NEW ARTICLE: Newsmax's Victimhood Blitz
Topic: Newsmax
DirecTV dropped Newsmax from its TV lineup, and it has been loudly playing the victim ever since, recruiting every right-winger it can find to help it complain -- but the Media Research Center is not really helping. Read more >>

Newsmax Tried To Defend Republicans Over Cutting Social Security, Medicare
Topic: Newsmax

Like other ConWeb outlets, Newsmax did what it could to defend Republicans against the (accurate) claim President Biden made during his State of the Union address that some Republicans want to cut Social Security and Medicare. First, though, there was a dismissive prebuttal in the form of a Feb. 6 article by Jay Clemons: "Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich already has begun criticizing President Joe Biden's upcoming State of the Union address, predicting it will be a 'very boring' speech, highlighted by a number of 'untruths' designed to get Democratic Party members of the House and Senate 'desperately cheering.'"

When the speech turned out not only to be not boring but also featured Biden calling out Republicans for their desire to cut Social Security and Medicare, Newsmax sprung into defense mode. Charlie McCarthy had a roundup of Republicans attacking the speech, including far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene calling Biden a "liar" for making that claim. Then it was time for Newsmax to have a parade of Republicans attacking the claim (despite the fact that numerous Republicans are on the record as expressing their desire to cut Social Security and Medicare):

• Rep. Fallon to Newsmax: Biden Speech 'the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly'
• Rep. Greene: 'Not Sorry One Bit' for Yelling 'Liar' During Biden's Speech
• Rep. Collins to Newsmax: Biden's Social Security Claims 'Outright Falsehood'
• Rep. Biggs to Newsmax: Biden a 'Big, Fat Liar' With SOTU Claims

Newsmax's columnists whined about this as well. Michael Dorstewitz denounced the claim in his Feb. 8 column: "This is a common claim made by Democrats. But it’s unfounded for one simple reason — it would be disastrous to the party." Larry Bell complained in his Feb. 10 column:

Republicans booed and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene shouted “liar” when Joe falsely stated that some among them proposed to “sunset” Medicare and Social Security.

He was apparently disingenuously referring to Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla. who only suggested that all federal legislation be subject to renewal every five years in order to “fix” and “preserve” those social programs so that they are financially solvent for the long term.

A Feb. 10 article by Charles Kim served as Scott's PR guy, helping him clean up the mess that Biden called out:

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., introduced his bill Friday to strengthen Social Security and Medicare after President Joe Biden accused him of trying to cut the entitlement programs during his State of the Union speech on Tuesday.

"I have been fighting since Day One to protect and preserve programs like Social Security and Medicare for Florida's seniors, and today I am proud to announce new legislation, my Protect Our Seniors Act, to safeguard the benefits of these critical entitlements," Scott said in a press release Friday.

[...]

Republicans attending the speech on the House floor of the U.S. Capitol heckled Biden, calling him a liar for the accusation.

Scott said Friday that his bill would rescind funding for 87,000 new Internal Revenue Service agents approved earlier this year in the Inflation Reduction Act, and redirect to funds to strengthen the programs for seniors.'

By Feb. 13, however -- a week after the speech -- Newsmax was adding qualifiers to those attacks, tacitly admitting Biden was right: "Sen. Mike Rounds: 'Vast Majority' of Republicans Don't Want to Sunset Social Security." A Feb. 17 article by the apparently unironically named Charlie McCarthy, meanwhile, documented more Scott backpedaling:

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., updated his Rescue America plan to exclude Social Security, Medicare, and the U.S. Navy from his proposal to sunset all federal legislation in five years.

Scott's changes come after his sunset proposal was blasted by President Joe Biden, Democrats, and some Republicans.

[...]

Scott wrote that his sunset proposal "was obviously not intended to include entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security — programs that hard-working people have paid into their entire lives — or the funds dedicated to our national security.

"I have never supported cutting Social Security or Medicare, ever. To say otherwise is a disingenuous Democrat lie from a very confused president. And Sen. Mitch McConnell is also well aware of that. It's shallow 'gotcha' politics, which is what Washington does."

Scott further said that Americans outside of Washington knew what he intended when he first released his Rescue America plan.

Living up to his name, McCarthy served only as a shill for Scott and avoided mentioning the obvious point that Scott would never had bothered to amend his plan if it was actually true that "Americans outside of Washington knew what he intended." Newsmax followed this with an anonymously written article noting that the Biden White House was making fun of Scott for amending his plan.

Biden's strategy was so successful, however, that a Feb. 20 article by Theodore Bunker highlighted Republicans trying to fight the claim:

Republicans are looking to push back against claims by Democrats that the GOP is looking to cut Social Security and Medicare, the Washington Examiner reports.

President Joe Biden said in his State of the Union address that some Republicans want to put those programs "on the chopping block," a claim that some are hoping to counter.

[...]

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., hit out at critics in an opinion piece released on Friday rejecting claims made by critics that his plan to sunset federal programs after five years unless extended by Congress is an attempt to cut Social Security and Medicare.

"I have never supported cutting Social Security or Medicare, ever." he wrote. "To say otherwise is a disingenuous Democratic lie from a very confused president."

Bunker didn't mention that Scott's plan to sunset all federal programs was the impetus for Biden claiming that Republicans want to cut Social Security and Medicare.

Newsmax Promotes Dubiously Sourced Attack On COVID Vaccines
Topic: Newsmax

Newsmax has apparently decided it wants in on some of that COVID vaccine misinformation action that WorldNetDaily has been not-so-lucratively mining. Lynn Allison wrote in a Jan. 25 article:

A new study claims that the underreporting of adverse events linked to COVID-19 vaccination is caused by clinical, political, systemic, and media factors. The peer-reviewed study published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research claims that this lack of information has led to misguided recommendations by authorities. The study is titled “The Blind Spot in COVID-19 Vaccination Policies: Under-Reported Adverse Events.”

According to The Epoch Times, Patrick Provost, a professor in the Department of Microbiology at Laval University in Quebec City, says his study is based on a the adverse reactions suffered by two scientists who were in good health prior to vaccination. He claims they experienced several adverse events (AEs) after getting COVID-19 vaccines and still suffer the consequences.

Allison didn't mention that not only is the Epoch Times an anti-vaxxer publication, the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research leans anti-vaxxer, so it's not clear how good the journal's purported peer review is.

There is one improvement over WND's approach, though: Allison did actually note Provost's anti-vaxxer leanings and that he "was suspended by Laval University for eight weeks last summer after he said publicly that there’s no real benefit to vaccinate children against COVID-19," and she did note criticismof Provost's results:

Provost’s views were challenged by many experts, including Dr. Mathieu Nadeau-Vallée, a medical resident at University of Montreal, who holds a Ph.D. in immunology. He said that Provost is not an expert in the mRNA technology used in the Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, or in the vaccination of children.

“This person doesn’t really have the expertise to speak about this,” Nadeau-Vallée.  “He’s a biochemistry professor; he doesn’t study messenger RNA, he studies small RNA. It’s not at all the same area of research. So, this is a person who is expressing themselves about a subject that they’re not really an expert in and is speaking against the scientific consensus on that subject.”  Nadeau-Vallée said that COVID-19 vaccines and public health measures have saved lives.

“Academic freedom means being able to speak about any subject but it doesn’t mean we can say false things,” he said, adding that if someone wants to speak against scientific consensus, they have to show scientific evidence.

This was all buried at the bottom of the article, however, with the questionable study claims given more prominence.

Newsmax Continued To Hammer Biden Over Classified Documents -- Until They Were Found With Pence
Topic: Newsmax

Newsmax published dozens of articles in the week after it was revealed that classified documents were found at properties frequented by Joe Biden after his term as vice president ended. There was one more article as well, a Jan 10 piece centered around another vice president:

The "double standard" after classified documents were found at the Penn Biden Center, where President Joe Biden kept an office, is "troubling," as he should face the same scrutiny under a special counsel as former President Donald Trump, former Vice President Mike Pence said Tuesday. 

"Equal treatment in the law is at the very center of the expectation of the American people and of our history and our tradition," Pence told talk show host Hugh Hewitt. "What did the Biden administration say — they were going to tap someone appointed in the Trump administration to take a look at it while President Trump faces down a special counsel? ... It's deeply troubling to me."

The FBI's "massive outreach" in August during the raid on Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate was the "original sin," said Pence. 

Meanwhile, Newsmax kept up the article onslaught in the second week of the story:

• Sen. Ron Johnson to Newsmax: Biden Docs 'Massive Diversionary Operation?'
• Devin Nunes to Newsmax: 'Plenty of Process in Place' to Examine Biden Docs
• Rep. Miller-Meeks to Newsmax: 'What Prompted Them' to Search for Biden Docs?
• Rep. Meuser to Newsmax: Biden Getting 'Benefit of Doubt' on Docs
• Ex-CIA Baker to Newsmax: Don't Want 'Multitiered' Justice for Mishandling Docs
• Obama's Ethics Chief: Biden's 'Negligence' in Handling of Classified Docs 'Appalling'
• Alina Habba to Newsmax: Transparency Lacking on Biden Documents
• Rep. Comer on Penn Biden Center: Did China Influence Biden Admin?
• Lara Trump to Newsmax: Burying Biden Docs Meddled in Our Elections
• Rep. Buck to Newsmax: 'Unusual' for Biden Lawyers to Handle Docs
• Hunter Biden Blacked Out Near Classified Docs: Report
• Fred Fleitz to Newsmax: 'Ridiculous' to Let Biden's Attorneys Examine Papers
• Alina Habba to Newsmax: Committee Will Find Truth on Penn Biden Center
• Hunter Biden 'Quarantined' at Father's Delaware Home Where Docs Found
• Rep. Davidson to Newsmax: FBI's Stance on Biden Papers 'Flashback' to Hillary
• Fred Fleitz to Newsmax: FBI's Search at Biden's Home 'Kinder and Gentler'
• Biggs to Newsmax: Biden 'Lies All The Time,' Document Reveal No Different
• Rep. Comer to Newsmax: Biden, Family Under Probe for 'Influence Peddling'
• Rep. Donalds to Newsmax: Biden Docs Indicate Espionage Act Violations
• Rep. Kiley to Newsmax: House Will Hold Biden to 'His Own Standard'
• Garland Tries to Deflect Stinging Criticisms of DOJ's Biden Doc Efforts

These 21 articles make for a total of at least 59 articles critical of Biden that Newsmax cranked out in the two weeks since the story broke. It did run one article on the other side of the story, a Jan. 17 wire service piece on the White house's response, as well as a Jan. 22 article noting the executive privilege issues in play in both the Biden and Trump cases -- but there wa also a Jan. 18 article letting Trump spin away his own classified document controversy (which Newsmax naturally defended) by claiming that some of the folders seized were empty and kept only as keepsakes.

Newsmax also published a Jan. 20 column by Fred Fleitz -- whom it had featured in five articles over those two weeks -- going on a Biden-bashing tear:

The series of explanations offered by Biden administration officials for the discoveries of classified documents in President Biden’s think tank office, home office, and home garage was not a cover-up of some kind of mistake by Mr. Biden’s former staff — when he was vice president.

Rather, they represent a brazen attempt to hide Mr. Biden’s abuse of government power and his arrogant attitude that the law does not apply to him.

Sadly, Biden's attitude and his playing fast and loose with both the rules and the truth are nothing new. 

The American people deserve an explanation of what really happened.

But then, classified documents were found in the possession of Pence -- and, like the Media Research Center, Newsmax suddenly changed its tune. Its first story on the revelation was a wire story, followed by an article touting Trump claiming that "Mike Pence is an innocent man. He never did anything knowingly dishonest in his life. Leave him alone!!!" There was also an article featuring Rand Paul fretting about "the overclassification of documents." A couple days later, there was a wire article in which Pence is literally quoted as saying "mistakes were made." There was also an article featuring FBI Director Christopher Wray lecturing all politicians about classified documents,

In addition, there was a paywalled piece by Marisa Herman claiming that "President Joe Biden and former Vice President Mike Pence each may want to consider issuing a mea culpa to former President Donald Trump after it was revealed that both men found classified documents that should not have been in their possession in their personal residences – and in Biden's case, in other locations, too."

Needless to say, Newsmax didn't mention to its readers that in the wake of the Mar-a-Lago raid, it published a wire article featuring Pence denying that he took any classified material with him after leaving the White House. And, like the MRC, Newsmax largely lost interest in the classified-document story after that

Newsmax DirecTV Victimhood Watch
Topic: Newsmax

After slowing things down at the end of week 6 of being dropped by DirecTV, Newsmax revved things up again at the start of week 7:

• Rep. Self to Newsmax: DirecTV Must Give Reasons
• Rep. Kiley to Newsmax: 'Disturbed' by DirecTV Removal
• Rep. Waltz to Newsmax: DirecTV 'Hearings in the Works'
• Georgia AG to Newsmax: Allow Free Speech, Despite DirecTV
• Sen. Ted Budd to Newsmax: 'Phones Ringing Off Hook' on DirecTV
• Sen. Cornyn to Newsmax: DirecTV Needs 'Diversity of Information'
• Rep. Jackson to Newsmax: Dump DirecTV Over Censorship
• Rep. Andrew Clyde to Newsmax: DirecTV Dropping Newsmax 'Very Concerning'
• Rep. Bob Good to Newsmax: DirecTV Must Answer for Censorship
• Rep. Tiffany to Newsmax: Hoping for Hearings on DirectTV
• Sen. Blackburn to Newsmax: Americans Know Big Tech Censors Conservatives
• Rep. Kustoff to Newsmax: Censorship of Newsmax 'Tremendous Loss'
• Sen. Lindsey Graham to Newsmax: 'Making Progress' With DirecTV
• Rep. Fitzgerald to Newsmax: 'Disappointed' by DirecTV Censorship
• Rep. LaTurner: DirecTV's Silencing of Conservatives 'Unacceptable'

These 15 articles bring the total number of articles Newsmax has published attacking DirecTV since it was dropped Jan. 25 to at least 258 -- and, of course, none of them mentioned the fact that DirecTV replaced Newsmax with another right-wing channel, The First. This time around, however, there were no Newsmax columnists mounting a defense.

Newsmax DirecTV Victimhood Watch: The Big Slowdown
Topic: Newsmax

Newsmax finished out week 6 of its victimhood narrative over getting dropped by DirecTV with further slacking off of its victimhood obsession. In the time period of March 4-7, it published no articles on at all on March 5 and 6, which the rest appeared only on March 4 and 7:

• Gaetz to Newsmax: House Should Hold Hearing on DirecTV Booting Newsmax
• Marjorie Taylor Greene to Newsmax: DirecTV's Move Will Affect Elections
• Rep. Murphy to Newsmax: DirecTV's Act a 'Blatant' Attack on Conservatives
• Ramaswamy to Newsmax: DirecTV's Decision Violates 'Existing Laws'
• Tony Perkins to Newsmax: Deplatforming Newsmax Is an 'Abuse of Power'

That's right -- only five articles. That makes at least 243 "news" articles attacking DirecTV since it happened on Jan. 25. There was also a March 7 column by Perkins, who heads the right-wing Family Research Council, making some of the same (discredited) arguments:

The campaign to boot conservatives from major satellite services began with COVID, but it has expanded.

A month after Joe Biden was sworn in, Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., and then-Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Calif., fired off letters to 12 companies, insisting that "right-wing media" outlets were hives of "misinformation," "conspiracy theories," and "lies," which, they allege, sparked the Jan. 6 riots.

They also accused networks like Newsmax, Fox, and OAN of being "key vectors" of disinformation about COVID that "could end up getting people killed."

Of course, we know now that the only real vector of COVID deception was the government itself.

As we noted the last time someone at Newsmax brought up this letter, it was in response to the indisputable fact that Newsmax, Fox News, and OAN spread falsehoods and misinformation about the 2020 presidential election that helped incite the Capitol riot.

Perkins' lame talking points continued:

DirecTV called their January announcement to drop their fourth-highest-rated cable news channel a "business decision."

That’s interesting since it had no qualms keeping 20 other less popular channels which are costlier for the broadcaster to carry.

As we've also noted, many of those channels are carried as part of package deals to carry multiple channels from a media company. Perkins closed by ranting:

Liberals, who used to at least pretend to have some use for free speech, have dropped all pretense now.

Their pattern of silencing people and ideas that threaten their leftist orthodoxy must be addressed — or this devastating cancer will spread.

It’s time to find out if DirecTV’s actions to cancel Newsmax and OAN were motivated by congressional Democrats.

But Perkins did his own bit of censorship -- he refused to tell readers that DirecTV replaced Newsmax with another right-wing channel, The First, meaning that there is no viewpoint censorship happening.

Newsmax Obsessed Over Biden Classified Documents
Topic: Newsmax

Newsmax aggressively defended Donald Trump following the FBI raid on his Mar-a-Lago estate to retrive classified documents he stole (after months of refusal to cooperate on the matter). So when it was revealed that classified documents were found at properties used by Joe Biden after his vice presidency but before he became president, Newsmax unsurprisingly went all in on attacking him. Here are some of the articles it published just in the first week of the story:

• Trump: 'When Is FBI Going to Raid' Biden's 'Many Homes?'
• Rep. Biggs Calls for Probe of 'Compromised' Jill Biden
• McCarthy: Dems 'Overplayed Their Hand' on Trump Documents
• Rep. Comer to Newsmax: Biden 'Continues Pattern of Not Being Transparent'
• Rep. Meuser to Newsmax: 'Equitable Treatment' Needed in Biden Papers
• Rep. Miller to Newsmax: 'I Don't Trust' AG Investigating Classified Biden Docs
• Fred Fleitz to Newsmax: Biden Docs 'Much Worse' Than Mar-a-Lago
• Senate Intel Committee Chair Warner Wants Briefing on Biden Documents
• Bolton to Newsmax: 'Close to Impossible' to Prosecute Trump Over Docs Now
• Dershowitz to Newsmax: 'Absolutely Confident' Trump Won't Be Indicted on Docs
• Megyn Kelly to Newsmax: Docs Discovery Hurts Biden Politically
• Rep. Miller-Meeks to Newsmax: Biden Had No Declassification Powers as VP (actually, he did)
• Fred Fleitz to Newsmax: Biden's Document Stash Wasn't an 'Accident'
• Devin Nunes to Newsmax: Many Questions About Biden Docs Timing
• Rep. Wittman to Newsmax: Equal Justice Needed on Biden Documents
• Rep. Comer to Newsmax: 'Two-Tier System of Justice' Exposed
• Rep. Brad Wenstrup to Newsmax: WH Must Provide Answers on Biden Docs
• Rep. Cline to Newsmax: 'Significant Evidence of a Crime' If Biden Hiding Classified Docs
• Kimberly Guilfoyle to Newsmax: Biden Thinks He's Above the Law
• McCarthy: Biden Must Have Had Previous Knowledge of Classified Docs
• Lara Trump to Newsmax: Biden Docs Reek of 'Hypocrisy,' Corruption
• Dershowitz to Newsmax: Neither Trump, Biden Will Be Criminally Prosecuted for Classified Docs
• Rudy Giuliani to Newsmax: Biden Docs Exposed to Get Him Out
• Hunter Biden Lived at Residence Where Documents Were Discovered
• Devin Nunes to Newsmax: 'Corrupt' DOJ Can't Be Trusted With Hur Pick
• Ben Carson to Newsmax: 'Enemies' Looking for Biden Documents
• Rep. Comer to Newsmax: Biden Can't Be Trusted With Nation's Secrets
• Alina Habba to Newsmax: 'Double Standard' Regarding Classified Docs 'Absurd'
• Rep. Greg Murphy to Newsmax: Could Hunter Access Joe's 'Vette'?
• Rep. Ogles to Newsmax: Biden, Trump's 'Destinies Are Intertwined'
• Gordon Chang to Newsmax: Biden Doc Discovery 'Stinks to High Heaven'
• Rep. Rick Allen to Newsmax: Biden Document Discoveries 'Poetic Justice'
• Rep. Alford to Newsmax: Biden Docs Could've Swayed Midterms
• Rep. Rosendale to Newsmax: Biden Docs Delay Shows Double Standard
• Fred Fleitz to Newsmax: Biden Doc Locations Not Handled as Crime Scenes
• Chris Christie: Did Biden or Klain Choose 'Not to Disclose' Docs Before Midterms?
• Trump Ridicules Biden's 'Unlocked, Unsecured' Garage in Docs Scandal

That's 37 articles in the first week of the story, for those counting at home.

There were opinion pieces as well. A Jan. 13 column by Michael Dorstewitz rehashed much of what Newsmax had already reported while also defending Trump, insisting that "the records in Trump’s possession were covered under the Presidential Records Act, and he had the power to declassify those records. As vice president Biden had no such power, and there’s no 'Vice Presidential Records Act' for him to fall back on." Again, vice presidents do have declassification powers. Larry Bell pushed the same falsehood to protect Trump in a column the same day:

If you imagined that the Aug. 8 FBI/DOJ raid on Donald Trump’s private residence at Mar-a-Lago was truly over secret documents as part of an undisclosed “criminal investigation,” let’s see if a belated report of multiple illegal stashes of Joe Biden’s classified materials dating to his time as vice president between 2013-2016 receives comparable legal culpability zeal.

[...]

There is a big legal difference between former President Trump’s private possession of classified documents which he had full authority to declassify, versus Joe Biden’s removal of such materials as vice president with no such license.

Bell concluded by whining, "Don’t count on an armed raid on Jill Biden’s wardrobe closet as happened to former first lady Melania Trump any time soon." He forgot to mention that Trump's failure to cooperate is the direct cause of the raid.

Newsmax DirecTV Victimhood Watch, With Added Ruddy Falsehoods
Topic: Newsmax

Newsmax entered week 6 of self-proclaimed victimhood over getting dropped by DirecTV with more of the same:

• Sen. Lankford to Newsmax: DirecTV Says, 'I Don't Like This Voice'
• Rep. Andy Harris to Newsmax: Hope for 'Pushback' Against DirecTV
• Sen. Vance to Newsmax: DirecTV Wrong to Deplatform 'An Important Voice'
• Reps. Bean, Letlow to Newsmax: Disheartened Over DirecTV Censorship
• Rep. Waltz: Congress Should 'Intervene' in DirecTV/Newsmax Case
• Rep. Comer to Newsmax: Democrats Are All for Censoring Conservative Speech
• Rep. Dusty Johnson to Newsmax: DirecTV Acting Like Communist China
• Dean Cain to Newsmax: DirecTV Doesn't Want 'Free Exchange' of Voices
• Sen. Tuberville to Newsmax: 'Mind-Boggling' to See Conservatives Censored
• CPAC's Mercedes Schlapp to Newsmax: DirecTV Removing Newsmax an 'Outrage'

With these 10 articles, Newsmax has published at least 238 articles attacking DirecTV for dropping it since Jan. 25, when it occurred.

Meanwhile, the head of Newsmax went to CPAC to mislead about his victimhood. Luca Cacciatore wrote in a March 2 article:

Newsmax CEO Christopher Ruddy sat down with Mercedes Schlapp on Thursday to discuss the network, its recent troubles with satellite provider DirecTV, and the ominous trend of media silencing alternate viewpoints.

At the Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Prince George's County, Maryland, Ruddy cited Nielsen ratings showing that Newsmax, a popular conservative news organization, is the fourth highest-rated news channel, a top 20 channel overall, watched by 25 million Americans on cable alone.

"It's really not our brilliance. It's the fact the American people want more choices in news," the network's founder declared, later noting that "the liberals and the left basically own everything in the media world."

"Why should the left have so many news choices, but conservatives only have one?" he continued. "Fox, let's admit it, is changing. It's good to have more voices, and I think Newsmax plays a very critical role in offering those."

Ruddy is lying. DirecTV replaced Newsmax with another right-wing channel, The First.

In part of the video Cacciatore didn't transcribe, Ruddy repeated the talking point that there are as many as "two dozen" news andinformation channels he calls "liberal." As we've pointed out, Ruddy's definition of a "liberal" channel is wildly and dishonestly overbroad, given that it includes things like the Weather Channel and Comedy Central

Newsmax DirecTV Victimhood Watch
Topic: Newsmax

Week 5 of Newsmax's massive victimhood campaign over getting dropped by DirecTV continued with more of the same on a slower pace:

• Rep. Steube to Newsmax: 'Double Standard' Involved in DirecTV's Actions
• Vivek Ramaswamy to Newsmax: Private-Govt 'Hybrid' Censorship Makes 'Blood Boil'
• Dick Morris to Newsmax: DirecTV, Censorship Will Be 'Major Topic' at CPAC
• Rep. D'Esposito to Newsmax: DirecTV Dropping Newsmax 'Insane'
• Ted Cruz: End Corporate Censorship, Bring Newsmax Back
• Rep. Moore to Newsmax: 'Have To Push Back' on Censoring Conservatives
• Rep. Perry to Newsmax: Congress Needs to Probe DirecTV Decision
• Rep. Giménez to Newsmax: Hearings on Censoring Conservatives 'Right'
• Rep. Biggs to Newsmax: DirecTV Hearings Likely in 3-4 Weeks
• Rep. LaLota to Newsmax: Censorship Like DirecTV's Must Be Stopped
• Rep. Babin to Newsmax: DirecTV Move 'Doesn't Pass The Smell Test'
• Sen. Cruz to Newsmax: DirecTV's Answers to Committee 'Insufficient'
• Rep. McClintock to Newsmax: America Was Built on Foundation of Free Speech
• Iowa AG Bird to Newsmax: 'Cancel Culture' a Threat to American Values
• Sen. Marshall to Newsmax: DirecTV Told Kansans Upset About Removal of Newsmax

This list is a little deceiving because it hides how much things had slowed down in week 5. Of these 15 articles, nine were posted on Feb. 28; the other six were posted on Feb. 25 and 27 (no articles were posted on Feb 26).This brings the total number of "news" articles attacking DirecTV since it dropped Newsmax on Jan. 25 to 228.

Again, Newsmax columnists attempted to help make Newsmax's case.  James Hirsen complained in a Feb. 24 column:

To truly amass power, a would-be autocrat or totalitarian regime will typically suppress any criticism or dissent that might emanate from those who may wish to challenge such authority.

How is the sinister goal of silencing vast numbers of individuals or organizations reached? By controlling and/or eliminating the free flow of news and information within a society.

Examining Newsmax’s removal from DirecTV’s platform is critical in understanding what has happened to the Fourth Estate, what stage in the totalitarian process we are presently in, and what are the means by which we can make our way back to freedom.

[...]

How much ideological discrimination of speech should a free people tolerate?

Here’s the simple answer.

None.

Of course, DirecTV replaced Newsmax with another rightwing channel, The First, meaning there is absolutely no "ideological discrimination of speech" happening here. But Hirsen didn't tell his readers that, because that would have blown up his entire column.

Newsmax's Own Arguments Against DirecTV Fail
Topic: Newsmax

One of Newsmax's arguments against being dropped by DirecTV -- about which it has spent the past month loudly whining about -- is that, as stated in a Feb. 4 article, "DirecTV continues to carry 22 liberal news channels, many with low ratings and all get paid hefty license fees." But it rarely released the list of those "22 liberal news channels." But it would show them on the TV screen every once in a while:

 

What? The Weather Channel is a "liberal news channel"? Comedy Central is a "liberal news channel"? As the Daily Beast summarized:

While channels like Vice, PBS, Spanish-language networks, and the major broadcasters air nightly news programs, they would hardly be described as “news channels.” Furthermore, describing specialty offerings like Justice Central (which just airs blocks of first-run courtroom shows in the same vein as The People’s Court) as a news network is downright insulting.

In terms of 24-hour cable news channels that could be seen as similar to Newsmax, the following apply from the network’s list: CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Bloomberg, Newsnation, Cheddar, CNN International, CNBC World, BBC World News and CNN en Espanol.

Now, are all of these channels considered liberal? While that is purely subjective, Newsmax has backed its claim by pointing to a 2019 poll that found a majority of Americans believed that all network news channels leaned to the left. Therefore, per the network, that means that The Weather Channel and a channel that airs stand-up comic performances must be part of the liberal news establishment.

The Daily Beast also pointed out that including all of those "22 liberal news channels," as Newsmax insists on describing them, Newsmax would rank 12th in ratings -- not the "fourth highest-rated cable network" it frequently claims to be as justification for DirecTV keeping it.

The Daily Beast further blew up Newsmax's argument that DirecTV pays for each individual "liberal news channel" it offers, noting that some come as part of packages; for instance, Vice is part of A&E Networks, and it's included in a package of other A&E-owned channels.

When the right-leaning Wall Street Journal published an editorial accurately pointing out that the Newsmax-DirecTV was a licensing dispute and not a "censorship" debate, going on to note that it's "bewildering why many Republicans are getting involved" by threatening government interference in a private business decision -- adding that "Political coercion of business is as distasteful from the right as it is from the left" -- Newsmax devoted an unsigned Feb. 20 editorial to complaining about it, claiming that the Journal "failed to mention some important facts":

First, the dispute is not over a fee price. AT&T, the 70% owner of DirecTV, is claiming Newsmax should get zero fees while all other U.S. cable news channels get them. Newsmax, the fourth highest-rated cable news channel, according to Nielsen, believes it is being discriminated against.

Importantly, the Journal editorial failed to disclose that one shareholder, Rupert Murdoch, controls both it and Fox News, its sister company.

As recent disclosures in the Dominion lawsuit revealed, Newsmax is a competitor to Fox. In 2020, Murdoch sent an email to Fox's CEO expressing serious concern about the rise of Newsmax and said the network needed to be "watched."

We understand Fox wants to be the only news source for right-of-center cable viewers, but that is not good for the GOP, democracy, or good competition.

Still, with such a serious conflict of interest, we thought the WSJ would disclose it. But they did not.

If Newsmax is demanding a fee and DirecTV dropped it instead of paying it, that means this is, in fact, a fee dispute. Also, it's ironic that Newsmax would complain about the Journal's conflict of interest here when Newsmax routinely refuses to disclose its conflicts of interest when it promotes books by Dick Morris and David Horowitz that were published by Newsmax's book division.

The editorial then went on a lengthy tangent about Fox News' own fee dispute with a DirecTV competitor, Dish Network, while not mentioning that 1) Fox News has much higher ratings than Newsmax and can therefore justify the carriage fees it wants, and 2) Newsmax has more streaming and OTT options than Fox News does, which would seem to obviate the need for Newsmax to actually be on DirecTV.

Of course, the editorial repeated its own debunked talking point:

Newsmax counts at least 22 liberal-leaning news channels still on DirecTV. All of them get cable license fees, and most have lower ratings than Newsmax.

And none have been deplatformed by AT&T.

Finally, the editorial failed to disclose to readers the fact that DirecTV replaced Newsmax with another right-wing channel. The First, meaning that its argument of viewpoint "censorship" is inoperative.

Newsmax DirecTV Victimhood Watch: Slowing Down The Pace
Topic: Newsmax

Going into its fifth week of victimhood over getting dropped by DirecTV, Newsmax surprisingly slowed down the pace of proclaiming itself to be a victim. It published no attack articles at all on Feb. 22, andonly these on the following two days:

• Rep. Moore to Newsmax: DirecTV 'Snuffed Out' Newsmax
• Rep. Hinson to Newsmax: Everybody 'Frustrated' by DirecTV Decision
• Rep. McCormick to Newsmax: Conservatives Must Impact DirecTV Finances
• Rep. Scott DesJarlais to Newsmax: House Oversight Will Probe DirecTV Censorship
• Rep. Fry to Newsmax: DirecTV's Actions Should Be 'Wake-Up Call'
• Rep. Comer to Newsmax: DirecTV Needs to Work This Out 'or Else'
• Sen. Cruz to Newsmax: 'I Think Viewers Ought to Have a Choice' for News
• Rep. Hageman to Newsmax: AT&T's Deplatforming Violates Free Speech

That's just eight articles in a three-day span -- a drastic slowdown from its pace of more than 50 articles a week in the first four weeks after it was dropped. With these articles, Newsmax has published at least 213 articles complaining about DirecTV's decision since it was dropped on Jan. 25.

Newsmax also continued to have columnists help make its case. Dishonest Catholic Bill Donohue had a very lazy rah-rah piece on Feb. 21, right down to directly and uncritically quoting its talking points:

On Jan. 25, the same day Newsmax announced it had been unjustly sacked by the AT&T-owned DirecTV, this writer called on Catholics to rally to its side.

Subsequently, this writer was followed by a host of prominent Americans who registered their criticism of DirecTV, many of whom called for a boycott.

Politicians, corporate leaders, TV personalities, sports figures, actors, lawyers, religious leaders — a Who's Who of American public figures — lambasted DirecTV, calling on them to carry Newsmax again.

Also contact your representatives in Congress.

That's it. No, really.

Ralph Benko put in more effort in his Feb. 23 column, but he slavishly stuck to the corporate line:

Yes, as a weekly Newsmax contributor, I’m loyal to Newsmax. That said, "By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes," to quote William Shakespeare and Agatha Christie. 

Per Newsmax:

"DirecTV pays cable license fees to all top 75 cable channels and to all 22 liberal news and information channels it carries.

"Almost all of these channels are paid hefty license fees significantly more than Newsmax was seeking — and despite the fact that most of the channels have much lower ratings than Newsmax.

"This is a blatant act of political discrimination and censorship against Newsmax," Christopher Ruddy, founder and CEO of Newsmax said.

The ejection of Newsmax by DirecTV carries a certain aroma of microaggression.

Benko censored the fact that DirecTV replaced Newsmax with another right-wing channel, The First, meaning that there is no viewpoint censorship. That didn't stop him from whining on his publisher'sbehalf, or from endorsing government interference into a private business decision:

ATT, of course, has the right to choose what to carry. That said, Mr. Market, so much more ruthless than federal regulators, will have the last word.

And, despite my devotion, as an ordoliberal, to free markets, those members of Congress who have raised vociferous objections to DirecTV’s exile of Newsmax have a legal and constitutional hook well worth exploring.

[...]

ATT, DirecTV’s mothership, enjoys billions of dollars of contracts with the federal government. If, following congressional investigation, ATT’s subsidiary’s exile of Newsmax turns out based on credal discrimination, smells like a violation of the spirit, at least, of federal anti-discrimination rules.

A congressional finding of credal discrimination should invite immediate remedial action by DirecTV… rather than inviting Uncle Sam to deliver a message, good and hard, by canceling a few billion dollars of ATT’s opulent government contracts.

We thought conservatives hated government interference in private busineess decision. Not if they can use them to advance an agenda, apparently.

Newsmax DirecTV Victimhood Watch
Topic: Newsmax

Newsmax is not going to stop playing victim over getting dropped by Newsmax, though the pace of self-victimization slowed a bit:

• Yeonmi Park to Newsmax: Censorship 'Path' to Winding Up Like North Korea (no mention that questions have been raised about Park's claimed origin story)
• RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel: 'The RNC Is Behind Newsmax'
• Rep. Burchett to Newsmax: Rioting Would Ensue If CNN Deplatformed
• Rep. Flood to Newsmax: DirecTV's Newsmax Drop Hurts Rural Americans
• Rick Santorum to Newsmax: DirecTV 'Trying to Hurt' Conservatives
• Sen. Tuberville: Newsmax Targeted to Silence Conservatives
• Rep. Barry Moore to Newsmax: DirecTV Part of Big Tech's Censorship
• Goya CEO Unanue: DirecTV Dropping Newsmax Is 'Evil'
• Rep. Buddy Carter to Newsmax: AT&T DirecTV 'Raises a Lot of Red Flags'
• Brian Andersson to Newsmax: Left Won't Engage in Debate
• Rep. William Timmons to Newsmax: DirecTV Move Symptom of Wider Problem
• Mike Reagan to Newsmax: AT&T, DirecTV Want to 'Whitewash' Free Speech
• Rep. Eric Burlison to Newsmax: DirecTV Made a 'Horrible Decision'
• Scott Walker to Newsmax: Musk Should Buy Liberal News Outlets
• Rep. Bill Johnson to Newsmax: I'll Be 'Front, Center' With Big Tech

With these 14 articles, Newsmax has published at least 205 "news" articles attacking DirecTV for dropping it in the four weeks since it happened on Jan. 25. 

Newsmax's columnists similarly whined as well. Steve Levy complained in a Feb. 17 column:

But the best way the left believes it can defeat evil in the world is to shut down the few remaining safe spaces for open thought — one being Newsmax. So they pressured the corporate board rooms they now control to do their dirty work.

And spare me the nuance that this isn’t a First Amendment issue because DirecTV’s owner AT&T is a private company. While this isn’t a constitutional issue, the company’s actions are without question anathema to free expression as espoused by the aforementioned founders of western civilization.

Today's liberals supporting Newsmax’s canceling would be well served to look back at one of the most significant Supreme Court cases in America's history: National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie (1977).

Younger progressives may be surprised to learn that it was the ultra-liberal ACLU which led the fight< to allow a group of neo-Nazis to obtain a permit to march down Main Street.

They were wise enough to know that acquiescing to the banning of a group, even as vile as the neo-Nazis, could one day lead to the quelching of their own speech.

So today's liberals shouldn’t support Newsmax because they agree with its programming. They should support Newsmax because to do otherwise may one day make their own freedom of expression less viable.

You know, maybe portraying Newsmax as akin to persecuted neo-Nazis isn't the best analogy he could have used.

Jerry Newcombe similarly complained in a column the same day:

Free speech and a free press. It’s American as apple pie — or so it used to be.

In 1875, President Ulysses S. Grant, declared: “Let us all labor to add all needful guarantees for the security of free thought, free speech, a free press.”

But today the left seems to have free speech in America by the throat. We see this in the recent example of corporate giant AT&T cutting off the conservative network Newsmax from satellite distribution through DirecTV, about which I commented recently. This appears to the tip of the iceberg.

Both Newcombe and Levy failed to mention the fact that DirecTV replaced Newsmax with a different right-wing channel, The First, meaning that no viewpoint discrimination is going on here, or that Newsmax is readily available on streaming, meaning that its speech has not been abridged.

Newsmax Columnist Pushes Conspiracy Theory To Bash Capitol Riot Committee
Topic: Newsmax

Like his fellow Newsmax columnist Jeff Crouere, Michael Dorstewitz was not happy with the House committee that looked into the Capitol riot, complaining in his Jan. 6 column that the committee "illustrates why we have an adversarial system of justice."

Dorstewitz gets a couple things wrong right off the bat. First, it's a legislative committee that never claimed to be anything else, which means that the "adversarial system of justice" does not apply. Second, Republicans were given the opportunity to appoint members to the committee, but then-House minority leader Kevin McCarthy refused to participate at all after then-House leader Nancy Pelosi refused some of his appointees for being pro-insurrection. (Would Dorstewitz have demanded that members of Al-Qaeda be appointed to the 9/11 Commission?)

Dorstewitz the complained that some witness testimony will not be made public, which prompted him to go into conspiracy mode:

Would they include the testimony of former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, who said it was the failures of the Pentagon, FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security that led to the tragedy of Jan. 6?

Would those records include information that someone from the inside had to have opened "the 20,000-pound Columbus Doors that lead into the Rotunda" that "are secured by magnetic locks that can only be opened from the inside using a security code"?

All of this and more would have been public record had the Jan. 6 Committee been formed as an adversarial body, as committees normally are.

As evidence of Sund's claims, Dorstewitz linked to an article featuring ... Sund promoting his new book in which he presumably detailed exactly that, arguably making release of his testimony redundant. Regarding the Columbus Doors stuff, that's a bogus conspiracy theory. As a fact-checker found:

No evidence exists to support the claim that an electronic mechanism locks the doors from the inside. For one, the eavy damage sustained by the interior rotunda doors does not indicate that the doors were willingly unlocked to permit the rioters’ entry. And while the Capitol Police declined to comment to The Dispatch Fact Check on security measures at the U.S. Capitol, other sources have suggested that the doors could not have been locked from the inside because of fire evacuation and safety rules.

It wasn't until nearly the end of his column that Dorstewitz finally admitted McCarthy's snit about refusing to participate in the committee after Pelosi rejected his pro-insurrection nominees, which he benignly described only as "strong Trump supporters." He then declared: "Although he was criticized for this, McCarthy was right in pulling his remaining committee choices."

Dorstewitz concluded by whining; "It’s un-American when any 'fact-finding' body acts as judge, jury and prosecutor, and the results are always predetermined." Yet pro-insurrection Republicans never set up a credible alternative, something Dorstewitz makes sure not to mention.

Newsmax DirecTV Victimhood Watch
Topic: Newsmax

The victimization narrative at Newsmax over getting dropped by DirecTV has aggressively continued as it goes into its fourth week:

• Rep. Victoria Spartz: DirecTV, Monopolies Will Turn US Into 'Oligarchy'
• Alina Habba to Newsmax: DirecTV Removing Newsmax 'Needs to Be Investigated'
• Rep. Kevin Kiley to Newsmax: DirecTV Canceling Basic Freedoms
• Rep. Bryan Steil to Newsmax: DirecTV Censorship 'Worthy of a Review'
• Texas AG Paxton to Newsmax: State Should Probe AT&T Over Deplatforming Conservatives
• Sen. Ted Cruz to Newsmax: DirecTV Censorship 'Indefensible'
• Monica Crowley to Newsmax: Biden FCC Pick Should Put 'Her Money Where Her Mouth Is'
• Jeffrey Lord to Newsmax: DirecTV Move Not Surprising Given Obama, Clinton Ties
• Penny Young Nance to Newsmax: AT&T Dropping Network is 'Censorship'
• Rep. Hern to Newsmax: DirecTV Censorship a 'Grave Concern'
• RNC's McDaniel to Newsmax: Members Urged to Fight DirecTV Censorship
• Bryan Leib to Newsmax: Jewish Leaders Demand DirecTV End Censorship
• Rep. Norman to Newsmax: House GOP Won't Stand for AT&T's Censorship
• Vivek Ramaswamy to Newsmax: AT&T, DirecTV Part of 'Ideological Cartel'
• CPAC Chairman Urges AT&T, DirecTV to Reinstate Newsmax
• Ben Weingarten to Newsmax: Censorship by Proxy 'Unlawful, Un-American'
• Rep. Greg Steube to Newsmax: Floridians 'Outraged' at DirecTV
• Alex Acosta to Newsmax: Private Sector Censorship Going Too Far
• CPAC's Schlapp to Newsmax: DirecTV's Move Not About Money
• Rep. Kiley to Newsmax: Congress Should Probe DirecTV's 'Censorship' of Newsmax
• CPAC Chair Schlapp to Newsmax: Dropping Newsmax Thwarts Conservative Speech

With these 21 articles, Newsmax has run at least 191 articles attacking DirecTV for dropping it since it happened on Jan. 25.And none of these articles mentioned that DirecTV replaced Newsmax with another right-wing channel, The First, which means no viewpoint "censorship" is happening.

Meanwhile, Newsmax unironically ran a wire service story on Feb. 15 stating how that "For the first time ever, U.S .adults will spend more time this year watching digital video on platforms such as Netflix, TikTok, and YouTube than viewing traditional television, Insider Intelligence forecast Wednesday." Newsmax has pointed out that "it offers its feed for free on its website, on YouTube and on multiple streaming platforms such as Roku, so viewers with DirecTV service will still be able to watch it -- which would seem to show that Newsmaxdoesn't actually need to be on  DirecTV and that everyone who really wants to watch it has found a way to doing so.

Newsmax also continues to have columnist complain on its behalf. Kenny Cody ranted in a Feb. 14 column:

Nearly one year after removing the conservative leaning One America News Network (OANN), from their channel lineup, DirecTV decided to drop Newsmax, a conservative-leaning outlet.

While DirecTV is arguing that both decisions were based upon non-negotiable contractual terms, the sense from Newsmax is that the provider wanted conservative voices, reporting, and voices silenced across their medium and perhaps thinks that both the Biden administration and other Democratic politicians had a significant influence regarding its decision to remove the network from its channel lineup.

Cody censored the fact that DirecTV replaced Newsmax with another right-wing channel, so no "conservative voices" are being "silenced." But the victimization narrative is a hard one to break, so Cody just kept ranting, with an added bit of pretending it's not government interference into private business matters if the government looked into this particular private business matter:

While it can be argued that Big Tech is working against conservative voices, a proper investigation should be launched to ensure if there was actual interference or influence by federal government officials, over companies like DirecTV.

It's not pro-big government to investigate the connection between government and private companies if it means they have a political bias, a bias demonstrated by impinging upon speech platforms.

It would be a giant step forward for the GOP if this connection were probed and proven by both U.S. Senate and U.S. House Republicans.

Dennis Kneale cheered Newsmax's strategy of screaming loudly over being on the bad end of a business decision in his Feb. 15 column:

By now, AT&T must be regretting the decision by executives at its DirecTV service to oust the Newsmax network from the 13-million-subscriber platform. The Newsmax response has been vociferous and effective, enlisting a platoon of conservative allies to side with the cable network.

Newsmax has fought back against its much larger foe by running a non-stop barrage of on-air stories about the clash, and online coverage on its website, and referrals to a new fight website. It also has used Twitter as a megaphone and a rallying point for supporters.

What AT&T and DirecTV brass may have viewed as a negotiation over new fees has blown up into a fight against Big Tech censorship. And with good reason.

DirecTV canceled a smaller conservative network, OAN, last April, after a few Democrats called on media platforms to pull the plug on conservative networks for spreading "misinformation." Now this?

He too failed to disclose thatDirecTV replaced Newsmax with another right-wing channel.

NEW ARTICLE: Morris And The Midterms
Topic: Newsmax
Newsmax pundit Dick Morris spent his time during and after the midterm elections making more failed predictions, fawning over Donald Trump and spitting out the occasional dumb hot take. Read more >>