media

NBC Names Debate Moderators -- or Celebrators

L. Brent Bozell III and Tim Graham, CNS News

The first Democratic presidential debates are scheduled for NBC and MSNBC on June 26 and 27. The Comcast-owned networks have just announced a team of five moderators for the 20 candidates who are allowed to participate, or one moderator per four contenders. 1. Rachel Maddow is a leftist, Trump-hating Russiagate conspiracy theorist. 2. Lester Holt was a one-sided disaster as a moderator between Donald Trump and Clinton in the fall of 2016. 3. Chuck Todd has a clear conflict of interest. 4. Savannah Guthrie. 5. Jose Diaz-Balart. The fabric that's been shredded here is the notion that NBC or MSNBC can be perceived by anyone with a brain wave as neutral moderators in our political debates.

The Media Press Dems for Impeachment Porn

David Catron, The American Spectator

The goal of the media is obvious. There might be a few journalists who think an impeachment inquiry will turn public opinion against Trump the way it did in Nixon’s case, but this isn’t 1973-74. The legacy media no longer enjoy a monopoly on the news. But they have been going through ratings withdrawal since Attorney General Barr announced that Mueller came up dry, and they want the Democrats to make them well. The Fourth Estate needs a fix of eyeballs and clicks, and believe they can get them with impeachment porn. That’s why they’re standing on the street clamoring for Pelosi to jump.

William Barr is asking questions the media don't want asked

Michael Barone, Washington Examiner

As Barr said spying is appropriate if it’s “adequately predicated,” and it’s unclear whether the spying on the Trump campaign was. Barr is old enough to remember when liberals did not take government legal or intelligence agencies’ word that spying on an administration’s opponents was justified, when they did not attack those who questioned it as unpatriotic. He may be amused that such doings are self-righteously justified today. But it’s good that he’s willing to ask questions most of the media doesn't want asked, to determine how the Obama law enforcement and intelligence agencies set about spying on the opposite party’s presidential campaign.

So now it’s OK to destroy lives in the name of fighting Trump?

Rich Lowry, New York Post

The Left is so obsessed with the idea that Russia pulls the strings of our democracy that it assumes every noxious piece of content on the internet might have been cooked up in a Russian troll farm. Although reporters with the historical memory of gnats might believe that rank abuse of America’s high elected officials is something new, it’s as old as the republic. And it’s often been anonymous. By all means, call out online distortions and lies, but deliberately exposing low-level political advocates to personal destruction is shabby and irresponsible — and more an act of political retaliation than journalism.

Mueller Strikes Out. Media Reports Home Run

L. Brent Bozell III and Tim Graham, CNS News

The same "objective" journalists who shamelessly whacked away at Kenneth Starr as a modern knock-off of the inquisitor Torquemada were presenting Mueller as the 21st-century incarnation of Eliot Ness. Two decades ago, Time trashed Starr as Bill Clinton's scandalous twin, saying, "he still dreams of being found not guilty." The only thing consistent about the press is its partisanship. At this point, accusing Trump of colluding with Russia is geopolitical birtherism. It's a baseless conspiracy theory pretending to be a silver bullet to the heart of Trump's presidency. It ably illustrates how the press set out to destroy Trump and destroyed their own reputations instead.

Law enforcement, media changed standards for Trump

Byron York, Washington Examiner

Angry disputes about the president have done terrible harm to the principle that an investigator, be it a journalist or a prosecutor, should meet at least some standard of proof before leveling an accusation. Trump's critics often accuse him of violating the norms that make our society and government work. Yet in their discussion of the dossier, some of those critics violated essential norms of fairness and accuracy. And in Mueller's no-exoneration gambit, a storied figure in American law enforcement abandoned one of the most important standards of justice. The damage done could last a long time.

Exploiting the MSM: Barr Uses CBS to Speak to America

Roger L. Simon, PJ Media

William Barr's interview Thursday (transcript here) with Jan Crawford is filled with fascinating details and surprisingly candid responses, but most interesting of all may be that he undertook this dialogue not with friendlies at Fox or the Wall Street Journal but with  CBS — the very beating heart of the mainstream media from well before the days of the Dan Rather embarrassment. The network is the sine qua non of Deep State establishmentarianism. You would think they would crucify him, but Barr is fearless — and justifiably so. He knows he is telling the truth and that, as the saying goes, will set you free.

ICYMI: April’s Great Economic News

Not that we believe in or promote “conspiracy theories,” you know, like the one that the Trump campaign was spied upon by a corrupt Obama-era FBI and intelligence apparatus. But there is one conspiracy we are convinced exits, and that is that the establishment media refuses to report good economic news.

Trump Counterattacks Using Democrat's Hypocrisy

Kurt Schlichter, Townhall

With our glorious ruling class, it’s all lies, it’s all garbage, and Trump gleefully exposes it all. Mueller declares him innocent and the Democrats claim that this actually shows Trump is more guilty than they ever imagined. People notice when they are being scammed – well, not stupid liberal people who buy into nonsense like socialism, global warming and the idea that men can have babies, but Normal people do. What Trump is doing by highlighting their hapless hypocrisy is undermining not just the garbage policies that make up the Democrat dogma but the entire notion that our liberal elite somehow consists of our betters.

As Barr mulls declassification, a familiar tune from critics

Byron York, Washington Examiner

In the days before the Nunes memo was declassified, many of the nation's top current and former intelligence officials, members of Congress, and analysts in the press warned that declassification would do grave damage to American national security. It didn't happen. Now, some of the same people are issuing somber warnings of the damage that will be done if Attorney General William Barr declassifies documents showing what else the nation's law enforcement and intelligence agencies did in the 2016 Trump investigation. The problem is, they were wrong then, and they are likely wrong again now.

Declassification and Cognitive Dissonance in the Media

David Catron, The American Spectator

The media must report the “news” in a way that requires them to claim two contradictory “facts” are both true: The President and AG Barr are engaged in a cover-up but are also involved in a nefarious plot to declassify and release as much information as possible. Media hacks at the New York Times and the Washington Post get paid to endure the cognitive dissonance caused by fabulist Adam Schiff, who responded to President Trump’s declassification order by claiming, “The cover-up has entered a new and dangerous phase. This is un-American.” For normal people dwelling beyond the Beltway — the voters — this gibberish just doesn’t cut it.

Delusional Democrats lash out at Trump -- again

Charles Hurt, Washington Times

Perhaps it is not exactly “presidential” of him to wallow in questions about the House speaker’s sanity. But, then again, it is far less presidential — and enormously damaging to the Republic — for Mrs. Pelosi and other high elected officials in the Democratic Party to make up outlandish claims to slur the president. All the while, using it as a pretense to refuse to get any actual work done. If you find all of this hard to follow at home or — more likely — simply do not give a flying crap, then you are not alone. Nor are you crazy. You are not the one who has lost his or her mind.

Mark Levin Takes on the Press

L. Brent Bozell III and Tim Graham, CNS News

Liberals don't want to engage with Levin or his books. Most won't seriously debate serious conservatives because as with issues like these, it's a lost cause. There are laws of nature, and this horse manure doesn't fly. They spent eight long years ignoring or dismissing the foibles of Obama while advancing anything he deemed necessary. When Obama aide Ben Rhodes boasted — in The New York Times! — that he had easily created an "echo chamber" in the press to promote their Iran arms deal, they didn't blink in surprise or embarrassment. They winked. Buy "Unfreedom Of the Press." Just imagine what will be the look on liberals' faces when they learn Levin has sold another million copies.

Trump Is Right To Play Hardball With Dems

“Bipartisanship” can’t be a one-off arrangement; Democrats must recognize President Trump’s legitimacy and debate the details of legislation in good faith, or President Trump is perfectly justified in refusing cooperation with them on infrastructure or any other issue.

The Washington Post Wants Team Trump Removed or Jailed

L. Brent Bozell III and Tim Graham, CNS News

The Post is goading the Democrats from the hard left for contempt citations, impeachments and even jail time. These same champions of impeaching and jailing Republicans out of so-called "institutional duty" will coo and wink over every Beto O'Rourke and Kamala Harris who runs against Trump. Back in 1972, Bob Dole had this newspaper pegged when he said, "without benefit of clergy, The Washington Post has set up housekeeping with the McGovern campaign." McGovern became "the beneficiary of the most extensive journalistic rescue-and-salvage operation in American politics." Some things never change.

The Government Spied on Me. You Could Be Next.

Sharyl Attkisson, Real Clear Politics

DoJ has blocked us at every turn in our attempts to obtain "discovery" from government agencies. Not a single page has been turned over. In a circular justification that only makes sense in the swampy recesses of Washington, D.C., a court recently determined that I am to blame for not being able to shake loose the information from the government to identify the John Doe federal agents who surveilled me. My appeal of this finding continues and, if we do not prevail, we will continue to the next step. Understandably, most Americans wouldn’t know it, but my court challenge is crucial to preserving our longstanding notions of personal freedom, press freedom and privacy.

The Avengers Is A Conservative Movie

Kurt Schlichter, Townhall

The conservatism we are talking about in Avengers, in Star Wars and in at least the original Star Trek is a larger kind of conservatism. It’s one that recognizes that there is good and evil, and that good is on the side of exceptional individuals rather than faceless masses of collectivist drones (like Imperial Stormtroopers, or all those interchangeable creatures the Avengers smash to bits). Government power is to be suspected and questioned – there’s often a conspiracy of bad guys embedded in the bureaucracy. The only difference between Hydra and our Deep State is that a looming doofus like James Comey who tweets pics of himself standing in cornfields inspires ridicule rather than fear.

I'm Glad Citizen Journalists Are Out There, Giving Us More Choice

John Stossel, PJ Media

We have lots of new media options today. Joe Rogan's podcast covers viewpoints from all sides. He has won a huge audience. Dave Rubin reports on YouTube from a classical liberal perspective. Naomi Brockwell covers how tech is changing the world. On the right, Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder and Candace Owens irreverently critique my New York City neighbors' sacred cows. On the left, Sam Harris has attracted a big podcast following by discussing all kinds of ideas, and Jimmy Dore takes a principled left-wing stand. I don't agree with all those new media people. I very much disagree with some of them. But I'm glad they are out there, giving us more choice.

Skipping Over Hillary and Obama Fights

L. Brent Bozell III and Tim Graham, CNS News

When Democrats start ripping one another, the media sees it as Ma and Pa having a fight and hide it shamelessly. A sulking, sanctimonious Obama blasts Clinton — and nothing. The networks haven't reported this, despite the source being a New York Times reporter. But this is funnier: It's also not in The New York Times. You have to go to the London Daily Mail or the Washington Examiner to find it. The media strongly denounced Donald Trump after an October 2016 debate for refusing to say whether he would accept the election results. But Hillary Clinton, like the press corps, can never accept what actually happened.

Should Journalists Go to Jail for Spreading Russia Lies?

Roger L. Simon, PJ Media

Will these journalists have learned a lesson and change their habits? Not likely. For the most part, they are moral narcissists, primed to feel confident of the righteousness of their cause even when faced with countervailing reality. And in any case, to change would lead to personality disintegration, loss of friends and family and, worse, being fired by the profiteers who run their companies. That's the way of the media world today. Time for the rest of us to learn new ways of getting our news, if we already haven't. And we probably have. Will those sources too be biased? Of course. All news is. It's written by humans. But at least it won't be criminal — or seditious.