proud" to have been there, although he left immediately when the breach of the Capitol had begun. This has led to suspicion that he might have started the lawlessness but left when it reached a dangerous crescendo.

"Yeah, I took credit for it, but I didn't know what I was taking credit for," Epps told an interviewer whose name was redacted in the transcript.

"'Orchestrating' is the wrong word," Epps would say later in the interview, adding his wife scolded him for using that word.

Mack further whined that "Early this year, the House committee rejected claims Epps was a 'fed,'" boasting it brought him in for this interview," but he offered no proof to the contrary.

When Epps ultimately was charged -- blowing up the conspiracy theory that he was a "fed" -- Mack leaned into it anyway in a Sept. 19 article:

After years of consternation among former President Donald Trump's supporters, the Justice Department has brought a charge against the man that urged Jan. 6 protesters to "go into the Capitol."

Ray Epps was charged Tuesday with a count of disorderly or disruptive conduct on restricted grounds, court records show.

There was no attorney listed in the court docket in the criminal case filed in Washington's federal court. The Associated Press' messages seeking comment from an attorney representing Epps in his lawsuit against Fox were not immediately returned Tuesday.

Epps was featured by Republicans and conservative media as having been an alleged face of the Jan. 6 protest, urging Trump speechgoers to storm the Capitol during the debate of election fraud allegations.

Mack weirdly didn't elaborate any further about Epps' "lawsuit against Fox," whic, of course, is about Fox spreading the lie that he was a "fed."

Theodor Bunker did explain it, though, in a Sept. 20 article on Epps entering a guilty plea:

Ahead of the hearing, Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Gordon denied claims that Epps had been a federal informant, saying he wanted to enter into the record because of the "unusual nature of the case" that Epps "was not before, during or after" Jan. 6, 2021 "a confidential source or an undercover agent for the government, the FBI, DHS or any law enforcement."

Epps has filed a lawsuit against Fox News for spreading "destructive conspiracy theories," and his attorney said on Wednesday that "Today's hearing and the plea agreement reached with the Department of Justice is further proof of that. It is also powerful evidence of the absurdity of Fox News' and Tucker Carlson's lies that sought to turn Ray into a scapegoat for January 6."

Mack brought up Epps again in a Nov. 9 article discussing Jack Smith's case against Trump:

Special counsel Jack Smith's case will attempt to tie former President Donald Trump to the Jan. 6 plot to "go into the Capitol" – as pushed by Ray Epps on Jan. 5, 2021 – arguing it was a plot to stop the certification of Joe Biden's Electoral College victory.

[...]

This week's filing contains no reference to Epps, who has denied working for the FBI, but admitted in a CBS "60 Minutes" interview the night before Tucker Carlson was fired this spring that it was a mistake to text on Jan. 6 that "I orchestrated it," as revealed by the anti-Trump House Jan. 6 select committee.

That Democrat-run committee ended before 2023, when Republican leadership was set to take over.

Trump has publicly the Epps "I orchestrated it" text, saying, "Gee, I wonder."

But Gaston's filing suggests there is evidence of the plot to enter the Capitol, without mentioning Epps, who is on video on the streets of Washington, D.C., on Jan. 5 urging demonstrators, "We have to go into the Capitol."

Some Trump supporters shouted back "No!" and repeatedly chanted "Fed! Fed! Fed!" suggesting Epps was working for the government in opposition to Trump's desire to have Congress debate the allegations of election fraud in key battleground states and have Vice President Mike Pence send the constitutionally contested Electoral College votes back to state legislatures for review after Jan. 6.

The Constitution has language that requires Congress to confirm the president-elect by the specific date Jan. 6.

When Epps was sentenced to probation for his actions, Newsmax relegated it to a Jan. 9 wire article that pointed out in the headline that Epps the "target of conspiracy theories and noted that he "was driven into hiding by death threats" because "Fox News Channel and other media outlets amplified conspiracy theories that Epps, 62, was an undercover government agent who helped incite the Capitol attack to entrap Trump supporters."

WND Whines That Nashville Massacre Isn't Considered A 'Hate Crime' Against White People
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily isn't just exploiting the alleged manifesto by the Nashville shooter to smear all transgender people as wannabe massacre commiters. It also wants to use it to whine about poor, oppressed white people. Bob Unruh complained in a Nov. 13 article:

The shooter who gunned down three children and three adults earlier this year at the Covenant school in Nashville said, in her manifesto, she hated the victims' white skin, their light features, their "privilege," their "fancy schools," their "mop yellow hair" and the fact they were "cr*ckers."

But two key federal law enforcement agencies have refused to recognize the murders as a hate crime.

It's according to a report at the Federalist.

The publication reported it asked "the nation’s top federal law enforcement agencies, which had access to the notebook [shooter Audrey Haley's manifesto] ever since March 27, if either had plans to classify the shooting as an anti-white hate crime or political violence spurred on by the proliferation of left-wing racism in schools and government, the DOJ ignored the request and the FBI claimed it did not have a comment."

That, the report noted, "sharply contrasts how both department and agency have treated other race-based shootings."

For example, "When a gunman in Buffalo, New York, opened fire in a grocery store, killing 10 in 2022, the DOJ used the shooter’s racist social media posts as justification to deem the act 'a hate crime and an act of racially-motivated violent extremism' worthy of several federal hate crime charges. The Justice Department extended the same treatment to Dylann Roof and the Texas mass shooter who killed 23 people at an El Paso Wal-Mart."

"Yet when it comes to investigating the Nashville shooting, which was rooted in the shooter’s disdain for people based on their skin color, as a hate crime against white Christians, the DOJ and FBI refuse," the report noted.

Note that Unruh is so sloppy that he couldn't even spell Audrey Hale's name correctly. He'salso repeated right-wing narratives about the massacre (while making sure not to reference the fact that Hale' possesion of guns made the massacre possible).Meanwhile, o thers have pointed out that those calling for the massacre to be a hate crime have voted against anti-hate crime laws. Ineeed, the Federalist has repeatedly lashed out at hate-crime laws.

Of course, Unruh failed to tell his readers about any of that. He's a stenographer, after all, not a journalist, and all he did here was rewrite a right-wing opinion piece and present it as "news."

NEW ARTICLE: Watching Over Wonky Whistleblowers
Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center loves narrative-advancing whistleblowers like Devon Archer and Gal Luft, to the point that it will work hard to ignore questions about their credibility -- and their criminality. Read more >>

MRC's Stelter Derangement Syndrome Flared Up As He Promoted His New Book On Fox News
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center's fall outbreak of Stelter Derangement Syndrome had on gotten started when Brian Stelter released a book critical of Fox News (which is forbidden at the MRC). The MRC's chief Stelter Derangement Syndrome sufferer, Tim Graham, who had a whataboutism-laden metldown over the book in a Nov. 10 post (though he still had to concede that Stelter's reporting was accurate on how Fox News lied to viewers):

Brian Stelter’s second book raining fire on Fox – Network of Lies – is coming out next week, but he appeared on MSNBC’s Alex Wagner Tonight on Thursday night to promote it. Somehow, in the seven-plus minutes of Fox-bashing, they didn’t discuss Stelter’s old network CNN having its freelancer literally kissed by a Hamas terrorist. That’s an inconvenient truth for Mr. Facts First.

Instead, MSNBC put on screen Stelter’s hot quote that “Fox is the black widow at the center of the web of lies that pervert American politics.” You can’t call CNN “fake news,” but you can compare Fox to a dangerously venomous spider.

Stelter’s book is in part a compilation of all the frantic internal communications over a short period when Fox aired embarrassing segments spreading wild conspiracy theories about Trump winning in a landslide. Some of those texts are explicit acknowledgments that this was fake news.

So let’s fast forward to the part where Stelter and Wagner address the current status of Fox and Trump.

Wagner asked “Does Fox, I mean, is all forgiven? And to what do you feel like Fox feels like it needs to actively curry favor with Trump? I ask that because it's interesting in and of itself. But because there's going to be January 6, 2025?”

This, on the network that hires their program hosts right out of the Biden White House public relations department, from Psaki to Symone. That illustrates a close relationship between a president and a network.

[...]

Wagner and Stelter won't discuss all of the misinformation that CNN and MSNBC uncorked in the Trump years, from the years of spreading Russian collusion conspiracy theories to the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop, falsely dismissed as Russian disinformation. "Networks of Lies" could describe that period for them.

Remember that Graham gave a pass to Fox News for telling those lies -- something he would never have done if CNN or MSNBC had done the same thing -- because it wouldn't hurt the channel with its core audience.

The next day, Alex Christy complained that Stelter plugged his book at his old employer and, like his boss, hurled whataboutism rather than respond to what Stelter said:

Brian Stelter returned to CNN on Friday when he joined The Source host Kaitlan Collins to continue his book tour and, just like old times, bash Fox News as the GOP's agenda setter while ignoring how the rest of the media helps set the left's agenda.

Collins noted that Rupert Murdoch is set to step down and wondered “How different does his media empire, not just Fox, but everything, look after that?”

After going on about the future of media more generally, Stelter eventually got to the specifics of Fox, “It's almost as if the energy has moved away from him. Although I think it's important to note, Fox is still the beating heart of the GOP. And that's where, for better and for worse, the narratives are still set.”

As opposed to the rest of the media, where narratives set for the left.

[...]

Stelter wasn’t buying the idea that Trump and Fox are distancing themselves from each other, “In a primary, he would argue that. But come general election, they'll be in Trump's corner.”

And CNN, and the rest of the media, will be in Biden’s corner.

Grahamm returned for an attempted gotcha in a Nov. 16 post on Stelter's appearance on NewsNation, where host Dan Abrams tried to get Stelter to unquestionly buy into Israeli propaganda:

Ex-CNN host Brian Stelter is ubiquitous on liberal TV networks and podcasts right now, selling his latest Fox-frying book Network of Lies, but one TV interview really stands out. He appeared on Tuesday night's Dan Abrams Live, and instead of delighting in the Fox hatred, Abrams pressed him on a raft of challenging media questions. Stelter stumbled throughout, but the most embarrassing part was claiming no host at CNN was partisan.

Stelter could have pointed at himself. But he thinks he and Jim Acosta were just "truth telling."

Up first? Abrams asked about the petition of Israel-hating journalists insisting news accounts must smear Israel as guilty of "genocide," "apartheid," and "ethnic cleansing." Stelter said these are "progressive writers" who might not be in news rooms, but they should push their "standards and practices" squad to explore it. Abrams shot back that "genocide" is not reality, but Stelter wouldn't commit. I wouldn't sign it, he said, but he wouldn't condemn it as not factual.

"That's a cop-out answer," Abrams said.

Graham continued to portray Stelter as the idiot for not biting on Abrams' gotcha questions:

Then came the one that drew the most attention. Who is the most partisan host on Fox? He said Maria Bartiromo, and Abrams said she's become a "fringe player." What about MSNBC? Stelter noted he was on Joy Reid's show, and she said Trump has an "authoritarian streak," which Stelter agreed on. But he tried to say she has a "point of view," a "perspective," not a bias. What about CNN? Abrams said CNN is the most dishonest network in denying it's biased. "Do you think there are any people on CNN who are overtly biased, whatever word you want to use that isn't offensive?" 

"I really truly don't," he said, "and they fired me!" He said feel free to send him comments at his email (bstelter@gmail.com). What about Jim Acosta? Stelter said "I think Jim is telling the truth, I really do!"

Graham said absolutely nothing about the content of Stelter's book other than to whine that is "Fox-frying." He whined further in a Nov. 19 post:

Taxpayer-funded PBS and NPR loathe Fox News like all leftists do, and both promoted ex-CNN host Brian Stelter's second Fox-bashing book Network of Lies. On Thursday, PBS NewsHour anchor Amna Nawaz ran Stelter through his usual talking points about Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, but concluded with the Big Picture, as reporters panic about how their coverage of Donald Trump won't prevent his re-election:

[...]

Stelter thinks there's someone out there who hasn't heard their incessant Trump warnings: "I would like to see the coverage amped up quite a bit on that front in order to help people who are not news junkies. I feel like I know what's going on, but most people are tuned out right now about the 2024 election. It's time to tune in."

On Tuesday's Fresh Air talk show on NPR, Stelter blabbed for more than a half-hour on the same points. Host Terry Gross mocked Tucker Carlson's exit: "Well, if Lachlan is focused on advertising, I mean, Tucker Carlson's extremism cost the network a lot of money. A lot of the sponsors pulled out. They had to rely on My Pillow (laughter) for - as a primary sponsor." 

As opposed to NPR, where we are the involuntary sponsors.

Graham's whataboutism continued: "It's funny sometimes that NPR people ask what Fox News shows are like, as if they have never seen it for a minute in their lives." As if the hate-watching of non-right-wing media the MRC does to cherry-pick clips could be consider real viewing.

Newsmax Was Surprisingly Balanced In Reporting Musk's Anti-Semitic Controversy
Topic: Newsmax

Newsmax offered surprisingly balanced coverage of Elon Musk's war with the ADL because it pointed out the spread of anti-Semitism on Twitter (well, X) after Musk took it over. Then Musk was credibly accused of endorsing anti-Semitism. Mark Swanson served up another surprisingly balanced account of that in a Nov. 16 article (though he did lean a bit into trying to do cleanup for Musk):

Elon Musk was replaced as a speaker in Thursday's Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit a day after he sided with a social media post widely viewed as antisemitic.

Officially, Musk dropped out due to a "schedule change" and was replaced by former Secretary of State John Kerry. However, the 11th-hour swap came in the aftermath of Musk agreeing with a Wednesday post on X that said Jewish communities spread "hatred against whites."

"You have said the actual truth," Musk replied, later clarifying that he doesn't believe "all Jewish communities" hate whites. But Musk did rail against the Anti-Defamation League.

"The ADL unjustly attacks the majority of the West, despite the majority of the West supporting the Jewish people and Israel. This is because they cannot, by their own tenets, criticize the minority groups who are their primary threat," Musk weeted.

He added, "I am deeply offended by ADL's messaging and any other groups who push de facto anti-white racism or anti-Asian racism or racism of any kind."

On Thursday, ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt took to Musk's X platform to accuse him of validating antisemitic theories, in this case, the theory that Jews encourage the influx of minority populations into the U.S. to thin out white majorities.

"At a time when antisemitism is exploding in America and surging around the world, it is indisputably dangerous to use one's influence to validate and promote antisemitic theories," Greenblatt posted.

Newsmax published a wire article noting the White House's condemnation of Musk's tweet, followed by an article by Nicole Wells offering another balanced approach: "Though [Musk] later suggested he was referring mainly to the Anti-Defamation League, the tech billionaire did not delete his original reply." Meanwhile, Eric Mack helped Musk do a little cleanup in a Nov. 22 article:

Democrats and liberal activist group Media Matters have attacked X owner Elon Musk, alleging he is profiting from a platform for free speech, including for antisemites, but Musk is undercutting their narrative.

"X Corp will be donating all revenue from advertising & subscriptions associated with the war in Gaza to hospitals in Israel and the Red Cross/Crescent in Gaza," Musk wrote Wednesday on X.

His pledged support for the state of Israel comes after Democrats in Congress wrote him Tuesday alleging X is profiting from premium accounts that glorify violence against Israelis.

In the letter to Musk and X chief executive Linda Yaccarino, the lawmakers noted reports from nonprofit organizations that showed people with X Premium accounts "glorifying barbaric acts of violence against Israelis" on the platform.

That was followed by more damage-control stenography from Jim Thomas in a Nov. 24 article:

Elon Musk is set to visit Israel next week to express support for the residents of Gaza, the New York Post reported.

According to Hebrew-language media, Musk, the Space X mogul and owner of the X — formerly Twitter — social media platform, plans to meet with Israeli President Isaac Herzog and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his visit.

Musk has been embroiled in past controversies, drawing criticism recently for a post on X in which he appeared to endorse an antisemitic conspiracy theory alleging that Jews were involved in facilitating mass migration to the West, according to The New York Times.

In recent months, Musk clashed with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a civil rights organization combating antisemitism in the U.S. Musk threatened legal action against the ADL, accusing the group of dissuading advertisers by asserting that X harbored neo-Nazi and antisemitic content.

That was joined, though, by a wire article the same day noting that "Elon Musk-owned social media company X could lose as much as $75 million in advertising revenue by the end of the year as dozens of major brands pause their marketing campaigns." That was followed by a Nov. 26 wire article noting Musk's actual meeting in Israel.

An anonymously written Nov. 29 article noted Musk's tepid apology and vulgar insult of advertisers who quit Twitter over the repeated controversies:

Elon Musk, addressing the mainstream media on Wednesday after an earlier post on X was dubbed antisemitic by many critics, apologized Wednesday for his “dumbest” ever social media interaction.

At the same time, though, he blasted advertisers leaving his platform because of rising antisemitism on X.

“I don’t want them to advertise,” he said at the New York Times DealBook Summit in New York, reported by CNN Business.

“If someone is going to blackmail me with advertising or money go [expletive] yourself. ... Hey Bob, if you’re in the audience, that’s how I feel” he added.

The anonymous writer didn't note that it took 12 full days for Musk to issue that apology, and that the offending tweet was still live. A Nov. 30 article by Wells noted that X CEO Linda Yaccarino "seemed to support Musk's feelings on" his vulgar diss of advertisers.

The MRC's Google-Haters Exchange Complements With Anti-Google 'Researcher'
Topic: Media Research Center

Another front where the Media Research Center is fighting its war against Google is through calling in a fellow Google-hater for backup. Catherine Salgado touted that attack on Google in a  Nov. 29 post:

A new website launched this week for the purpose of exposing Google’s leftist bias and making the tech giant accountable to the public.

Tech Watch Project announced its America’s Digital Shield website in an X (formerly Twitter) post Sunday. The website is a tool launched to bring accountability to anti-free speech giant Google. TechWatch exists because of the work of psychologist Dr. Robert Epstein, who has long accused Google of trying to influence elections through search engine manipulation, a reality which concurs with MRC Free Speech America’s research.

In its X announcement, Tech Watch quoted Epstein to explain the new site’s purpose, “JUST IN: AmericasDigitalShield.com is live. ‘THIS is how you make #Google accountable to the public. THIS is how you get them to stop MANIPULATING OUR ELECTIONS & INDOCTRINATING OUR CHILDREN.’  - @DrREpstein.” Tech Watch’s website explains that its areas of focus include “Manipulation of Our Elections.”

Epstein, if you'll recall, is the anti-Google "researcher" whose work has been discredited as biased and shoddy. Nevertheless, the MRC loves Epstein because he advances conservatively correct narratives; note that Pariseau boasted that Epstein's work "concurs with MRC Free Speech America’s research." She went on to fluff:

America’s Digital Shield professes to capture “ephemeral experiences” online and to expose Big Tech, including by exposing inappropriate content on YouTube and tracking Google’s, Yahoo’s and Bing’s search engine bias. The site even has a list of elections it claims were “flipped” by Google and topping that list is Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential win. A Media Research Center poll previously found that Big Tech censorship altered the 2020 election results in Biden’s favor.

We've documented how that MRC poll was biased, as it was conducted by the polling firm founded by Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway.

The MRC and Epstein later engaged in mutual fluffing, as documented in a Dec. 21 post by Salgado:

Psychologist and researcher Dr. Robert Epstein and MRC Free Speech America Vice President Dan Schneider exposed how Google sways and manipulates U.S. elections.

Schneider and Epstein spoke at an election integrity seminar organized by attorney Cleta Mitchell to help conservative leaders understand the threat mounted by Google. Schneider showed the results of Google’s search result manipulation in favor of Democrats, especially President Joe Biden. Dr. Epstein explained how Google and YouTube change voters’ minds through “ephemeral experiences,” expressing his goal of “shining a light on Google” to stop its election interference.

Schneider discussed MRC Free Speech America’s Google studies, describing the tech behemoth as “the fount of all evil.” Schneider referred to MRC’s 2022 election study showing how Google search results favored Democrat candidates in key midterm Senate races, burying GOP campaign sites in 83 percent of the races. He then explained MRC’s multiple 2023 studies exposing Google’s search result bias burying Biden’s presidential opponents’ websites ahead of each GOP debate. Republican candidates’ websites in particular did not appear on the first page of results.

Dr. Epstein called MRC’s work “rock solid.” Epstein also claimed to go much deeper in the amount and type of data he and his team have collected, with custom software that collects anonymized data from the computers of hundreds of “field agents.”

The fact that Epstein thinks the MRC's shoddy and partisan work is "rock solid" is disqualifying by itself. As we documented regarding the MRC's 2022 attacks, the MRC manufactured a search phrase without providing any reason for its preferred search results to have come from it, falsely portraying that as election manipulation. When others pointed out the shoddiness, the MRC offered nothing substantial in response beyond complaining it was criticized. Of course, Schneider wild smear of Google as "the fount of all evil" demonstrates even more that the MRC's war on Google is partisan, not based on credible research.

Salgado continued to pretend that Epstein's so-called research is credible:

In 2016, 2018, 2020 and 2022, Epstein said that he and his team recorded thousands and then millions of these ephemeral experiences. Algorithms are not objective as people imagine, but are programmed a certain way, Epstein explained. Studies conducted by Epstein found a 40+ percent shift in favor of a candidate based on Google’s search engine bias. On his new platform, which collects Google ephemeral experiences data in real-time from politically balanced “field agents” around the country, Epstein keeps a list of elections he says were flipped by Google. The 2020 presidential election is included on his list of flipped elections.

As we've also noted, Epstein's "research" on the 2016 election was based on just 21 undecided voters, making it a tiny sample that no judgment could legitimately come from. Salgado concluded by lecturing:

Epstein’s team has built a “large-scale, permanent system to capture ephemeral content on a massive scale in all 50 states and shine the light on Google and other companies so that they will stop.” Because, unless Google’s election meddling can be discouraged, as both Schneider and Epstein demonstrated, America will not have free and fair elections.

Epstein's history of dubious research does not engender trust in his alleged "large-scale, permanent system." And the fact that the MRC is so wholeheartedly teaming up with Epstein to the point that they fluff each other in public shows the shoddy partisanship of the entire enterprise. Remember, the MRC's definition of "free and fair elections" are only the ones in which right-wingers are the victors.

WND Columnist Try To Defend Evangelical Minister -- While Refusing To Describe His Alleged Sexual Misconduct
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WND has been a big fan of evangelical lerader Mike Bickle -- in particular, columnist Larry Tomczak. In a 2021 column, for example, Tomczak listed him among the "men and women of God" who offered "insights to help us navigate these tumultuous times." In another 2021 column, Tomczak touted how "Mike Bickle shared in humility his own challenges and those of the International House of Prayer community in responding to the radical reset God is calling us to in preparing His Bride for His return." In a column from last February, Tomczak promoted the movie "The Jesus Revolution," noting that some leaders who came from that movement were Bickle and fellow WND columnist Michael Brown.

But in October, allegations surfaced that Bickle was involved with sexual misconduct involving several women over decades in his ministry in Kansas City, where he currently leads the International House of Prayer. The first WND columnist to address the controversy was not Tomczak but, rather, Brown, whose Nov. 1 column discussed the fallout but wouldn't mention exactly what Bickle was accused of doing, offering only a link to them instead:

It was absolutely shocking to learn this past weekend that serious allegations had been brought against Mike Bickle, senior leader of IHOPKC. (This stands for International House of Prayer, Kansas City.) Mike is a personal friend and, to my knowledge, a beautiful example of devotion to Jesus. He spent hours daily in prayer and the Word, lived very simply, donating large amounts of money to the Gospel, and always embraced a message of repentance and purity. How could the charges be true?

Right now, we must pray for everything to come to light through proper, due process, and no conclusions should be drawn until then.

If the charges are true, focus must first be put on the victims themselves, working for their full restoration and healing. They are often forgotten at times like this, which only adds sin to sin and hurt to hurt. As for Mike, if he were found guilty, the focus should be on his personal, spiritual restoration, not on discussion about ministry restoration.

As for everyone else affected, let me speak as a father and elder, knowing how much mercy the Lord has had on me and knowing that none of us can boast in our own righteousness. All of us stand by grace, and none of us is too big to fall.

Brown then tried to spin things away from Bickle by claiming that other people's faith shouldn't be affected:

No matter who falls short, God remains the same – perfect in His goodness, His righteousness, His justice, His mercy, and His love. Only God is God!

If Mike's writings helped you draw closer to Jesus, be thankful for that. The closeness you enjoy is real.

If Mike's example motivated you to live sacrificially and devote thousands of hours to prayer and worship, be glad. Your prayers were not in vain. (And they were directed to the Lord, not to people.) Your worship did reach the throne of heaven. (You weren't worshiping Mike; you were adoring the Creator and Redeemer.) Your sincerity has not changed.

[...]

As to whether you can trust your pastors or elders or spiritual leaders (after all, you think, if it turns out Mike Bickle was leading a double life, how do I know that others are not?), let me say three things.

First, the great majority of leaders are not involved in sexual or moral scandals. If they were, the church would have collapsed and died centuries ago. It makes good sense to believe the best unless there is evidence to the contrary.

Second, trust the leaders to the extent they have earned your trust. As far as they have modeled a godly life before you (or, before those who know them best), you can trust them accordingly. As Hebrews states, "Remember your leaders, who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith" (Hebrews 13:7; see also 1 Corinthians 11:1; Philippians 4:9; 1 Thessalonians 2:9-10).

Third, don't exalt people. Don't make servants of the Lord into superstars. Don't give them status that belongs only to the Lord.

It was nearly another month before Tomczak weighed in on the Bickle scandal, in his Nov, 28 column -- and like Brown, he would be euphemistic, saying only that Bickle is alleged to have "conducted himself in untoward ways, requiring investigation and possible disciplinary measures" and tried to suggest the allegations were false:

I've known Mike for over 40 years as a very close friend. I also state at the outset that any established wrongdoing should never be covered over but examined and dealt with according to Scripture. In 51 years of ministry, I've seen the "good, bad and ugly" in similar situations. "Smite the shepherd, and the sheep will scatter" (Matthew 26:31). The "accuser of the brethren" (Revelation 12:10) knows this.

A classic episode of "The Twilight Zone" once depicted alien beings infiltrating a community to engage in a campaign of personal and community destruction by whispering subtle morsels of evil reports that eventually brought citizens to blows. The aliens watched gleefully from the hillside, basking in their success.

Dante's "Inferno" listed levels in hell, and the very bottom was reserved for those involved in treachery and betrayal. The reason is probably due to the horrible repercussions that result when people damage others' lives and reputations.

"There are six things the Lord hates … a false witness who speaks lies … and he who sows discord among brethren" (Proverbs 6:16-19). Discernment is critical.

"Do not listen to an accusation against an elder, unless it is confirmed by two or three witnesses" (1 Timothy 5:19 ESV).

"The first to present his case, seems right until another comes and examines him" (Proverbs 18:17). This is called "due process" – innocent until proven guilty – and it's the basis for our legal system (which is opposite of England where a person is guilty until proven innocent).

Months ago, I was in a room where a person referred to a Christian leader as a "sexual predator." I cautioned the person and later got back to him with accurate facts after an in-depth conversation with the leader and an attorney. The tragedy is that damage had been done with false reports that circulated and a reputation ruined from slander.

After attacking the alleged victims, Tomczak stood by Bickle:

Here's the deal: In 4-plus decades of relationship with Mike Bickle, I stand with him as a man who puts character before charisma. He lives in a modest home with a most generous heart. He's affirming, winsome and authentic. When he was transitioning from pastor to establish the International House of Prayer, he invited me to lead the church and was ever so gracious when I finally declined. While planting our church in a rented facility, I remember Mike (our featured speaker) helping our takedown crew loading up the van. On another occasion, after ministering for a weekend in our church, he gave his entire honorarium to our 20-year-old son in the parking lot so he could get engaged! Facing opposition from a combative local leader, Mike humbly called me for advice. My wife (Mike's her favorite Bible teacher) was blown away when he sent me home from Kansas City with a beautiful portrait of heaven. Every Friday for years I put out in our kitchen a picture of me with Mike and Diane to inspire me for my weekly "Bridal Fast."

I say all the above praying for God's perfect will to be done. I reiterate that accountability is essential. If the careful investigation reveals wrongdoing, I'm confident it will be handled biblically and redemptively with discipline and God's plan for restoration of this man of God who is a gift to the Body of Christ worldwide. He needs our intercession at this critical time. May he emerge stronger than ever to finish well. We love and appreciate you, Mike!

After Bickle admitted at least some of the accusations were true, Tomacak played defense in his Dec. 13 column:

In his personal statement, Mike shared that he was "deeply grieved" about "my past sins" of "20+ years ago. …" "I asked for forgiveness" [from his wife, family, and now church community and the body of Christ].

He sincerely believed these things "were dealt with and under the blood of Jesus," but "since this has now become public," Mike explained, "I want to repent publicly."

With today's "open season" in social media, Mike mentioned that some accusations "are out of context, greatly exaggerated or blatantly false" … but exhorted, "Please do not criticize those who are voicing their disdain for me. Please only speak blessing to them and about them" (Matthew 5:44).

He said that he would not be engaging in "public preaching ministry" and sees this as "God's delayed loving discipline on my life" (Hebrews 12:6, 11), saying he will "look to other leaders to determine how long this season will last – it may be long and it may even be permanent. I will only reengage in my public preaching ministry if God confirms it through others."

Tomczak concluded with more defense: "With everything that has surfaced with our brother Mike Bickle, and the inspiring International House of Prayer, may their cutting-edge prophetic ministry emerge even sharper than ever before through this experience."

A couple weeks later, IHOPKC cut ties with Bickle. Neither Brown nor Tomczak have mentioned that development.

MRC's Stelter Derangement Syndrome Continued During The Fall
Topic: Media Research Center

The Media Research Center is in a continual state of Stelter Derangement Syndrome -- never mind the fact that he lost his CNN show more than a year ago. Alex Christy was the sufferer in a Sept. 19 post:

Former chief media correspondent for CNN, Brian Stelter, joined MSNBC’s Ari Melber on Friday’s edition of The Beat to talk about his old employer, the media as a whole, and to proclaim that the industry’s job is to be “louder than the liars” who attack them.

Melber wondered, “So, has CNN, in your view, lost its way? And were they wrong in some of the programming decisions they made, including regarding yours?”

Stelter replied that he didn’t think so because, “there's a big difference between a management regime versus CNN as an institution. And that's true for lots of media companies. When you're reading the newspaper, you’re reading a website, you hate an article, you hate a column, judge that one column. Don't judge the entire institution and that's what I would say about CNN or any other big media brand.”

That would make more sense if you were talking about the op-ed pages or an opinion-based publication, but not for the allegedly straight-news outlets like CNN or MSNBC. When the news section repeatedly makes the same mistakes, blaming individuals covers up systemic problems.

Christy would never make that comment about Fox News, even though the problem he ascribes to CNN and MSNBC is much worse there. He continued to whine:

As for attacks on the media, “This torrent of lies directed at an institution that's trying to get to the truth and, Ari, that's why we need this kind of coverage all the time to try to figure out the best path to being louder than the liars. That's our job. We are supposed to be louder than the liars.”

That also contradicts Stelter’s earlier statement. On one hand, Stelter wants people to criticize individuals, not outlets, but here he is urging the entire industry to adopt certain standards. At the same time that standard of claiming something is true simply because the media said it is, is why the industry is facing a “torrent” of criticism.

Christy himself is a walking contradiction because he refuses to hold Fox News to those same standards.

Brad Wilmouth served up a torrent of whataboutism in a Sept. 26 post after Stelter called out Fox News' history of division on the occasion of Rupert Murdoch's retirement:

Is there anything stranger than crusading leftists on CNN and MSNBC blaming Fox News for dividing Americans? Soon after CNN anchor Abby Phillip attacked Fox News for "outrage porn," MSNBC's The Sunday Show offered ex-CNNer Brian Stelter blaming Rupert Murdoch for dividing America, pitting neighbor against neighbor. 

Name-dropping the title of his new anti-Fox book, Stelter excoriated the outlet as a "Network of Lies" and laughably claimed that Fox, unlike the pro-Biden media, is "not rooted in reality."

The segment was remarkable, coming on the same fulminating cable network that has a substantial history of trafficking in vitriol against conservative public figures, even in this segment. Host Jonathan Capehart recalled congressional Republicans who are resisting a budget deal as he segued to the issue of Fox's future:

But if you zoom out, you can see the real roots of Republican craziness. One of the key factors, media mogul and architect of Fox News, Rupert Murdoch, who announced he is stepping down as chairman this week. As a column in The New York Times noted, Rupert Murdoch's empire used passion and grievance as fuel and turned it into money and power.

There's no "passion and grievance" in MSNBC and in Capehart's performance?

At no point did Wilmouth make any attempt to actually respond to what Stelter said.

It surely must have pained Nicholas Fondacaro to admit that Stelter actually echoed right-wing talking points in an Oct. 20 post:

“There is no defense here.” Even CNN’s former media janitor Brian Stelter couldn’t find it in him to throw rhetorical sawdust on the liberal media’s regurgitation of Hamas propaganda and misreporting of the blast at a hospital in Gaza. In a Wednesday appearance on NewsNation’s Dan Abrams Live, Stelter ripped into the media for their “atrocious” coverage of the blast and said they lacked “common sense” when they parroted unbelieve death toll numbers Hamas gave them, just minutes after it occurred.

“Hamas is not a credible source for information period. And yet, so many in the media treat them as if their statements just as reliable as any other government statement,” host Dan Abrams emphasized as he was leading into his interview with Stelter.

Stelter noted that he’s usually the one defending the media, but this time “there is no defense here.” “This was an atrocious series of mistakes by many different major newsrooms all around the same time on Tuesday,” he decried. Worse yet, he warned: “I don't think there's been a follow-up or accountability to make sure doesn't happen again.”

[...]

He concluded by lecturing his media colleagues on how they should be like doctors and “do no harm” when reporting from disaster areas, both natural and manmade. “Don't make a terrible situation worse. War is already Hell. It should not be made worse by misreporting,” he said. “But I fear that on Tuesday the media made a bad situation worse. They actually did harm as opposed to trying to the opposite.”

It probably helped that Stelter said this on NewsNation, which the MRC loves to pretend isn't biased despite its clear right-leaning slant. But if Stelter had targeted his remarks at Fox News, Fondacaro would be in a rage, since criticism of Fox News is not allowed.

Indeed, when Stelter released a new book criticizing Fox News, the MRC once again went into full derangement mode. More on that soon.

WND Tries To Lionize Discredited Lawyer Obsessed With Seth Rich
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily just can't stop exploiting -- and lying about -- the death of Seth Rich in order to peddle its own far-right political narratives. Bob Unruh tried to keep right-wing conspiracy theorires about Rich alive in a Nov. 29 article:

The details about the murder of Seth Rich, a Democratic National Committee worker shot and killed as he walked to his Washington, D.C., home in 2016, remain clouded in mystery.

Police claimed it was a robbery gone bad but his wallet was untouched, and he was shot in the back.

WND columnist Jack Cashill has documented that it just may have been Rich who downloaded DNC details to give to muckracker Julian Assange to post at WikiLeaks on the internet at the time.

Investigator Ty Clevenger also had revealed that the FBI has Rich's personal and work computers, and officials at the investigation team have asked for permission to release those details – over 66 years.

But that apparently is about to change.

The Gateway Pundit reports a federal judge has ruled the FBI must turn over evidence regarding Rich's murder.

Yes, Unruh's two main sources are both conspiracy theorists -- Cashill and Gateway Pundit. And as we pointed out when Cashill touted Clevenger to bolster his conspiracy theory, Clevenger is a discredited lawyer who is a Seth Rich conspiracy dead-ender. Unruh went on to hype Clevenger and the conspiracy theory:

The report explained, "Attorney Ty Clevenger is the bulldog attorney who has been after the DOJ and FBI for years to get to the bottom of who supplied the DNC and [former DNC chair John] Podesta’s emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 election."

It continued, "This was always the key to the Russia collusion nightmare. If Russia didn’t supply emails to WikiLeaks (the FBI has never asked WikiLeaks who supplied the emails by the way) then the Russia collusion story was built on a lie.

[...]

Social media explained, "Seth Rich is the guy that was murdered because he most likely had incriminating information on many Democrats."

"Social media," it turns it, was just some random Twitter troll.

This was followed by a Nov. 30 article by Alicia Powe, a former WND writer who's now with Gateway Pundit, that glorified Clevenger. The credit is a bit murky; the subheadline claims that the article is about what Clevenger "tells WND," but the byline states "WND News Services," which WND sticks on outside content like Gateway Pundit. Either way, Powe is all about trying to lionize Clevenger and perpetuating the conspiracy theory:

The corporate media still maintains the state-dictated narrative that Rich was killed during a botched robbery and, in tandem with Big Tech, continues to systemically warn that reports of Rich leaking a trove of emails to WikiLeaks founder and political hostage Julian Assange are "fake news” and "conspiracy theories."

But defense attorney Ty Clevenger is still on the case, leaving no stone unturned, in a legal battle against the Federal Bureau of Investigation that has spanned nearly six years.

[...]

The intelligence agencies and DNC claimed Trump "colluded with Russia” to hack their server and badgered Trump with baseless allegations in an investigation that spanned nearly the entire duration of his presidency, but suspected that Rich leaked the information.

Asked whether Rich leaked the DNC emails, Clevenger's answer was decisive. "Yes. I don't think the FBI would have fought me this hard – unless there was something really embarrassing they were trying to keep under wraps,” he said. "Unfortunately, the conclusive evidence that I have seen in a case pending in DC is sealed, so I can't talk about it.

"But I have tried to get [Rep.] Jim Jordan and John Durham to subpoena the evidence from the civil case because I think the public ought to know what's in there. So far, neither of them is interested.

"I don't know who killed Seth Rich. I'm not trying to get in the middle of the murder investigation. I've always focused on finding any evidence that he was involved in the leak. When I proved that he was the source of the leak, then I'd start making noise about the murder investigation.”

[Julian] Assange repeatedly denied that Russia or any "state party" was involved in the leaking of DNC emails, and the WikiLeaks founder even strongly alluded that Rich was the source of the emails.

In fact, the Mueller report found that the DNC emails were, in fact, stolen by Russia and that Assange had been in communication with Russian military officials before and after Rich's death. Powe didn't mention that inconvenient fact, of course, nor did she disclose that Clevenger was the lawyer for Ed Butowsky, a right-wing operative on whose behalf he sued various people and media outlets for purported defamation -- nearly all of which have been either withdrawn or thrown out of court, in no small part because Butowsky lied during his lawsuit against one media outlet. Powe also cryptically wrote:

Clevenger warned that Fox News is nearly "as involved in the cover-up as the FBI.”

"Fox News paid for everyone's silence,” he said. "I begged Fox to hold off settling the case and they paid money through the nose not just to make the case go away and silence everybody. Fox News is the controlled opposition,” he said, contending it's no surprise when "one Murdoch sat on one of the boards for the Clinton Foundation. The Murdochs are 'conservative' as long as it makes them money – they are professionally Republicans.”

Powe refused to explain things any further, but she is presumably referring to Fox News' settlement with Rich's family in January 2021 -- reportedly for seven figures -- over a false story it published on its website about Rich that featured statements made by Butowsky, who retracted all of them as part of the settlement. WND censored all mention of that settlement on its website because it blows up the conspiracy (and cynical exploitation) narrative.