UPSIDE-DOWN WORLD: Politico, CNN *still* won’t name the anti-Trump “whistleblower” everyone knows, but they have no problem broadcasting worldwide the picture and identity of a doctor who who warned authorities of a potential “SARS-like” outbreak in December 2019, but was reprimanded by Wuhan police and is most certainly going to be a target of the Chinese secret police.

Because the deranged think that Trump will have the guy killed, right after he sells Alaska to the Russians and puts black people “back in chains.”

BUMPED WITH UPDATE AT BOTTOM:

LAWS ARE FOR LITTLE PEOPLE: Hilary Edition. As Tyler O’Neil has reported, Clinton has twice refused to accept service of Tulsi Gabbard’s defamation lawsuit, trying to weasel her way out of a legal battle.

The New York Post also reported that:

[Gabbard’s lawyer] said their process server first attempted to effect service at Clinton’s house in Chappaqua on Tuesday afternoon — but was turned away by Secret Service agents. The agents directed the server to Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, who on Wednesday claimed at his Washington, DC, firm, Williams & Connolly, that he was unable to accept service on Clinton’s behalf.”

Here’s the thing. She had her Arkansas law license reinstated last May. But the Arkansas Rules of Professional Conduct state that:

Rule 8.4. Misconduct.
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: (a) violate or attempt to violate the rules of professional conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another; (b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; (d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; (e) state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official; or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law; or (f) knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law.

Seems to me that dodging service of a complaint might violate sections (c) and (d), no?

**UPDATE: Someone explained the law to The Smartest Woman Ever:
“A lawyer for Hillary Clinton has finally accepted legal documents in connection with a $50 million defamation lawsuit filed by 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, the Hawaii congresswoman’s lawyer told Fox News on Thursday night.”

LAWS ARE FOR LITTLE PEOPLE: Hilary Edition. As Tyler O’Neil has reported, Clinton has twice refused to accept service of Tulsi Gabbard’s defamation lawsuit, trying to weasel her way out of a legal battle.

The New York Post also reported that:

[Gabbard’s lawyer] said their process server first attempted to effect service at Clinton’s house in Chappaqua on Tuesday afternoon — but was turned away by Secret Service agents. The agents directed the server to Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, who on Wednesday claimed at his Washington, DC, firm, Williams & Connolly, that he was unable to accept service on Clinton’s behalf.”

Here’s the thing. She had her Arkansas law license reinstated last May. But the Arkansas Rules of Professional Conduct state that:

Rule 8.4. Misconduct.
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: (a) violate or attempt to violate the rules of professional conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another; (b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; (d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; (e) state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official; or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law; or (f) knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law.

Seems to me that dodging service of a complaint might violate sections (c) and (d), no?

UH, PHRASING?: The New York Times endorses Klobuchar and Warren for President. In lauding Warren, the Times actually said this:

“Senator Warren is a gifted storyteller.”

Does anyone think they have a clue over there?

APPLE’S SIRI TELLS YOU ISRAEL IS A “ZIONIST OCCUPATION STATE“: As of 10am, only i24News and The Post-Millenial have covered this at all. Apple’s Siri scrapes Wikipedia for “answers” about public figures. So it appears that last night one of the SJW crusaders who call themselves Wikipedia editors decided to change the entry for Israeli President Rivlin as follows:

The entry was fixed about an hour after it was noticed. The Post-Millennial news blog dug into the story and asserts that the vandalism (not a “hack”) occurred in the SJW world of Wikipedia editors.

Not a word from “major” legacy media as of 10am. You can bet your bottom dollar if they called Nancy Pelosi a pedophile or called Oprah a drug addict, this would be a much more “important” story.

Yes, most of us know that usually only stupid people rely on Wikipedia as the central foundation for a theory or factual statement. Yet, others make a career of it. AOC used Wikipedia to smear Tucker Carlson’s The Daily Caller in public, relying on Wikipedia to slanderously describe the publication as “White Nationalist.”  It’s not. Not even close. (Disclosure: I provide media law advice to TDC).

There ought to be a full investigation, but major legacy media is fixated on whether or not Prince Harry can continue to call himself “Prince.”

**UPDATE: At least Newsweek catches up.

REMEMBER: You are not really Black, Gay or a Woman unless you toe the Party Line. Gay conservative and thoughtful writer Chadwick Moore gets the gulag treatment from Facebook:

“In October, I received a 30-day ban for ‘hate speech,’ after I shared a link to my Spectator column titled ‘Rednecks are the least racist people in America.’ The column pulled heavily on research from philosopher Thomas Sowell and historian Colin Woodard and my own self-deprecating stories about growing up in cracker culture in Greater Appalachia…I appealed that ban a whopping six times and each time, sometimes within seconds, I was notified by Facebook that, upon studied and serious review from a Facebook speech agent, sharing my own column published in a well-respected magazine about how rednecks aren’t racist is, inarguably, hate speech.”

Time to re-write Section 230.

SUE THE BASTARDS: California’s State Controller Betty Yee says she “can’t find” any of the 49 million bills she paid last year. So fiscal watchdog OpenTheBooks has filed suit under the state’s Freedom of Information law. Here’s a link to the lawsuit.

As The Good Professor says: “we’re in the very best of hands!”

HUMBLEBRAG: Dan Bongino gets it. And proving he’s a smart guy, he scans both Instapundit and The Daily Signal for contrarian analysis.

MY THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE WITH DON LEMON: As The Good Professor blogged here, CNN coughed up a settlement in the libel claim brought by Nick Sandman, one of the horrible, terrible, vicious and very very racist Covington Kids. In digging through the case file, I found this little gem argued by CNN:

“Courts treat statements characterizing people as “racist” as nonactionable opinion because they cannot be proved true or false… Sandmann cannot as a matter of law base a defamation claim on this statement as it offers an expression of opinion so subjective as to be unprovable.”

So, now CNN is saying it’s not possible to prove someone a racist? Did anyone run this by Don LeMons, who would call a dog “racist” if it pooped in his yard?

OMG! THE KIDS MIGHT BE EXPOSED TO UNAUTHORIZED IDEAS!
I’m always stunned by the call for censorship (sometimes a dogwhistle) from left-leaning media outlets. It’s almost as if they secretly fear their ideas will not stand up to scrutiny…

WAITAMINNIT:…isn’t he one of those folks who chided Trump for *not* invading Syria?

#MyWarGood
#YourWarBad

PLEASE DON’T DRIVE DRUNK: OK, OK, it’s New Year’s Eve, so in light of my plea, read this instead.

IT TAKES A ̶V̶I̶L̶L̶A̶G̶E̶ ENTIRE NEWSROOM: Glad to see it took the entire Reuters staff to bollix this up so badly.
Confirmation bias or just plain stupid?

AN OBSERVATION AFTER READING GLENN’S POST: “Newly Released Eric Holder Memo: Feds Can Use FISA to Spy on Journalists.”

From experience, I can just hear the voices in DC newsrooms:
“That was so three years ago. Obama is not President anymore, let it go. Oh, how are we doing on that story about Trump’s grandfather being all in for the Kaiser?”

SO MUCH FOR BEING THE SMARTEST PEOPLE IN THE ROOM:

Nothing beats being laid off just before the Holidays, huh?

WAITAMINNIT, WAT? Earlier this week, Bloomberg Media announced its first acquisition in more than a decade, buying CityLab:

“An offshoot website of the Atlantic that reports on a variety of areas—development, housing, transit, the environment—from an urban policy perspective. And as part of that purchase, it appears half of the website’s editorial staff could lose their jobs.”

According to Business Insider, 7,800 journalists have lost their jobs so far this year. I thought President Trump was supposed to be Biggest Threat to the Press Ever, what with him being mean to Jim Acosta and all.

But putting reporters on the breadlines? Nahhhhhhh.

WHO DOES HE THINK HE’S FOOLING? Mike Bloomberg’s decision to lopsidedly cover only Trump (and no Democrats)  has my old friends in the newsroom pretty ticked off. But leaving his own name off of the “Bloomberg Billionaire’s Index” is just dumb.

Not that I’m cheering for anyone of these people, but he’s giving Fauxcohoantas and Grumpy Socialist a stick with which to hit him over the head.

Res ipsa loquitur.

CREDIT WHERE IT’S DUE: Spartacus makes a calm statement about yesterday’s murder of Jersey City police Detective Joe Seals and Jewish civilians but refrains from turning it into a political “anti-NRA” screed. First, now is not the time. Second, I’m willing to bet good money that the perpetrators were not NRA members, and even go so far as to say the weapons used were obtained in violation of already-existing law.

That said, we know the Jewish supermarket was targeted, yet nobody has released the names of the perpetrators so far.
I’m guessing it’s those damned Presbyterians again.

**UPDATE: Police say the shooters were from the “Black Hebrew Israelite movement.” Same nice folks who confronted the Covington Kids in DC.

SELF-AWARENESS DEFICIENCY ALERT: Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales is launching a social-media website called WT: Social. The platform aims to compete with Facebook and Twitter, except instead of funding it using advertising, Wales is taking a page from the Wikipedia playbook and financing it through user donations.

Says Wales:

“The business model of social media companies, of pure advertising, is problematic,” Wales told Financial Times. “It turns out the huge winner is low-quality content.”

If there is any human being in the known universe who truly understands “low-quality content”, it is Jimmy Wales. Wikipedia might be the go-to site for cretins like Soledad O’Brien and Alexandria Occasional Cortex  but for the rest of the literate world…

HOW STUPID DOES SHE THINK WE ARE? WAIT, DON’T ANSWER THAT: Not content with trying to outdo Hillary’s “plain folk” masquerade (“I’m gonna get me a beer“); now she tweets out a picture of her family with their humble station wagon:

Which is all well and good, except that’s a 1953 Lincoln Capri. Hardly the preferred ride of working class families. It sold back then for $3,766, which adjusted for inflation,  is equal to $35,436.09 in 2019. Not exactly “dust-bowl” poor.
**Error fixed: this was Lincoln’s top of the line car in ’53. They did not offer the “Continental that year.**

LET’S PLAY A ROUND OF “WHISTLEBLOWER SHIT-SHOW!”  Well, CBS fired Ashley Bianco, producer formerly of ABC for allegedly releasing the video that outlines how ABC spiked an investigation of pedophile and Clinton mega-donor Jefferey Epstein. Megyn Kelly interviews her and she tearfully denies it. On the same day, James O’Keefe published a letter from the real whistleblower.

In the meantime both networks are following the DNC-talking points about investigating leakers: When the President does it, it’s bad. When they do it…crickets.

Where to start? I wish Kelly had asked Bianco what CBS told her when they fired her. That aside, I’ve been asked a lot about her legal remedies. Honestly, you could take what I know about Labor Law, put in your eye and still see pretty well. As I understand it, NY is an “at-will” state, meaning they can fire you for no reason unless it’s a race/age/gender thing.

Defamation? Maybe, but defamation claims in NY require “in hac verbae”, that is a pleading of the actual defamatory statement in the Complaint. And you can bet that both CBS and ABC would fight coughing up any docs for years, and would resist pre-action discovery to depose the HR departments to find out what ABC said to CBS. I doubt this lady has the financial wherewithal for that kind of fight.

But, this may be one of the rare instances where a cause of action for Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress might work. Very generally, the tort requires that the plaintiff must have been in the “zone of danger” of the defendant’s negligent act, or it must have been foreseeable that the defendant’s negligent conduct would have caused the plaintiff emotional harm. (And New York does not, like a few states, require physical harm or contact). And if CBS fired an employee on ABC’s mistaken say-so, well, that’s pretty damned negligent. Dare I even say “collusion”?

Who’s taking odds that CBS writes a check to make this go away?

BTW, Jeffrey Epstein did not kill himself.

OUR MORAL BETTERS? NOT SO MUCH: The Newspaper Guild’s Washington Post Unit just published a study of pay disparities at the paper. Some highlights of their findings?

• Women as a group are paid less than men.
• Collectively, employees of color are paid less than white men, even when controlling for age and job description. White women are paid about the median for their age.
• Women of color in the newsroom receive $30,000 less than white men — a gap of 35 percent when comparing median salaries.
• The pay disparity between men and women is most pronounced among journalists under the age of 40.
• Men receive a higher percentage of merit pay raises than women, despite accounting for a smaller proportion of the newsroom.
• The Post tends to give merit raises based on performance evaluation scores, but those who score the highest are overwhelmingly white. The Post is fairly consistent across races/ethnicities and genders at awarding raises to those who do well on performance evaluations. But in 85 percent of instances in which a 4 or higher was awarded to a salaried newsroom employee, that employee was white.

According to the preeminent press ethics think-tank The Poynter Foundation, (second item on page) “the Post claims the study is “seriously flawed” and “does not accurately take into account factors such as position, experience and job performance.”

Do as we say, not as we do.

DUMB IS AS DUMB DOES: Remember how just last July, in Knight First Amendment Institute v Trump  the Second Circuit sided with Democrats who said (rightly, IMHO) that the President, using his Twitter account to make policy statements, could not block people? Someone forgot to tell Alexandria Occasional-Cortex, who blocked Dov Hivkin, a former Brooklyn Assemblyman who takes issue with her pro-Palestinian stance. He sued her pants off in federal court, and she threw in the towel this afternoon.

“I have reconsidered my decision to block Dov Hikind from my Twitter account,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a statement obtained by The Post on Monday. “Mr. Hikind has a First Amendment right to express his views and should not be blocked for them.”

I suspect she or her crack staff used Wikipedia for research again, an all-too-common problem with her.

*Wrong COA cited, fixed now. Thanks Prof. Volokh**

THIS JUST IN: U.S. Judge William Bertelsman today reversed course and ruled that attorneys for Nick Sandmann could start discovery for a portion of their lawsuit against the Washington Post over its coverage of the so-called Cov Cath incident. It turns out that on reconsideration, the Court found that at least three of the sued-upon statements were both defamatory and the complaint was plausible enough to warrant discovery. The ruling (hidden behind PACER paywall) which revives the case, states that:

“The Court also notes that the proposed First Amended Complaint makes specific allegations concerning the state of mind of [Nathan] Phillips, the principal source of these statements. It alleges in greater detail than the original complaint that Phillips deliberately lied concerning the events at issue, and that he had an unsavory reputation which, but for the defendant’s negligence or malice, would have alerted defendant to this fact.”

Seems to me the Post has three options: 1) continue to publicly slime the teen; 2) admit they were in a rush to publish and took the word of a less-than trustworthy source (shades of Rolling Stone’s “Jackie”!) or 3) fight in court till the last dog is hanged and try to grind them down to settlement by attrition and financial exhaustion.

More to come, I’m sure.