Search Results

THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES AND YOU WON’T GO FAR WRONG: The Washington Post Invents a Vaccine Claim Ron DeSantis Didn’t Make.

Nowhere in this quote does DeSantis suggest that getting the COVID-19 vaccine can affect fertility.

The speech, which was given at an event where DeSantis announced $2.3 million for nursing and vocational programs, focused on the critical medical worker shortage seen not just in Florida but around the country. The Post, as well as MSNBC and other outlets, are cutting off a key sentence from the DeSantis quote. A local outlet in Florida gives you the context you need. . . .

In one sentence, it’s clear that DeSantis is talking about how vaccine mandates will only make a shortage of nurses worse. Young nurses who are wanting to get married and start families are getting let go because they aren’t getting vaccinated. It’s a controversial policy because on one hand, potentially spreading the virus from staff to patients is a medical and legal nightmare, but on the other hand, you’re looking at a shortage of nurses because of the virus and other circumstances already and letting more go only hurts the quality of care you can give.

DeSantis is looking at the mathematical equation here and deciding that it’s silly to look at a health care worker shortage and think “We need more barriers to work,” which is not an unreasonable conclusion to draw.

But the media looks at the DeSantis quote, cuts off a sentence, and declares he is spreading some conspiracy theory because he’s a successful Republican governor and he’s speculated to be a frontrunner in 2024. He has dismissed the media on multiple occasions as the hacks they are, and they don’t like being undermined.

At this point, I no longer assume that they’re biased or sloppy. I assume that they deliberately make things up for partisan reasons.

THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES AND YOU WON’T GO FAR WRONG: What media bias? Journalists overwhelmingly donated to Hillary Clinton.

Late Sunday evening, Washington Post reporter Chris Cillizza tweeted: “Let me say for the billionth time: Reporters don’t root for a side. Period.”

It was a hilariously ill-timed tweet, because Monday morning the Center for Public Integrity released its 2016 campaign analysis showing journalists giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

Of the 430 people CPI identified as “journalists, reporters, news editors or television news anchors ­— as well as other donors known to be working in journalism,” 96 percent gave money to Clinton, according to federal campaign finance filings. Those 430 journalists gave $382,000 to Clinton and just $14,000 to GOP nominee Donald Trump. CPI identified just 50 journalists who gave to Trump (meaning 380 gave to Clinton.)

CPI noted that the law only obligates candidates to disclose the names of donors giving more than $200 in a single election cycle, meaning many more members of the media could have donated to either campaign, but in smaller amounts.

Cillizza followed up his earlier tweet by commenting on the CPI report: “Well this is super depressing. NO idea why any journalist would donate $ to politicians.”

CPI noted that even as many newsrooms have policies against donating to politicians (the New York Times is more vague, strongly suggesting that such donations would compromise the paper’s integrity), their reporters donated.

This isn’t an age of Trump thing among journalists, either. In 2012, every major media outlet donated heavily to President Obama compared to Mitt Romney (yes, even Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, which owns Fox News). The story was the same in 2008.

It’s a political monoculture, and that’s one reason for the rise of Trump.

THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES AND YOU WON’T GO FAR WRONG: Our Press Falls Down on the Job Again.

Libya is no closer to stability or peace than it has been since the invasion. Western plans to bring order to the country are failing yet again. . . .

We must all be grateful that we don’t have a Republican President or it would be Libya, Libya, Libya all the time, a deafening chorus of shrieks and imprecations. “How could the White House be so stupid as not to learn the lessons of Iraq?” “Who knew what, and when?” We would also be hearing much more about the consequences of our failures: the continuing flows of arms, funds, and jihadis to various groups in Africa and beyond, not to mention the damage to U.S. prestige. The responsible officials would be hounded by an enraged press corps and an aroused public. Hillary Clinton has actually been quite lucky that the GOP attack focused almost solely on Benghazi, when that tragic incident was only the tiniest piece of a major policy disaster.

Not that a return to Bush-era press inquisitions would be a good thing. There really ought to be some kind of happy medium between the no-holds-barred relentless attacks on GOP foreign policy failures and the whistle-past-the-graveyard treatment of Democratic ones. And many of America’s biggest recent foreign policy failures had strong bipartisan support at the time. A lot of Democrats backed the Iraq invasion, and a lot of Republicans backed Libya.

Nobody is ever going to get everything right in foreign policy—that’s not the way history works. But these days in the U.S., in large part thanks to the way much of the press (with some honorable exceptions) goes about its business, we have got a system that makes it hard for us to learn from our mistakes—to have the serious conversation about foreign policy and global strategy that the country badly needs.

We have the worst political class in history.

JUST THINK OF THE MSM AS DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE: “The media feel like lawyers for the Clinton campaign, taking whatever the evidence is and presenting it as advantageous to their client,” Ann Althouse writes.

Which brings us to media professor and early blogger Jeff Jarvis:

And note this:

Now do ABC, aka, the House of Stephanopoulos; NBC, the home of Al Sharpton; CBS, whose news division president is David Rhodes, brother to self-immolating Obama advisor Ben Rhodes, and where the current host of Face the Nation advised Obama in 2013 to ‘Destroy the GOP’; and of course, the Clinton News Network.

DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES UPSET AT INSUFFICIENT KOWTOWING: Media pile on Rand Paul after aggressive response to NBC’s Savannah Guthrie.

They’re your enemies. Treat ’em like Obama treats Fox News. And you have to laugh at this: “Rand Paul thinks he knows how to be a journalist better than you do.”

Here’s a hint: He does. Because it’s not that hard to be a better journalist than Savannah Guthrie, and most of her peers. The truth is, they’re not very good at what they do, but so long as they function as Democratic operatives with bylines, they don’t have to be. And that’s the real problem.

UPDATE: Republican strategists — and FOX producers — should probably click through and read the comments here. . . .

DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES — AND CLOWN SHOES. Hit On Georgia Republican Perdue Blows up In BuzzFeed’s Face. “Perdue wasn’t signing a ‘woman’s torso,’ as BuzzFeed claimed. The truth is that he was signing a woman’s diabetic pump at the request of the woman as a way to raise awareness for juvenile diabetes. Rather than own up to and correct the error, BuzzFeed merely blame-shifted by changing the headline to: Tracker Fail: Dems Miss Insulin Pump In Video Of Perdue Signing Young Woman.”

When you take pre-digested hit pieces from political hit men. . . .

JUST THINK OF THEM AS DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES AND IT ALL MAKES SENSE: Becket Adams: This Washington Post puff piece on President Obama’s recent fundraising tour is really something else.

Juliet Eilperin at the Washington Post gained some amount of notoriety earlier this year after she penned an embarrassing and now-debunked attack on Charles and David Koch, the libertarian-leaning bogeymen of the left.

And now she has authored what may be this year’s silliest puff piece for the Obama administration.

To be fair, though, the year is nowhere near over.

ALL THE PRESIDENT’S DEMOCRATIC PARTY OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES: Bob Woodward brands Biden debate performance a ‘political h-bomb.’

Watergate reporter and long-time Washington Post associate editor Bob Woodward said President Biden’s debate performance was a “political hydrogen bomb” and the public deserves to know what really happened.

Woodward joined MSNBC’s Air Melber on Friday following the debate, where he said the performance was “so bad, so awful” that reporters must be looking for some explanation from his staff.

“I think the answer here is in reporting, in seeking very aggressively, an explanation — what happened here?” Woodward said. “We don’t want it to come out in some book or some memoir in a couple of years or a decade. We’d need to know now.”

That’s nice, Bob. But why didn’t we get aggressive reporting on Biden’s condition in the run-up to the debate?

More Woodward:

“I sat there and watched it and I could not believe it. I said, not only is this a political hydrogen bomb for him and the Democratic Party, it, you know — what happened? What happened?” he said.

Calls for the president to drop out are not hasty, Woodward said, but more energy should go toward seeking an explanation behind the debate performance.

“Look, let’s step back. If a building blows up in downtown of some city, the story will be what happened and then the story will be how did this happen, why did this happen? And that’s where I’m very, very curious because this was a mega disaster,” Woodward said.

Any thoughts on why so many DNC-MSM stenographers ran with the White House’s “cheap fakes” talking points about Biden’s lack of mental acuity the week before the debate, Bob? As Ed Morrissey wrote yesterday: Debate Disaster: Dems And Media Defrauded America on Biden. Make Them Pay.

None of the people on that panel understood the scope of the disaster last night. Biden just exposed a vast cover-up, nearly universal among elected Democrats and almost as much within the US national media, designed to keep people in the dark about the president’s mental capacity.

They spent the last four years foisting a near-senile old fool onto a nation at a moment of dire crisis. That includes Axelrod. It includes Bedingfield. It includes Van Jones. It includes the New York Times, the Washington Post, MSNBC, CNN, and practically every other establishment media outlet. It also includes Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, every Democrat governor and member of Congress (except Dean Phillips), and most especially Jill Biden, who had to rush the stage to pull Joe off of it:

Democrats now want to pull a switcheroo and hope everyone forgets all about this breathtaking cover-up and corruption. That includes all of those Democrats who voted for Biden in primaries this year on their word that Biden was up to the task — and whose votes will count for nothing in any scenario that changes the ticket. Talk about betrayal!

We’ll game that out separately, but that won’t solve the appalling credibility destruction that took place and which applies to all of the above. Elected Democrat officials from Kamala Harris on down participated in a scheme to defraud American voters, not once but twice, and the media aided and abetted it both times.

How and why the media spent years protecting Biden is the real story, not just what happened at the White House, but the guild will do its best to protect its own.

Beyond covering for Biden, as Mike LaChance writes at Legal Insurrection: Democrats and the Media Have Spent Years Pushing Real ‘Cheap Fakes.’

DEMOCRATIC PARTY BRASS BECOMING INCREASINGLY ANGRY AT OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES: Biden campaign brings top journalists to Wilmington.

Two people with knowledge of the situation told Semafor that during meetings with reporters from outlets like The New York Times, the Washington Post, and others, campaign officials have invoked a coverage spreadsheet laying out areas where the team believes their reporting has fallen short.

In particular, campaign officials have chafed at some of the coverage of former President Donald Trump, feeling that outlets are too focused on his legal troubles and haven’t paid enough attention to some of his incendiary recent statements on the campaign trail. A source familiar told Semafor that with the exception of its recent meeting with the Times, the campaign meetings had been “substantive” and “productive,” and that Biden staffers were scheduled to meet in the coming days with political reporting teams from ABC, NBC, The Wall Street Journal, Fox, NPR, Reuters, Bloomberg, and others in Wilmington.

And of course, it’s worth nothing: If Donald Trump Did This, the Establishment Media’s Heads Would’ve Exploded.

This team knows that every aspect of the narrative must be controlled for them to have a shot at re-election. It’s creepy and un-American. If they’re this worried about bad press concerning Joe Biden, maybe Democrats shouldn’t have doubled down on this bad bet. The man is being led off by his wife at events, unable to comprehend his surroundings. If he can’t handle two events in one day without falling, bumbling, drooling, or looking lost, this endeavor isn’t worth entertaining. I don’t see Biden surviving a campaign season that isn’t handicapped by COVID procedures. Those are long over, and voters expect the president to have the stamina to do multiple events in various states for days on end until we all vote in November.

On that issue, no meeting could smooth over Biden falling or suffering a blown mental fuse a la Mitch McConnell on the stump.

This is the inevitable twilight years of a politician who at the peak of his power (and faculties) loved nothing more than insulting journalists and locking them in closets.

Exit quote:

DEMOCRATIC PARTY OPERATIVES WITH BYLINES RECEIVE THEIR MARCHING ORDERS: White House Sends Letter To Media Allies Directing Them to Intensify ‘Scrutiny’ of House Republicans Investigating Biden Corruption.

The Biden White House sent a letter to its media allies Wednesday, directing them to intensify their “scrutiny” of House Republicans after Speaker Kevin McCarthy announced an impeachment inquiry into the Biden family’s influence-peddling operation.

“It’s time for the media to ramp up its scrutiny of House Republicans for opening an impeachment inquiry based on lies. Impeachment is grave, rare, and historic. The Constitution requires ‘treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” Ian Sams, a spokesperson for the White House Counsel’s Office, wrote in the letter to top U.S. news executives, according to CNN. “After nearly 9 months of investigating, House Republicans haven’t been able to turn up any evidence of the President doing anything wrong,” Sams added inaccurately.

In reality, Republican investigators have produced a mountain of evidence in the form of bank records, suspicious activity reports, wire transfers, text messages, whatsApp messages, emails, voicemails, photos, along with the testimonies of whistleblowers, and Hunter Biden’s former business partners, not to mention Joe Biden’s admission on tape that he got the Ukrainian prosecutor general fired by withholding $1 billion in US loan guarantees in exchange for his ouster.

Democrats, on the other hand, launched an impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump in 2019 based on the complaint of one then-anonymous Democrat operative (who was aware of Biden’s corruption) who blew the whistle after Trump asked Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to look into the Biden family’s shady business dealings in a phone call.

The White House memo reportedly includes a 14-page appendix that “comprehensively addresses the 7 key lies House Republicans are suggesting they are basing an impeachment on.”

Sams alleged that an impeachment inquiry with no supporting evidence should “set off alarm bells for news organizations.”

David Frum swings into action!